Analysis Collingwood Almanac 2015

[Knightmare]

I wonder if Ayce Cordy still has any value, delisted by Dogs but still only 25, ruck/3rd tall prospect which we have found very hard to fill.

Ayce Cordy while he may seem appealing to some due to his height and initially high draft position lacks a point of difference or even a best position.

Cordy I'd deem to be something like a poor man's Keeffe. So other than considering Cordy for a VFL list position, I wouldn't spend any more time thinking about him than that.

If we're looking for depth in a ruck/3rd tall type (and I don't believe we need it with Moore, White and Gault then Witts and Cox behind Grundy who will both want games) but Sam Grimley if we were to say delist Gault and/or White could be an alternative as someone who Hawthorn may delist. Grimley is less bad through the ruck than Cordy and also as a forward at least at VFL level experienced success and as such isn't as far off AFL standard.

 

[TradeDraft]

Ayce Cordy while he may seem appealing to some due to his height and initially high draft position lacks a point of difference or even a best position.

Cordy I'd deem to be something like a poor man's Keeffe. So other than considering Cordy for a VFL list position, I wouldn't spend any more time thinking about him than that.

If we're looking for depth in a ruck/3rd tall type (and I don't believe we need it with Moore, White and Gault then Witts and Cox behind Grundy who will both want games) but Sam Grimley if we were to say delist Gault and/or White could be an alternative as someone who Hawthorn may delist. Grimley is less bad through the ruck than Cordy and also as a forward at least at VFL level experienced success and as such isn't as far off AFL standard.

Ayce Cordy = A Massive Dissapoinment

 

[mike123]

If Seedsman were to go to Adelaide or the Kangaroos, what would be a realistic trade outcome you'd support?

 

[TradeDraft]

If Seedsman were to go to Adelaide or the Kangaroos, what would be a realistic trade outcome you'd support?

There 2nd Round pick. Maybe Mullett for Seedsman?

 

[soreplums]

There 2nd Round pick. Maybe Mullett for Seedsman?

I'd take mullet for Seedsman in a heartbeat. Understand that mullet just signed recently though.

 

[Knightmare]

If Seedsman were to go to Adelaide or the Kangaroos, what would be a realistic trade outcome you'd support?

That's a tricky one.

The issue is Seedsman's value would be fairly low as a fringe type, so gaining a piece of interest in a trade is difficult and really other than a move for a far superior player I would not support a trade involving Seedsman, as he offers exactly what we don't have in outside run and carry. So I'd be more inclined to move him if it is for a bigger name piece - say a Treloar as a result.

From North Melbourne I'd consider Lindsay Thomas or Ryan Bastinac if offered for Seedsman.
From Adelaide I'd consider Cameron Ellis-Yolmen or Charlie Cameron if offered for Seedsman.

The most likely possibility if dealing with either club would be picks, which with both Adelaide or North Melbourne probably their second round pick would be what we'd be hoping for if we are in a situation where we absolutely must trade Seedsman to one of those clubs for whatever reason.

Whether either team is willing to give up any of these pieces or picks for Seedsman would be up to their evaluations of his talent v the other talents listed or picks listed, I'd tend to think in the case of all the above they would not. But you can only ask.

Thomas and Cameron I like as small forwards, and they're types I could see room for alongside our current forward mix. Ellis-Yolmen while we have a strong midfield group, his contested ball winning I feel can be among the better mids in the game based on how dominant his contested ball winning was when he was around the ball. And Bastinac as a high motor outside runner and high level accumulator also would offer something we could probably do with some more of. So that would be the general thought process.

 

[4#Didak#4]

Is there any reason we wouldn't want to make a big play at a guy like Jake Carlisle (apart from the whole ASADA thingy)?

