List Mgmt. 2020 List Management II

[Blue_Fusion]

There's still absolutely nothing that suggests SOS was a terrible recruiter...

I've asked Harry Hindsight to give the list of players SOS should've drafted along with the best list manager of the past 5 years and to no surprise he's ducked under the covers...

Maybe he's finally realised that even the best list manager has missed out on drafting 99% of the players he would've listed as those that SOS should've drafted...

There's no point crying over fringe players and speculative draft picks. Fact is, list managers are very lucky to nail one or two late picks/rookie selections and if they really could spot their true talent, they would've drafted them a lot earlier anyway.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

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?

Yet SOS big on Setterfield, Henry and Green who were all tied to clubs. Safe to say that this doesn't apply to all recruiters.

 

[Eiffel 65]

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.

I rate our rookie selections against Richmond because they're the benchmark for winning flags at the moment.

Recruiters rated JSOS, however, they also knew he was never going anywhere bar Carlton.

Just keep in mind he kicked 6 goals against WA in the championships. He was on other clubs radars, but once again, recruiters don't put much time into prospects they know they don't have access to.

U18s: Jack Silvagni boots six as Vic Metro thumps WA

Carlton father-son prospect shines in big win for Vic Metro

www.afl.com.au

 

[95blues]

I don't see why its considered so offensive to suggest SOS hasn't done the greatest job

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.

Agree with this.

Hitting with your 1st rounders is merely meeting expectations.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

I don't see why its considered so offensive to suggest SOS hasn't done the greatest job

All good to suggest that if that is your opinion.

But to spout rubbish about him being a terrible recruiter then using hindsight to list a bunch of players he should've taken in the rookie draft of all places...

 

[BluesTragic]

Dan Butler was there for the taking and wanted to play at Carlton.

What a monumental stuff up

 

[DangerousD]

I think you missed my point.
Richmond did well with their rookie picks, but likewise butchered a number of first rounders. If they didn't have those mistakes, the rookies wouldn't have gotten a look in.

Of course but we know that doesn’t happen, what do you think when you look back at our use of the rookie draft and late selections in the national draft?
The reason why I think we are behind where we should be and still with a lot of question marks over the list, is because we placed so much emphasis and importance on top end picks, when these picks fail to develop we are left exposed. I don’t know how anyone looks at the list of players SOS brought in, that are no longer here and thinks, what was he thinking.

The wheeling and dealing was great, trading out Menzel, Henderson, Yarran was great, sorting out the tpp was great and starting the rebuild was great, the players brought in by trades has been poor, senior players brought in via the rookie draft has been poor and I really really hope by the end of next year we can all sit here and say, thank god for LOB, Dow, SPS and Cuningham coming on, because that’s 4 first round draftees that have been disappointing to date.

 

[Eiffel 65]

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

3rd round onwards, SOS had one good selection (Williamson).

SOS did not land one good rookie selection.

Just on that, I need to point out SOS traded away Shane McAdam for a bag of chips in 2018. Not a good look when you end up taking Hugh Goddard and Tom Bugg in the 2018 Rookie Draft.

 

[Jeremias]

I don't see why its considered so offensive to suggest SOS hasn't done the greatest job

It's not.

Literally everyone has accepted that SOS made errors. It would be silly to suggest otherwise.

 

[CJMB]

Yet SOS big on Setterfield, Henry and Green who were all tied to clubs. Safe to say that this doesn't apply to all recruiters.

Off the top of my head, Dunkley & Mosquito are two that were tied up (F/S & NGA respectively) who got taken by other clubs.

 

[azlou]

Carlton forward signs contract extension

The Blues have locked away more promising talent.

www.zerohanger.com

For team balance I see this as his role at least 70% small forward quick fast and can snap a goal

 

[HARKER]

Re our rookies -

Said this some time ago, but the last five players we took on as rookies had something - Gibbons, Cottrell, DeLuca, Honey and Phillips.
What happened before this was largely a head shaker.

Each of the players I mentioned above showed something from the get-go, even though DeLuca was cut.
Most of the rookies before them though......ordinary. You give them a go because you feel that you may not be seeing something that the recruiters had, but JGM, LeBois, Gallucci, Shaw, O'Shea, Mullett (although a DFA) Goddard, Bugg just didn't front up with anything that stood out.

The difference in watching Honey and Phillips this year to what had come about years previously - Chalk and cheese.

 

[Macca43]

I don't see why its considered so offensive to suggest SOS hasn't done the greatest job


Agree with this.

Hitting with your 1st rounders is merely meeting expectations.

Hitting your first rounders is meeting expectations, but getting multiple first rounder picks on a regular basis for 5 years is a great effort.

Then fi we look at our later picks - from 2015 JSOS at 53 is our only pick in the national draft outside the first round, 2016 Williamson with 61looks a great pick, Polson is still on the list after being taken at 59 and MacReadie could still but a big win and of course fisher at 27 looks inspired while Alex Silvagni was a good get in the rookie draft, and in 2017 De Koning was considered a reach at 30 but looks a bargain.

