Analysis Clarko in 2019 “We’re a middle of the road team”

[lethalselbow]

When you're losing all the draft picks look crappy.

When you're winning it all looks golden.

Reckon many of our draft picks are a lot better than people on here realise. Also, there's a lot of early calls writing off players who have barely tied up their laces in a Hawthorn jumper.

My concern is the game plan as I'd like to see it working better and know what it is.

 

[Judd2Sewell]

Because Finn and Downie didn’t get a game and KID!!!!

Imagine if all of the posters that sit on the other side of this discussion started dismissing all of your arguments by simply saying, "because experience," after yet another bad loss with the same usual suspects in the side?

E.g.. Those in the media querying the rebuild see the likes of TOB, Ceglar, Howe, etc continue to get games simply, "because experience."

Doesn't really encouraging any kind of reasonable discourse now, does it? It's just going to inflame the situation on here.

 

[Judd2Sewell]

no it isnt. high picks are high picks, and the lower down you go the more flawed players naturally get

our drafting since 16, when we've had the picks, has been fine. Good even. The problem is of course our strategy meant we had very little of them.

By contrast, and something that never gets bought up because we were winning - our drafting during our threepeat was dreadful and one of the reasons were in the mess we are in.

I don't think a single player drafted between 2012-16 played in our side on the weekend other than Hardwick. Maybe there's one more idk

Hard to say that the drafting has been good at this stage.

Worpel and Day are the players that we have hit on. CJ looks to be another, though it is a smaller sample size.

Morrison and Cousins have been decent and will hopefully continue to develop into solid role players for us.

As it stands though, there are question marks over everyone else drafted in that period.

I personally believe that CJ, Finn, Downie, DGB, Brockman, Kosi, Lewis, Jeka and Mitchell will prove to be good to great draft choices - but we can't claim that as yet. Unfortunately we will likely only be able to make such a claim around the end of next year and onward, once these players are given a solid run in the team.

 

[Timo pez]

Releasing the shackles and losing by 100 might not have good positive energy about it either.

If the team played hard and desperate football, they wouldn't lose by 100 points regardless of the game style.

 

[MrPremiership]

If the team played hard and desperate football, they wouldn't lose by 100 points regardless of the game style.

or they still would

 

[Lickmesocks]

Playing Kosi and Jeka regardless of whether they are doing the right things is a recipe for disaster though.

We still have to have team values and non negotiables.

I am yet to see Kosi or Jeka do anything wrong as our slow ball movement and lack of ability to connect up from HB to HF would be a forwards nightmare.

The game against the crows when we attacked and moved the ball quickly all over the ground showed us that Kosi with some decent ball movement can be a reasonable forward.

 

[The hands of stone]

Trying to cover the list hole created from 2012-2016 we created an even bigger hole. It’s why I hope we just slowly focus on the rebuild.

Even Kennett’s compete by 2023 is rubbish. This list is woeful. The most likely way we are in finals in 2023 is by trading in a heap of players for draft picks. And some FA.

Which is what got us into this mess. It won’t lead to a flag but a long stretch of mediocrity. I want to see this club take risks for the future. Not for the short term

I would rather that than pull out the old '5 year' plan that every rebuild seems to be timelined too and rarely ever work .

Why not back ourselves to nail the next few drafts , the comp is pretty thin so its not a totally absurd aim to have .

 

[Jazzfan]

I would rather that than pull out the old '5 year' plan that every rebuild seems to be timelined too and rarely ever work .

Why not back ourselves to nail the next few drafts , the comp is pretty thin so its not a totally absurd aim to have .

IMO that can only work if we are aggressive, to get more picks inside the top 10. I don't think simply taking our draft hand in the next two drafts will be enough if we are aiming at being relevant in two years.

 

[Lickmesocks]

When you're losing all the draft picks look crappy.

When you're winning it all looks golden.

Reckon many of our draft picks are a lot better than people on here realise. Also, there's a lot of early calls writing off players who have barely tied up their laces in a Hawthorn jumper.

My concern is the game plan as I'd like to see it working better and know what it is.

Don’t question the game plan whatever you do. It’s the lack of talent to implement it that’s the issue .

