Traded 11. Darcy Lang (2014-2017)

Remove this Banner Ad

year of the cat said:
I don't think so. It appears that Lang would have been taken in the 20's if we hadn't taken him at 16. I don't think he is quite the reach that the media have reported. Like the same stage after last years' draft with Thurlow, I'm getting more and more comfortable with Wells' call here.
Click to expand...
Maybe Lang might have gone higher if not for hes injury.Maybe the media people didnt rate him or only rated players that played in the second half of the TAC cup.
 
Scarily, whenever I hear his name I think of this...

large.xt3eb1z23985.jpg


:eek:
 
Jon Douglas said:
The only question, which some have asked, would Darcy have been there at pick 36 and therefore we could have taken Acres for example ? Well GFC simply don't take risks like that obviously. Not big gamblers and that seems fair enough to me.
Click to expand...

Have heard my club may have been into Lang for one of our many 2nd round selections. It's then a matter of how keen your club really was on him, which was self-evident. I reckon he's a beaut TBH.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

rocker_oz33 said:
Maybe Lang might have gone higher if not for hes injury.Maybe the media people didnt rate him or only rated players that played in the second half of the TAC cup.
Click to expand...
I know bugger all about it, but it seems that if they don't have your "beep test" and "vertical leap" data, then the draft media (circus) don't know you exist.

A question for anyone... Is the draft combine purely to measure athletic/endurance qualities or are there skills test in there as well?
 
Moggy said:
I know bugger all about it, but it seems that if they don't have your "beep test" and "vertical leap" data, then the draft media (circus) don't know you exist.

A question for anyone... Is the draft combine purely to measure athletic/endurance qualities or are there skills test in there as well?
Click to expand...

There is skills test.
Decision making, Kicking, Handball.
 
OzeSparky said:
There is skills test.
Decision making, Kicking, Handball.
Click to expand...
Yeah it's called match day observation. It's a nice touch and added piece of information to have, and gives everyone more of a look at the kids, but I'm sure by then the recruiters have done their homework already and it hardly means much any of that nonsense testing. I can see it coming into some consideration if your line ball over a couple of players who to take, otherwise I doubt they read too much into it.

From what I gathered when I spoke with recruiting down at Geelong, was that they begin looking at these kids seriously at around 14-16 years of age.

Apparently it was a different story I was told by someone else I'm close with inside the club about the ablett brothers, apparently those two were being watched bad reported on as early as 12! Obviously had the recruitment department excited, especially Nathan I heard as he was the better of the two. Still makes me sad what that boy should have turned out to be
 
fpm84 said:
On Wells, his reputation has largely come about due to his superb work away from top end picks.

Enright, Rooke, Milburn, Duncan, Motlop, Christensen... None were top 20 picks. Murdoch was taken with a late pick and improved to the point he was selected for a prelim. You only need to look at the stories of Blicavs and Mumford to see his lateral thinking.

As for his first rounders... Bartel, Mackie, Corey, Selwood and Taylor have been major hits. Varcoe was a hit albeit not to the same level. Tenace was an unmitigated disaster and the jury is well and truly out on Brown. It's too early to pass judgement on Smedts and Thurlow.
Click to expand...


No, un unmitigated disaster would have been if several stars were selected AFTER Tenace. Here are the first two rounds for 2003. It's basically, who, who, who and who, with the exception of two or 3 good players who will reach 200 games.

7. Tenace
8. Raph Clarke
9. David Trotter
10. Ryley Dunn
11. Beau Waters
12. Ryan Murphy
13. Brent Stanton
14. Fergus Watts
15. Troy Chaplin
16. Josh Willoughby
17. Billy Morrison
18. Llane Spaanderman
19. David Mundy
20. Sam Butler
21. Alex Gilmour
22. Cameron Thurley
23. Matthew Moody
24. Chad Jones
25. Harry Miller
26. Daniel McConnell
27. Adam Campbell
28. Jay Nash
29. Tim Schmidt
30. Brad Symes
31. Joshua Krueger
32. Brayden Shaw
33. Jed Adcock
 
Claude Balls said:
No, un unmitigated disaster would have been if several stars were selected AFTER Tenace. Here are the first two rounds for 2003. It's basically, who, who, who and who, with the exception of two or 3 good players who will reach 200 games.

