Where to for Nick O'Keaney.

[saynta]

I understand that a player can't be on a rookie list for a third year,

If this is correct, O'keaney must be either up graded or delisted as trading him is no longer an option.

We have pick 100 to use on him but that means three more players have to be delisted.

Holmes, Pierce, Wright or Minchington are the obvious ones in the firing line.

[degruch]

Off to one side...I can't believe we'd give Lonie another crack and not Meatball. I guess if you're in charge of a list, and you've got 2 inconsistent and not entirely effective small forwards, you'd give the younger one a chance to develop of the two. Meatball did take a couple games on though, Lonie only has endeavour IMO. We'll see.

[saynta]

Off to one side...I can't believe we'd give Lonie another crack and not Meatball. I guess if you're in charge of a list, and you've got 2 inconsistent and not entirely effective small forwards, you'd give the younger one a chance to develop of the two. Meatball did take a couple games on though, Lonie only has endeavour IMO. We'll see.

I know Mitch only played a handful of games, but in those played I believe he was in the top 10 in the competition for forward defensive efforts. Around 6 I believe.

I would be sorry to see him go.

[kosifantutti]

I understand that a player can't be on a rookie list for a third year,

If this is correct, O'keaney must be either up graded or delisted as trading him is no longer an option.

We have pick 100 to use on him but that means three more players have to be delisted.

Holmes, Pierce, Wright or Minchington are the obvious ones in the firing line.

I don't think that's true any longer regarding rookies.

From Wikipedia, so you know it's true:

Each club is allowed to maintain a list of up to six eligible Category A rookies and three Category B rookies. Up to three rookies can be retained, with the player's permission for a second or third season,[2] with the others having to be either delisted or elevated to the primary list at the time of the National Draft.

But there has also been some mention of the rules changing this year and rookies being treated the same as senior listed players.

[saynta]

I understand that a player can't be on a rookie list for a third year,

If this is correct, O'keaney must be either up graded or delisted as trading him is no longer an option.

We have pick 100 to use on him but that means three more players have to be delisted.

Holmes, Pierce, Wright or Minchington are the obvious ones in the firing line.

I don't think that's true any longer regarding rookies.

From Wikipedia, so you know it's true:

Each club is allowed to maintain a list of up to six eligible Category A rookies and three Category B rookies. Up to three rookies can be retained, with the player's permission for a second or third season,[2] with the others having to be either delisted or elevated to the primary list at the time of the National Draft.

But there has also been some mention of the rules changing this year and rookies being treated the same as senior listed players.

There was talk about the reasons that Collingwood signed the young rookie Sam Murray from the Swans and mention that he couldn't stay on the rookie list for a third year.


""Murray, taken by the Swans with pick 66 in the 2015 rookie draft, is yet to play an AFL game and has been plying his trade in the NEAFL where he’s transitioned from a midfielder to a defender.

Collingwood fans hit social media to criticise the deal, but recruiting boss Derek Hine asked: “Have they seen Sammy play?

“Everyone can smash it, but they don’t know him. They’ve got no understanding of the player or the rules.

“The difficult thing we had in this particular trade is that the rules state the player, as a second year rookie, has only got three avenues. He can take a contract to join Sydney’s primary list, he gets traded as has happened here, or he has to sit out of footy for 12 months. He can’t go into the national draft.”

[kosifantutti]

That's interesting, because I just found this in the AFL rules

A Club may retain a Player on its Rookie List for a third season provided it
nominates such Player or Players using Form 32 prior to advising the AFL of its
Primary List under Rule 6.1(a) and such Player consents to being nominated on
the Rookie List for a third season.

http://s.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Te ... 202016.pdf
That document is dated 2016 but I won't assume it's the latest version.

[saynta]

That's interesting, because I just found this in the AFL rules

A Club may retain a Player on its Rookie List for a third season provided it
nominates such Player or Players using Form 32 prior to advising the AFL of its
Primary List under Rule 6.1(a) and such Player consents to being nominated on
the Rookie List for a third season.

http://s.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Te ... 202016.pdf
That document is dated 2016 but I won't assume it's the latest version.

Bit of a puzzle eh?

[ace]

I understand that a player can't be on a rookie list for a third year,

If this is correct, O'keaney must be either up graded or delisted as trading him is no longer an option.

We have pick 100 to use on him but that means three more players have to be delisted.

Holmes, Pierce, Wright or Minchington are the obvious ones in the firing line.

I have NOK being taken at No5 in the rookie draft ahead of the 2016 season.
That means he has a year to go as a rookie before he must be upgraded or face the draft again.

