Draft picks 2000-2002

[Daytripper]

I posted this on the main board but think it got lost in between all the trolling. Thoughts !

I agree to a certain extent but the draft is not the salvation that many think. Lets remember St Kilda have made only one finals appearance since the Riewoldt/Ball era and are no certainties this year.

What is vital is player development. Sure having a No 1 draft pick is fantastic but what happens if he goes down and the rest of the list haven't been developed properly. It can sometimes create an unhealthy reliance on the one player.

Again, we can look to the US where the draft has been in for much longer than here. Teams like the Clippers & Warriors consistently get top 4 picks yet they still don't make playoffs. And a great player makes a much bigger difference in a 5 man a game than a 22 man a game. The best teams over there are the ones that are well coached, manage injuries, keep their players happy and who trade astutely. No reason to think that it should be any different here.

The problem with Essendon at the moment lies with our 20-22 year old's. Have a look at our draft selections from 2000 - 2002.

In 2000 we picked up James Davies at pick 17, then Ted Richards, Marc Bullen, Sam Hunt and Jordan Bannister.
In 2001 we chose Shane Harvey at 18, then Joel Reynolds, Simon O'Keefe and Andrew Welsh.
In 2002 it was Laycock (10), Winderlich (11), then Darren Walsh, Cartledge and Watson.

To be brutally honest only one of these has shown anything (Welsh), one has promise (Laycock), one is still unknown as he is a ruckman (Cartledge) and the rest are either all basically battlers or have since been delisted.

I think we have arrested the poor draft selections since then but we are paying the price for poor recruiting in that period.

Yes we are on a small slide but lets not forget we were in exactly the same position last year. I have every confidence that we will be back much sooner than the people who are gloating over our apparant death would like.

 

[nonchalance]

We can extend that to 1999, when our first pick was 40, so that compounds the problem. We were lucky in that we got Hille with it, who's been better than pick 40 should be, but the problem remains.

Agree with you there.
Theoretically, we should then have three poor years to make up for it.
I don't expect to be down that long.

 

[ManWithNoName]

2003 was a good draft year though.

KEPLER, Stanton and Dyson.

 

[nonchalance]

And I think 2004 is going to be just as good, jarryd - but as DT pointed out, there is a four-year gap in our list.

 

[Longy413]

I think the problem in those years came with us drafting for need rather than the best player available.

We needed a player like James Davies. Tall, quick, exciting. We should have taken Kerr, but we had Johnson, Blumfield, Caracella, Heffernan, etc.
We missed Bewick, we needed his replacement. Shane Harvey was it. We needed another ruckman, so we took O'Keefe.
None of these guys came on. Thank christ for Andrew Welsh.

In 2002 Laycock was the best available. Should have gone a lot earlier. We were lucky to get him. Likewise with Bradley. We were bagged for not taking the player we needed when Tenace stormed onto the scene. Three rounds into 2005 and Kep is averaging 25 touches and 10 marks.
In 2004, Monfries was the best available. He wasn't the quick midfielder we needed. But boy has he got some class.
There has been a definate change in our drafting attitude over the past couple of years and I think it is starting to show dividends.

 

[Stealth bomber]

The thing about drafting for need is that you never know what your need is going to be in the future. Playing lists aren't static; they grow and change over time, bad players come good; good players get injured or lose form or simply get old and retire.

Needs shouldn't be completely neglected either, but I'd rather see talent win out. If a player is a genuine game-breaker, they are most likely versatile enough to play in most places on the ground anyway.

 

[Darealrath]

Draft the best, and trade (and pre season draft) for needs..

2000 was deplorable.

 

[Schopp]

I read somewhere may have even been on this site that the recruiting staff wanted to use the top pick on Kane Cornes and instead we picked up Davies because Sheeds took over the decision making. However he listened to the recruiting staff on not taking Martin Pike, a bit of a double whammy. I think Winderlich could come good (maybe not as good as Schammer who went a couple of picks after) if given a string of matches and game time in the middle. We may even lose short term with such an attitude but long term it would be a winner. If he keeps getting put in for short bursts in the forward line then taken off and then dropped it wont help.

Cartledge looks good though. Even though we lost to Carlton in the ruck that awful night a couple of weeks ago, some of his tapwork was very thoughtful and went straight to our midfielders advantage.