 

[PT Bar None]

We've really lost the concept of context as a species, haven't we? We can only focus on things that we have seen very recently and that completely defines our world view?

Melbourne being held up as the gold standard of list rebuilding I just cannot get my head around. This is the same Melbourne that has been rebuilding their list for so long that their prized #1 picks have started retiring, yeah? That's actually happened and I haven't gone too hard on the LSD and woken up in a parallel universe, yeah? Feel like I have to check.

And this whole "XTZ is closer to their next premiership KDF" nonsense. It's utterly unpredictable!
How many excellent Melbourne teams have there been since the mid 60's? And how many premierships?
Ditto St Kilda
Ditto Bulldogs
Ditto Geelong.
Ditto Collingwood
etc.

Some properly good sides that came up with nada. The flipside of the same coin that was Bulldogs in 2016.

If you sat down in round 8, 2008 and forecast which list was closest to or furthest from their next Premiership, most people would've had the Tigers below the fold. And now they've got 3 and counting.

I know they're "the media" and they've got all this time to fill, so they have to talk about something. But I can't be the only one who remembers things that happened more than a year ago? I guess that's why I don't work in the media.

Some days, this *en world man...

 

[MrPremiership]

It's never as good as it seems.

It's never as bad as it seems.

 

[Judd2Sewell]

It's never as good as it seems.

It's never as bad as it seems.

Not true. 2013 to 2015 was every bit as good as it seemed.

 

[The Spirit of Cricket]

Hard to say that the drafting has been good at this stage.

Worpel and Day are the players that we have hit on. CJ looks to be another, though it is a smaller sample size.

Morrison and Cousins have been decent and will hopefully continue to develop into solid role players for us.

As it stands though, there are question marks over everyone else drafted in that period.

I personally believe that CJ, Finn, Downie, DGB, Brockman, Kosi, Lewis, Jeka and Mitchell will prove to be good to great draft choices - but we can't claim that as yet. Unfortunately we will likely only be able to make such a claim around the end of next year and onward, once these players are given a solid run in the team.

yeah fair enough, but relative to their draft position the listed players (aside from S. Mitchell, Downie, Finn and DGB) have already been substantially better than where they were picked just by debuting. I don't know the actual odds but I'd guess it's something like 1 in 5 chance of ever playing an AFL game pick 45+?

my point was more you cannot call our drafting since 16 bad, and it is not even remotely to blame for our current predicament. Broader list decisions, the rapid decline of good players and poor drafting during our 3peat years are much more at fault

 

[Jazzfan]

Don’t question the game plan whatever you do. It’s the lack of talent to implement it that’s the issue .

Didn't you see how angry Clarko was on the weekend?

 

[The Spirit of Cricket]

We've really lost the concept of context as a species, haven't we? We can only focus on things that we have seen very recently and that completely defines our world view?

Melbourne being held up as the gold standard of list rebuilding I just cannot get my head around. This is the same Melbourne that has been rebuilding their list for so long that their prized #1 picks have started retiring, yeah? That's actually happened and I haven't gone too hard on the LSD and woken up in a parallel universe, yeah? Feel like I have to check.

And this whole "XTZ is closer to their next premiership KDF" nonsense. It's utterly unpredictable!
How many excellent Melbourne teams have there been since the mid 60's? And how many premierships?
Ditto St Kilda
Ditto Bulldogs
Ditto Geelong.
Ditto Collingwood
etc.

Some properly good sides that came up with nada. The flipside of the same coin that was Bulldogs in 2016.

If you sat down in round 8, 2008 and forecast which list was closest to or furthest from their next Premiership, most people would've had the Tigers below the fold. And now they've got 3 and counting.

I know they're "the media" and they've got all this time to fill, so they have to talk about something. But I can't be the only one who remembers things that happened more than a year ago? I guess that's why I don't work in the media.

Some days, this fu**en world man...

Jimmy Toumpas, Tom Scully*, Jack Trengove*, Jack Watts*, Cale Morton, Jordan Gysberts, Lucas Cook, Jack Grimes*, all taken in the top 15 picks during Melbourne's 'rebuild'

yeah, they're not a team i'd be looking at when assessing how to rebuild a team lol

*couple of decent seasons

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

I am yet to see Kosi or Jeka do anything wrong as our slow ball movement and lack of ability to connect up from HB to HF would be a forwards nightmare.