Carlisle is on the market with no club nomintated. His only request seems to be to play in defense. Personally I think this suits us great. Our key depth stocks are really poor since losing Keefe. Brown & Frost have done a great job this year and were unusually durable (especially Brown), however we were one injury away from disaster. We had a rookies in Marsh & Moore in reserve and an injured Reid. Taking Moore & Reid away from the forward line is just robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Carlisle is a great defender and an inconsistent forward. He would shore up our back half nicely. Reid is somewhat similar in versatility, but he is happy to play forward and it frees him to play forward which I think is where he provides most value to our team. We then have the ridiculous luxury of swapping them (and Moore) around at times during a game plus Carlisle can pinch hit the ruck. We would be killing two birds with one stone - it ensures we have class at both ends. I see him as essentially replacing the role we had ear marked for Keefe, except Carlisle is one massive upgrade on Keefe - plus Carlisle probably took better drugs

It is just a matter of getting a deal done. Essendon are known to be pretty unreasonable traders and they will make this trade painful for everyone. However they will (or should) not allow him to walk to Carlton in the PSD for nothing - and nothing would please me more than him not at Carlton.

Our current trade pawns seem to be Seedsman, Freeman and Witts (plus some picks of course). Essendon should and would be very interested in each of those for varying reasons. They have seen first hand what Seedsman can do and suits their game style. Freeman by himself would be attractive with his foot speed and his age profile (but potentially can be turned into a first rounder if traded elsewhere). They need a ruckman badly as Giles & Bellchambers were very poor this year. I am not inclined to trade Witts but if a deal is right then maybe. I think we do have enough to be able to arrive at a mutually satisfying deal.

Given we were waving wads of cash at Kreuzer, salary cap should not be an issue.

If I say Freeman, Seedsman, Witts, First & Second Round Pick for Treloar, Carlisle and some loose change I feel our best 22 improves enourmously albeit at the cost of some decent depth.

 

[Ketchup]

IF reports of Seedsman potentially wanting to go to Adelaide (although I don't believe it for a second), do you think a straight swap with Charlie Cameron would be achievable? If he wanted to come our way.

Personally, I think Seedsman is worth squat, but Id rather try target a specific need players (such as a small forward) than a third or fourth round pick.

Who would you look at with the three clubs listed so far? North, Adelaide and Brisbane

 

[Knightmare]

Is there any reason we wouldn't want to make a big play at a guy like Jake Carlisle (apart from the whole ASADA thingy)?

Carlisle is on the market with no club nomintated. His only request seems to be to play in defense. Personally I think this suits us great. Our key depth stocks are really poor since losing Keefe. Brown & Frost have done a great job this year and were unusually durable (especially Brown), however we were one injury away from disaster. We had a rookies in Marsh & Moore in reserve and an injured Reid. Taking Moore & Reid away from the forward line is just robbing Peter to pay Paul.

Carlisle is a great defender and an inconsistent forward. He would shore up our back half nicely. Reid is somewhat similar in versatility, but he is happy to play forward and it frees him to play forward which I think is where he provides most value to our team. We then have the ridiculous luxury of swapping them (and Moore) around at times during a game plus Carlisle can pinch hit the ruck. We would be killing two birds with one stone - it ensures we have class at both ends. I see him as essentially replacing the role we had ear marked for Keefe, except Carlisle is one massive upgrade on Keefe - plus Carlisle probably took better drugs

It is just a matter of getting a deal done. Essendon are known to be pretty unreasonable traders and they will make this trade painful for everyone. However they will (or should) not allow him to walk to Carlton in the PSD for nothing - and nothing would please me more than him not at Carlton.

Our current trade pawns seem to be Seedsman, Freeman and Witts (plus some picks of course). Essendon should and would be very interested in each of those for varying reasons. They have seen first hand what Seedsman can do and suits their game style. Freeman by himself would be attractive with his foot speed and his age profile (but potentially can be turned into a first rounder if traded elsewhere). They need a ruckman badly as Giles & Bellchambers were very poor this year. I am not inclined to trade Witts but if a deal is right then maybe. I think we do have enough to be able to arrive at a mutually satisfying deal.

Given we were waving wads of cash at Kreuzer, salary cap should not be an issue.

