List Mgmt. Do we keep injury prone players too long on our list?

[Gotta_Bea_Hero]

With Ed going down on the weekend with a season ending injury, it raised the question Do we keep injury prone players on our list for too long, hoping that they will come good one day. I've listed the players that I consider "injury prone" and their h&a games tally against what they could have played:

Wright : 132 games / 220 games
Garner: 34 / 132
Jacobs: 64 / 132
Wood: 40 / 132
Turner: 59 / 110
Durdin: 9 / 88
EVW: 15 / 88

Other than Durdin, most people would have the others in our best 22 when fit and firing, when you factor in - we had Tarrant on our list for 7 years before he produced 4 good seasons of consistent footy and Daw whom we've kept for the same period, but only seen one good season. How long can we expect to retain these guys for?

 

[Harris 10]

Yes.

And we reward average players with longer contracts that what's required.

 

[GreatBradScott]

Yes. I remember hearing a story about the second last off-season Kieran Harper was contracted.

The Dogs offered up a decent pick in the 40s or 50s around the time we were looking at Cooney (who eventually went to Essendon in other highly questionable circumstances).

The deal broke down, but the Dogs still had a decent pick on the table to get Harper over.

It is alleged people around the club were more terrified of him leaving and becoming good elsewhere, than considering maybe he was physically cooked and a fresh pick in a decent range was a better opportunity.

He stayed for another year on the list before being delisted in 2015.

I believe it's a systemic list management issue.

Freo threw the kitchen sink at Aaron Black and Mason Wood got a decent offer from the Swans. Both clubs were offering tasty picks.

I get we have responsibility to them as people and by all means, hold on as much as you can, but we are not brave enough to make the move.

We wait too long on too many blokes, by all means, keep a Jacobs because he is important. But to have BJ, Garner, Wood and now EVS (arguably Anderson too) all on the list at once, it's now a massive liability.

You can't stake too much best 22 hopes on constantly injured players. Start marking hard calls.

 

[Sillygit]

It is alleged people around the club were more terrified of him leaving and becoming good elsewhere

Possibly the single worst mentality to have in a list management strategy. A "don't want to look stupid" idea that almost guarantees you'll look stupid eventually.

 

[Smoocher]

Simple answer.

Yes.

We also keep too many vanilla flankers on our list.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Tas]

It is easy to judge with the benefit of hindsight, however, did we make bad calls given the information at hand at the time of the calls is a more complex matter. Should we have got rid of Tarrant? Should we have got rid of Daw prior to last year because he broke down after 1 or 2 games?

Some players can return and play their best footy despite quite horrific periods out injured. Higgins missed a lot of football at the Dogs, he has been a great contributor for us. Waite missed a heap of football at Carlton and even with us, but his impact was significant.

Sure, we can make room on our list for more players, but what caliber of player are you going to replace them with? Most of the players on the list are early draft pick players, are you going to get rid of them to put on more fourth and fifth round pick players? Because the bigger issue is the restraint on talent we have coming into the club with numerous mid-table finishes.

Sometimes the lesser of two evils is to try and work a player through their issues and maybe you wont get 10 years service out of them, perhaps you will only get 5 really good years out of them after they overcome their injury hurdles, that is likely a lesser risk than taking an extreme long shot at players with lower ceilings.

 

[The Brady Bunch]

Simple answer.

Yes.

We also keep too many vanilla flankers on our list.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

But that's only because we've spent the best part of 20 years drafting medium sized flankers out of the TAC Cup thinking that they'll become James Hird.

 

[shintemaster]

It is easy to judge with the benefit of hindsight, however, did we make bad calls given the information at hand at the time of the calls is a more complex matter. Should we have got rid of Tarrant? Should we have got rid of Daw prior to last year because he broke down after 1 or 2 games?

Some players can return and play their best footy despite quite horrific periods out injured. Higgins missed a lot of football at the Dogs, he has been a great contributor for us. Waite missed a heap of football at Carlton and even with us, but his impact was significant.

Sure, we can make room on our list for more players, but what caliber of player are you going to replace them with. Most of the players on the list are early draft pick players, are you going to get rid of them to put on my fourth and fifth round pick players? Because the bigger issue is the restraint on talent we have coming into the club with numerous mid-table finishes.

Sometimes the lesser of two evils is to try and work a player through their issues and maybe you wont get 10 years service out of them, perhaps you will only get 5 really good years out of them after they overcome their injury hurdles, that is likely a lesser risk than taking an extreme long shot at players with lower ceilings.

All true. It really comes down to a multitude of factors at the time. The skill of the player, the type of injury, the depth of the squad, the availability of picks to replace them, the depth of the draft... list goes on. The answer to the OP's question is clearly - sometimes.

 

[Groin guru]

But that's only because we've spent the best part of 20 years drafting medium sized flankers out of the TAC Cup thinking that they'll become James Hird.

That's because we finish mid-table. Best mids are picked in the top 10. After that you either get dumont types or you get xfactor flankers that you hope can turn into mids.

We've been unlucky with Garner and Harper. McKenzie was a dud. Atley and Lmac couldn't cut it.

You either bottom out of cross your testicles.

 

[Firestarter]

Case by case scenario. Too many examples of wrong and right respectively to make binary answers (that's yes or no in case you're wondering, Snake. The word binary probably triggers your trauma.)

 

[Dirty_11]

Yes. I remember hearing a story about the second last off-season Kieran Harper was contracted.

The Dogs offered up a decent pick in the 40s or 50s around the time we were looking at Cooney (who eventually went to Essendon in other highly questionable circumstances).

