List Mgmt. 2020 List Management II

[The Old Dark Navy's]

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.

Yet those guys all got a game with us at one point or another, which shows that they were recruited as mature depth because we had none. We had seen what going into games too young could do to a team and to a young player confidence wise. Filling those spots with unseen VFL players or unrated 18 years old, isn't much more of a strategy to be honest.

I don't agree with many of those selection, if any to be honest. There were other DFAs I was more interested in, but these are just opinions.

 

[Macca43]

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.

Yeah the players are different but the decision making is also different. Early on with so many young early draftees we looked harder at players who have been in the system with a body that could handle the level but we were happy to turn over quickly if they didn't work. As out list matured we could start going younger and taking players who we expected will take time.

 

[Macca43]

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.

Well it is safe to say that would be your assumption when you are drafting but the reason SOS traded to get so many first round picks was so that the theory remains sound even if all our top end picks didn't work out.

"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." Are we left with a massive hole?

Lets say this year we end up bring in Williams and Saad as seems to be the agreed minimum and then lets say Dow, O'brien, Cuningham and Stocker (I assume they are your 4 borderline players) don't develop - now pick your 2021 best 22.

Do you get Plowman, Newman and Marchbank into defence?
Is Williamson pushing Newnes off the wing and out of the side?
Does Murphy start on the ground or is he in the side at all?
Which 2 out of Casboult, TDK, Pittonet plays?
Up forward is McGovern out of the side, can JSOS squeeze in, what about Gibbons?

LAte picks are always a punt and you can criticise SOS for missing but at least you can see a clear and evolving strategy

 

[BlueJet]

Re: the quality of SOS work.
If the poster in question had said that SoS did a great job rather than a terrible one, would this discussion be ongoing?
If not why not?

 

[JustaBattler]

I'd bet London to a brick SOS himself didn't like most of the salary dumps he took to get the players the Club wanted onto the list - has anyone asked him?

 

[JustaBattler]

Re: the quality of SOS work.
If the poster in question had said that SoS did a great job rather than a terrible one, would this discussion be ongoing?
If not why not?

there is a rather large gap betwen 'great' and 'shyte' - dont ya think?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Re: the quality of SOS work.
If the poster in question had said that SoS did a great job rather than a terrible one, would this discussion be ongoing?
If not why not?

It would be ongoing because there are other posters who have similar opinions, and there would be counter arguments to their points as well.

I'm not sure why it matters. Have we got to a point where we should just state our own opinions without quoting others as a segue into our own views?

What is wrong with challenging views? There are posters here who appreciate a good debate as long as we don't get personal about it.

 

[95blues]

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.

I'd value what I see on the training track far less then even the scratch matches this season. Athletes like Honey, LOB, Cottrell, Cunningham etc always look good on the track. Just like Kane Lucas, Menzel and countless others.

Its obviously my opinion but quality AFL level footballers dominate Reserves games (even the scratch matches). And this goes for 1st and 2nd year players too. Guys like Lambert and Zorko or Gibbons who year after year get 30 touches a game but don't have the sexy things like huge vertical leaps.

 

[TENACIOUS]

Yes SOS is a club legend and we all love him. The way he was sacked was extremely poor by the club..

But if you look at our list SOS and his team didn't do that great of a job, it was average at best.
We currently have a lot of holes to fill and are currently not a top 8 list..

After the first round they had far more miss's than hit's through the draft.
We currently have a lot of depth and (over rated on here) but unknown talent on the list.

As for trades and FA, yes the wheeling and dealing was fun for us all through trade week.
But the only top tier player they managed to bring in through a trade/FA is Plowman.
They brought a lot of top 20-40 depth and cheap useless list cloggers that set us back (No longer on the list).
Also their inability to land any of the big fish they perused during trade week

This is a job they were paid well to do.. If it was anyone else but SOS, they would have been sacked earlier.

Austin has already landed a top tier player through FA in Williams, something SOS failed to do.

 

[katmanblue]

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

Spilt milk.

On SM-N960F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Jimmyonesix]

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

Sydney swans

 

[HARKER]

I'd value what I see on the training track far less then even the scratch matches this season. Athletes like Honey, LOB, Cottrell, Cunningham etc always look good on the track. Just like Kane Lucas, Menzel and countless others.

Its obviously my opinion but quality AFL level footballers dominate Reserves games (even the scratch matches). And this goes for 1st and 2nd year players too. Guys like Lambert and Zorko or Gibbons who year after year get 30 touches a game but don't have the sexy things like huge vertical leaps.

No. It's a lot more than that.
One also has to look at attributes that can convert into AFL standard qualities.

Lucas and Menzel were premium picked players and that's not what I'm putting forward here.
It's the vision with rookie picks that have a chance of making it and there's several components here that allow the opportunity for this to come about - Ability. Desire. Positional imperatives.

This is where he CFC missed the mark over several years.

 

[The Greek Freak]

Sydney swans

Yep Sydney have been competition leaders for finding rookie gems by a mile

 

[95blues]

No. It's a lot more than that.
One also has to look at attributes that can convert into AFL standard qualities.

Lucas and Menzel were premium picked players and that's not what I'm putting forward here.
It's the vision with rookie picks that have a chance of making it and there's several components here that allow the opportunity for this to come about - Ability. Desire. Positional imperatives.

This is where he CFC missed the mark over several years.

Personal opinion again but in Honey, Cottrell, Owies and even Philp I see guys we'll be shaking our heads at in a few years. A bunch of guys with 99's for Speed, Vertical, Endurance etc but 49's for football.

