2012 Draft Discussion

[Grimreepah]

Always interesting reading the players analysis compared to those on here.

And do love that there is an arm length test at the combine.

They have all these tests (height, vertical leap, running vertical leap, arm length) but we don't get data on what is actually relevant - the highest point in the air that a player can reach.

 

[matwt73]

I also like the fact that they mention how many games they saw and reported on. Which is to say, 'more than the 45 seconds of YouTube highlights I would have watched to come to a knee jerk decision'

 

[notliondown]

The thing that I wished I knew was how much value was put on the personal side - the interviews, the meeting with the parents, the one on one time.

Anyone can watch a footy game and see talent... or dissect beep tests and statistics.

But to actually know whether or not that talent is already at its potential, whether its in a fragile body or mind, whether it belongs to a grateful level headed and hardworking teen or a petulant, spoilt man child, a mind willing and able to accept challenge or one that will crack under pressure, who is a loner and who will thrive in a team environment... that's really the stuff that we could never hope to know the way Kerr and co do.

It strikes me that they must value it almost as highly as the raw skills and body that we all see.... maybe more. They have an insight into who these guys REALLY are... and while nothing is guaranteed in life I reckon they've got the formula pretty right by reading that analysis.

No wonder the BF armchair selectors never pick the right spuds

 

[dlanod]

They have all these tests (height, vertical leap, running vertical leap, arm length) but we don't get data on what is actually relevant - the highest point in the air that a player can reach.

Height - height of head + arm length + vertical jump of choice.

 

[Grimreepah]

The thing that I wished I knew was how much value was put on the personal side - the interviews, the meeting with the parents, the one on one time.

Anyone can watch a footy game and see talent... or dissect beep tests and statistics.

But to actually know whether or not that talent is already at its potential, whether its in a fragile body or mind, whether it belongs to a grateful level headed and hardworking teen or a petulant, spoilt man child, a mind willing and able to accept challenge or one that will crack under pressure, who is a loner and who will thrive in a team environment... that's really the stuff that we could never hope to know the way Kerr and co do.

It strikes me that they must value it almost as highly as the raw skills and body that we all see.... maybe more. They have an insight into who these guys REALLY are... and while nothing is guaranteed in life I reckon they've got the formula pretty right by reading that analysis.

No wonder the BF armchair selectors never pick the right spuds

All clubs seem to be putting an increasingly high value on personality traits - showing dedication, mental toughness and professionalism is very important these days.

 

[Skoob]

Height - height of head + arm length + vertical jump of choice.

Beat me to it

 

[Grimreepah]

Has the recruitment philosophy changed in recent times? In 2008 Hadley was lauded for picking up footballers over athletes, but there seems to have been a progressive swing back to athleticism since then. Indeed if you include the promoted rookies in this year's draft, four of the five picks are noted more for their athleticism than their natural football ability. And even Mayes is a very capable athlete.

 

[Grimreepah]

The thing that I wished I knew was how much value was put on the personal side - the interviews, the meeting with the parents, the one on one time.

Anyone can watch a footy game and see talent... or dissect beep tests and statistics.

But to actually know whether or not that talent is already at its potential, whether its in a fragile body or mind, whether it belongs to a grateful level headed and hardworking teen or a petulant, spoilt man child, a mind willing and able to accept challenge or one that will crack under pressure, who is a loner and who will thrive in a team environment... that's really the stuff that we could never hope to know the way Kerr and co do.

It strikes me that they must value it almost as highly as the raw skills and body that we all see.... maybe more. They have an insight into who these guys REALLY are... and while nothing is guaranteed in life I reckon they've got the formula pretty right by reading that analysis.

No wonder the BF armchair selectors never pick the right spuds

Further to this, in relation to the heavy focus on personality traits, it should be recognised that you are going to avoid some misses, but you might miss out on some hits too. Darling for example might have been seen as a high risk prospect, but you never know for sure how things will pan out. The players with lots of ability but with suspect characters would be the ones giving recruiters the most headaches, and are going to land them the most criticism from people with 20/20 hindsight.

 

[whatboutbob]

Further to this, in relation to the heavy focus on personality traits, it should be recognised that you are going to avoid some misses, but you might miss out on some hits too. Darling for example might have been seen as a high risk prospect, but you never know for sure how things will pan out. The players with lots of ability but with suspect characters would be the ones giving recruiters the most headaches, and are going to land them the most criticism from people with 20/20 hindsight.

To use someone topical: Dane Swan - pass or fail? I can guess what Caro thinks.

 

[drummond2fevola]

To use someone topical: Dane Swan - pass or fail? I can guess what Caro thinks.

I think thats getting a bit off topic from the draft discussion there whatboutbob

 

[whatboutbob]

I think thats getting a bit off topic from the draft discussion there whatboutbob

*shrug* comes back to the question of drafting players with question marks over their character, and what sort of an impact they have on shaping the club. Darling, for example, might look like a star now, but what if his perceived character flaws cause issues down the track? Taking that to the end of the spectrum, what about Cousins and (now, potentially) Swan? They both contributed significantly to premiership wins, but have they also skewed their club's culture to the worse? At what point does one say 'Worth it!'? Does the end (silverware) justify the means?

 

[Grimreepah]

At what point does one say 'Worth it!'?

This is very much a judgement call, because there is no measure for one's influence on the team dynamic.

Does the end (silverware) justify the means?

Yes. The goal is to win games of football, not win Australian of the year. I think your first question is more illustrative of the dilemma involved - does the good (that which increases the chances of winning a premiership) outweigh the bad (that which decreases the chance of winning the premiership)? Or to be more specific, how that net result compares to other players.

