Rumour CROWS-RELATED TRADE RUMOURS - ALL trade rumours go here!

[cammo6556]

Nick Dal Santo was pick 13 in one of the strongest drafts in the hisotry of the game. This draft will not even come close. This particular draft has been raided for already by GC picking up the best 17 year olds last year. That in itself diluted the draft significantly. Add to that the fact that they have a ridicilous number of picks in this draft (top 10 alone) and its going to be a washed down draft big time.

This could quite possibly turn out to be one of the worst drafts in a VERY VERY Long time.

Top 20 or so players should contain some real gems, but after that.... Geez

 

[Crow-mo]

Care to name 1st round picks that he has failed to develop?! Sellar maybe?! Anyone else?!

sure.

watts
meesen
pfeiffer
sellar

and its only recently dougie's jumped out that category.

 

[Stiffy_18]

sure.

watts
meesen
pfeiffer
sellar

and its only recently dougie's jumped out that category.

Ok and of those care to name which ones were drafted under Criag's regime?!

While we are at it lets compare 2nd, 3rd and 4th round draft picks and compare his overall success rate!

Also for a bloke thats defended our drafting and player development under Ayres I find it rather odd that you would stick up for Ayres yet disapprove of Craig in this area considering that one is well ahead of the other on that front!

 

[amer]

sure.

watts
meesen
pfeiffer
sellar

and its only recently dougie's jumped out that category.

Pfeiffer, Watts and Meesen have tried their luck at other clubs and failed, so there's at the least an argument for it in these cases being the players, not Craig. Jury's still out on Sellar (not that I think much of him) but even then, I'm leaning towards the "there's a reason he slid from a supposed no. 1 proposition to barely going inside the first round" side of the argument.

It's all moot - we don't have an example of a first rounder floundering at Adelaide under Neil Craig before fulfilling his potential elsewhere.

 

[jo172]

Counting Watts is a bit much. An Ayres draftee who bolted 8 games into the Craig era.

Also, i find the distinction focusing on first round players as to whether Craig can develop players artificial. If hypothetically a coach has all first round failures but rookies several AAs (like your mate Ayres Cm) is he really a failure at developing talent?

Also, it's a fallacy to place all the blame (just as it is to give all the credit to) a coach for a player coming good. I would put it to you that some of the variables as to why Pfeiffer, Meesen amd Watts failed such as personal character are exactly the same variable as to why Danger, Douglas and Davis seem to have or be likely to suceed. Also they arguably are more talented. Neither of these variables are accounted for by the coach.

You could argue that a good developer of talent would take the less talented first rounders and make them talented, but i'd suggest that is not the quickest way home.

 

[Crow-mo]

Ok and of those care to name which ones were drafted under Criag's regime?!

While we are at it lets compare 2nd, 3rd and 4th round draft picks and compare his overall success rate!

Also for a bloke thats defended our drafting and player development under Ayres I find it rather odd that you would stick up for Ayres yet disapprove of Craig in this area considering that one is well ahead of the other on that front!

huh? the only one not drafted under craig was Watts, and Craig took over about 10 weeks into his first season. are you saying that he doesn't come under his watch?

Ayres was in the chair for much less time thqn Craig and oversaw 2 of the worst drafts of all time.

not sure what that has to do with your claim that sellar was the only 1st rnd pissed away.

had you forgotten how long Neil has been in the chair?

 

[Crow-mo]

Counting Watts is a bit much. An Ayres draftee who bolted 8 games into the Craig era.

you've missed a year.

Also, i find the distinction focusing on first round players as to whether Craig could argue that a good developer of talent would take the less talented first rounders and make them talented, but i'd suggest that is not the quickest way home.

less talented first rounders? make them more talented? you've lost me.

 

[Crow-mo]

couple more things. if you want to claim he is a good developer of talent, then yes it is relevant to look at the talent under his charge.

secondly baselining him to ayres, involves baselining him to a sacked coach. A comparison i think is very apt

 

[Allefgib]

Ok and of those care to name which ones were drafted under Criag's regime?!

While we are at it lets compare 2nd, 3rd and 4th round draft picks and compare his overall success rate!

Also for a bloke thats defended our drafting and player development under Ayres I find it rather odd that you would stick up for Ayres yet disapprove of Craig in this area considering that one is well ahead of the other on that front!

Just to be devils advocate Stiffy - weren't you banging on about the following:

Tell us how can you develop something that is not there. You can't turn someone into a great footballer if they do not have that kind of talent. You cannot develop outside midfielders if all you are drafting is talls.

Hate to say it mate but under Craigy's regime of late that's exactly what we've been doing!. i.e. we aint developing outside mids because we ain't be drafting them!

 

[XztatiK]

Nick Dal Santo was pick 13 in one of the strongest drafts in the hisotry of the game. This draft will not even come close. This particular draft has been raided for already by GC picking up the best 17 year olds last year. That in itself diluted the draft significantly. Add to that the fact that they have a ridicilous number of picks in this draft (top 10 alone) and its going to be a washed down draft big time.

This could quite possibly turn out to be one of the worst drafts in a VERY VERY Long time.