If I say Freeman, Seedsman, Witts, First & Second Round Pick for Treloar, Carlisle and some loose change I feel our best 22 improves enourmously albeit at the cost of some decent depth.

Carlisle I'm relatively down on and rather than from a talent standpoint, instead from a character standpoint. He from reports this season has been to paraphrase uninterested and with his heart just not in the game. And being photographed in public smoking a cigarette is not the imagine you want your players portraying and as such I can only imagine we will not talk to Essendon regarding Jake.

Carlisle has had a down season that is not representative of his talent. So in theory his value is lower than it should be which as a potential buyer suggests potentially good conditions to buy if other clubs don't get too overexcited, which being a still young tall I anticipate probably happens.

But forward or back, and I'm with you probably back, I'd love to have him. It's just hard to see us having the assets available to get him if we go ahead with making the play for Treloar firstly, then Aish.

I'd be open to a trade of Jack Frost for Jake Carlisle if Essendon want another tall who can step in and help from round one. Anyone inside my preferred best 22 or picks until the trades we have flagged as priorities have been made, I would not be attempting a trade for Carlisle myself.

Give the media reports with nothing linking Carlisle to Essendon the reality is he won't be one of our considerations, and that is to be expected given the number of other names we have been heavily tied to. But additionally with our depth of key defenders, while I feel Carlisle would be an upgrade, I see with our consistent view to fill needs that he will for these reasons in our situation be overlooked.

IF reports of Seedsman potentially wanting to go to Adelaide (although I don't believe it for a second), do you think a straight swap with Charlie Cameron would be achievable? If he wanted to come our way.

Personally, I think Seedsman is worth squat, but Id rather try target a specific need players (such as a small forward) than a third or fourth round pick.

Who would you look at with the three clubs listed so far? North, Adelaide and Brisbane

The talk is Seedsman can attract a top 30 pick or equivalent.

I mentioned Charlie Cameron in an earlier question (maybe this thread or another thread) as someone I would consider in a trade of Seedsman.

My gut feel is while the value is probably pretty close, that Adelaide would not accept a Cameron for Seedsman trade.

Most likely given all the picks we are expected to be trading out (with the club hoping to add Treloar and Aish) that we most likely would be looking at the second round selection of an Adelaide or North.

 

[Men of Steele]

Ayce Cordy while he may seem appealing to some due to his height and initially high draft position lacks a point of difference or even a best position.

Cordy I'd deem to be something like a poor man's Keeffe. So other than considering Cordy for a VFL list position, I wouldn't spend any more time thinking about him than that.

If we're looking for depth in a ruck/3rd tall type (and I don't believe we need it with Moore, White and Gault then Witts and Cox behind Grundy who will both want games) but Sam Grimley if we were to say delist Gault and/or White could be an alternative as someone who Hawthorn may delist. Grimley is less bad through the ruck than Cordy and also as a forward at least at VFL level experienced success and as such isn't as far off AFL standard.

He simply just cannot play and is quite possibly the worst player to ever be senior listed in history.

 

[4#Didak#4]

Carlisle I'm relatively down on and rather than from a talent standpoint, instead from a character standpoint. He from reports this season has been to paraphrase uninterested and with his heart just not in the game. And being photographed in public smoking a cigarette is not the imagine you want your players portraying and as such I can only imagine we will not talk to Essendon regarding Jake.

Carlisle has had a down season that is not representative of his talent. So in theory his value is lower than it should be which as a potential buyer suggests potentially good conditions to buy if other clubs don't get too overexcited, which being a still young tall I anticipate probably happens.

But forward or back, and I'm with you probably back, I'd love to have him. It's just hard to see us having the assets available to get him if we go ahead with making the play for Treloar firstly, then Aish.

I'd be open to a trade of Jack Frost for Jake Carlisle if Essendon want another tall who can step in and help from round one. Anyone inside my preferred best 22 or picks until the trades we have flagged as priorities have been made, I would not be attempting a trade for Carlisle myself.

