Pre Draft Tactics

[no1bankteller]

I have posted this on the Draft and Trading Board too but I also want WC people's opinion on this.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Apperently there are number of teams that are keen to draft Callum Burgess, what interests me is how many of those teams would draft him if he is available.

Allow me explain. If for instance I am Essendon or Collingwood and I wanted to draft Brock Mclean for instance. Now I also know that WC is also keen on him but there is also a rumour going around that WC are trying to hide Callum Burgess.

Now knowing that WC is keen on Callum, Essendon and Collingwood then realease mis-information that they too are keen on Callum, and therefore forcing WC to use an earlier pick and improve their chances of drafting Brock Mclean.

Whilst I am not suggesting that Essendon and Collingwood are jointly conspiring against WC. However they are both using a similier tactic to imprve their odds of landing their preferred player.

What do you think?

[Milenko]

It's all irrelavant anyway because McLean will go top 10, and Freo wouldn't pass up an inside midfielder.

[no1bankteller]

Originally posted by Milenko
It's all irrelavant anyway because McLean will go top 10, and Freo wouldn't pass up an inside midfielder.

I only used McLean as an example...its the overall issue of information out there and how much is actually mis-information...

Perhaps I was not too clear I would like the focus to be on the issue not on the McLean he was just an example of a player Ess and Colingwood may be targeting.

[Streaker]

Originally posted by no1bankteller
I only used McLean as an example...its the overall issue of information out there and how much is actually mis-information...


The story in the Sunday Times quoted Sheedy as saying "I'm still not sure of the boy Burges, yet". To me this was Kevin with his tongue in cheek playing mind games. With Essendon having picks 6 and 13 it was meant to cast doubt but I still don't think Sheedy would take him.

Other recruiters would be having doubts too because Burges might be the real deal and then again the Eagles might be using mis-information themselves. A sting of some sort. Only those recruiters who had taken the time to come to WA and watch him play would know if he is the real deal or not. The proof will be in where he gets taken in the draft I guess.

[daddy_4_eyes]

I don't think WC will take Burges at #11 at the expense of a better player, just because other teams might take him before our next pick.

I think draft tactics are limited to taking players clubs believe are needed/will offer best value in the long/short term (depending on desired result. Carlton would pick short term players over better long term prospects, whereas Brisbane would do the opposite)[i.

A likely tactic is if WC picked up two midfielders with picks 11 and 20, they'd likely go for a different type with pick 26. Don't think WC would release false information in the hope of misguiding other clubs (if a club is stupid enough to take Burges just because he might have been hidden by WC, and he might be a real talent, then they deserve the worst).

[no1bankteller]

Originally posted by daddy_4_eyes
I don't think WC will take Burges at #11 at the expense of a better player, just because other teams might take him before our next pick.

I think draft tactics are limited to taking players clubs believe are needed/will offer best value in the long/short term (depending on desired result. Carlton would pick short term players over better long term prospects, whereas Brisbane would do the opposite)[i.

A likely tactic is if WC picked up two midfielders with picks 11 and 20, they'd likely go for a different type with pick 26. Don't think WC would release false information in the hope of misguiding other clubs (if a club is stupid enough to take Burges just because he might have been hidden by WC, and he might be a real talent, then they deserve the worst).

Some valid arguments there and I accept your viewpoint...I just wonder how many clubs try and use the game theory when leaking information.

[Black Thunder]

I think the clubs are run very proffesionally nowadays, to the point where they just ignore what opposition clubs say or think, and it's the best thing to do. No use worrying about what you can't control.

[ozzult]

If our recruiting staff just draws up a list of the eligible players, and list them from best to worst (in their opinion), when it comes to our turn, we just take the player who is closest to the top and still available.

Tactics shouldn't come into it after that.

[xfactor23]

agrees

[Voice of Reason]

Originally posted by ozzult
If our recruiting staff just draws up a list of the eligible players, and list them from best to worst (in their opinion), when it comes to our turn, we just take the player who is closest to the top and still available.

I was talking to someone about how we selected Paul Johnson last year and apparently this is pretty much what happens. I say pretty much because I'm sure size and type of player wanted comes into it too.