Is this serious?

They’re young and not perfect. Some of Kosi’s efforts and chasing earlier in the year was pretty second rate.

 

[VandoHawk]

Is this serious?

They’re young and not perfect. Some of Kosi’s efforts and chasing earlier in the year was pretty second rate.

Kosi really turned that around. Has been super with his defensive stuff and hard running recently even if he doesn’t always hit the scoreboard. Body positioning is his next step, his defender instincts are still kicking in and he starts behind his opponent far too often.

Jeka had some pretty average 1v1 efforts against WC but he also tried to hit the packs and was in good positions but done dirty multiple times (I remember when he was 10 metres free in a pocket and Sheils kicked it straight to his direct opponent). I echo your earlier statement where I wouldn’t mind if he stayed in the senior side but wouldn’t mind if he was sent back to BH either.

 

[The Spirit of Cricket]

Don’t question the game plan whatever you do. It’s the lack of talent to implement it that’s the issue .

it's absolutely valid to question the gameplan, its just inaccuracies about it that are repeated daily from people that don't fully understand how it's meant to work gets tiresome, as opposed to how it is (or isn't) working.

the fact that it isn't working is and should be interrogated, but constantly saying our forwards are coached not to lead, that players are forced to look sideways or backwards whenever they take a mark, that they're coached to play without flair or dash, simply isn't true. these are symptoms of a side down on confidence, still learning the new gameplan and with poor general skill.

we've seen how it can work, in periods vs the cats, crows, dons and freo. we want to generate overlap run, handing the ball off to our strongest line in terms of skill and speed (HB) who then connect with high-leading forwards. if there is no option to run and carry, we will look to switch to open space for the ball to be carried, or look to kick it corridor. defensively we still rely a lot on repeated F50 entries, but this has been particularly dreadful due to really poor pressure from our current fwd line. the connection between our HBs and HFs has also been very poor. another flaw I can see is that our wings provide very little run and carry, while we're playing a game-style that relies on overlap handballing. I'm sure there's more too it or bits of it are wrong, but that's what I've gathered from track-watchers, watching our good periods and reading various interviews etc.

the intent of this gameplan hasn't been demonstrated consistently whatsoever.

based on this, the appropriate line of questioning is: should the gameplan be adjusted to accommodate our list seeing as they haven't been competent at it? or do we give it more time, say till the end of this or next year? Is it the players that cannot figure it out, are they just down on confidence, is our list just that bad, is the plan not being coached well enough?

remember that 'clarko's cluster' (the full-ground zone) took about 3 years to implement perfectly (I think we started training half-ground zones in 06?) and then our chip-kicking style another year and a half, and that was with an experienced and extremely talented list. this current gameplan was worked on at the start of 2020, but was eventually scrapped bc of covid, so its essentially completely new.

i personally think we should give it at least till the latter half of this season to see how effective it can be, even with a pretty bad list. i like that, in spite of what people think, we are trying to develop into a more aggressive, attacking side. we are really bad at it now, but I can see how it would work in the modern afl. But if after a year or so we are still getting no more consistent and executing, then the coaches and players can reasses over the offseason

 

[CHUBBSS]

Don’t question the game plan whatever you do. It’s the lack of talent to implement it that’s the issue .

But you can’t say that because it still needs to be seen to work even with talent.

maybe it will work... but if the plan is built around unfound talent it will be a long 3 years if we don’t change the plan or find some more talent

 

[Judd2Sewell]

yeah fair enough, but relative to their draft position the listed players (aside from S. Mitchell, Downie, Finn and DGB) have already been substantially better than where they were picked just by debuting. I don't know the actual odds but I'd guess it's something like 1 in 5 chance of ever playing an AFL game pick 45+?

my point was more you cannot call our drafting since 16 bad, and it is not even remotely to blame for our current predicament. Broader list decisions, the rapid decline of good players and poor drafting during our 3peat years are much more at fault

2016
Pick 74 (5th rounder) - Harry Morrison
Pick 76 (5th rounder) - Mitchell Lewis

Rookie pick 14 - Oli Hanrahan
Rookie pick 31 - Jack Fitzmagic
Rookie pick 46 - James Cousins

