A concerned pie

[MarkT]

Having all but taken care of our need to plan for the future in terms of talls, we are now free to take as many midfielders as we like without the concern that we are going to simply run out of sufficient numbers of KPPs. KPPs take longer to develop, so having taken them now means that the midfielders that we can pick up in the 2007 and 2008 drafts will become ready at roughly the same time.

In an era more and more orientated towards midfielders we are getting worse and worse in the midfield. It started badly under MM with the wrong types targeted. By the time we focus heavily on the midfield we will be in dire need, if we are not already. If we continue to do it all virtually exclusively via the draft we are doomed. That might sound melodramatic but IMO it is almost impossible to build the right squad without quality trading. Maybe we have the greatest draft guru of all time and maybe we will somehow finish low enough to get some early picks in spite of actually having a talented squad but even then we will be relying on the vagaries of player type availability and human development.

You have to draft well, trade in and out well, cull well and still takes the odd punt. The reality is we haven’t done any one of those well under the current regime. There are some signs that the drafting has improved although the extent is debatable. It’s nice to have the likes of Pendlebury and Thomas coming through but bragging about getting potential from top 5 picks is dangerous. In 1999 and 2000 we picked up Fraser and Didak who both looked promising early and turned out to be quality players but that sure as hell didn’t mean we had gold in Judkins and the MM philosophy.

In respect of our more recent drafting I can’t complain in that we appear to have adopted a best available approach. If that’s the case then I am happy subject to the judgements made which can only be tested after a few years. That said, drafting is only one part of list management and as vital as it is, if you want to win premierships it is inadequate in isolation.

My point being, now Derek Hine can spend the next two drafts essentially just looking for midfielders, rather than going into them looking for whatever holes we have to fill.

We’ll still be in desperate need for a quality first ruck as our list does not have a single one of them.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Old ground but you are going back to the 2000 and 2001 drafts for “young” midfielders and in any case that’s the sort of list any club can rattle off. Even if I am wrong “not a bad list” is mediocrity and we need a “very, very good list” given pending retirements.

They are all under 25. Thats still young. Its a good enough list for the short term, especially while Holland O'Bree Buckley Davis Burns and Licuria are able to contribute. Throw in a fully fit Rhyce Shaw. We'll need to draft more next year but I dont see the urgency you see.

Some of our quicker talls (we now have plenty, eg Cox, Goldsack, Reid, Rusling, O'Brien) may also fill a gap in the midfield thats been so badly lacking for the past 20 years - a tall running midfielder, like a Hird or an Embley or a Bruce. The possibilities are endless with this list, with the main exception being a lack of another quality ruck option.

I think this is the point Vinnie is alluding to, Mark - you are understimating the potential of our taller recruits to add a new dimension to our team with their pace and versatility, which may hopefully increase our midfield's potency.

 

[MarkT]

Timmy if it was good enough we would have won the final and then possibly gone further.

As for this years crop I am not under or over estimating anything. I have not seen any of them play at any level. Going by the draft we have 2 of the best 10 young talents of 2006 but none judged by others to be at the very pointy end. That’s about all you can say. We may well have a few quicker talls and if so that’s great. The probability of a player of Hird’s quality is very small - less than 1% based on the number of players drafted each year v the number of players at Hird’s level.

Our kids may well add a new dimension. They may also play a handful of games before being delisted. Obviously we all hope it is the former and the bios read well. There seems to be massive optimism from people here though. The reality is we had 1 more first round pick than most clubs and none in the top 3 to 5. To think our kids are any better than anyone else’s is just blind optimism. By and large we started with a mid range squad, had mid range picks and we have some of our best players on the verge of retirement. We have no more quality coming through the ranks than numerous other clubs.

We are average. Plain and simple average. The performance of our football department is shown by the results of the football team. That is as objective as you can get - results are the arbiter not you or I. IMO it isn’t nearly good enough. Not even remotely close. We have had as good or better drafting positions as anyone and we are average anyway you want to look at it. Building up 18 year old nobodies and 20 year olds that haven’t actually produced anything yet won’t change that. What will change it is time, effort and quality in every aspect of list management. We can debate whether we now have the personal that will produce that but the best you can say right now is that 1 aspect of it – drafting talent identification - looks better than it was but it was very poor before and any improvement has to be viewed in light of the picks we have “earned” from our failures.

 

[rand corp]

kids were at school yesterday.