I'll admit a degree of naievity in my comments re Mitch Clark's value a few days back but I really think people are going too far by writing this one off just because it is a comprimised draft. There is a hell of a lot of talent around that pick 14 mark and IMO not a lot of difference from pick 5/6 to 14 this year. I am extremely keen to hang onto those first few picks.


These Pav rumours are killing me. 14 + 33 + Griffin is as much as I would give up. If Freo want more then they can keep him. The extra player is also the deal-breaker for me. Anyone but Jacky and we're losing. To suggest Knighta (or his value) is the extra player is crazy. I wouldn't trade Knighta for Pav outright.

Also getting sick of people going on about how bad a selection Sellar was. I know the actual selection isn't the subject of the argument here, but still. That so called 'superdraft' died in a crumpled heap after Jack Riewoldt. Shaun Grigg is the only player picked closely behind Sellar who should give us some sort of regret. Plus the two clear bargains after that pick were Tippa and D-Mack.

Knights + pick 50 >for> Jacobs + Walker + 36

Does that seem fair? or take out the picks?

 

[feenix67]

couple more things. if you want to claim he is a good developer of talent, then yes it is relevant to look at the talent under his charge.

secondly baselining him to ayres, involves baselining him to a sacked coach. A comparison i think is very apt

Every coach is a sacked coach.

He's developed more rookie listed players into first 22 players than any other coach. That is a much better indication of how he can develop talent than how many first rounders kicked on.

 

[XztatiK]

Every coach is a sacked coach.

He's developed more rookie listed players into first 22 players than any other coach. That is a much better indication of how he can develop talent than how many first rounders kicked on.

Exactly. Especially considering the latest one wasn't even a footballer.

 

[Allefgib]

Every coach is a sacked coach.

He's developed more rookie listed players into first 22 players than any other coach. That is a much better indication of how he can develop talent than how many first rounders kicked on.

Don't some just see out a contract and both sides don't chase an extension?

 

[Crow-mo]

Every coach is a sacked coach.

He's developed more rookie listed players into first 22 players than any other coach. That is a much better indication of how he can develop talent than how many first rounders kicked on.

i'd be interested to see your analysis on this.

 

[cmndstab]

couple more things. if you want to claim he is a good developer of talent, then yes it is relevant to look at the talent under his charge.

secondly baselining him to ayres, involves baselining him to a sacked coach. A comparison i think is very apt

I agree that to discuss how good Craig is at developing talent, you need to look at the talent he has developed - and who was in charge at the time of recruiting that talent is irrelevant if they spent most of their development years at the club during Craig's time.


However, why must we restrict ourselves to only looking at first round draft picks? Why is it any less relevant to look at how well Craig has gone at turning late-round and picks into players that appear AFL capable? Let's look from the 2003 draft forward, since Craig was involved from 2004. We'll ignore the most recent draft too since it's way too early to make any meaningful judgements from there. We have the following list of players taken in national drafts:


Fergus Watts
Joshua Krueger
Ben Hudson
John Meesen
Nathan Van Berlo
Chad Gibson
Ivan Maric
Chris Knights
Richard Douglas
Darren Pfeiffer
Bernie Vince
Alan Obst
Jason Porplyzia
James Sellar
Kurt Tippett
David Mackay
Nick Gill
Bryce Campbell
Patrick Dangerfield
Andy Otten
Jarrhan Jacky
Myke Cook
Tony Armstrong
Aaron Kite
Taylor Walker
Phil Davis
Shaun McKernan
Rory Sloane
Tom Lee
Will Young


That's 30 players drafted. Of that list, I would say the following players have been developed to AFL standard - not necessarily elite players, but AFL standard at least.


National draftees: Ben Hudson, Nathan Van Berlo, Ivan Maric, Chris Knights, Richard Douglas, Bernie Vince, Jason Porplyzia, Kurt Tippett, David Mackay, Patrick Dangerfield, Andy Otten, Taylor Walker, Phil Davis, Rory Sloane.

With question marks but not rubber stamps on James Sellar, Myke Cook, Tony Armstrong, Shaun McKernan and Will Young.

That's 14/30 players developed into AFL standard footballers, with question marks over five (let's tentatively say two of them work out). 16/30 sounds like a decent strike rate to me, considering we're looking at all rounds in the draft. I don't know what the competition average is, perhaps somebody can enlighten me. Either way, it doesn't sound anywhere near as bad as it does when we simply choose to look at all the first round draft picks that haven't worked out for us.


Of course, it's almost impossible to compare Craig's development of talent compared to that of other coaches. Perhaps our recruiting was worse than other clubs and to have developed what we have is a feat in itself, or perhaps to have only had our players reach the heights they have so far is an underachievement. How do you compare the ability to develop a playing list obtained from late draft picks courtesy of finishing top eight every single draft period Craig's been a part of, to that of another coach developing a group of early draft pick players? Coaches don't tend to stay in the job long enough for us to take a meaningful sample, and you get the impression that the majority of super players would have been super regardless of their senior AFL coach, and only a small difference either way could have been made by that stage. I personally feel that the strongest credit to a coach is how he is able to prepare fringe players for AFL - the late round picks, and those that fall out of favour. Top round draft picks should be good, and if they're not, I tend to blame the recruiter. Late round draft picks, however, should still have enough footballing and athletic ability that a good developer of talent can turn them into capable AFL players. So far, I'd say Craig has done a decent job of that.


