How long should a rebuild take?

[Joao]

Yeah you need some experience left to teach the kids or you can end in the wilderness for years, look at Carlton and Melbourne with their 5 year plans every 5 years.

Of course the real key to any flag is a period of good luck, you could keep drafting the best players available for 10 years and still fail if they were to run into an extended spell of injuries, personnel problems, concussion protocol etc.

100%

 

[Freomaniac]

Why is that funny?

Because like crows, port and eagles , GWS were expected to win a flag with in 8 years with the concessions they got

 

[bzparkes]

I found it interesting, listening to gettable, and them talking about North Melbourne rebuild being 5 or 6 years away from making finals.

Is a 8+ year rebuild too long?

Should we try to make it shorter?

It's not the 'rebuild' that takes time, that should only take around 3 years to accumulate enough talent.

It's the development, getting games/experience into young players and keeping the team together that takes time.

North's has only gone on so long because they've been a basket case since Scott left and Hawthorn/WCE are similar, as both tried to delay the inevitable by topping up when they where nowhere near it.

 

[go_the_dockers]

It's not the 'rebuild' that takes time, that should only take around 3 years to accumulate enough talent.

It's the development, getting games/experience into young players and keeping the team together that takes time.

North's has only gone on so long because they've been a basket case since Scott left and Hawthorn/WCE are similar, as both tried to delay the inevitable by topping up when they where nowhere near it.

3 years is only 6 draftees in first 2 rounds.
I think you need to get lucky to rebuild in 3 years.

Agree, we will see it more with teams chasing flag then bottoming out badly which slows down rebuild as you start with no or little talent between 23 and 27.

 

[go_the_dockers]

The other option is worse than bottoming out. Being competitive e.g 6 to 10 is horrible spot to be for 3 years straight. . Assuming your list is not building.

Average draft picks but no chance of flag.

 

[bzparkes]

3 years is only 6 draftees in first 2 rounds.
I think you need to get lucky to rebuild in 3 years.

Agree, we will see it more with teams chasing flag then bottoming out badly which slows down rebuild as you start with no or little talent between 23 and 27.

Plenty of other avenues to bring talent in now though, such as MSD, supplementary sign ons and free agents. Then there's trading future picks to fast track, pick splitting and now talk of future picks.

You only really need to nail those 3x first rounders and have a few of those later picks become solid performers to get back into finals contention within a few years.

I'd say it's probably far more important to get the correct development team, coaching and fitness regime in place so that whoever you bring in develops properly.

People are fixated on high draft picks but WCE in 2018 won the flag with only 3x top 10 picks(Kennedy, Masten & Jetta), with Kennedy being the only real standout.

Obviously there were strong contributions from NN, Gaff and Sheppard throughout the year but only Sheppard managed to play in finals and even he went out injured in the first one.

Of the team that played in the 2018 grand final, only 7 of them were first rounders. 7 of them also came in via trades and that team was rock bottom right when GC/GWS entered the competition.

I'd say the success was more down to the right off-field appointments than the talent on the list necessarily. The exact same can be said for the club's fall from grace, obvious. Hawthorn in a similar basket, although they had more draft picks to play around with, as well as starting far earlier.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Plenty of other avenues to bring talent in now though, such as MSD, supplementary sign ons and free agents. Then there's trading future picks to fast track, pick splitting and now talk of future picks.

You only really need to nail those 3x first rounders and have a few of those later picks become solid performers to get back into finals contention within a few years.

I'd say it's probably far more important to get the correct development team, coaching and fitness regime in place so that whoever you bring in develops properly.

People are fixated on high draft picks but WCE in 2018 won the flag with only 3x top 10 picks(Kennedy, Masten & Jetta), with Kennedy being the only real standout.

Obviously there were strong contributions from NN, Gaff and Sheppard throughout the year but only Sheppard managed to play in finals and even he went out injured in the first one.

Of the team that played in the 2018 grand final, only 7 of them were first rounders. 7 of them also came in via trades and that team was rock bottom right when GC/GWS entered the competition.

I'd say the success was more down to the right off-field appointments than the talent on the list necessarily. The exact same can be said for the club's fall from grace, obvious. Hawthorn in a similar basket, although they had more draft picks to play around with, as well as starting far earlier.

Agree with large chunks of what you said.

I am not sure a bottom 6 side will get many free agents, especially the smaller sides.

 

[bzparkes]

Agree with large chunks of what you said.

I am not sure a bottom 6 side will get many free agents, especially the smaller sides.

That would be the last piece, IMO. FA's at the start are fine if your side lacks maturity but A-graders will only commit if they see a genuine chance at success.

It's pretty much where North failed, because other than when they courted Dusty, most of the other attempts were when they were on the down. Then there was bringing in Polec & Pittard, who were only there for the paycheck.

 

[go_the_dockers]

That would be the last piece, IMO. FA's at the start are fine if your side lacks maturity but A-graders will only commit if they see a genuine chance at success.

It's pretty much where North failed, because other than when they courted Dusty, most of the other attempts were when they were on the down. Then there was bringing in Polec & Pittard, who were only there for the paycheck.

That is almost once you have made finals.

Brisbane did well getting a few big bodied mids. You do need to find away to improve your 15-20 best players on your list, so you are half competitive early.

Until we get unlimited free agents, I think rebuilds will take a while.

 

[Ricky Vaughn]

North and WC are proof that this can occur. GC have been building for 14 years so far if Finals is considered a pass mark.

Lists take a long time if you go over the cliff. Geelong have managed to escape this surprisingly but maybe not forever.

100% it can occur, but it’s a failed rebuild.

if you make consistently good decisions on list management from “ground zero” you’ll be back in Finals within 5 years.

 

[Purple Suit]

100% it can occur, but it’s a failed rebuild.

if you make consistently good decisions on list management from “ground zero” you’ll be back in Finals within 5 years.

I think 5 years for a full rebuild is gold standard though. That is, 5 years out of finals while you rebuild the club. With 18 teams, 5 years out and 4 years in the finals would be an average. Teams obviously stay up longer too so others miss out for longer.

If playing / winning finals is the official end of a rebuild then Freo did it in 6 seasons out of finals. Losing a lot of senior players probably prolonged it but I think it will mean our contending period will be longer with a bigger core bunch of players and high end talent compressed. We have barely missed a draft pick along the way while losing a lot of good players and we now have three first rounders this year to top it off.

 

[Dazb86]

3 years