List Mgmt. DFA targets

Remove this Banner Ad

MyManLynch said:
Well, Hine aiming for a senior list of 38 & mentioned we will use 3 live picks in the draft 27, 66 & 77.
If that's the case, then no DFA in his sight.
Click to expand...

Only on the senior list. He may have one in his sights on the rookie draft.
 
mike123 said:
Only on the senior list. He may have one in his sights on the rookie draft.
Click to expand...
Hine may still be considering a delisted player or two for the rookie draft, but any such player picked up for that draft will not be classed as a DFA.

Realistically, given that Hine has suggested we are set to have a senior list of 38 with 3 picks taken in the draft, this thread may as well be closed because there's nothing left to discuss.
 
35Daicos said:
Hine may still be considering a delisted player or two for the rookie draft, but any such player picked up for that draft will not be classed as a DFA.

Realistically, given that Hine has suggested we are set to have a senior list of 38 with 3 picks taken in the draft, this thread may as well be closed because there's nothing left to discuss.
Click to expand...

That's just technicality, just because they won't be classed as DFA doesn't mean the prospect adding a delisted player to our list isn't up for discussion.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

mike123 said:
That's just technicality, just because they won't be classed as DFA doesn't mean the prospect adding a delisted player to our list isn't up for discussion.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, I'm just being my usual pedantic self! It seems we are now extremely unlikely to be adding a player as a DFA but of course we may still pick up a delisted player somewhere along the line. If you want to keep discussing it in this thread go your hardest, I probably won't bother joining in, however!!
 
35Daicos said:
Absolutely, I'm just being my usual pedantic self! It seems we are now extremely unlikely to be adding a player as a DFA but of course we may still pick up a delisted player somewhere along the line. If you want to keep discussing it in this thread go your hardest, I probably won't bother joining in, however!!
Click to expand...

Can't blame you.
 
mike123 said:
Can't blame you.
Click to expand...
I may as well add that it is a bit surprising, given that the draft is meant to be a weak one, that we have (apparently) decided to go this way. I thought it pretty likely they'd snap up a DFA (on a short-term contract), but still I prefer to see them using list spots on untried types and hope to find a gem or two with the lower picks.
 
35Daicos said:
I may as well add that it is a bit surprising, given that the draft is meant to be a weak one, that we have (apparently) decided to go this way. I thought it pretty likely they'd snap up a DFA (on a short-term contract), but still I prefer to see them using list spots on untried types and hope to find a gem or two with the lower picks.
Click to expand...
Hine must have his eye on a couple (pick 66 & 77) late picks, which will end up being late 50's picks.
He even mentioned, we have the scope to go to 40...just in case a player slips...like Marsh 2 years back.
I too am surprised we are not going down the DFA path.
 
I'm not in the least bit surprised that we're not looking at any DFAs.

A lot of people presume that in a weak draft teams are more likely to look at DFAs but I think the reverse is true. In a strong draft clubs are more likely to delist borderline players because there is a greater chance of improving the list through the draft. The result is that there are reasonable players available through free agency

In a weak draft borderline players are far more likely to hold their spots on lists, because finding quality replacements is more difficult.

In a year where the draft is almost universally predicted to be one of the worst on record, players who get delisted probably deserve to be. Less trash and treasure. More trash.
 
Boris the Contradiction said:
I'm not in the least bit surprised that we're not looking at any DFAs.

A lot of people presume that in a weak draft teams are more likely to look at DFAs but I think the reverse is true. In a strong draft clubs are more likely to delist borderline players because there is a greater chance of improving the list through the draft. The result is that there are reasonable players available through free agency

In a weak draft borderline players are far more likely to hold their spots on lists, because finding quality replacements is more difficult.

In a year where the draft is almost universally predicted to be one of the worst on record, players who get delisted probably deserve to be. Less trash and treasure. More trash.
Click to expand...
Good point
 
mike123 said:
Only on the senior list. He may have one in his sights on the rookie draft.
Click to expand...

I reckon Lachie Dalgleish from the Bombers might be a go for us as a DFA rookie based on rumours we have spoken to him. He seems a better rookie list type than a main lister. Pace to burn too which is something we need.
 