[Saintly66]

Word is will either be delisted or upgraded to the senior list and a tall (probably Pierce) will be put on the rookie list. NOK position is now more favourable after the trade period that isn’t to say he won’t be gone.

[To the top]

I am unsure of height and weight but if you are of smaller frame then you need a point of difference being pace, evasion and sublime skills with the ball in hand including because your stature means you will be fed the ball more often than not

So a receiver not an inside player, where bigger bodies are required

Freeman is the proto type with a mature body shape plus pace and skills

Gresham has evasion skills to offset a lack of genuine pace - and skills with the ball

Where do Minchington, Lonie and Wright compare?

And O'Kearney?

As an example, Sinclair has outside skills including 2 sided use which is an asset not these days readily apparent for some reason

That 2 sided use sets Sinclair apart and delivers him space to work in

These are the skill sets you note

[To the top]

I am unsure of height and weight but if you are of smaller frame then you need a point of difference being pace, evasion and sublime skills with the ball in hand including because your stature means you will be fed the ball more often than not

So a receiver not an inside player, where bigger bodies are required

Freeman is the proto type with a mature body shape plus pace and skills

Gresham has evasion skills to offset a lack of genuine pace - and skills with the ball

Where do Minchington, Lonie and Wright compare?

And O'Kearney?

As an example, Sinclair has outside skills including 2 sided use which is an asset not these days readily apparent for some reason

That 2 sided use sets Sinclair apart and delivers him space to work in

These are the skill sets you note

[silverhalo]

I am unsure of height and weight but if you are of smaller frame then you need a point of difference being pace, evasion and sublime skills with the ball in hand including because your stature means you will be fed the ball more often than not

So a receiver not an inside player, where bigger bodies are required

Freeman is the proto type with a mature body shape plus pace and skills

Gresham has evasion skills to offset a lack of genuine pace - and skills with the ball

Where do Minchington, Lonie and Wright compare?

And O'Kearney?

As an example, Sinclair has outside skills including 2 sided use which is an asset not these days readily apparent for some reason

That 2 sided use sets Sinclair apart and delivers him space to work in

These are the skill sets you note

Good post.....totally agree

[Con Gorozidis]

Interesting question.
I don't watch any VFL so I am wondering how NOK compares with someone like Eli Templeton?

[saynta]

Interesting question.
I don't watch any VFL so I am wondering how NOK compares with someone like Eli Templeton?

I think Eli had a better year, but Nick has more upside.

[Con Gorozidis]

Certainly reads like he had a good season so doesn't deserve to be delisted aged 20.
Happy if they can find a spot for him.
I'd prefer NOK on the list than Lonie to be honest.
Just can't see how Lonie can make it in the AFL unfortunately.

[Saintly66]

Interesting question.
I don't watch any VFL so I am wondering how NOK compares with someone like Eli Templeton?

I think Eli had a better year, but Nick has more upside.

Yep agreed, won the calders best and fairest and was in the all Australian under 18s side the kid is definitely no slouch and just needs opportunity.
Was touted as a top 10 pick in 2015 then during the year slowly went down the order, I know a few clubs didn’t pick him because he didn’t have “x factor”.

[Wayne42]

No X factor might cause him to go through life pondering the Why factor, especially if he is dumped.

[Jacks Back]

No X factor might cause him to go through life pondering the Why factor, especially if he is dumped.

Zzzzzz

Only kidding Wayne42 (x,y,z).

What about the Irish guy (I've forgotten his name)? He was playing a similar small forward role as well.

[saintspremiers]

If Lonie and Minch get contracts then the potentially much better NOK will get delisted

[Junior]

I have watched a heap of Sandringham games over the last two years.

NOK is a good player can find the footy well and is a nice mark for his height, but he does not have any X factor and is very conservative in his ball use.

Minchington is a much better player in my opinion, NOK should be given a final third year as a rookie to see if he can become morse damaging by foot as he can find the football no trouble.

[Drake Huggins]

No X factor might cause him to go through life pondering the Why factor, especially if he is dumped.

Zzzzzz

Only kidding Wayne42 (x,y,z).

What about the Irish guy (I've forgotten his name)? He was playing a similar small forward role as well.

To be sure, it's Connellan. This guy has serious wheels. He could be like McKenna or AMT at Essendon. A real smokey for 2018.,

[Saintly66]

Has been delisted.

[Selhurst Saint]

Has been delisted.

When was this announced??

[kosifantutti]

Has been delisted.

When was this announced??

I'm not sure if Saintly66 is an ITK or just posts things he half heard a month ago. He announced the delisting of one of the Irishmen last week but I think it was actually Joe Baker Thomas who was delisted weeks ago.

[Selhurst Saint]

Hmmmm....It has just been announced.