[no1bankteller]

Originally posted by ozzult
If our recruiting staff just draws up a list of the eligible players, and list them from best to worst (in their opinion), when it comes to our turn, we just take the player who is closest to the top and still available.

Tactics shouldn't come into it after that.

Ok...however I do believe that because the recruiting process is so subjective mistakes are often made, otherwise why weren't Fletcher and Cox picked up by other clubs in the draft instead of rookie listed by us, therfore I still think that mindgames come into play.

Strategy/rumours/innuendo is the x factor and place doubts into recruiters heads to try and create doubt and uncertainity. Causing the recruiter to think, have I missed something and maybe create confusion at the draft table on the day. You can minimise this by doing your homework but doubt will still exist.

In fact looking back at 2001 draft there was lots of quesion marks around Judd's shoulders and is the reason why he slipped to no.3 in the draft. This is a perfect example of a type of issue that can be utilised to gain the pick you want, ie use the partial truth to create doubt and get a player you want. Which I am suggesting both Essendon, Collingwood and Freo may be doing in Burgess case.

[YAKUZA]

Originally posted by West Coast Stre
The story in the Sunday Times quoted Sheedy as saying "I'm still not sure of the boy Burges, yet". To me this was Kevin with his tongue in cheek playing mind games. With Essendon having picks 6 and 13 it was meant to cast doubt but I still don't think Sheedy would take him.

Other recruiters would be having doubts too because Burges might be the real deal and then again the Eagles might be using mis-information themselves. A sting of some sort. Only those recruiters who had taken the time to come to WA and watch him play would know if he is the real deal or not. The proof will be in where he gets taken in the draft I guess.

I can assure you that Essendon and KS would be very much aware of Burges, their man in WA knows all there is to know about the boy and rates him very highly.

[carneagles]

Interesting post no1. I have to admit, I did suspect when the story came out that maybe the Eagles were playing silly buggers by letting it leak that they were hiding Burges, whilst having their eye on someone else. Or maybe they just want people to think that ...

If you think too hard about potential crafty recruiting moves, you just wind up giving your brain some sort of vapour lock. Well, I get one anyway.

And Sheedy can get stuffed. But that's a given, really.

[Mead]

Originally posted by carneagles
Interesting post no1. I have to admit, I did suspect when the story came out that maybe the Eagles were playing silly buggers by letting it leak that they were hiding Burges, whilst having their eye on someone else. Or maybe they just want people to think that ...

If you think too hard about potential crafty recruiting moves, you just wind up giving your brain some sort of vapour lock. Well, I get one anyway.

And Sheedy can get stuffed. But that's a given, really.

Good point. (the one about Sheedy getting stuffed.)

Sometimes I think that if fans tend to overcomplicate drafting- I'm pretty sure that a team has picks 11, 20 and 26, what they'll actually do is show up to the draft with a list of the 26 players they like the most in order from best to worst. Then they will take the highest rated player who is still available on that list at pick 11, then whoever is still available at pick 20 and so on. If Worsfold were approached with some of the convoluted 'make them think that we think that they think that we think that we'll draft player X' schemes that have been floated around here before, he'd probably smile and nod politely whilst repeatedly hitting the big red security button under his desk.

[ozzult]

Originally posted by Mead
smile and nod politely whilst repeatedly hitting the big red security button under his desk. Enter Peter Sumich and Rob Wiley to sort the matter out.

[no1bankteller]

Watch this space at tdraft time and lets see who puts up and drafts Burgess at an early pick...

IMO there is a bit of game play going on at the moment...at least between Essendon and us...Personally I think that Sheedy is taking every opportunity to have a dig...

[carneagles]

Originally posted by Mead
If Worsfold were approached with some of the convoluted 'make them think that we think that they think that we think that we'll draft player X' schemes that have been floated around here before, he'd probably smile and nod politely whilst repeatedly hitting the big red security button under his desk. On the Burges leak, I suspect that the old saying* is very relevant - when the two possible explanations are a conspiracy or a f*ck-up, it's a f*ck-up every time.


* (Think of it as Ockham's Razor after Mrs Ockham used it to shave her legs)