List Mgmt. 2022 Draft Thread - Part I

[George]

Sticking this at the top of each page. If it gets annoying, let me know and I can just put it in the original post of the thread. Credit to Lore

 

[Winmar2Lockett]

I did consider him but am hoping another year at the club and that will persuade him to stay for the long haul. If the club knew for certain he was leaving next year, then trading in for another 1st round pick this year would make perfect sense.

It doesn't necessarily need to be one specific player who would generate a 1st rounder... it could be a few players who bring in 2nd or 3rd rounders that can be put together to get back into the 1st round.

 

[gringo2011]

No, some recruiters are definitely better than others. Wells, Beatson, etc. I just don't know if we've got one who's actually good - and neither does the club. The club thought Trout and Libba were good enough for head recruiter.

The easiest way to manage the risk that you might have a mediocre recruiter is to ask him to pick mids and that way if he's actually good, we'll get a great midfield. And if he's just ok then we'll still get a chance at a good midfield.

I sort of agree with you. Mids taken high have a much higher strike rate through the draft's history. We seemed to have an issue with taking mids for a decade. We tried to take HBFs and utilities and avoided obvious needs and didn't even draft those well.

I would like to target a mid with our first pick for a couple of years just to bulk up the future list quality but anything after first round should just be best available. We need KP and ruck depth, small forwards and probably some more running HBs and HFs/ wings as well. Neglecting those won't help us long term.

To me you need a couple of gun KPs but the rest of the supporting talls can be depth types taken later.

 

[Winmar2Lockett]

If we draft as poorly as we have in the past it really doesn't matter what position we target though unfortunately

We've taken a heap of mids it that time and haven't been able to produce an A grader, sake thing with our key position players until we landed King

I

McCartin & Goddard (when Goddard slid to us) the bookends for the next decade

Billings, Dunstan and Acres was going to set us up and be our core as well.

Development folks... that's the key.

Nothing wrong with any of those picks (albeit conservative selections)... they were just horribly developed and coached.

 

[gringo2011]

It doesn't necessarily need to be one specific player who would generate a 1st rounder... it could be a few players who bring in 2nd or 3rd rounders that can be put together to get back into the 1st round.

I doubt anyone wants a pile of second and third rounders for a first rounder in next years draft. Would have to be a very good established player or high potential kid. Perhaps if a club wanted Nas they give us their first and we hand over Nas and a third rounder as a sweetener if it's a higher pick. If Clark isn't any better next year he probably wouldn't get us more than a second round pick ebven.

Relying on trading players out for a first sounds less of a plan and more of a hope.

 

[saintmike65]

I sort of agree with you. Mids taken high have a much higher strike rate through the draft's history. We seemed to have an issue with taking mids for a decade. We tried to take HBFs and utilities and avoided obvious needs and didn't even draft those well.

I would like to target a mid with our first pick for a couple of years just to bulk up the future list quality but anything after first round should just be best available. We need KP and ruck depth, small forwards and probably some more running HBs and HFs/ wings as well. Neglecting those won't help us long term.

To me you need a couple of gun KPs but the rest of the supporting talls can be depth types taken later.

A bad draft can set you back years, the point about drafting flankers is spot on..the drafting of Billings, Clark and Coffield as high picks has really stifled our midfield for a long time!

 

[gringo2011]

I


Development folks... that's the key.

Nothing wrong with any of those picks (albeit conservative selections)... they were just horribly developed and coached.

Goddard was just too slow and immobile for a KPB. We might have tried to make him a forward but I think he was just a guy who went high in the draft based on his junior form. McCartin wasn't a great KPF and again we might have tried him into a back but we dumped him due to his concussion issues not his ability. Taking a guy at pick one with diabetes and a bit shorter than most modern full forwards over the outstanding player from that draft was just poor recruiting.

Development wasn't any good either but it's more the rest of the 22 than the first round picks that suffer when it comes to development.

 

[Ads734]

I


Development folks... that's the key.

Nothing wrong with any of those picks (albeit conservative selections)... they were just horribly developed and coached.

100%

 

[Winmar2Lockett]

I doubt anyone wants a pile of second and third rounders for a first rounder in next years draft. Would have to be a very good established player or high potential kid. Perhaps if a club wanted Nas they give us their first and we hand over Nas and a third rounder as a sweetener if it's a higher pick. If Clark isn't any better next year he probably wouldn't get us more than a second round pick ebven.