2017
Pick 45 (3rd rounder) - James Worpel
Pick 67 (4th rounder) - Dylan Moore
Pick 71 (5th rounder) - Jackson Ross

Rookie pick 7 - Harry Jones
Rookie pick 23 - David Mirra
Rookie pick 34 - Dallas Willsmore

Cat-B rookie - CJ

2018
Pick 52 (3rd rounder) - Jacob Kosi
Pick 64 (4th rounder) - Matt Walker

Rookie pick 14 - Damon Greaves
Rookie pick 30 - Will Golds
Rookie pick 42 - Tim Mohr
Rookie pick 49 - Will Langford

2019
Pick 13 (1st rounder) - Will Day
Pick 29 (2nd rounder) - Finn Maginness
Pick 57 (4th rounder) - Josh Morris

Rookie pick 9 - Emerson Jeka

Cat-B rookie - Harry Pepper

2020
Pick 6 (1st rounder) - DGB
Pick 29 (2nd rounder) - Seamus Mitchell
Pick 35 (2nd rounder) - Connor Downie
Pick 47 (3rd rounder) - Tyler Brockman

Rookie pick 4 - Jack Saunders

---------------------------------------

Since 2016 (5 drafts) we have had:
2x first rounders - 2019, 2020
3x second rounders - 2019, 2020 (x2)
3x third rounders - 2017, 2018, 2020
3x fourth rounders - 2017, 2017, 2019
3x fifth rounders - 2016 (x2), 2017

In total, that's:
1 x top 10 - pick 6
2 x top 20 - pick 6, 13
4 x top 30 - pick 6, 13, 29, 29
5 x top 40 - pick 6, 13, 29, 29, 35
7 x top 50 - pick 6, 13, 29, 29, 35, 45, 47

Only seven top 50 picks in a five year period. Only five top 40 picks. That's averaging one top 40 pick per season.

---------------------------------------

I think with the selections we have had we have done quite well - relative to where the picks were made, and if we hit on the 2019 and 2020 picks (also relative their draft positions) then we will have done exceptionally well.

We can't even claim that we have had any "busts" given the players that are no longer on the list were all late picks, rookies and/or injured.

But the real problem is we have had only five picks in total in the first two rounds over the last five seasons. That's where the biggest problem lies. That's where people have issues with the rebuild.

We just haven't brought in elite talent, and the elite top-end talent we have brought in was done so over the last two years so we haven't had a chance to see them (hopefully) flourish.

It's good to have our fourth and fifth rounders, and rookies, turn into decent role players (Morrison, Moore, etc), but what we really need are those elite players to come through and help elevate them.

For me - looking at those names gives me confidence that the 2019 and 2020 draftees will prove their worth.

Edit: we were relying on the later picks punching right above their respective draft positions. Worpel has definitely done that (first rounder, top 10 in hindsight). Kosi and Lewis may prove to do that. But even if the others all become solid role players it wouldn't be enough. We really need all of Brockman, Lewis, Kosi, Greaves, Jeka and Morris to do it.

 

[Mercy Seat]

Is Cornes expecting us to go pick up 3 first-rounders after every loss? He keeps saying the same thing every week. We get it.

 

[HODGEYROAD]

2016
Pick 74 (5th rounder) - Harry Morrison
Pick 76 (5th rounder) - Mitchell Lewis

Rookie pick 14 - Oli Hanrahan
Rookie pick 31 - Jack Fitzmagic
Rookie pick 46 - James Cousins

2017
Pick 45 (3rd rounder) - James Worpel
Pick 67 (4th rounder) - Dylan Moore
Pick 71 (5th rounder) - Jackson Ross

Rookie pick 7 - Harry Jones
Rookie pick 23 - David Mirra
Rookie pick 34 - Dallas Willsmore

Cat-B rookie - CJ

2018
Pick 52 (3rd rounder) - Jacob Kosi
Pick 64 (4th rounder) - Matt Walker

Rookie pick 14 - Damon Greaves
Rookie pick 30 - Will Golds
Rookie pick 42 - Tim Mohr
Rookie pick 49 - Will Langford

