I'm hearing Ramsey and Gibbo not offered contracts

But I also heard Park a few weeks back

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

Now that keeps it simple.

Regards Cazzesman

_________________
Ricky Gervais - “Everyone has the right to hold whatever beliefs they want. And everyone else has the right to find those beliefs f***ing ridiculous.”

Thanks Spooky and Snakehips. I was hoping someone with a better understanding could sort it out for us.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

I'd rather pay Willo out and give the spot to Ramsay.

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

I don't want to be negative but it's only Thursday and it appears we're done. Trade week has another 6 days!
Usually I'm hanging out until the deadline on the last day. WTF am I going to do with my time now?

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

If it were me, I'd take O-Mac. The second one, not so clear-cut.

Based on our list make-up - the likelihood that Doc misses most of the year, Williams hopefully comes back far fitter than was expected last year and slots back into the midfield rotation, and the want to give Stocker some midfield time, I think Parks would be handy back-up, and would acquit himself better in a back six with some strategy and team-first approach.

Based on potential, I think Cottrell could be something aged 23-25 with the right development invested into him.

Given the probability for a supplementary spot available at the start of the year (could we potential get one for Marchbank or Cuningham too?) - you'd probably keep Parks being from interstate, and back ourselves to offer Cottrell more of an opportunity than going back to Pearcedale affords.

Gibbons
Ramsay

Delisted.

_________________
dane's trolling again

Ditto

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

Official by the looks of your post dane?

_________________
Everyone looks good in Navy Blue

I'd be keeping Oscar and maybe Gibbons. Head to the draft for the rest.

_________________
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter" - Winston Churchill.

Gibbons and Ramsay gone via Trade Radio

I’d keep LOB and O’Mac and maybe rookie Ramsey.

The others have been covered through trades and hopefully the draft

So is that minimum delistings required assuming we don't trade in another player?

We now have 34 on Main List. So have up to 4 list spots available

Started with 36 on Main List
Out - Murph, Caz, Gibbons, Ramsay, SPS (Minus 5)
In - Cerra, Hewitt, Young (Plus 3)

_________________
Go Blues

Yep think so, no more delistings required if we only want to use two picks in the ND and promote one Cat A rookie.

Thanks snakehips. So with Gibbons & Ramsay now delisted, and assuming we trade in no more players, am I right to say we need to cut one more to have the mandatory three picks in the draft?

Instead of another delisting, I wonder if we’re about to trade out a player for a pick? Maybe we’ve had a nibble for LOB or McGovern?

_________________
It's never as good as it looks and it's never as bad as it seems.

We could delist one more, which would allow us to use 3 picks on kids in the ND. Alternatively, we can avoid any further delistings from the primary list by promoting one cat A rookie to the primary list and using just 2 picks in the ND. If we go down the latter path, I think we would still need to delist one further player from the cat A rookie list (would leave us with 5 cat A rookies), i.e. go with 37-5-1.

If we're only using one live pick in the draft, looking at the points the Dogs have currently, they're on -17, assuming Darcy goes at pick 3.

23 for 25 and 64 gives the Dogs an extra 40 odd points.

Any chance we could bundle up 25 along with next year’s second or a player for a first rounder?

A couple of 25s is the equivalent of about a pick 9.

_________________
“When a clown moves into a palace, he doesn't become a king. The palace turns into a circus.”
Turkish Proverb

If we only take one live pick to the ND we'd need to promote two of Boyd, Cottrell, Honey, Kennedy, McDonald, Mirkov or Parks. From a salary cap view point I suspect it'd probably be cheaper to take the extra kid in the ND, rather than promoting a second cat A rookie, but probably not a great deal of difference. Probably just comes back to whether Austin has his eye on someone he thinks will still be there later in the draft with our second pick. That pick will probably move up a little bit (maybe into the 50s) once all the father-son matching and academy picks are removed. Alternatively, perhaps there might be plans afoot to try some pick swapping in an attempt to move that second pick into an earlier round.