Heater,
Rhyce,
Swan,
Johnson,
Pendles,
Thomas,
Neon,

there's your new, emerging and possible future mids right there
(that's six players without mentioning Bux, Burns, O'Bree, Licuria or Holland)

Stanley & Iles could yet emerge as run with negating mids, Cox and Davies are outside chances.

Egan and Lonie could/can play wing.

D*ck & Wellingham are both promising, lighting quick outside mids and Goldsack has claims as a future prospect.

And I haven't mentioned: Lockyer, Didak, McCaffer (whom I don't think will become top mids) & Clarke (who is just too raw at the minute), nor the rookie fly-weight Nicholls, who definitely has talent.

Despite talk of it in the papers, I refuse to even consider the possibility of considering Medhurst as a mid.

So whilst we went for talent, height, pace and decision making in the draft, we are not bereft of future options. We did draft a few kids with midfield potential a couple of years down the track in D*ck, Goldsack, Wellingham & Clarke.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Timmy if it was good enough we would have won the final and then possibly gone further.

So our midfield's a year behind the Bulldogs and they beat us in one game. So what. We belted Port Adelaide in the finals a few years ago and they didnt jump off a bridge - in fact the same players who got belted learned from it and won a premiership.

Of the players I mentioned as being midfielders players of the future, two were in their second seasons of senior footy (Egan, H Shaw), two were in their first season (Pendlebury , Thomas) one was in his third year (Swan) and one injured his knee at the end of the year (Didak). Just because they werent good enough in one game does not mean they wont be good enough in the future. They just need time, and with the senior players on the list still good enough to get the pill , they'll get the time.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

We are average. Plain and simple average.

We ended up fifth, missing the top four on percentage. Thats above average. Average is 9th and we're better than that. Plain and simple. Its still not good enough, but its better than 11 other teams.

And we've turned over ten players out of our list, mainly VFL players who were not up to it, so we've added some players for the future, replacing players with no future.

 

[Dwayo]

Coin Toss - you should be concerned. Many are predicting that the pies will be the "wooden spooners" this year. Do not have the cattle to mix it in the top eight. The doggies showed you where you really are.

Club needs to get rid of Mick and have a fresh approach and plan.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Many are predicting that the pies will be the "wooden spooners" this year.

Thats been happening for twenty years. In fact we were nominated as near wooden spooners (ahead of Carlton, of course!!!! )by almost every expert in the country last year.

Fact is, we have a good draw, have the same starting 22 as last year (except Tarrant), have a better list of youth than the past 5 years. We're no worldbeaters but theres no reason to think we wont at least make the eight.

 

[Dwayo]

Thats been happening for twenty years. In fact we were nominated as near wooden spooners (ahead of Carlton, of course!!!! )by almost every expert in the country last year.

Fact is, we have a good draw, have the same starting 22 as last year (except Tarrant), have a better list of youth than the past 5 years. We're no worldbeaters but theres no reason to think we wont at least make the eight.

Not enough quality depth to cover for injuries and poor form. Speed through mid-field an issue plus kids will need time. Top teams will be too good.

 

[Coin_Toss]

We ended up fifth, missing the top four on percentage. Thats above average. Average is 9th and we're better than that. Plain and simple. Its still not good enough, but its better than 11 other teams.

We ended up seventh if you count finals. I agree with you in that it was only one game but the way we lost should be deemed as shameful and unacceptable - we were beaten convincingly by a team who finished 8th at the end of the home-and-away season (according to your system). I don't know about you, but I go to the football to see Collingwood fight tooth and nail and were insipid in that regard.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Its one game. Only one game. Just like it was only one training session you saw. A few years ago Port got beaten in similarly embarrasing fashion by Collingwood in a final. They didnt panic, they just learned from it. We'll learn more from losing to the Bulldogs than we ever learned from beating Port Adelaide.

We've turned over ten players to remedy our list. We already knew at the start of 2004, 05 and 06 that our list had structural deficiences. Its been addressed (albeit slowly, but there were plenty of problems) , and we'll start seeing results in 2007 with a serious assault after that. You and Mark are going over old ground as usual.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Top teams will be too good.

That doesnt make us wooden spooners though.

We'll be 5th-8th, like last year. Theres no pressure on us because nobody expects anything. Pressure's all on teams like the Dockers who are "due".

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Not enough quality depth to cover for injuries and poor form.

Nor do many teams, Sydney Swans included. Look how the Crows capitulated late last season when they copped a few injuries and got found out tactically.

 

[MarkT]

So our midfield's a year behind the Bulldogs and they beat us in one game.