Edit: Craig's record with rookie-listed players is not actually very good. He hadn't successfully turned a rookie-listed player into an AFL player other than Griffin until Petrenko played, and he's not exactly put his position in our best 22 beyond doubt yet either. It is worth noting however that our rookie list success rate picks up dramatically once Rendell becomes our head recruiter. Pre-Rendell, one success story in three years. Post-Rendell, we could consider Petrenko, Martin, Henderson, Jaensch and possibly even Schmidt as success stories, though the jury is still out on Schmidt and much of his development was done at Brisbane anyway. Thompson, Wright and Riley may or may not make it, we'll have to wait and see.

 

[amer]

Luke Thompson will make it, has class written all over him. Could well end up the best of the lot.

 

[Bockchoy67]

Luke Thompson will make it, has class written all over him. Could well end up the best of the lot.

Has to tidy up that kicking though.

 

[SurfingTheVoid]

All hail Rendell.

 

[WAG]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/102166/default.aspx

CARLTON may have a tough task hanging onto promising ruckman Sam Jacobs who is open to the idea of a return to his home state of South Australia.

With the probable loss of Griffin back to WA, I really think we should look at this trade. He is only 22 and is already averaging 22 hitouts per game in 2010. He is only going to get better IMO.

Would rather this than pay over the odds for Pav!

 

[jo172]

you've missed a year.

My bad

less talented first rounders? make them more talented? you've lost me.

What I meant is that there is an argument that having talented players may not indicate that the coach is able to develop talent.

Presumably the true indicator of being able to 'develop' talent is to take untalented players, such as the ones you nominated, and make them perceivably talented.

The problem I find with this argument would be that surely it's all the better to get talented players in the first place!

 

[Cap]

I think we are also overlooking the mental capacity of some of these 1st rounders that we have "missed out" on

of the 4 that were mentioned, Only Watts never had the chance through injury, the others had the opportunity to developed (Meesen and Pfiefer in other clubs) but for a variety of reaasons couldn't get there heads in the right place.

I personally think Craigy has shown if you are prepared to work hard, he'll give you every opportunity.

 

[PooMonkey]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/102166/default.aspx



With the probable loss of Griffin back to WA, I really think we should look at this trade. He is only 22 and is already averaging 22 hitouts per game in 2010. He is only going to get better IMO.

Would rather this than pay over the odds for Pav!

Interesting.....as these articles are in today's Herald Sun and Age respectively....

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/carltons-tall-timber-off-limits/story-e6frf9jf-1225915581257
"Matthew Kreuzer, Shaun Hampson and Robert Warnock are all contracted, with former rookie Sam Jacobs about to sign a new deal in coming weeks."
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/carltons-tall-timber-off-limits/story-e6frf9jf-1225915581257

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/blues-rethink-walker-plan-20100907-14zjk.html
The club may yet field offers for Walker - Adelaide is understood to be very interested in his versatility - and seek to trade him but its plans are less certain now than they were before the weekend.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/blues-rethink-walker-plan-20100907-14zjk.html

It seems as though Walker may be headed your way??

I doubt very much that he will stay at the Blues next year.

I know we are very keen on Knights, and maybe a straight swap for the two may be on the cards.

 

[DJ75]

Interesting.....as these articles are in today's Herald Sun and Age respectively....

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/carltons-tall-timber-off-limits/story-e6frf9jf-1225915581257
"Matthew Kreuzer, Shaun Hampson and Robert Warnock are all contracted, with former rookie Sam Jacobs about to sign a new deal in coming weeks."
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/carltons-tall-timber-off-limits/story-e6frf9jf-1225915581257

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/blues-rethink-walker-plan-20100907-14zjk.html
The club may yet field offers for Walker - Adelaide is understood to be very interested in his versatility - and seek to trade him but its plans are less certain now than they were before the weekend.
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/blues-rethink-walker-plan-20100907-14zjk.html

It seems as though Walker may be headed your way??

I doubt very much that he will stay at the Blues next year.

I know we are very keen on Knights, and maybe a straight swap for the two may be on the cards.

Except that Knights>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Walker. No straight swap there, more likely Knights for Walker & Jacobs.

 

[Gets!]

Walker straight swap for knights? Are you taking the piss?!

Carlton fan are the worst by the length of the bass strait of proposing ridiculous trade proposals. Look at all the fools on their board demanding a first rounder or Phil Davis for Jacobs. Why the s**t are you guys so delusional???

 

[DJ75]

Walker straight swap for knights? Are you taking the piss?!

Carlton fan are the worst by the length of the bass strait of proposing ridiculous trade proposals. Look at all the fools on their board demanding a first rounder or Phil Davis for Jacobs. Why the s**t are you guys so delusional???

Because like Geelong they have had so much success in recent years everyone of their players (even the fringe ones) must actually be better than everyone elses first choice players. Pretty obvious really.....