List Mgmt. 2020 List Management II

[Stamos]

Because nailing a rookie pick can have the exact same reward as a first. Look at guys like Papley, Saad and Williams we have chased hard over the last couple of years. All rookie picks.
we also can’t rely on being crap and getting top end picks all the time so you have to do better at the back end of the draft.

once we realise some of our first rounders aren’t good AFL level players we then will see the benefit or lack of those latter picks

Also missing my point.

Richmond picked Lennon ahead of Cripps. Do you think that's the sort of recruiting we should lionise?

 

[Eiffel 65]

Well, ASOS wasn't a miss. Fulfilled his role, added to the club.
Also Gibbons and Cottrell. And I wouldn't be writing off Honey.

But the main point is you can't be saying a recruiter is doing well because their late picks come through when their early picks fail.

Those players don't exactly make a case for your point. Not when you're comparing them to the likes of Lambert and Short.

All I'm saying is that his success rate for rookie selections was 0.

We've arguably had some big misses in the first round too. I'm not going to critically analyse them because we've had our fair share of hits. Like I said, drafting players will have both hits and misses. Combine the hits and misses of our first round selections and I reckon we've done alright.

However, as a recruiter/list manager, a 0 success rate with those back end picks is unacceptable. I'm just saying that this aspect of our rebuild was left to be desired.

 

[goreds]

Sitting back enjoying the thread, good read at the moment!

 

[Eiffel 65]

What do the other clubs, apart from Richmond looks like in terms of successful rookie picks?

Literally every club has at least one very good player taken from the rookie draft in that time.

Look, what I'm saying here is no surprise to anyone in industry or supporter from any other club. Whether you want to acknowledge that fact is another thing altogether.

Have you ever heard the phrase "It's a SOS pick"?

SOS did good things, but there were elements of his list build that he could have done better. There's no point being in denial about it.

 

[Stamos]

Those players don't exactly make a case for your point. Not when you're comparing them to the likes of Lambert and Short.

All I'm saying is that his success rate for rookie selections was 0.

We've arguably had some big misses in the first round too. I'm not going to critically analyse them because we've had our fair share of hits. Like I said, drafting players will have both hits and misses. Combine the hits and misses of our first round selections and I reckon we've done alright.

However, as a recruiter/list manager, a 0 success rate with those back end picks is unacceptable. I'm just saying that this aspect of our rebuild was left to be desired.

It's clearly not 0 though.
Less than we would have liked? Absolutely. But not 0.

 

[F_therest]

End of the day SOS has transformed our list from one with lots of older players, journeymen and not much young talent in 2015 when he joined us to one brimming with young talent, with all major positions except small forward well stocked and looking very promising in only 5 years.

So while there were many misses, there's been plenty of hits and we are in good shape overall.

Seriously, back in 2015 our young talent was literally names like Watson, Menzel, Boekhorst & Jaksch. I think people forget just how bad our list was.

He didn't just sit on his hands either, he did exceptionally well to secure the draft picks we used to draft McKay, Curnow & Cuningham in his very first year - i'm not sure too many other LM's would have pulled that off. Secured Setterfield for a 2nd rounder. Did well out of Gibbs even if LOB/Kennedy/McGovern havent given us the return we'd have hoped so far - jury still out and we did get TDK as well.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Those players don't exactly make a case for your point. Not when you're comparing them to the likes of Lambert and Short.

All I'm saying is that his success rate for rookie selections was 0.

We've arguably had some big misses in the first round too. I'm not going to critically analyse them because we've had our fair share of hits. Like I said, drafting players will have both hits and misses. Combine the hits and misses of our first round selections and I reckon we've done alright.

However, as a recruiter/list manager, a 0 success rate with those back end picks is unacceptable. I'm just saying that this aspect of our rebuild was left to be desired.

Some late picks that have worked have been pointed out to you and you still follow up by saying zero.

You can't compare them to other rookies and say they are better so ours don't count as a success.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Because nailing a rookie pick can have the exact same reward as a first. Look at guys like Papley, Saad and Williams we have chased hard over the last couple of years. All rookie picks.
we also can’t rely on being crap and getting top end picks all the time so you have to do better at the back end of the draft.

once we realise some of our first rounders aren’t good AFL level players we then will see the benefit or lack of those latter picks

That Williams we are chasing was a SOS rookie pick btw.