Give the media reports with nothing linking Carlisle to Essendon the reality is he won't be one of our considerations, and that is to be expected given the number of other names we have been heavily tied to. But additionally with our depth of key defenders, while I feel Carlisle would be an upgrade, I see with our consistent view to fill needs that he will for these reasons in our situation be overlooked.

I would suggest that if we have Treloar that we shouldn't waste resources chasing another mid in Aish (talkikng about bad attitudes!) if there is key position players floating around. Key position players like Carlisle are very difficult to find so if there is even a small window we should be trying to jump into it.

I actually just think our key position stocks are thin not only in number but in class so I think the need is far greater than adding another mid where we have great depth.

Key Forward: Cloke, Moore, White
Key Back: Brown, Frost, Marsh
With Reid being able to play either end.

If we can get Reid on the park and keep Cloke & Brown fit things are OK, but as we saw this year when we lose one of those guys things unravel very quickly. Any time where White is playing as the first or second key forward or even a first or second year player it means we have got things wrong.

I take on board the fact his attitude did stink this year. However I think this stems from a great deal of stress and frustration from the whole Essendon situation. A number of Bombers players have dropped away significantly in performance and attitude and this is no coincidence. People need to cut all those players some slack and take their situation into account. I think a fresh start will help in many ways.

Carlisle's upside is extremely high, his ability to control the air in his area is elite. His hands are second to only Cloke in the game, I am pretty bullish about having two contested marking beasts at either end of the ground.

I think St Kilda is in the box seat for him if they put their first round pick up - and you can guarantee they will demand this (its rumoured they already have asked for Jack Billings!). North Melb have withdrawn their interest due to the number of Key Position players they already have. My take on it is that Jake just wants to get out of Essendon for a fresh start preferably to a Melbourne club who will be in contention in the next 1-4 years.

Whoever can get a deal done with Essendon will get him, simple as that. Once the Treloar deal is done I would be throwing everything behind that being the next priority.

 

[Knightmare]

I would suggest that if we have Treloar that we shouldn't waste resources chasing another mid in Aish (talkikng about bad attitudes!) if there is key position players floating around. Key position players like Carlisle are very difficult to find so if there is even a small window we should be trying to jump into it.

I actually just think our key position stocks are thin not only in number but in class so I think the need is far greater than adding another mid where we have great depth.

Key Forward: Cloke, Moore, White
Key Back: Brown, Frost, Marsh
With Reid being able to play either end.

If we can get Reid on the park and keep Cloke & Brown fit things are OK, but as we saw this year when we lose one of those guys things unravel very quickly. Any time where White is playing as the first or second key forward or even a first or second year player it means we have got things wrong.

I take on board the fact his attitude did stink this year. However I think this stems from a great deal of stress and frustration from the whole Essendon situation. A number of Bombers players have dropped away significantly in performance and attitude and this is no coincidence. People need to cut all those players some slack and take their situation into account. I think a fresh start will help in many ways.

Carlisle's upside is extremely high, his ability to control the air in his area is elite. His hands are second to only Cloke in the game, I am pretty bullish about having two contested marking beasts at either end of the ground.

I think St Kilda is in the box seat for him if they put their first round pick up - and you can guarantee they will demand this (its rumoured they already have asked for Jack Billings!). North Melb have withdrawn their interest due to the number of Key Position players they already have. My take on it is that Jake just wants to get out of Essendon for a fresh start preferably to a Melbourne club who will be in contention in the next 1-4 years.

Whoever can get a deal done with Essendon will get him, simple as that. Once the Treloar deal is done I would be throwing everything behind that being the next priority.

I agree with a lot of the concepts you put forward and a lot of what you are thinking, though I do see our situation slightly differently.

In terms of our stocks as a starting point.
We have:
KPD: Brown, Frost
DEF/KPD: Marsh, Scharenberg
KPP: Reid
KPF: Cloke
KPF/RUCK: Moore, Gault, White
RUCK/KPF: Witts, Cox
RUCK: Grundy

And within this I would look to play:
Brown with Marsh and Scharenberg.
Then Cloke and Reid with Grundy and one of Witts/Moore/Cox.