Relying on trading players out for a first sounds less of a plan and more of a hope.

It's not relying on trading players out... just part of the overall strategy. 12 months out who knows what clubs will do... academy & FS's can create opportunities.

As I said, it's looking less & less likely but if Phillipou & Cmac are both available when WC's 1st pick comes around then it would be worth considering. Next year's draft is looking like having multiple WA kids at the top end so they may bite.

 

[saintmike65]

We’ve been saying that for a decade.

Owens and Windhager fell into our lap…hardly makes up for many years of not drafting pure mids!

 

[Winmar2Lockett]

Goddard was just too slow and immobile for a KPB. We might have tried to make him a forward but I think he was just a guy who went high in the draft based on his junior form. McCartin wasn't a great KPF and again we might have tried him into a back but we dumped him due to his concussion issues not his ability. Taking a guy at pick one with diabetes and a bit shorter than most modern full forwards over the outstanding player from that draft was just poor recruiting.

Development wasn't any good either but it's more the rest of the 22 than the first round picks that suffer when it comes to development.

I'll disagree on both of those opinions.

Goddard was tracking nicely until the achilles. He was no less mobile than Steven May is now.

Paddy had shown more than enough before the head knocks started to take effect.

I'm not going over the Petracca/McC decision for the millionth time.

Development & overall coaching was a bin fire.

 

[gringo2011]

100%

Melbourne couldn't develop players until they started to draft better either. There is a bit of both but you can't polish a turd. The bulk of development is basic training like skills which are improved through skills drills and individual programs, fitness and games access. There is playing them in the VFL in position and working on flaws but over all most clubs do similar programs. Some development is sped up in a club higher up in the cycle too, because kids can come in and play without a direct opponent or a defined role because older guys will cover them.

The best clubs have more support staff which can help. Geelong before the soft cap, used to run 4 coaches per player, it means that no-one is left behind. The high picks rarely get left to self develop, it's guys taken late in the draft sent off to the VFL and left to themselves that really struggle to move forward in an unprofessional environment.

 

[gringo2011]

I'll disagree on both of those opinions.

Goddard was tracking nicely until the achilles. He was no less mobile than Steven May is now.

Paddy had shown more than enough before the head knocks started to take effect.

I'm not going over the Petracca/McC decision for the millionth time.

Development & overall coaching was a bin fire.

I watched a fair bit of Goddard. I thought his only bit of good form was just before we dumped him. He moved like the QE II. May is a gun because he beelines the ball and is one of the best interceptors in the game, Hugh didn't have many strengths. Paddy had a few promising games but he would have had less good games than Cooper Sharman to be honest. He wasn't terrible but I don't think he was a great choice then or now. Not sure how you'd develop either out of their short comings.

 

[saintmike65]

I remember vividly when Leigh Montagna suggested Richo trial McCartin in defence, with his excellent reading of the play & field kicking a feature..alas, it took Sydney to do it!!

I watched a fair bit of Goddard. I thought his only bit of good form was just before we dumped him. He moved like the QE II. May is a gun because he beelines the ball and is one of the best interceptors in the game, Hugh didn't have many strengths. Paddy had a few promising games but he would have had less good games than Cooper Sharman to be honest. He wasn't terrible but I don't think he was a great choice then or now. Not sure how you'd develop either out of their short comings.

 

[botts]

I remember vividly when Leigh Montagna suggested Richo trial McCartin in defence, with his excellent reading of the play & field kicking a feature..alas, it took Sydney to do it!!

I remember Gary Lyon saying the exact same thing on the radio. We are always to smart for our own good

 

[Ads734]

Melbourne couldn't develop players until they started to draft better either. There is a bit of both but you can't polish a turd. The bulk of development is basic training like skills which are improved through skills drills and individual programs, fitness and games access. There is playing them in the VFL in position and working on flaws but over all most clubs do similar programs. Some development is sped up in a club higher up in the cycle too, because kids can come in and play without a direct opponent or a defined role because older guys will cover them.

The best clubs have more support staff which can help. Geelong before the soft cap, used to run 4 coaches per player, it means that no-one is left behind. The high picks rarely get left to self develop, it's guys taken late in the draft sent off to the VFL and left to themselves that really struggle to move forward in an unprofessional environment.

No Melbourne couldn;t develop players untill they brought in Paul Roos. Our VFL program is a joke and has been since Paul Hudson left. No consistant VFL senior coach and all first timers. Its so much easier to say that our draftin has been crap then adress the underlying coaching/development issues imo.