Hoping not...

 

[HARKER]

Personal opinion again but in Honey, Cottrell, Owies and even Philp I see guys we'll be shaking our heads at in a few years. A bunch of guys with 99's for Speed, Vertical, Endurance etc but 49's for football.

Hoping not...

That doesn't matter and isn't the point.

The point is that in later picks and rookie drafts, some chances should be taken and afford development to take hold of what may not have been there otherwise. All of the players I mentioned had 'something' going for them and made sense from positional requirements and as for their predecessors........not so much.

 

[The Return of the Paf]

Sure, but is that what I've argued?

I don't know, I haven't looked that far back in the thread but I like to put my two bobs worth in to what I read in 'real' time. Saying things like 'player 'X' was overlooked by 17 clubs' (or, whatever) and 'every recruiter makes mistakes' is a common arguing tactic around these parts; it irks me because it puts the breaks on the possibility of getting down to the nitty gritty. 'Mistakes' that are forgivable are ones that follow a completely logical rationale but just fail to work out for whatever reason, drafting Gibbs at #1 despite him not living up to his form as a junior is one example. I'd much rather fail miserably once in a blue moon (no pun intended) but get most things right than win big once yet fall slightly short on a fairly consistent basis. To be perfectly honest, I'm not really all that critical of 'Silvagni' as an entity but questions have to be asked about some recruiting decisions made by Carlton over the last four years.

Silvagni made a fantastic start in his first year, lets face it, but the draft crop available that year and the short lived rules for trading for points helped a lot. The following season was good on paper but the first really questionable move was not trading Gibbs in a superior draft year, you can't convince me that recruiters don't have a general idea one year in advance. Another thing that people seem to insist on and excuse is drafting for need over best available; you simply can't get the player you are hoping on if they are not there to begin with. I'm thinking two names (that I won't mention but you can guess) in the same draft had us reaching, but most won't see it like that because it's a subtle example and sometimes immediate needs are never a reach but long term ones are, for whatever stupid reason. You can't go against the grain of talent no matter how desperate you are, you just get people failing in their positions because they aren't quite up to the task. Surplus at least gives you trade currency.

 

[Eiffel 65]

This is a job they were paid well to do.. If it was anyone else but SOS, they would have been sacked earlier.

Not necessarily sacked earlier, but they would have been more heavily criticised for some of the decisions made.

 

[The Return of the Paf]

Personal opinion again but in Honey, Cottrell, Owies and even Philp I see guys we'll be shaking our heads at in a few years. A bunch of guys with 99's for Speed, Vertical, Endurance etc but 49's for football.

Hoping not...

You can add Ramsey to that. It's not even that; Philp is the only one to write home about in terms of draft testing.

 

[katmanblue]

Is there anything fish lacks to become a top small forward could he spend the offseason learning from Eddie
We desperately need a small crumbing forward he looked pretty good in couple of games I don’t know if he trained last preseason for the role or if he was injured

The will.

Still wants to be an astronaut.
I mean, a midfielder.

On SM-N960F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[teagueyubeauty]

Yep Sydney have been competition leaders for finding rookie gems by a mile

We used to be just about the best at picking talent with the rookie/PSD, we just couldn’t nail the premium picks.

The positions we are bereft in (small forward, back pocket) are the types clubs find regularly late, would be nice to nail a couple


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[95blues]

It's not even that; Philp is the only one to write home about in terms of draft testing.

Best part about it was he tested so well for speed... yet one of the more common criticisms was that he doesn't use it. The speed that is.

 

[COBALT BLUE]

Thanks. Now I know what I'm dealing with here.

It's funny - you're probably thinking you've gone some way to proving your 'point', yet the only thing you've demonstrated is the ability to compile a list.

Unfortunately the above does nothing to prove your initial statement. Anyone can put a list together - it's another thing to understand and analyse.

You could literally put a list together similar to the above, for every single recruiter. Every single one in the history of the game.

Can you tell us the context in which these guys were recruited? Can you tell us why most of them were brought to the club. I'm sceptical but happy to debate.



You keep saying that but you've actually not put any proof forward.

Where is this proof? Are you still working on it or do you really think what you've put forward proves what you think it does?

I don't think I believe that either .....this is CFC and SOS will always be highly regarded
He came at a time when NOBODY wanted to know the club in a few areas of coarse including players

 

[katmanblue]

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

Eh?

On SM-N960F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Opine]

Yes SOS is a club legend and we all love him. The way he was sacked was extremely poor by the club..

But if you look at our list SOS and his team didn't do that great of a job, it was average at best.
We currently have a lot of holes to fill and are currently not a top 8 list..

After the first round they had far more miss's than hit's through the draft.
We currently have a lot of depth and (over rated on here) but unknown talent on the list.

As for trades and FA, yes the wheeling and dealing was fun for us all through trade week.
But the only top tier player they managed to bring in through a trade/FA is Plowman.
They brought a lot of top 20-40 depth and cheap useless list cloggers that set us back (No longer on the list).
Also their inability to land any of the big fish they perused during trade week

This is a job they were paid well to do.. If it was anyone else but SOS, they would have been sacked earlier.

Austin has already landed a top tier player through FA in Williams, something SOS failed to do.

What do you think was the main selling point that Austin utilised to get Williams to commit to Blues via FA?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

What do you think was the main selling point that Austin utilised to get Williams to commit to Blues via FA?