Then Frost is that depth key defender with probably Moore and Cox until they pass those others by or someone gets hurt (probably Reid) those next in line.

And that group I'm mostly happy with, though very open to improving if we can acquire a higher level option in any of those positions other than the ruck. And shouldn't require White or Gault to play.

I agree with your assessment of Carlisle where he just seemed plainly fed up with all the ASADA stuff and Essendon generally which has resulted in his form slump last year and to a greater extent this season. And probably this also impacted on his behaviour more generally. So I'd at the right price be open to him.

As for Aish v Carlisle. I'm anticipating that Aish is the cheaper of the two. Aish we may be able to get for our second round selection and a fringe type. And if Aish nominates us, that puts us in front position to get him.

Carlisle on the other hand would require I'm guessing a pick perhaps as high as pick 10 to get with the market for him seeming hotter.

So Aish being cheaper and not coming with the baggage based on that is my slight preference. But positionally and on immediate offering, I completely agree you are right to prefer Carlisle with the quality of our kpp stocks not what ideally they should be.

Additionally with Carlisle, I see it less as targetting either Carlisle or Aish, but more so Treloar or Aish. With Essendon probably wanting our pick 7 (even if it means Collingwood were to gain Carlisle and Essendon's second round selection).

 

[Implanttheseed]

Knightmare saw that jack Fitzpatrick was delisted.. Thoughts on him in Gault out?

 

[Knightmare]

Knightmare saw that jack Fitzpatrick was delisted.. Thoughts on him in Gault out?

Much of a muchness. Both tall, athletic and versatile without being AFL standard.

I liked Fitzpatrick as a junior with his acceleration at his height that real point of difference. But the reality is he has not found a position that he plays to an AFL standard and has not shown that improvement many had hoped to develop into any particular position.

 

[Apex36]

Interested to know your thoughts on Ben McKay KM? 200cm, seems to be able to play both ends of the ground and has shown significant development since deciding to follow his brother in to the TAC cup system.

Would he be worth a shot with a mid 20's pick? Has the traits that Hine seems to love in being a bottom ager and significant scope for development.

 

[Knightmare]

Interested to know your thoughts on Ben McKay KM? 200cm, seems to be able to play both ends of the ground and has shown significant development since deciding to follow his brother in to the TAC cup system.

Would he be worth a shot with a mid 20's pick? Has the traits that Hine seems to love in being a bottom ager and significant scope for development.

McKay has certainly over the second half of the season come into calculations.

He may push into the late first round range, or if not then in the 20s somewhere seems to be the rough feel for where he lands.

McKay is 200cm and young as a late December birthday. So that's always handy and leaves the possibility open for a greater level of development than many others in this draft class.

To compare Ben to Harry (his twin brother) Harry is the more athletic and probably better rounded talent, Ben is the stronger built and stronger mark of the two.

Is Ben worth selecting? He may be, but I'm not convinced beyond doubt and as such I'd favour others I'm more confident in. With both of those McKay boys more glimpses of promise with only mild, inconsistent and often quiet performance. In KPPs I'd like someone more dominant beyond doubt rather than the McKays who both are very speculative recruiting choices.

If we retain our second round selection. I'd personally prefer Kieran Collins, Clayton Oliver, Ryan Clarke, Wayne Milera or Luke Partington as players who have all performed strongly throughout the season and have the production and impact of performance behind them to make me feel confident in the 20s if there to select them.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Hey Knightmare,

There is a lot of talk around the pointy end of the draft and trade period ...

... but what are your thoughts about the less fancied blunt end of the draft and trade period?

We've had magnificent success in recent periods with Langdon, Williams, Frost and Crisp. Marsh, Oxley and Ramsay are also on their way to becoming hits. Dwyer played his role.

We seem to be averaging around 2 to 3 hits from the fringes.

What do you think is behind this? Is it that some players just respond very well to the senior football environment in general? Or the Collingwood environment in particular?