 

[Eiffel 65]

It's clearly not 0 though.
Less than we would have liked? Absolutely. But not 0.

It's 0

 

[Eiffel 65]

That Williams we are chasing was a SOS rookie pick btw.

Zac Williams was an academy selection.

No other club had access to him.

So you can't really say SOS picked him. He was just there to be taken as a graduate of their academy program at the time.

Had he of been on the open market, then that's a different scenario altogether.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

It's 0

You're just being stubborn now.

So JSOS, Williamson and Gibbons are nothing.

Moving on.

 

[Eiffel 65]

You're just being stubborn now.

So JSOS, Williamson and Gibbons are nothing.

Moving on.

0 for rookies.

Literally 1 successful selection from the 3rd round onwards.

JSOS was F/S selection and doesn't sound like he'll be at the club either. Doesn't count if they're not in the open pool.

Gibbons isn't a long term prospect either. Don't rate him. I'll give you the tip. If he was delisted or on the trade table, I don't think any other club would come after him.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Zac Williams was an academy selection.

No other club access to him.

Rookie drafted. Others could have bid on him in the National Draft surely? Bit of a restraint of trade if no other club can try to get you.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

That Williams we are chasing was a SOS rookie pick btw.

And was more important then the majority of his first rounders while he was their.

 

[Stamos]

0 for rookies.

Literally 1 successful selection from the 3rd round onwards.

JSOS was F/S selection and doesn't sound like he'll be at the club either. Doesn't count if they're not in the open pool.

Gibbons isn't a long term prospect either. Don't rate him. I'll give you the tip. If he was delisted or on the trade table, I don't think any other club would come after him.

I don't particularly rate Gibbo as more than depth, but when he plays 36 out of a possible 39 games, that is not a miss.
Calling that 0 is not a mistake of opinion, but a mistake of fact.

 

[Eiffel 65]

Rookie drafted. Others could have bid on him in the National Draft surely? Bit of a restraint of trade if no other club can try to get you.

A local boy from NSW. Wasn't going anywhere.

Opposition recruiters tend to put less to no time into academy prospects of opposition players because they know it's highly unlikely they'll get them.

Recruiters have opened up about this on Twomey's Road to the Draft podcasts.

Why spend your time and resources on a player you don't have access to when you can focus on a player you can actually draft?

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

Also missing my point.

Richmond picked Lennon ahead of Cripps. Do you think that's the sort of recruiting we should lionise?

The point is you can overcome inevitable mistakes in the first round if you can find player later in the draft.

 

[Stamos]

The point is you can overcome inevitable mistakes in the first round if you can find player later in the draft.

No, the point was that if a recruiter didn't make mistakes then rookies wouldn't be in the best 22.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Literally every club has at least one very good player taken from the rookie draft in that time.

Look, what I'm saying here is no surprise to anyone in industry or supporter from any other club. Whether you want to acknowledge that fact is another thing altogether.

Have you ever heard the phrase "It's a SOS pick"?

SOS did good things, but there were elements of his list build that he could have done better. There's no point being in denial about it.

You don't think that could be said about any list manager?

 

[BlueBlood15]

Eddie can teach him how to kick with his right?

Fisher just doesn't seem to be a natural forward.
He's a one touch accumulator and quality distributor.

He's better than most smalls we have to play forward, but I just don't see him having that innate goal-kicking ability.

I am intrigued by how we are planning to address the need at small forward going forward.
Eddie will be 34 by round 1 and I don’t expect him to perform much differently than this year.
Owies may or may not be on the list next year - presumably will come down to the size of list cuts.
Fish has been re-purposed as a forward but I see him more as a midfielder who can rotate through half forward. Same as Cunners.
I think we should be looking to recruit someone for the role that can learn from Eddie. We don’t need someone to kick 35+ goals but rather someone that can pressure, tackle and kick the odd couple of goals to play as one of a couple of smaller forwards

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

0 for rookies.

Literally 1 successful selection from the 3rd round onwards.

JSOS was F/S selection and doesn't sound like he'll be at the club either. Doesn't count if they're not in the open pool.