I don't buy all this speculation about how weak the draft is. This is no exact science. You can be sure that superstars of the competition will be hiding there down the list, as well as best and fairests, disappointments and complete busts.
A line seems to have been blindly adopted that the draft is a dud, and we have low picks so let's take some known quantity with flaws.

Personally I trust Hine and Rendell to deliver though the draft.
 
Can DFA's apply for the National Draft? Perhaps we are are willing to risk taking them in there to make up our three live picks?

Does the preseason or rookie draft count as a like selection?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

soreplums said:
Can DFA's apply for the National Draft? Perhaps we are are willing to risk taking them in there to make up our three live picks?

Does the preseason or rookie draft count as a like selection?
Click to expand...
All delisted players can enter the draft if they choose.
They can also enter PSD & rookie draft.

Edit: we have 6 places to fill on our list, we can choose how we fill that number.
We could draft 5 in main draft, plus 1 in rookie draft, or 4 & 2, or 3 & 3 (the most likely option).
We can also use DFA or PSD to make up the numbers.
Bottom line, we must have a minimum 44 players (Senior + Cat A rookies).
Of which a minimum of 38 senior & 4 Cat A rookies.
Looks as though we are not going down the DFA path.
 
Last edited:
Tails1 said:
Dave he could also play 10-12 games for the year to give Maynard or Shaz a break from time to time. The young blokes will tire (or get injured) as the year goes on and Adcock could come in very handy; especially as a free hit. I like his leadership qualities more than anything.
Click to expand...

Think with Shaz, Williams, Langdon, Toovey, Marsh, Maynard, Sinclair, Ramsay, and Oxley we've got more than enough HBF BP depth and I don't see Adcock as offering significantly more than of any of them.
 
TradeDraft said:
Agree Adcock would be better then Pick 66 or 77 that we have.

Though would he Except a Role that would not Gurantee him Best 22 Spot?
Click to expand...

You can't possibly know that. Look at the players we've grabbed late in the ND or via the RD.
 
Timmy from Thomastown said:
Given we have lost senior players ( in terms of age) Armstrong Young and Dwyer and picked up only Howe, there's plenty of room for and older player to add to the list. No harm done even if he plays VFL all season.

Hine has delivered his message already about the quality of the draft, that's why we will probably have only two live picks, a second round and a fourth round. If it's a choice between a fifth round pick or a DFA such as Adcock then I choose Adcock.
Click to expand...

Has he? Are you assuming that because we've traded our early picks he doesn't rate the quality of the draft?
 
MyManLynch said:
We still have to add 6 more players to our overall list.
Can't see us adding 6 more 18-19 year olds.
We surely will add a DFA or mature age State League player via draft.
Click to expand...

Why not? As it stands we've got 35 players on the senior list and Goodyear is probably the only 1 of them that you'd struggle to make a case for a senior game in 2016. How much more depth do we need and when should we draw a line through longer term development?
 
MyManLynch said:
So you prefer to add 6 more 18 year olds to a very young list?
We have lost a bit of experience this year...our depth is more shallow than previous years.
A DFA & or mature age draftee may assist. Then can still add 4-5 new 18 year olds from draft.
Click to expand...

Disagree, and I actually think there will be a significant improvement in our age-experience profile in 2016 irrespective of drafting more kids.

Going into 2015 we had 16 players on our list with 50+ games with Sinclair, Williams, Seedsman and Adams to potentially join them.

In 2016 (as it currently stands) we'll have 20 players 50+ with the potential for Frost, Grundy, Crisp, Witts, Langdon and Aish to join them.

And every player on our list gets a +1 on their age profile relative to the start of this season.
 
Last edited:
spartan-magpie said:
I'd take morabito. I know he's stuffed. But if he came good. Wow.
Click to expand...

Agree, get his body right and he has more upside than any other DFA available. There appears to be a gentleman's agreement for other clubs not to recruit these types of players who are merely being dropped to the rookie list I wouldn't mind grabbing him.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. DFA targets

Similar threads

SchuPie
Trade + FA targets 2024
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
148
Views
10K
Pedro
Pedro

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top