2019
Pick 13 (1st rounder) - Will Day
Pick 29 (2nd rounder) - Finn Maginness
Pick 57 (4th rounder) - Josh Morris

Rookie pick 9 - Emerson Jeka

Cat-B rookie - Harry Pepper

2020
Pick 6 (1st rounder) - DGB
Pick 29 (2nd rounder) - Seamus Mitchell
Pick 35 (2nd rounder) - Connor Downie
Pick 47 (3rd rounder) - Tyler Brockman

Rookie pick 4 - Jack Saunders

---------------------------------------

Since 2016 (5 drafts) we have had:
2x first rounders - 2019, 2020
3x second rounders - 2019, 2020 (x2)
3x third rounders - 2017, 2018, 2020
3x fourth rounders - 2017, 2017, 2019
3x fifth rounders - 2016 (x2), 2017

I think with the selections we have had we have done fairly well - relative to where the picks were made and if we hit on the 2019 and 2020 picks (also relative their draft positions) then we will have done exceptionally well.

We can't even claim that we have had any "busts" given the players that are no longer on the list were all late picks, rookies and/or injured.

But the real problem is we have had only five picks in total in the first two rounds over the last five seasons. That's where the biggest problem lies. That's where people have issues with the rebuild.

We just haven't brought in elite talent, and the elite top-end talent we have brought in was done so over the last two years so we haven't had a chance to see them (hopefully) flourish.

It's good to have our fourth and fifth rounders, and rookies, turn into decent role players (Morrison, Moore, etc), but what we really need are those elite players to come through and help elevate them.

For me - looking at those names gives me confidence that the 2019 and 2020 draftees will prove their worth.

* it's a little scary when you see it listed like that and we had no selections better than 45 over a 3 year period between 16-18.

 

[Jazzfan]

I feel our game plan, in our successful period, was really detailed, structured and complicated. And look, it might work again, elite foot skills, happy to lose the clearances by setting up behind the ball etc., but we are so far short of the talent required that it's hard to see any light at the end of the tunnel. The results being we are unwatchable.

Richmond, who are the most recent dynasty (yes, they are) play to such a simple game plan. It's about contested ball, driving it forward and putting unbelievable pressure on the ball. Listening to Alistair Lynch is really enjoyable, it's such a basic game plan, but they have their non negotiables in a player (it isn't foot skills) and they just back blokes in that others might not.

We are trying to hold on to a game plan that brought so much success, but the flip side of that is we continue to look at players in the lens of what they can't do. Running patters, or doesn't know the structures for example. I feel we would benefit greatly from simplifying our game plan, and allowing our young players to come up to the level without too much running through their head... Move it quick, benefit of youth, and work your arse off to apply pressure around the ground.

To be honest, and people will hate this, but Nash is the ultimate example of brining a guy up to AFL and taking away his strengths. He looks lost trying to play within our structure, overthinks everything.

 

[Brishawk]

Imagine if all of the posters that sit on the other side of this discussion started dismissing all of your arguments by simply saying, "because experience," after yet another bad loss with the same usual suspects in the side?

E.g.. Those in the media querying the rebuild see the likes of TOB, Ceglar, Howe, etc continue to get games simply, "because experience."

Doesn't really encouraging any kind of reasonable discourse now, does it? It's just going to inflame the situation on here.

You can level criticism at selection and take into consideration the overall balance of the side. It is the relentless howl any time a particular player is or isn’t chosen that dominates the KID position. And then when we get belted playing a very inexperienced side and then howling that Clarko has lost the plot because Finn gets dropped and Howe gets a game.

you know I disagree with plenty of selection decisions (two ruck policy as an example).The howling over selection of fringe players is, frankly, embarrassing. Supporters of other clubs would be laughing their arses off at the s**t people post on here.

 

[Judd2Sewell]

fu** it's a little scary when you see it listed like that and we had no selections better than 45 over a 3 year period between 16-18.

Edited the post to add:

In total, that's:
1 x top 10 - pick 6
2 x top 20 - pick 6, 13
4 x top 30 - pick 6, 13, 29, 29
5 x top 40 - pick 6, 13, 29, 29, 35
7 x top 50 - pick 6, 13, 29, 29, 35, 45, 47

Only seven top 50 picks in a five year period.