Gibbons isn't a long term prospect either. Don't rate him. I'll give you the tip. If he was delisted or on the trade table, I don't think any other club would come after him.

You keep posting about back end picks and also suggested nothing outside the first round. If you keep mixing your language up like that, it creates confusion to the reader who might believe your contention.

Zero rookies ... fine. Gibbons has been valuable but you don't rate him. That's fine. You can't offer to give me the tip about his chances of getting to another club, while also using the words 'I don't think'. One implies certainty, the other implies personal opinion.

I'll rate my rookie successes based on value we get from them vs cost. You rate them based on how they compare to Richmond rookies. We each have a system I guess.

JSOS was in the pool to be bid on, and many thought he wasn't much chop and got selected on name alone. He has shown enough to suggest he can play AFL football and if he goes to another club who has made him an offer to suggest they too rate him, how could that not be considered a success?

We have Polson, Macreadie, Honey, Phillips, Cottrell, as late picks or rookies 22 years of age and under. If they survive the next cut, the jury is still out on this guys.

A lot of teams have had success bringing in older rookies. They are already physically developed and have made up for their shortfalls that saw them miss getting drafted in the first place. We probably have to give our younger guys that opportunity too.

 

[Eiffel 65]

I don't particularly rate Gibbo as more than depth, but when he plays 36 out of a possible 39 games, that is not a miss.
Calling that 0 is not a mistake of opinion, but a mistake of fact.

He has played 36/39 games because we've messed up our back end selections.

Look, I think SOS has done a great job.

Weitering over Schache. Big tick.
Selecting McKay as the bolter in 2015. Big tick.
Acknowledging that Adelaide had a strong interest in McKay at 11 but no interest in Charlie, hence, drafting them in reverse order for how they were rated on our draft board. Big tick.
SPS over Will Brodie. Big tick.
Fisher and TDK as second round selections. Big tick.
Walsh over Rankine. Big tick.
Backing his intel that Kemp may slide to pick 17 in the 2019 draft. Big tick.

He has done a lot right. His back end picks, however, were a sh!tshow.

SOS has done a good job overall. Pretty much everyone is really bullish on our list and that is thanks to SOS. I'm just acknowledging that his back end selections let him down.

 

[ABigOlDoofus]

There should be some because history tells you that premiership winning sides have developed strong depth and competition for spots with rookie selections. Richmond are a great example of this and I've listed some of their rookie gems below.

You can't solely rely on first round selections. You only get one per year. Premiership winning sides aren't made up of 12 first rounders and a bunch of hacks. It's a big reason why our list build took longer than expected. We were unable to land anything late in the draft. It's a big reason why we were sitting on two wins at the end of the 2018 season (3 years into our rebuild).

Late/Rookie selections as part of Richmond's premiership side in 2019:
Nathan Broad: Pick 67 in 2015 National Draft.
Jayden Short: Pick 11 in 2015 Rookie Draft.
Kane Lambert: Pick 46 in 2015 Rookie Draft.
Jason Castagna: Pick 29 in 2015 Rookie Draft.
Ivan Soldo: Pick 68 in 2015 Rookie Draft.
Liam Baker: Pick 18 in 2018 Rookie Draft.
Marlion Pickett: Mid season draft selection.

Got to say, in looking at the above selections, the Richmond recruiting team did an amazing job in 2015.

That's the sign of an incredible, rolled gold recruiting team. I'm not saying SOS was infallible, just that comparing most list managers to that resume will see them pale in comparison.

 

[Stamos]

He has done a lot right. His back end picks, however, were a sh!tshow.

SOS has done a good job overall. Pretty much everyone is really bullish on our list and that is thanks to SOS. I'm just acknowledging that his back end selections let him down.

There is a big difference between this, and the hyperbole of saying 0

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

No, the point was that if a recruiter didn't make mistakes then rookies wouldn't be in the best 22.

Yes but we know SOS does make mistakes so not being able to find players late is a massive worry.

Over the next 7 years we are probably hoping to only have 7 picks inside the top 30 (starting next year) simply from ladder position. If you can’t find players with cheap picks then your not doing your job.
There are going to be a lot more misses then hits but you do need several hits to be doing your job.