Past #41: Matt McGuinness - delisted end '22 - 0 NM games/goals - thanks Matty

Remove this Banner Ad

I look forward to the recruiting team picking the next rangey defensive type who is immune to any muscle development and will die if they come into contact with protein.

I ******* hate when we reach for a selection and pick a kid that is nowhere near it.
Just identify what the old man looked like in his prime to gather an idea of the campaigners genetics. Suss his uncles, brothers, etc and if they’re string beans then move the * on.

It’s not bloody hard to see who can fill out and adapt to the AFL program and who can’t.
He was a category B rookie. There was no reach.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Thought I was reading that he was finally starting to come on a bit in the 2s this year?
 
He was a category B rookie. There was no reach.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk

I'm of the school of thought there is an opportunity cost for every selection. There's no "free hits".

Any player consumes many levels of club resources. Ultimately this was an unsuccessful Cat B selection - would hope the club reviews these things to gradually improves its talent identification methods. Whether it does is another matter.

Maybe tazaa is in the ballpark - for example with some deeper digging his physical limits might've been better assessed from a probability perspective.
 
I'm of the school of thought there is an opportunity cost for every selection. There's no "free hits".

Any player consumes many levels of club resources. Ultimately this was an unsuccessful Cat B selection - would hope the club reviews these things to gradually improves its talent identification methods. Whether it does is another matter.

Maybe tazaa is in the ballpark - for example with some deeper digging his physical limits might've been better assessed from a probability perspective.
If it’s a free hit then why not go for one who has the most upside. I failed to see the upside on McGuiness.

Some players in the AFL system just click and flourish. Again he’s cat B but it was almost a waste of time.

FWIW - my approach to draftees is all the same. Top 10 pick or rookie - it’s extremely important to see which kid can fill out and who can’t. We aren’t drafting them for 18 and 19 it’s from 25-30.
 
Last edited:
If it’s a free hit then why not go for one who has the most upside. I failed to see the upside on McGuiness.

Some players in the AFL system just click and flourish. Again he’s cat B but it was almost a waste of time.

FWIW - my approach to draftees is all the same. Top 10 pick or rookie - it’s extremely important to see which kid can fill out and who can’t. We aren’t drafting them for 18 and 19 it’s from 25-30.

Yeh it's a weird logic.

Then run an athletics testing screening in the US, pick 2x U22yo 210cm+ kids who can tick enough testing boxes, plonk them on the Cat B list and hope for the best.

Or go to somewhere up north, watch the local rugby and pick 2x flashy kids based purely on athletic talent and try the same.

If you want to treat the Cat B list as lucky dip then swing big.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Yeh it's a weird logic.

Then run an athletics testing screening in the US, pick 2x U22yo 210cm+ kids who can tick enough testing boxes, plonk them on the Cat B list and hope for the best.

Or go to somewhere up north, watch the local rugby and pick 2x flashy kids based purely on athletic talent and try the same.

If you want to treat the Cat B list as lucky dip then swing big.
I think we went to the Mr Puniverse competition.

Sent from my SM-A908B using Tapatalk
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top