7. Tenace
8. Raph Clarke
9. David Trotter
10. Ryley Dunn
11. Beau Waters
12. Ryan Murphy
13. Brent Stanton
14. Fergus Watts
15. Troy Chaplin
16. Josh Willoughby
17. Billy Morrison
18. Llane Spaanderman
19. David Mundy
20. Sam Butler
21. Alex Gilmour
22. Cameron Thurley
23. Matthew Moody
24. Chad Jones
25. Harry Miller
26. Daniel McConnell
27. Adam Campbell
28. Jay Nash
29. Tim Schmidt
30. Brad Symes
31. Joshua Krueger
32. Brayden Shaw
33. Jed Adcock
Click to expand...

Not many stars in that list. Stanton, Jed Adcock, Troy Chaplin, Beau Waters (not sure that if David Mundy is the current Freo Mundy). Some good players there but not real stars. Poor draft basically.

I really dislike the fact people think Wells can always get it right. He wont - it is impossible to get right 100 % of the time. I have often written that he is the best recruiter but has his failures - like all recruiters do. He has to viewed in context - in comparison to other recruiters. His strike rate is higher than other recruiters and that is what makes him the best. He is not infallible.

Tiger Woods was, or is the best golfer, but no one expects him to win every tournament he plays in.

I think the best way to view recruiters, and a realistic one at that, is their strike rate and the picks they have available to them. If you mainly have not many top 10 picks it is obviously harder to secure champions. It can be done but it is harder to identify them.

So on both criteria Wells does well. High strike rate of very good footy players and using 10 + higher picks to get them.

People seem to think because they follow a club passionately that gives them the ability to criticise the club or a particular person in the club WITHOUT looking at the facts or evidence - or sufficient detail or context. An opinion for the sake of opinion is ghastly and becoming ever more prevalent in society.

You hear all the time I have a right to an opinion and yes you do - but why do want an opinion voiced that is not based on evidence, one that has been researched and checked ? We are living in dangerous times my friends.

Experts get it wrong to - but less often and at least they have put the time in and know many of the necessary factors that need be considered. Some people think because experts can get it wrong it justifies them having an unsubstantiated opinion. Can you see how dangerous things are becoming ?

It is a bit different on a Board like this which is designed for passionate footy followers to voice an opinion - but it would be nice if they were at least considered opinions. And yes there are some questions that can never be fully answered. Had Chapman and Simpson played against the Hawks in the Prelim - would have we won ? Well such questions are ponderable but can never truly be answered - as they cannot be tested.

I enjoy mots posters on this Board even if we have different opinions on things. Many provide detail and evidence for their opinion and I consider that to be good form - and many have changed my opinion because their argument is persuasive and evidenced based.

Please keep that coming guys.

PS. Great info CB.
 
And of course all those that have issued shoot on sight order to Wells for taking Lang are the same people who issued the same order in 06 when he took Selwood. Bad knee, broken leg, what was he thinking...o_O

Not suggesting Lang will win BnF, 3 flags, NAB Rising star, AA etc - but maybe, just maybe the pick is not as bad as the nay sayers are making out.

Go Catters
 
Moggy said:
I know bugger all about it, but it seems that if they don't have your "beep test" and "vertical leap" data, then the draft media (circus) don't know you exist.
Click to expand...

If you think this is a circus, imagine the scrutiny placed on the young men who are trying to get into the NFL or NBA :eek:

I heard they even go as far as to measure hand size as that can play a big part in their career
 
Bobby_ said:
If you think this is a circus, imagine the scrutiny placed on the young men who are trying to get into the NFL or NBA :eek:

I heard they even go as far as to measure hand size as that can play a big part in their career
Click to expand...