Perhaps they are. Perhaps they aren’t in the same class. It all remains to be seen. We have seen the development of their lot and we are speculating on ours. Regardless, they aren’t good enough either. My disappointment at losing to them is compounded by the fact that we were actually a better side than they are everywhere but the midfield.

We belted Port Adelaide in the finals a few years ago and they didnt jump off a bridge - in fact the same players who got belted learned from it and won a premiership.

Port continued to top up and went on to win. We are 3 years past where they were just prior to their flag. We have had two large culls and don’t have anywhere near the older players they had to win their flag – just in time I might add. They also stayed top 4 whereas we have some off two bottom 4 finishes. There is a world of difference between where they were at and where we are at. Their coach learned from their failures. He moved Cornes back and change the way they played. I wish I was confident our coach was able to do likewise.

Of the players I mentioned as being midfielders players of the future, two were in their second seasons of senior footy (Egan, H Shaw), two were in their first season (Pendlebury , Thomas) one was in his third year (Swan) and one injured his knee at the end of the year (Didak). Just because they werent good enough in one game does not mean they wont be good enough in the future. They just need time, and with the senior players on the list still good enough to get the pill , they'll get the time.

They weren’t good enough in a number of key games – that’s why after a 8-3 start we didn’t finish the H&W in the top 4. 3 quality midfields made us look ordinary at best – Melbourne, Freo and St. Kilda in the second half of the year. Admittedly we had 2 good wins over Swans & Eagles. The reality is after 8-3 we fell in a hole because we just didn’t have the midfield and when the finals came around that was clearly exposed. It is just so Collingwood to dismiss the evidence as a 1 game aberration. That is what we have done for nearly 50 years. It’s time for that to stop. This is one of my main criticisms of MM and co post 2002 and particularly 2003. You just have to assume natural improvement won’t be enough to bridge the gap. You have to take measures to address weak spots. It’s too late now for this squad so I am not complaining about the 2006 drafting. All I am doing is responding to the over rating of our misfield. We are among the worst midfields in the AFL and we are at least 2 very good players not yet on our list away from being among the better ones.

 

[MarkT]

Coin Toss - you should be concerned. Many are predicting that the pies will be the "wooden spooners" this year.

Collingwood won’t be bottom 4, at least not without a horror injury count. That isn’t the issue. The issue is that we won’t be playing off for the premiership. We will be mid table. Anywhere between 5th and 10th depending on injuries and development of a few mids.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Collingwood won’t be bottom 4, at least not without a horror injury count. That isn’t the issue. The issue is that we won’t be playing off for the premiership. We will be mid table. Anywhere between 5th and 10th depending on injuries and development of a few mids.

At least on that we agree!!

But I've got us bottom half of the eight and on the rise, you've got us bottom half of the eight and in decline again.

My brain hurts, had enough of this debating, bring on the footy!!!

 

[jefffff34]

In my opinion we are clearly an emerging side. People remark at how hard it will be without Didak for half a season, and Holland for a quarter of it.

That is two players out of 40 odd. We have depth now, something we really didn't have in 2003 in my opinion. Plus the young blokes that have been blooded will obviously improve. We now have five top 10 picks on our list from the previous three drafts, Egan, Thomas, Pendlebury, Reid and Brown. You can build a team around these five players for years to come. These guys can form the nucleus, just like the Australian cricket team made a nucleus in the mid 80s of Border, Boon, Waugh, Jones, etc.

We're a good team.

 

[King Woodie]

I have to say, I don't like it how people think that people like Johnson or Davis or even H Shaw will become our midfield stars of the future. They may become part of a midfield rotation, but not starting mid stars. You look at the best mids in the league at the moment, and most of them are true mids, not forward pockets and back pockets who have been moved to the midfield to cover some gaps. Mind you, I think this is the coaches/recruiting staff's fault as ever time they comment on a new draftee that isn't a tall, they say "yeah and we reckon he will push into the midfield...". Reality is you have to get midfielders to play in the midfield. Buckleys, Judds, Cousins, Ball, Hayes, Dal Santo, Voss, etc etc. If Johnson hasn't commanded a midfield spot now at 26, he won't become one magically in the next 3 years. Egan WILL NOT become a midfielder.

 

[MarkT]

At least on that we agree!!

But I've got us bottom half of the eight and on the rise, you've got us bottom half of the eight and in decline again.

My brain hurts, had enough of this debating, bring on the footy!!!