Are we better at finding fringe players who will fill best 22 roles?

IMHO, it's the ability of teams to find these players from the fringes that is the key to their success. Is that fair?

 

[mike123]

Our injuries have certainly helped fringe players make their mark.

 

[Unknown Identity]

Ryan Clarke is the one i want...
Not sure he'll last until our 2nd round.

 

[Knightmare]

Hey Knightmare,

There is a lot of talk around the pointy end of the draft and trade period ...

... but what are your thoughts about the less fancied blunt end of the draft and trade period?

We've had magnificent success in recent periods with Langdon, Williams, Frost and Crisp. Marsh, Oxley and Ramsay are also on their way to becoming hits. Dwyer played his role.

We seem to be averaging around 2 to 3 hits from the fringes.

What do you think is behind this? Is it that some players just respond very well to the senior football environment in general? Or the Collingwood environment in particular?

Are we better at finding fringe players who will fill best 22 roles?

IMHO, it's the ability of teams to find these players from the fringes that is the key to their success. Is that fair?

The dynamic of this draft relative to the norm is that the top 5 is excellent. Top 20 reasonable but below average. Top 30 below average. And from 30 onward this is a poor draft and as bad as we've seen in the past 10 years.

And understanding this dynamic of this years draft and having heard Hine's interviews relating to this years draft he has consistently to paraphrase mentioned that he does not at all like this draft and that he would like to firstly trade out of the draft and secondly minimise the players taken. So the conditions after the first 30 will probably be something like the rookie draft last year where we were looking at Manteit for a feel as to the quality of players and unless someone high on our draft board slides into the late/rookie draft region this year is not likely the year we find many late/rookie. Though you never say never with our record excellent late/rookie and our recruiters arguably the best at the country be it early or late/rookie draft at identifying talents. And even you could add that for identifying talents for our VFL side we continue to do exceptionally well.

Why I feel we have had success doing this is a few things. We have the quality of recruiters with Hine and Rendell both particularly I'd say best three in the country standard talent identifiers. But in having those two the things we value in looking at the trends of those we pick are those who through:
1. Computer (statistical) analysis would be coming out on top.
2. Those younger types who have played state league footy and performed strongly.
3. Those who can win the contested footy with the view that contested ball winning is that one thing that most strongly translates and is most critical to AFL play.

And if they are actually as I speculate doing just this, I think they've got the formula pretty well spot on.
And I'd hope they'd understand other historical and other elements with the rookie draft and late draft regions of the draft such as the success of rookie rucks, the success of small forwards late/rookie draft, the success of backmen (tall/medium/small) and also outside types all having a relatively similar strike rate to the national draft compared to say key forwards where the position so much is about a talent superiority.

As for having such a good record late/rookie draft. Certainly 2010 and before I put that down to strong coaching and strong leadership. More recently while it's always going to be a combination of those factors, in more recent seasons with a number of our recruits I'm putting it more so down to strong talent identification with that more so now with our coaching group and leadership group not what we had by comparison in 2010.

In terms of this trade period I desperately hope and fully expect that the focus is entirely placed on getting better now and looking to add players specifically who can improve the quality of our best 22. And within that construct we'll no doubt look to target young players who fit suitably with our young core group coming through and will still be around when our younger types have fully developed so as to maximise our premiership chances when our young players peak.

Regarding fringe types, particularly on other lists. Up until last offseason that was in my view our most major failing from a recruiting perspective. Just seeing depth type after depth type added each season, only to waste a list position and get immediately overtaken by younger and better types we identify through the draft.
If you were to isolate those comments to our ability to identify role players late/rookie draft then I would agree with that, as we have found countless role players in the late/rookie regions of the draft and relatively that is a major strength.

 

[Knightmare]

Ryan Clarke is the one i want...
Not sure he'll last until our 2nd round.

I love Ryan Clarke's game myself.