I guess the Hawks missed the measurement of Garlett's tackle. Clearly they have no idea how big a dick he can be..:cool:

Go Catters
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Bobby_ said:
If you think this is a circus, imagine the scrutiny placed on the young men who are trying to get into the NFL or NBA :eek:

I heard they even go as far as to measure hand size as that can play a big part in their career
Click to expand...
Did they do that back in the 80's? I'm pretty sure they didn't, because if they did I'm certain that Muggsy Bogues wouldn't have ever played in the NBA.
 
Just reading the articles about Lang on the AFL site,sounds like
a pretty serious injury he sustained this year.
May miss a decent chunk of pre-season too by the sounds of it.
Will be behind the 8 ball from the get go then,fair to not expect too much
from him in 2014 then.
 
He
BUSTER29 said:
Just reading the articles about Lang on the AFL site,sounds like
a pretty serious injury he sustained this year.
May miss a decent chunk of pre-season too by the sounds of it.
Will be behind the 8 ball from the get go then,fair to not expect too much
from him in 2014 then.
Click to expand...

He says he is just starting to run now and will be ready to do full training in Feb. I assume that means no full pre-season (as per usual with our first pick) and he will therefore start the season proper late.

At 77 kgs I cannot see him playing seniors next season but if can be eased into the VFL team by rounds 3-4 and then get a good run and then a full pre-season could play a few senior games next season. Especially if Kelly pulls the pin.
 
Bobby_ said:
immediate Kelly replacement?
Highlights looked as though Lang has no worries winning contested footy or clearances and even better, his foot skills are considered very good.
Click to expand...

No idea but cannot see him playing senior next season- but I suppose he could play 2015 if Kelly pulls the pin. We also have Jansen who is already probably big enough to play midfield but suspect he wont have the tank yet for an AFL midfield position. May start as a sub a bit like Caddy but Caddy had a pretty good tank already.

Let's just hope that Kelly has a good season next year - but he seemed a little slower and less effective in the back end of this season. I think he may only have maybe 2 seasons at best left in him - but of course he could well prove me wrong.
 
I don't have high expectations for next year, possibly not for 2015 either, as that type of injury can take a while to overcome. Both physically and mentally. But after that I think he could really take off. The fact he likes his cricket and that was his priority, instead of a full footy preseason, makes me think theres plenty of room for improvement.
 
Claude Balls said:
No, un unmitigated disaster would have been if several stars were selected AFTER Tenace. Here are the first two rounds for 2003. It's basically, who, who, who and who, with the exception of two or 3 good players who will reach 200 games.

7. Tenace
8. Raph Clarke
9. David Trotter
10. Ryley Dunn
11. Beau Waters
12. Ryan Murphy
13. Brent Stanton
14. Fergus Watts
15. Troy Chaplin
16. Josh Willoughby
17. Billy Morrison
18. Llane Spaanderman
19. David Mundy
20. Sam Butler
21. Alex Gilmour
22. Cameron Thurley
23. Matthew Moody
24. Chad Jones
25. Harry Miller
26. Daniel McConnell
27. Adam Campbell
28. Jay Nash
29. Tim Schmidt
30. Brad Symes
31. Joshua Krueger
32. Brayden Shaw
33. Jed Adcock
Click to expand...

Adcock, Waters, Chaplin, Mundy would be the nice gets out of that lot.
IIRC, many were keen on Tenace before we got him.
 
Jon Douglas said:
Let's just hope that Kelly has a good season next year - but he seemed a little slower and less effective in the back end of this season. I think he may only have maybe 2 seasons at best left in him - but of course he could well prove me wrong.
Click to expand...

Kelly had a late start to preseason don't forget, that might have had a little to do with it. He's got 2 years left, maybe more depending on how his next 2 years work out. I don't think we draft guys with the expectation to replace someone like Kelly in 2 years either. We seem a bit more long term than that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dazbroncos
Senior 11. Mitchell Edwards (2023 - )
2 3
Replies
54
Views
5K
Shadow89
S

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top