I’ve actually got us bottom half of the 8 and swinging like a pendulum. I can’t see much rise but I can’t see much fall either. My concerns are not of pending doom but of extended mediocrity. As champs exit we will have some youth coming through but to win premierships we need about twice as many as we have IMO. The gap between 5th and 1st is great unless you really are a young team on the rise. We are a few good drafts away from that and really good drafts are difficult from mid table.

Yeh, bring back the footy and make me look stupid please Collingwood. Trust me no one wants to be wrong on this more than I do.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

I have to say, I don't like it how people think that people like Johnson or Davis or even H Shaw will become our midfield stars of the future. .

Thomas and Pendlebury will be the stars. And Didak, who already is a star and will spend more and more time in the midfield. H Shaw too has the pedigree to be a star - he nearly won the Rising Star this year, and generally hacks dont win that award. Dont let this "hes only played defence" stuff put you off, thats just the MM way of teaching young players the ropes. Thats four who could be great players, and the rest like Johnson fill out the rotations.

We have star potential already in our line-up, and we'll top that up in next years draft, having picked up plenty of talls this year. I dont know where the next superstar will come from, but you can win flags without a superstar in your midfield - like Sydney and Port Adelaide have done.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

I’ve actually got us bottom half of the 8 and swinging like a pendulum. I can’t see much rise but I can’t see much fall either. My concerns are not of pending doom but of extended mediocrity. As champs exit we will have some youth coming through but to win premierships we need about twice as many as we have IMO. The gap between 5th and 1st is great unless you really are a young team on the rise. We are a few good drafts away from that and really good drafts are difficult from mid table.

And how are we likely to get this youth in? I'm thinking by patiently waiting for the draft each year and attempting to get younger and better.

People are crying that guys like Nathan Buckley, Scott Burns, James Clement and Anthony Rocca are getting older, and won't be around for much longer, but by that same token, I am hope that guys like Dale Thomas, Scott Pendlebury, Travis Cloke and many of the others will step up to the point where we don't miss them.

The fact of the matter is, we recruited two good players between 2001 and 2003. That isn't enough, and it is failure in recruiting. It takes at 5 years of solid drafting to build a championship side.

Look at West Coast - From 1999, when they picked up Darren Glass, Adam Hunter and Dean Cox, to 2001 when they picked up Chris Judd, Ashley Hansen and Quinten Lynch, to 2003 when they drafted Beau Waters, and they picked up most of their premiership side over that period.

Now, we have had three potentially strong drafts in a row. In saying that, I am suggesting that perhaps half of the players we have drafted might turn out to be good players, which is an outstanding ratio, even when teams draft well. We are still, however, two more solid drafts away from having a team that we can believe might actually have a shot at a premiership.

Given that we still need that extra injection of talent to come from two drafts, I am somewhat glad that we now need midfielders, as they will take much less time to develop than talls would, if we needed those in the coming drafts.

From a strategic point of view, Derek Hine has done well in terms of planning for future drafts, rather than whinging about what has been done in the past and going into panic mode about what our most immediate needs are.

 

[magilla]

im with mark t on this one, to much optimism is being shown about these players that are yet to play a game. they could be great or they could turn out to be duds, i will wait to judge them on quality of performance rather than an age and pick number. no offence but some of you are starting to sound like hawthorn fans.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

im with mark t on this one, to much optimism is being shown about these players that are yet to play a game..

Too much pessimism is being shown around plyers who have already been delisted. I'm sick to death of hearing about mistakes made at the drafting table in 2002 - those duds have now been cleaned out.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

im with mark t on this one, to much optimism is being shown about these players that are yet to play a game. they could be great or they could turn out to be duds, i will wait to judge them on quality of performance rather than an age and pick number. no offence but some of you are starting to sound like hawthorn fans.

Which players who haven't played a game are being hyped up relentlessly?

Most of the hype is for guys like Dale Thomas, Scott Pendlebury, Dane Swan, Heath Shaw and others who have actually proven something at AFL level.

 

[magilla]

Which players who haven't played a game are being hyped up relentlessly?

Most of the hype is for guys like Dale Thomas, Scott Pendlebury, Dane Swan, Heath Shaw and others who have actually proven something at AFL level.

pendelbury and thomas have played half a season, hardly proved themselves. they have potential i agree but are not guaranteed to carry our midfield, egan really needs to improve, is a shocking decision maker. and blazes away far to often.

and i may have exaggerated the hyping of new players by comparing to hawthorns fans, but to assume we have depth now is very optimistic. if our main senior players suffer injuries we will be screwed.