 

[pebblesofsand]

I watched a fair bit of Goddard. I thought his only bit of good form was just before we dumped him. He moved like the QE II. May is a gun because he beelines the ball and is one of the best interceptors in the game, Hugh didn't have many strengths. Paddy had a few promising games but he would have had less good games than Cooper Sharman to be honest. He wasn't terrible but I don't think he was a great choice then or now. Not sure how you'd develop either out of their short comings.

Your memory is going - played 8 games in his first season averaged 12 disposals and 4 marks (best game was 20 disposals and 5 marks). Only played 1 game in 2016 when he did his achilles then turf toe and then his next game was in the last round in 2018 before he was de-listed.

Looked more than likely as 19 YO young defender in his first year - but the fact is that his injuries meant he never really got a proper go at it.

 

[Joffaboy]

Owens and Windhager fell into our lap…hardly makes up for many years of not drafting pure mids!

33 and 47 fell into our lap - ok

 

[botts]

33 and 47 fell into our lap - ok

Considering we actually only had pick 49 I would say they fell in our laps

 

[bird_man]

I


Development folks... that's the key.

Nothing wrong with any of those picks (albeit conservative selections)... they were just horribly developed and coached.

I think we've clearly had development issues but I don't think you can put it all down to that and pretend our drafting hasn't been really poor for.the best part of 10 years.

 

[hangdog]

I


Development folks... that's the key.

Nothing wrong with any of those picks (albeit conservative selections)... they were just horribly developed and coached.

I reckon this is spot on. Some hard luck with injuries to high-middle range picks has hurt too. Goddard, McCartin, Gresham, Clark, Coffield, Billings, Higgins, McKenzie, Paton. All these blokes have had significant time out at a stage, or multiple stages.

The Goddard one frustrated me the most. Felt like we really didn't give him a chance to get back, especially considering he was a key pos player that generally takes longer to get to the level.

 

[botts]

I reckon this is spot on. Some hard luck with injuries to high-middle range picks has hurt too. Goddard, McCartin, Gresham, Clark, Coffield, Billings, Higgins, McKenzie, Paton. All these blokes have had significant time out at a stage, or multiple stages.

The Goddard one frustrated me the most. Felt like we really didn't give him a chance to get back, especially considering he was a key pos player that generally takes longer to get to the level.

Carlton gave Goddard a crack for a couple of extra year. Couldn’t get it together there either

 

[hangdog]

I doubt anyone wants a pile of second and third rounders for a first rounder in next years draft. Would have to be a very good established player or high potential kid. Perhaps if a club wanted Nas they give us their first and we hand over Nas and a third rounder as a sweetener if it's a higher pick. If Clark isn't any better next year he probably wouldn't get us more than a second round pick ebven.

Relying on trading players out for a first sounds less of a plan and more of a hope.

GC needs to store points for a free academy players, no?

Here's a hypothetical. Seb Ross in his last year of a contract, playing good footy, but is picked behind Steele and Crouch each week and has Gresham, Clark, Sinclair, Windy, Owens, Pick 10, Bytel all pushing for a spot in the guts.

Even if he has a good season, is he someone we can trade for a pick in the 20's along with our organic 2nd rounder for their first? So long as there's genuine improvement from the names listed above, Seb could become expendable (which would be brutal given his resurgence).

Zak Jones might fall into that category also, but wouldn't fetch anything higher than the 30's.

 

[Ephemeral Hope]

Max Heaths best game was 16 disposals, 3 goals and 28 hitouts. Fair performance for an 19 yo ruck in the VFL. Tired towards the end but I'm certain he will get a run this year.

As for Allison - still think he will surprise a few this year.

Also played second fiddle to Campbell often so didn’t get all the time there

 

[RWB4life]

Bit of talk about trading up to Essendon but what about targeting Hawthorn? If we could give a future second up to potentially guarantee tsatas or philipou assuming suns go ginbey or Humphrey?

Sent from my SM-N985F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Ephemeral Hope]

And that one big game was against the other young ruck, who was picked up in the PSD? can't recall his name, who actually had a much more consistent & better season.
Allison kicked a 70 metre bomb goal, in his last game for Sandy. Lets hope he can become the Gunston, he's been compared to. ???

The other ruck who was chosen BEFORE Heath. Loved that he showed him who the better ruck is in the end. I want Heath to destroy the North one who got picked first