 

[Schopp]

I think the problem in those years came with us drafting for need rather than the best player available.
QUOTE]

Spot on IMO. Brisbane, the best recruiters in the business appeared to go for the best available rather than need. In last years draft for instance, despite having a string of quality ruckman, they drafted Cameron Wood, who was touted widely as going in the top five. 204 cm ruckman with agility and an arm length that is something like 10cm's greater than the average of someone that height will be a huge problem most teams to counter.

 

[jackie_bombers]

The thing is, you can also get good players with higher draft picks (Hird ) and one young talent isn't going to solve all your problems. In 2003 and 2004 we started to find some talents, and they're looking good. I just dont understand how people can think a few years on the bottom of the ladder is going to solve your problems

 

[Longy413]

The thing is, you can also get good players with higher draft picks (Hird ) and one young talent isn't going to solve all your problems. In 2003 and 2004 we started to find some talents, and they're looking good. I just dont understand how people can think a few years on the bottom of the ladder is going to solve your problems

For every James Hird that gets picked up with a late pick there are 150 Michael Davis'.

Just doesn't happen anymore.

 

[marcuz]

The thing is, you can also get good players with higher draft picks (Hird ) and one young talent isn't going to solve all your problems. In 2003 and 2004 we started to find some talents, and they're looking good. I just dont understand how people can think a few years on the bottom of the ladder is going to solve your problems

The next Judd, Riewoldt, Wells may not solve all your problems but it bloody helps. The fact is you cant trade duds for top 5 picks anymore and that is the place you get your next superstars. You may get some later in the draft but your best bet is to get a top 5 pick. And unfortunately you need to bottom out so to speak to gain one of those.

 

[go team]

lets be honest folks - the club should hire one of us as the recruiting officer...

 

[Longy413]

lets be honest folks - the club should hire one of us as the recruiting officer...

Between us we'd have recruiting manager, assistant coach, senior coach, fitness coach and bootstudder covered.

 

[nonchalance]

Also skills coach, runner and medical staff, apparently.
And the selection team will have to have an election.

 

[ant555]

I posted this on the main board but think it got lost in between all the trolling. Thoughts !

I agree to a certain extent but the draft is not the salvation that many think. Lets remember St Kilda have made only one finals appearance since the Riewoldt/Ball era and are no certainties this year.

What is vital is player development. Sure having a No 1 draft pick is fantastic but what happens if he goes down and the rest of the list haven't been developed properly. It can sometimes create an unhealthy reliance on the one player.

Again, we can look to the US where the draft has been in for much longer than here. Teams like the Clippers & Warriors consistently get top 4 picks yet they still don't make playoffs. And a great player makes a much bigger difference in a 5 man a game than a 22 man a game. The best teams over there are the ones that are well coached, manage injuries, keep their players happy and who trade astutely. No reason to think that it should be any different here.

The problem with Essendon at the moment lies with our 20-22 year old's. Have a look at our draft selections from 2000 - 2002.

In 2000 we picked up James Davies at pick 17, then Ted Richards, Marc Bullen, Sam Hunt and Jordan Bannister.
In 2001 we chose Shane Harvey at 18, then Joel Reynolds, Simon O'Keefe and Andrew Welsh.
In 2002 it was Laycock (10), Winderlich (11), then Darren Walsh, Cartledge and Watson.

To be brutally honest only one of these has shown anything (Welsh), one has promise (Laycock), one is still unknown as he is a ruckman (Cartledge) and the rest are either all basically battlers or have since been delisted.

I think we have arrested the poor draft selections since then but we are paying the price for poor recruiting in that period.

Yes we are on a small slide but lets not forget we were in exactly the same position last year. I have every confidence that we will be back much sooner than the people who are gloating over our apparant death would like.

I agree , it is these players that need to stand up which is not happening.Richards just doesnt seem up to it got a full game on the ground last week and i wasnt really impressed, Bullen has had time and the games now to be doing something but he is only average. Sam Hunt well what do you say , his defencive work and run is fantastic but his kicking at times is just shocking. Joel Reynolds for mine looks like he struggles to read the play and is very injury prone.Is a goer he gives his all but i dont think he will make it.That leaves Jobe ,too many injuries ,Watson . No pace , great vison and can read the game but will never make it if he cant shake the persistant injuries.
2002 may yet be ok as Laycock looks like he will make it and even though Cartledge has only played 1 game i think he will be ok , his form for Bendigo last year and the 2 games this year has been very good. Not sold on Widerlich yet but given the injuries he has had i am prepared to hold judgment on him.
So yes we have a very large gap in our list which isnt being filled. Thankfully the last two years we have drafted particully well.