The deal broke down, but the Dogs still had a decent pick on the table to get Harper over.

It is alleged people around the club were more terrified of him leaving and becoming good elsewhere, than considering maybe he was physically cooked and a fresh pick in a decent range was a better opportunity.

He stayed for another year on the list before being delisted in 2015.

I believe it's a systemic list management issue.

Freo threw the kitchen sink at Aaron Black and Mason Wood got a decent offer from the Swans. Both clubs were offering tasty picks.

I get we have responsibility to them as people and by all means, hold on as much as you can, but we are not brave enough to make the move.

We wait too long on too many blokes, by all means, keep a Jacobs because he is important. But to have BJ, Garner, Wood and now EVS (arguably Anderson too) all on the list at once, it's now a massive liability.

You can't stake too much best 22 hopes on constantly injured players. Start marking hard calls.

In fairness Black looked like he could have been anything when that offer was thrown at us.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Smoocher]

But that's only because we've spent the best part of 20 years drafting medium sized flankers out of the TAC Cup thinking that they'll become James Hird.

Will Walker the perfect example.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[kangafruity]

Lance Piccione, David Calthorpe, Jon Hay, Jordy Gisberts ring any bells and I am sure there are plenty of others. We have had some good ones but we have had some really bad pick ups too

 

[Roostein]

I just hope that management will be more ruthless at the end of this season and cut the underperformers, paying less attention to their potential, if that’s what’s preventing players like Turner and Wood from being traded. If we’re not getting the high picks, we need to take more risks at the trade table.

This year and last, we’ve been too reliant on injured players imo. We were/are such a better team with Jacobs, Daw and Anderson in the team. I’d be open to trading anyone, including these three, and the club needs to be too. If there’s no one to trade for, trade them for picks.

 

[ferball]

Case by case scenario. Too many examples of wrong and right respectively to make binary answers (that's yes or no in case you're wondering, Snake. The word binary probably triggers your trauma.)

Pretty sure you mean "non-binary" but I laughed anyway.

 

[Firestarter]

Pretty sure you mean "non-binary" but I laughed anyway.

Touche.

 

[benbanjo]

Out of interest, how many of our players would get a game at the likes of Richmond, Collingwood, WCE, Melbourne?

I cant think of, Tarrant, Higgins, Polec, Cunnington, Jacobs who would get a game at all the clubs.
Then Goldy, JZ, Brown, Thompson, at 2-3 of the team.

Thats pretty much it off the top of my head.

 

[Shermanator]

Lance Piccione, David Calthorpe, Jon Hay, Jordy Gisberts ring any bells and I am sure there are plenty of others. We have had some good ones but we have had some really bad pick ups too

How could you leave out the all time great in David Bourke?..

 

[Mav]

Didn’t Scotts come out say that we’ve kept players in general on our list for too long?

 

[DarwinRoo]

Out of interest, how many of our players would get a game at the likes of Richmond, Collingwood, WCE, Melbourne?

I cant think of, Tarrant, Higgins, Polec, Cunnington, Jacobs who would get a game at all the clubs.
Then Goldy, JZ, Brown, Thompson, at 2-3 of the team.

Thats pretty much it off the top of my head.

Since when has Melbourne been the bench mark? Jake Melksham is still running around for them.

 

[Junk yard]

Yes, unfortunately there's four or five that are cooked but hopefully I'm off the mark.

 

[koshari]

Yes.

And we reward average players with longer contracts that what's required.

difference between average players and injured players.

 

[King Corey]

With Ed going down on the weekend with a season ending injury, it raised the question Do we keep injury prone players on our list for too long, hoping that they will come good one day. I've listed the players that I consider "injury prone" and their h&a games tally against what they could have played:

Wright : 132 games / 220 games
Garner: 34 / 132
Jacobs: 64 / 132
Wood: 40 / 132
Turner: 59 / 110
Durdin: 9 / 88
EVW: 15 / 88

Other than Durdin, most people would have the others in our best 22 when fit and firing, when you factor in - we had Tarrant on our list for 7 years before he produced 4 good seasons of consistent footy and Daw whom we've kept for the same period, but only seen one good season. How long can we expect to retain these guys for?

I think for any player who joined North at minimum draft age, the 1st season should be disregarded. Any games during that season are considered a bonus ahead of schedule.

So that'd make it-

Wright : 132 games / 198 games
Garner: 34 / 110
Jacobs: 64 / 132
Wood: 40 / 110
Turner: 59 / 88
Durdin: 9 / 66
EVW: 15 / 66

Fwiw list still doesn't make for great reading.

 

[roos_fanatic08]

We have culled some kids too quickly (Hibberd, Mountford & Kennedy).

We have signed up mediocre players for far too long (McDonald, Hrovat, Wood)

We have also held on to injured players too long. In some cases where their output is excellent (Garner & Jacobs) it is understandable.

We have a poor development system of younger players

We also have poor drafting in general (Durdin, McKenzie ect ect)

Along with an average and inflexible game plan we are destined for continued mediocrity.

 

[Mcarcherey]

can't help but lol at ppl who bag out our draft picks, picks like durdin were regarded as a massive slider, he was talked up to be a top 5 pick! but hindsight is 20/20 and some love to come out of the woodwork to dig the boots in about draft picks. it's even funnier when they talk 2nd rounders - outside of the top 5-10 picks clubs recruit on a needs basis and it's a lottery to whether they'll work out.

heaven forbid LDU not work out, watch the same posters come out and say "we should've pick cerra or stephenson" FFS it was the best decision at the time, stop dwelling over it.