 

[Grimreepah]

Caro errs far too much in favour of focusing list management on being a good samaratin. She doesn't seem to grasp, or deliberately ignores, the high value clubs put on good footballing ability.

 

[dlanod]

Has the recruitment philosophy changed in recent times? In 2008 Hadley was lauded for picking up footballers over athletes, but there seems to have been a progressive swing back to athleticism since then. Indeed if you include the promoted rookies in this year's draft, four of the five picks are noted more for their athleticism than their natural football ability. And even Mayes is a very capable athlete.

I don't think we've swung all the way back. I haven't heard a knock on any of our draft selections that they weren't natural footballers. Instead they are natural footballers who are also very good athletes. Swinging too far back would be focusing too much on drafting the draft camp king - the Wilkinson and Harvey (who we did get but as a rookie) type. Lonergan might be this year's king, so jumped up from being a mid second rounder to a mid first rounder.

To use someone topical: Dane Swan - pass or fail? I can guess what Caro thinks.

Most (all?) teams did pass on Swan at least once...

 

[POBT]

I don't think we've swung all the way back. I haven't heard a knock on any of our draft selections that they weren't natural footballers. Instead they are natural footballers who are also very good athletes.

I agree. I think the fact that we're focusing on the top end of the draft means that we're getting players who are closer to the complete package.

 

[irel]

I think a balance of athleticism and football nous is the objective and in our current recruits this is most obvious. Yes, none are complete package but then that is a very rare beast that comes with completeness at 18 years old.

 

[notliondown]

All clubs seem to be putting an increasingly high value on personality traits - showing dedication, mental toughness and professionalism is very important these days.

Further to this, in relation to the heavy focus on personality traits, it should be recognised that you are going to avoid some misses, but you might miss out on some hits too. Darling for example might have been seen as a high risk prospect, but you never know for sure how things will pan out. The players with lots of ability but with suspect characters would be the ones giving recruiters the most headaches, and are going to land them the most criticism from people with 20/20 hindsight.

*shrug* comes back to the question of drafting players with question marks over their character, and what sort of an impact they have on shaping the club. Darling, for example, might look like a star now, but what if his perceived character flaws cause issues down the track? Taking that to the end of the spectrum, what about Cousins and (now, potentially) Swan? They both contributed significantly to premiership wins, but have they also skewed their club's culture to the worse? At what point does one say 'Worth it!'? Does the end (silverware) justify the means?

I agree. I think the fact that we're focusing on the top end of the draft means that we're getting players who are closer to the complete package.

I think a balance of athleticism and football nous is the objective and in our current recruits this is most obvious. Yes, none are complete package but then that is a very rare beast that comes with completeness at 18 years old.

See, I guess I'm thinking that we all think the same way... at some point just being a great all round athlete and natural footballer is the core - and I'd happily agree with you in what is the general consensus for - well lets say 1st round picks. Not too many clubs would shy away from what talent just naturally rises to the top and you could probably make some loose assumptions about attitude, determination etc that got them there anyway.

It's more the picks that bring us guys like Papa and Close - or... the Reddens and O'Briens, Lesters and Greens... the 2nd 3rd and 4th etc round picks that always seems to bring much conjecture and debate.

Is that where the psych and off field testing and interviewing etc play a far bigger role?

 

[POBT]

Just to clarify, my post was about the footballer v athlete debate and nothing to do with attitude, off-field behaviour etc.

 

[FRANK STALLONE]

In reference to comments about athleticism over natural footballers. A balance is the best option i think, there have been many draftees at many clubs for many years, ( i said many, many times!) drafted for their athleticism, big tanks, and general aerobic capacities, more often than not they are failures. A natural footballer wins almost everytime, how often do we see players that get pushed down draft order cos they are too slow, nothing flashy, no x factor, but someone picks them up and they just know how to find the footy, know where to run. Our very own Simon Black (although had the running background) was deemed to slow, and to this day he's certainly no quicker but still gets the ball cos he has the smarts. And extreme example of a failure Israel folau ( as had zero football smarts nor a big tank) But was always destined to fail! But with the way our game is going and has been for some time, a combination is excellent, by only going off what i read its hard to gauge our new draftees football nous, but their aerobic capabilities fill me with confidence, i still rate the nous higher, but the more i read, (particulary paparone) i like, and the thing i rated the most in kerr's analysis was papa's approach to training, ie; the dedication! i have played footy for many years and had many team mates with great skills but bad attitudes that were overtaken by less gifted players with better dedication and work ethic, and hunger!!!!!

 

[borrat]

i liked the part where rob said doc is one player who in the pre season looks to have benefited from taking the first year to find his feet and get an afl ready body

i wouldnt mind if they did the same with mayes next year because he is still pretty skinny and doesnt really serve an immediate need i.m.o anyway

 

[rusty08]

From a generally reliable f b page, its apparent that box hill hawks have signed Retzy. Apologies if this is not the appropriate thread.

 

[whatboutbob]

From a generally reliable f b page, its apparent that box hill hawks have signed Retzy. Apologies if this is not the appropriate thread.

If true, a good move to get under the nose of clubs.

 

[Bert Man]

From a generally reliable f b page, its apparent that box hill hawks have signed Retzy. Apologies if this is not the appropriate thread.

Which page?

 

[FRANK STALLONE]

i liked the part where rob said doc is one player who in the pre season looks to have benefited from taking the first year to find his feet and get an afl ready body

i wouldnt mind if they did the same with mayes next year because he is still pretty skinny and doesnt really serve an immediate need i.m.o anyway

agreed but having said that if he warrants a game body or not so be it