His speed, agility, endurance and work rate is very impressive and really stands out consistently at TAC Cup level. He has the numbers, the scoreboard impact. While he can lack consistency at times by foot, when he gets his kick going he can do big damage and really finishes well when within range of goal. Can win the contested footy to a high level and has the ideal inside/outside balance.

I was shocked that AFL draft writer Callum Twomey in an August draft update for AFL.com didn't rate Clarke inside his top 25 power rankings. So whether AFL clubs agree with Cal will be interesting, but it may be plausible that Clarke may be available if indeed they do.
Then again he also doesn't rate Luke Partington inside his top 25. So like most years, my draft views again will be very different to that of recruiters.

On Clarke, I personally rate him a top 10 quality prospect in this draft so fair to say my assessment of Clarke is very different.

 

[76woodenspooners]

Curious about the idea of shallow drafts ...

Does that literally mean that the talent waxes and wanes from year to year?

Or does it mean that the ability of recruiters to identify talent waxes and wanes from year to year?

For example, if we went back over previous seasons and plotted 'recruiters predicted strong and weak seasons' versus 'performance of players picked up in the 30 to 50 range'; how much correlation would there be?

Why I feel we have had success doing this is a few things. We have the quality of recruiters with Hine and Rendell both particularly I'd say best three in the country standard talent identifiers. But in having those two the things we value in looking at the trends of those we pick are those who through:
1. Computer (statistical) analysis would be coming out on top.
2. Those younger types who have played state league footy and performed strongly.
3. Those who can win the contested footy with the view that contested ball winning is that one thing that most strongly translates and is most critical to AFL play.

And if they are actually as I speculate doing just this, I think they've got the formula pretty well spot on.

I'd add another key ingredient to the mix ...

... In a Hine interview ages ago, he described how they run a feedback process where they go back over their draft misses and try to understand why they were missed, and then assess how they should refine their processes.

That's continuous improvement at its finest!

 

[Justlokan]

In a Hine interview ages ago, he described how they run a feedback process where they go back over their draft misses and try to understand why they were missed, and then assess how they should refine their processes.

That's continuous improvement at its finest!

Not trying to be a wet blanket but I would expect this happens regularly at most if not all clubs. Continuous improvement is where we find innovative ways to manage lists, particularly in response to changing regulations and landscape. For instance, I'd like to think Hine and co have looked at the player types we'll need as a result of changes to the sub rule and interchange caps. It's not just about looking back at our misses but what type of player we need for the future.

Or maybe looking at specific players from other clubs with a view to employing them for a specific need and then aiming to discard them in a few years (the free agency nature of the market would allow this). White may be a good example of this, fulfilling a need for the 2nd ruck/2nd KPF until Darcy develops. This type of recruiting could be the future of list management, helping clubs maintain competitiveness while still regenerating their lists. Geelong and Sydney are good examples of this, as history has shown that bottoming out doesn't always work and takes a long time (eg Melbourne and Carlton)

 

[Knightmare]

Curious about the idea of shallow drafts ...

Does that literally mean that the talent waxes and wanes from year to year?

Or does it mean that the ability of recruiters to identify talent waxes and wanes from year to year?

For example, if we went back over previous seasons and plotted 'recruiters predicted strong and weak seasons' versus 'performance of players picked up in the 30 to 50 range'; how much correlation would there be?



I'd add another key ingredient to the mix ...

... In a Hine interview ages ago, he described how they run a feedback process where they go back over their draft misses and try to understand why they were missed, and then assess how they should refine their processes.

That's continuous improvement at its finest!

Every year the dynamics are different with different guys coming through.

This year looking in any u18 competition. It's plainly obvious how reduced the standard is and more particularly from a draft perspective how few if any are showing they can take over or heavily influence games in any way. And that's why this year is looking so glum with arguably no worthwhile talents in WA this year and the Victorian talents not up to the level they generally (and more particularly the Metro boys).

The ability of recruiters is much of a muchness, you can have your better years and worse years, but essentially the talent is not the same every year and this is one of those years when good options are particularly scarce.