As for the rookies you really need to look at needs, we loaded up on so much top end talent we needed rookies to add maturity so we largely took punts on players that had been in the system (Silvagni, Shaw, O'Shea, Goddard, Bugg) but if you include the likes of Cotrell, Gibbons, Honey & Phillips -it is hard to make a case that SOS was no good at picking outside round 1.

 

[Eiffel 65]

It's not.

Literally everyone has accepted that SOS made errors. It would be silly to suggest otherwise.

Every recruiter makes errors.

 

[DangerousD]

There's still absolutely nothing that suggests SOS was a terrible recruiter...

What is terrible though? He clearly wasn’t. What’s a par? What’s fantastic?

 

[Macca43]

Re our rookies -

Said this some time ago, but the last five players we took on as rookies had something - Gibbons, Cottrell, DeLuca, Honey and Phillips.
What happened before this was largely a head shaker.

Each of the players I mentioned above showed something from the get-go, even though DeLuca was cut.
Most of the rookies before them though......ordinary. You give them a go because you feel that you may not be seeing something that the recruiters had, but JGM, LeBois, Gallucci, Shaw, O'Shea, Mullett (although a DFA) Goddard, Bugg just didn't front up with anything that stood out.

The difference in watching Honey and Phillips this year to what had come about years previously - Chalk and cheese.

The maturity of the list needs to be considered when comparing 2019's rookies with the prior years.

 

[Jeremias]

Every recruiter makes errors.

Yes - hence why simply putting forward a list of 'misses' is a shallow and lazy way of analysing Silvagni's work.

 

[HARKER]

The maturity of the list needs to be considered when comparing 2019's rookies with the prior years.

Not at all and I'm talking about watching the guys at training.

I watched Honey and Phillips this year and it didn't take long to see that there was something there.
Pretty much the same as the year before with Cottrell and Gibbons, although I was somewhat dark on Gibbons for being selfish.

It's different. Way different.

 

[Eiffel 65]

Yes - hence why simply putting forward a list of 'misses' is a shallow and lazy way of analysing Silvagni's work.

I agree with that.

But I don't agree with anyone rating what SOS did from the 3rd round onwards in the draft.

Anyway, I'm done on this topic. SOS did a good job and I really don't have that much interest in reflecting on the negatives of his list build. As a whole, I genuinely rate what he's done for the club from a holistic perspective in regards to our list build. I haven't agreed with every decision, but overall, I'm very happy with where we now sit.

 

[The Return of the Paf]

Yes - hence why simply putting forward a list of 'misses' is a shallow and lazy way of analysing Silvagni's work.

Every recruiter makes mistakes = Silvagni, pass. Now, that's shallow and lazy.

 

[Jeremias]

Every recruiter makes mistakes = Silvagni, pass. Now, that's shallow and lazy.

Sure, but is that what I've argued?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

list cloggers and duds! Where did it get us? ... Terrible strategy, that cost us 2-3 years of misery.

Yeah nah, that didn't cost us. Age balance and development and coaching have cost us thus far, not a lack of success with rookie picks and senior cast offs.

 

[DangerousD]

As for the rookies you really need to look at needs, we loaded up on so much top end talent we needed rookies to add maturity so we largely took punts on players that had been in the system (Silvagni, Shaw, O'Shea, Goddard, Bugg) but if you include the likes of Cotrell, Gibbons, Honey & Phillips -it is hard to make a case that SOS was no good at picking outside round 1.

The theory around it is sound but thats assuming all your top picks end up good players. We took punts on players that were gone after 1 season or 2 and ignored players overlooked from the draft or from the state leagues, if the top picks don’t come one, you’re left with a massive hole because you ignored the late rounds of the draft and topped the list up with poor players.

I can be a bit negative at times but I see four of top draftees as being borderline best 22 going forwards, I see two mature players that we gave up three 2nd round picks for as not being best 22, if these guys don’t come good on their talents, we will be left with a big job to do because we ignored the rookie draft too often.

I don’t see the recruitment of Oshea, Shaw, Mullett, Fasolo, Palmer, Smedts, Lang, Lobbe or Silvagni as helping win many games or limit the losers that we did suffer, we would be in a much better position if we just went to the draft.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Off the top of my head, Dunkley & Mosquito are two that were tied up (F/S & NGA respectively) who got taken by other clubs.

Yup! Didn't Collingwood go big on picking up Brisbane Academy players last draft? Clubs aren't afraid to have a shot and the argument that you don't want to put time and resources into a player you have less chance of picking up doesn't really wash, because nobody knows how a draft will wash out. We literally put time and resources into hundreds of players who get recruited by other clubs before we get a chance to get them anyway. Also, these academy players aren't playing on their own, they are playing with other players we are also taking a look at. It's no extra effort at all these days really, not if you are casting your net far and wide.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I don't see why its considered so offensive to suggest SOS hasn't done the greatest job

I don't know why its considered offensive to debate the point with valid points either.

Are there any points in life universally agreed upon? This forum would be shit without counter points.