Crows Chat That 'Doesnt Deserve Its Own Thread' Thread part 2

[George CantStandYa]

No, this is actually boring from both sides.

Of course the job of recruiters is to pick good players.

The only interesting part comes when we acknowledge that no one has ever gotten it right 100% of the time.

If it's obvious there's going to be some failures - how many is too many? And is the reason why a player was a failure worth considering?

If its boring you don’t have to join in

I’d say 4 first rounders over a short period of time is too many, don’t you?

 

[Mostyn]

If its boring you don’t have to join in

I’d say 4 first rounders over a short period of time is too many, don’t you?

I reckon, across four first rounders, you need one home run, two solid base hits and you can afford one strike out.

 

[Mostyn]

The other thing we've never solved as an industry is how to talk about first rounders, as they're vastly different.

It's almost better talking about them in groups of twelve picks or so, instead of groups of 20.

 

[George CantStandYa]

I reckon, across four first rounders, you need one home run, two solid base hits and you can afford one strike out.

That’s fair enough, we got 4 flops though, hence the criticism

 

[1990crow]

I reckon, across four first rounders, you need one home run, two solid base hits and you can afford one strike out.

I think for an average AFL side this would be about right, but if you want to win flags it needs to be nailed 3/4 and 1/4 is solid base.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

I think for an average AFL side this would be about right, but if you want to win flags it needs to be nailed 3/4 and 1/4 is solid base.

Hawthorn and richmond had few first misses before flags

 

[George CantStandYa]

I think maybe I’ve been harsh on Hamish, he got Fog right in between Gallucci and Jones/McHenry. So 1 out of 5

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

How do our recruiters stack up against the industry leaders?

Are we getting more or fewer hits? More or fewer early misses?

 

[1990crow]

I think maybe I’ve been harsh on Hamish, he got Fog right in between Gallucci and Jones/McHenry. So 1 out of 5

There really isn't any defending 2016-2019. It's horrific.

2016 - Galluci (fail), Poholke (fail)
2017 - Fogarty (tick), McPherson (fail)
2018 - Jones (average), McHenry (trending fail), Hamill (below average), Sholl (average)
2019 - McAsey (fail), Worrell (trending tick), Schoenberg (hard to tell, average)

Not ideal.

 

[George CantStandYa]

How do our recruiters stack up against the industry leaders?

Are we getting more or fewer hits? More or fewer early misses?

Not sure, but Melbourne had a run of dud first rd picks and then changed recruiter, the rest is history.

 

[George CantStandYa]

There really isn't any defending 2016-2019. It's horrific.

2016 - Galluci (fail), Poholke (fail)
2017 - Fogarty (tick), McPherson (fail)
2018 - Jones (average), McHenry (trending fail), Hamill (below average), Sholl (average)
2019 - McAsey (fail), Worrell (trending tick), Schoenberg (hard to tell, average)

Not ideal.

McPherson is a tough one, I like him as a player but he’s always injured, we did draft him with injury concerns so yes you could call it a fail.

Jones at pick 9 is a fail.

Worrell is a tick, he just needs games which he will get now.

Some of these players are plus 20 picks and you’re going to have misses with those, that’s why it’s crucial you get the first rounders right and the four that Hamish ****ed up are going to cost us, they could be the difference between a successful rebuild or not. Even if 2 of the 4 were quality players, then that’s a big addition of talent to the team.

I just don’t get how some on here just brush it off, don’t they want a flag?

 

[jackster83]

I reckon, across four first rounders, you need one home run, two solid base hits and you can afford one strike out.

Getting two top ten picks badly wrong in successive years should be enough to see a change of head recruiter.

 

[1970crow]

Nah, Carmo is on the right track here. We have a really good crop of talent coming through together. Time will tell, but the nay sayers I think will have plenty of egg on their faces.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

talent is only part of the recipe.

 

[Mostyn]

How do our recruiters stack up against the industry leaders?

Are we getting more or fewer hits? More or fewer early misses?

That's the actual question.

There's been a few posters who have done some good coverage of this across the journey. It tends to get 24 hours of discussion and then we circle back to what people just feel personally, whether that's supported by the data or not

 

[1970crow]

Wow hindsight is a great thing so now yourare telling me our recruitment staff should be able to know the future when drafting ?

