2020 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[The Big Cat]

Something has to be wrong with my rookie list calculation. I had Bell, Wicks, O'Connor and McLean. Then we committed to adding Gray, which gets us to 5. If Gardiner says we would like to add Fox to the rookie list plus a DFA, that would bring the number to 7. One over the limit.

Wasn't Bell elevated to the main list at the start of last year?

[Ludwig]

Wasn't Bell elevated to the main list at the start of last year?

I thought so. Footywire had Bell listed as a rookie, but who knows if that's correct? I was just going off the AFL website, also quoted somewhere on here, that Bell was one of the CAT B rookies. It could be a mistake and it's really O'Connor who is the CAT B rookie. It's difficult working things out if we have to deal with misinformation. There's certainly some missing information to contend with. Wouldn't it be nice if we could see the a published list of the yesterday's list lodgements?

I think everyone is happy that Fox will be staying on our list. Barracuda does it again! Great call.

Adelaide has taken themselves out of the running for a trade swap with the Swans by doing one with Freo. Now Freo stands as our best chance of picking up more points by trading one of our picks in the 40s for picks 55, 56 and 63. Freo looks close to the 44 player limit, so I can't see them taking those picks to the draft. A swap looks imminent.

I'm all for helping GC become competitive, but perhaps the AFL is going overboard on the help they're giving them. GC are on the way to building the best list in the league, but once the VIC clubs get wind of how good they are, they'll take away all their goodies, forcing a transfer of their best player to Victorian clubs.

[Aaron]

"Sydney will relist Robbie Fox after almost mistakenly delisting him." ..."Gardiner has revealed how the Swans wished to drop Fox to the rookie list which they were unable to do prior to a late rule change by the AFL." On SEN, Gardiner confirms that Fox will be with us in 2021. See details at
Swans to rookie delisted Fox after late rule change

[Markwebbos]

"Sydney will relist Robbie Fox after almost mistakenly delisting him." ..."Gardiner has revealed how the Swans wished to drop Fox to the rookie list which they were unable to do prior to a late rule change by the AFL." On SEN, Gardiner confirms that Fox will be with us in 2021. See details at
Swans to rookie delisted Fox after late rule change

Barracuda comes through! Everyone on RWO can settle down now.

[SwanSand]

In 2020 we had a significant number of Injuries to our very important players. Number of these players were iced up and never took part in action.
Buddy of course is getting recurrent Hamstrings
Heeney has played with some duress over the last 2 years with regards to his Ankle.
Hewett with his back
Sam Reid with his recurrent soft tissue problems
Sam Naismith with his ACL
This could just be bad luck but the management of certain injuries is a cause for concern.

What is that Brisbane Medical team is doing which is different than the other 17 teams that has resulted in some of the very good but injured players wanting to go there? Not that they havent had their fare share of injuries. But players like McCarthy, Birchall who rarely played for their respective teams have ended up playing enormous number of games for Lions and now possibly Daniher and Cockatoo will add to it too.

I reckon to build a successful team we need every box ticked
Quality of Players in each position
Depth
Luck with Injuries
Coaching
Game Style
Team and Club Culture
Work Ethos
And eventually Medical Team

We are certainly Ok with the Team and Club culture and Work Ethos with regards to players and coach
I reckon the Game style is improving and the personnel are evolving with evolving game style.

We still lack in Quality of players, Depth and Medical Team (Not sure if we can improve on the medical team performance and if we have to..... How do we do it?)

[gloveski]

Just goes to show what a @@@@ show AFL house is running atm . Surely teams should have been consulted about the proposed rookie list changes . Looks like a few teams where caught out


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Captain]

Barracuda comes through! Everyone on RWO can settle down now.

Excellent news!

Also well done on some good insight barracuda!

[longmile]

So happy with Fox back. God a big broad smile in the office today! I was right ??

[bloodspirit]

We will have 5 rookies or commitments going into the draft: Gray, Bell, Wicks, O'Connor and McLean. I'm assuming Amartey is now on the senior list. It would be easy to move Naismith to the rookie list. In any case, he could be moved to the inactive list allowing us an additional Pre Season supplemental selection.

With 5 committed rookies, it only leaves one spot left. I think we will use that for Paddy McCartin, and if not him, then we are very likely to leave it open for in-season drafts or supplemental drafts. That would obviate the possibility of Fox being relisted as a rookie. It's possible using other assumptions, but looks highly unlikely. Maybe barracuda is right and we have some trick up our sleeve that hasn't been covered.

I can see the possibility of us cutting ET and signing Paddy McCartin to the main list on a 1 year contract. After taking 3 players in the national draft our main list size will be at the minimum of 36 and our rookie list at 5. So we would go into the post draft period with a total list size of 41. It leaves room for adding players to both rookie and main lists. This configuration seems the most efficient for minimizing the TPP and leaving open future drafting. It's the sort of thing the Swans would do.

I wonder who's on our rookie list now. It's a shame that a few players like McLean and O'Connor are not mentioned as to which list they are on. I thought the AFL reduced the CAT B list max to 2, but the AFL website only mentioned Bell and Wicks being CAT B rookies. What about O'Connor? What happened to him? Is there an exception for the Irish recruits? Has he been moved to a CAT A rookie or to the main list?

This late call by the AFL to allow 2 players to be directly moved from the main to the rookie list is a farce. They have to let clubs rescind up to 2 delistings that they would prefer to directly move to the rookie list. This would apparently include Fox.

Something has to be wrong with my rookie list calculation. I had Bell, Wicks, O'Connor and McLean. Then we committed to adding Gray, which gets us to 5. If Gardiner says we would like to add Fox to the rookie list plus a DFA, that would bring the number to 7. One over the limit.

Ludwig, I think the answer is that there are 4-6 rookies (cat A) + 2 cat B rookies - leading to 6-8 in total and thereby resolving your conundrum.

[bloodspirit]

Great news re Fox! He deserves it. Bit awkward though!

[Melbourne_Blood]

Given it’s still 2 weeks away probably wouldn’t read too much into it - given we’re talking about pick 3, I would say we’d talk to him again if we were considered him.

No idea why Carlton would talk to him twice - first pick at 31 so no chance of moving up the order. Maybe thinking 2 years ahead if he goes to a non-Vic club?

Who is the player in question , can’t seem to find the original post ..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lwjoyner]

I wish someone (AFL or Swans) would clear up the 2 lists ,.the primary List and Rookie (i would call it the supplementary list now). The club used to show on its website the Rookies and the primary list separately. Its now all speculation by us all as to who is on what list. Bell, Oconnor, mclean, wicks and amerty. We know Gray and now Fox (hopefully) will be on the rookie (supp list) who else'
We are all guessing and have different views, I for one are lost.

[Markwebbos]

Who is the player in question , can’t seem to find the original post ..

Elijah Hollands

[Melbourne_Blood]

Elijah Hollands

Cheers. Surely they’re no hope there, unless they reckon he’ll slip down due to the ACL, like kemp did to them last year ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ludwig]

Ludwig, I think the answer is that there are 4-6 rookies (cat A) + 2 cat B rookies - leading to 6-8 in total and thereby resolving your conundrum.

You're right. I just read the latest on the rule. I missed that one. The only excuse I can make is that my glasses were sent to Bangkok for new lenses and I'm not seeing too well without them. In the interim, it's probably best to ignore everything I write. It's just rubbish.