Generally the correlation is fairly strong between what recruiters expect and what actually happens. There will be differences of course with some surprises, sometimes things work out slightly better/worse than expected. But when as extremely as is the case this year, it's plainly obvious with this looking and it seems a near consensus the most shallow draft we've seen in the past 10 seasons.

You're right about the looking back over what was done well/badly in hindsight.

From my own perspective I know last year I underrated the role playing potential of several what I'd describe lesser talented, and that's something as a result I need to focus in on changing so that I can better identify those lower level role players who may like say Jack Lonie as an example carve out a role. And this is just one of several examples I could have given of several holes I have identified in my own ability as an identifier of junior talent that I will put the work into to fix.

 

[4#Didak#4]

We often discuss positions and how to classify players. Below is the coaches AA team using "best practice" structure according to all opposition club analysts:

BACKS
Tall/medium defender: Easton Wood (WB)
Tall defender: Alex Rance (Rich)
Small defender: Zach Tuohy (Carl)
Medium defender: Bob Murphy (WB)
Tall defender: Cale Hooker (Ess)
Medium defender: Jarrad McVeigh (Syd)

MIDFIELD
Ruck: Todd Goldstein (NM)
Inside/outside midfielder: Dan Hannebery (Syd)
Inside midfielders: Nat Fyfe (Fre), Josh Kennedy (Syd), Matt Priddis (WC)
Inside/outside midfielder: Andrew Gaff (WC)

FORWARDS
Inside/outside midfielder: Patrick Dangerfield (Adel)
Key forward: Jake Stringer (WB)
High half-forward: Brett Deledio (Rich)
Small forward: Chad Wingard (PA)
Key forward: Josh Kennedy (WC)
Tall/medium forward: Jack Gunston (Haw)

INTERCHANGE
Inside midfielder: David Mundy (Fre)
Inside/outside midfielder: Scott Pendlebury (Coll, capt)
Inside/outside midfielder: Bernie Vince (Melb)
Ruckman: Nic Naitanui (WC)


My Collingwood Version (with depth players in brackets):

BACKS
Tall/medium defender: Tyson Goldsack (Adam Oxley)
Tall defender: Nathan Brown (Jonothan Marsh)
Small defender: Marley Williams (Ben Sinclair, Jackson Ramsay)
Medium defender: Matthew Scharenburg (Brayden Maynard)
Tall defender: Jack Frost
Medium defender: Alan Toovey (Tom Langdon)

MIDFIELD
Ruck: Brodie Grundy
Inside/outside midfielder: Scott Pendlebury
Inside midfielders: Levi Greenwood, Taylor Adams, Jack Crisp
Inside/outside midfielder: Steele Sidebottom

FORWARDS
Inside/outside midfielder: Dane Swan
Key forward: Travis Cloke (Corey Gault)
High half-forward: Jamie Elliot
Small forward: Alex Fasolo (Jarryd Blair, Ben Kennedy)
Key forward: Ben Reid (Jesse White)
Tall/medium forward: Darcy Moore (Brenden Abbott)

INTERCHANGE
Inside midfielder: Jordan De Goey (Brent Macaffer)
Inside/outside midfielder: Travis Varcoe (Paul Seedsman)
Inside/outside midfielder: Tim Broomhead (Nathan Freeman, Matthew Goodyear)
Ruckman: Jarrod Witts (Mason Cox)

I have left out the delisting and may have missed one or two like Karnezis (meh).

There is a lot of midfielders in these setups and we are pretty well placed especially if we can add a Treloar into the mix.

High half-forward is a specialist position it seems and Elliot is well suited here as well as say Dane Swan if Treloar moves in to the midfield mix.

I am reasonably concerned by the lack of key defender and forward depth. However the above is a 36 man squad so we I expect we will add something in the offseason that will at least provide some depth and cover in these areas.

I am aware Darcy Moore as a Tall/Medium forward is not a perfect fit, but we simply do not have that sort of player other than say Goldsack and potentially PM Abbott (should have more free time next year). We could run with say Moore as a key forward, Reid back and Abbott as the medium/tall forward.