On SM-G996B using BigFooty.com mobile app

I'm not suggesting that I predicted any of that. I'm just stating the fact that whilst we look to have drafted well early the last couple of years, prior to that we've done relatively poorly with our first picks. We've heard the club say that successful rebuilds are based upon 4 drafts, but there are ?s over our earlier ones.

And I never stated anything about what our recruitment staff should know. Just where we find ourselves right now. Do you disagree?

 

[Mostyn]

McPherson is a tough one, I like him as a player but he’s always injured, we did draft him with injury concerns so yes you could call it a fail.

Jones at pick 9 is a fail.

Worrell is a tick, he just needs games which he will get now.

Some of these players are plus 20 picks and you’re going to have misses with those, that’s why it’s crucial you get the first rounders right and the four that Hamish ****ed up are going to cost us, they could be the difference between a successful rebuild or not. Even if 2 of the 4 were quality players, then that’s a big addition of talent to the team.

I just don’t get how some on here just brush it off, don’t they want a flag?

I don't think it's something anyone should brush off.

We should make a call on Hamish at the end of this year. We'll have all the info we need on what he's done. Personally, I'd lean towards a change, just so we don't get stale - but if we have a solid year, then I'm less stressed.

My feelings are

PICKS 1 to 12 - 75% need to become first 22 players
PICKS 13 to 24 - 50% need to become first 22 players
PICKS 25 to 36 - 33% need to become first 22 players
PICKS 36 on - whatever you get is a bonus.

There will always be more flops than hits. The issue probably is where the flops come.

Also - what does it mean if you do better than average with later picks? Does that make up for doing worse that average with earlier selections?

 

[1970crow]

No, this is actually boring from both sides.

Of course the job of recruiters is to pick good players.

The only interesting part comes when we acknowledge that no one has ever gotten it right 100% of the time.

If it's obvious there's going to be some failures - how many is too many? And is the reason why a player was a failure worth considering?

And you're being equally as boring. All that is self evident. But reality is that to varying degrees we missed 4 of 5 first round picks. We look to have corrected last 2 years and also traded in genuine talent this year. What is undeniable is that missing those first picks is not a great foundation to build a contending 22 upon. You need to get a lot right to win a flag, we're starting behind the 8 ball. It's patently obvious.

 

[George CantStandYa]

I don't think it's something anyone should brush off.

We should make a call on Hamish at the end of this year. We'll have all the info we need on what he's done. Personally, I'd lean towards a change, just so we don't get stale - but if we have a solid year, then I'm less stressed.

My feelings are

PICKS 1 to 12 - 75% need to become first 22 players
PICKS 13 to 24 - 50% need to become first 22 players
PICKS 25 to 36 - 33% need to become first 22 players
PICKS 36 on - whatever you get is a bonus.

There will always be more flops than hits. The issue probably is where the flops come.

Also - what does it mean if you do better than average with later picks? Does that make up for doing worse that average with earlier selections?

If it’s true he interviewed for the North job maybe he even realises it’s time for a change.

He has been here for a long time, it would be good to have a different philosophy and set of eyes.

Doing better than average with later picks doesn’t make up for the elite talent you missed at the top end. Imagine our side now with Serong and Butters over McAsey and Jones. For starters instead of drafting more mids like we did this year, we could actually address some other areas of our list where there are deficiencies.

And we wouldn’t be talking about making the 8 in 2024 onwards, we’d be a firm favourite to make the 8 in 2023.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

There really isn't any defending 2016-2019. It's horrific.

2016 - Galluci (fail), Poholke (fail)
2017 - Fogarty (tick), McPherson (fail)
2018 - Jones (average), McHenry (trending fail), Hamill (below average), Sholl (average)
2019 - McAsey (fail), Worrell (trending tick), Schoenberg (hard to tell, average)

Not ideal.

