Draft Language Translator - 2000

[RUNVS]

This is a very old article from Jake Niall and i would prefer to just bump the original thread but with the new forum the formatting is completely off so here is the article again which i found very funny.

Happy is the football fan. He has just read about the AFL draft and is pleased to learn that his team has drafted several superstars. He cannot believe it managed to pick up so many prospective champions on one afternoon.

His club is delirious with the crop of youngsters it harvested at the draft table. ``We couldn't be happier with the players we picked up,'' said the recruiting manager. ``We can't believe X got through to pick 53.''

In the history of the draft, we are yet to hear a club sigh and express regret at its poor choices. Clubs never say: ``We stuffed it up. Thought Smith might get through to pick 20, didn't have a clue once he was taken. We just hope we can fluke one 50-gamer.''

On Sunday, we heard that StKilda's No.2 pick, Justin Koschitzke, might be the next Stephen Kernahan - ie, a strong, athletic, pack-marking centre half-forward, with great skills, outstanding leadership and a mullet haircut.

The No.1 pick, Nick Riewoldt, was described as a cross between Carl Ditterich and James Hird - two players with little in common, besides blond hair. In a press release, Brisbane called its first pick, Ashley McGrath, a mixture of Peter Matera, Michael Long and Nigel Lappin.

At least these October champions were early picks and, in time, might become Kernahans, Carls and Longs. What the fan should be wary of, however, is the unbridled praise and positivity that is showered even on picks 57 and 62.

The reality of the draft is that only a minority of players will make it past 100games. No matter what they gushed about their choices, the clubs didn't rate the draft highly. When you subtract players with AFL experience (11), there were 20 fewer kids drafted than last year.

In private, recruiters were bemoaning the lack of depth and thought the draft was thinner than a supermodel's waist.

To learn the truth about the players chosen by your club, you must understand the language of recruiting and learn to translate it into truth. For example, if a player is called ``a hard-working midfielder'', you can safely assume that he is slow. If he is a ``project player,'' you mightn't see him play for five years, if at all.

At the risk of killing pre-season fantasies, we offer the following translations of draft terminology:

"Outside player with good pace'' - a receiver, won't go in.
"He's a real athlete'' - played mostly basketball or soccer. No idea about footy.
"Quick hands/great vision/has footy smarts'' - slow.
"We can't believe we got him at pick 42'' - We haven't seen the X-rays or spoken to his parole officer.
"He's an elusive type'' - absolutely terrified.
"Great goal sense'' - never handballed in his life.
"He's a burst player'' - has only one burst, no endurance.
"Has skills, needs to work on his fitness'' - will be a blimp before the season's end.
"He has a great upside'' - he has even greater downside.
"Tremendous work ethic and a great competitor'' - no skills.
"Solid citizen, from a good family'' - private schoolboy.
"Natural forward'' - never tackled, shepherded or manned up.
"Raking left-foot kick'' - a dud on his right.
"Suited to a tagging role'' - can't play.
"He will add to our depth'' - can't play.
"He's a bit of a punt, but we needed a third ruckman'' - can't play.

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/how-to-decipher-language-of-draft-2000.480906/#post-12135352

 

[Hva sher a]

thanks for the memories - this was a good read.

Also like to add:
Versatile utility type = runs around like a headless chook
Project player = will be delisted in 3 years
has silky skills = front-runner who goes missing in tight games
great results at the Combine/Draft camp = see "he's a real athlete"

 

[Slattery_20]

FWIW, pick 53 was Hayden Skipworth, who played 50-odd with Adelaide then Essendon; pick 57 was Stephen Sziller, recycled by the Tigs for 30-odd games after 100+ at St Kilda; pick 62 was someone called Daniel Breese who I have never heard of.

Also around the mark were a few more pretty competent players, Shane Wakelin at 49, Cassissi at 50, Amon Buchanan 52, Chris Newman 55, Daniel Cross 56, Johncock 67 - it wasn't *that* shallow.

 

[yaco55]

Think the previous post shows that even paid recruiters, can't be sure how strong/weak a draft is, until 5 years later.

Not much hope for us BF types.