Problem is, you're grading players on the most recent season, not their careers .....just watch ratings change dramatically at the end of next season

I'm sure 2 seasons ago, you didn't have Sholl & Schoenberg as "average" .....and I'm sure you would have rated Fogarty as "average"

Jones is 22, 58 games ....he had some good games this year, will he be a star player ....no
But he will be an above average player

Problem is ....people expect top dozen players Drafted to be "franchise" players ....if you do an analysis, very few top 10 players are any better than above average players .....but as Club supporters, we're pretty myopic

 

[George CantStandYa]

Problem is, you're grading players on the most recent season, not their careers .....just watch ratings change dramatically at the end of next season

I'm sure 2 seasons ago, you didn't have Sholl & Schoenberg as "average" .....and I'm sure you would have rated Fogarty as "average"

Jones is 22, 58 games ....he had some good games this year, will he be a star player ....no
But he will be an above average player

Problem is ....people expect top dozen players Drafted to be "franchise" players ....if you do an analysis, very few top 10 players are any better than above average players .....but as Club supporters, we're pretty myopic

Merry Xmas Wayne, you surely are an optimistic person, Jones above average??

Posters want our recruiters to maximise our picks and pick quality players with low picks, reckon Butters will be better than above average

 

[Mostyn]

Merry Xmas Wayne, you surely are an optimistic person, Jones above average??

Posters want our recruiters to maximise our picks and pick quality players with low picks, reckon Butters will be better than above average

Yeah, it's disappointing that we were clearly deciding between Jones and Butters for that pick and we chose the slightly undersized kid instead of the possibly injury prone kid. We took the wrong risk.

Still, I'll forgive the recruiters on that, as they had identified the right type.

McAsey ... I just think we were being a bit too smart with that pick. Just take Hayden Young. Doesn't matter that we don't have an immediate role for him - he was pretty much a guaranteed player.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Merry Xmas Wayne, you surely are an optimistic person, Jones above average??

Posters want our recruiters to maximise our picks and pick quality players with low picks, reckon Butters will be better than above average

Merry Christmas George

Yes, I'm basically an optimist with footy .....you have to, otherwise there's no enjoyment in the game ....it's the optimism that has you backing up week after week, believing you're a chance to win ....although deep down you know it's unlikely

I've watched a lot of replays of this year ...a good chance to watch without the emotion of matchday ....Jones did a lot of good things, but as we would all agree, doesn't get enough of the ball & has some brain fades, consistent with youth

I'm more down on McHenry, who fumbles too much for my liking ....good hands are essential at AFL level

Gotta remember, despite assurances by the Club, that they Draft on talent ....we all know, there's a needs list which alters the talent order UNLESS you get freak players like Daicos or Horne-Francis

 

[Mutineer]

Yeah, it's disappointing that we were clearly deciding between Jones and Butters for that pick and we chose the slightly undersized kid instead of the possibly injury prone kid. We took the wrong risk.

Still, I'll forgive the recruiters on that, as they had identified the right type.

McAsey ... I just think we were being a bit too smart with that pick. Just take Hayden Young. Doesn't matter that we don't have an immediate role for him - he was pretty much a guaranteed player.

We'd have taken Lachie Ash the more contested player IMO.

And if not for the AFL giving the Suns a ridiculous leg up in that draft Noah Anderson would have been suiting up in a Crows guernsey./

 

[George CantStandYa]

Yeah, it's disappointing that we were clearly deciding between Jones and Butters for that pick and we chose the slightly undersized kid instead of the possibly injury prone kid. We took the wrong risk.

Still, I'll forgive the recruiters on that, as they had identified the right type.

McAsey ... I just think we were being a bit too smart with that pick. Just take Hayden Young. Doesn't matter that we don't have an immediate role for him - he was pretty much a guaranteed player.

You’re assuming that’s the reason they chose Jones over Butters, more likely they got the talent id wrong. I can’t forgive them for that especially when they’ve ****ed up 4 first rounders.

Anyway, arguments been done to death, todays not the day for it, Merry Xmas

 

[Golumless]

How do our recruiters stack up against the industry leaders?

Are we getting more or fewer hits? More or fewer early misses?

Poorly, but well, it's expected to be poor seeing we've got a lot of picks in an era where we were imploding coming to a head. Recruiting isn't going to be insulated by that, seeing it's a rather small cog in player development machine and screwing up your coaching team is inevitably going to screw up your drafting. Either from a coaching group incapable of developing/managing players or end up being way too scattergun with what they want a team identity to look like (or worse, just copying trends).

It's looking to have picked up in 2020-21 drafts but that's most likely also just a response to outside factors, seeing our off-field coaching picked up.