Opinion Drafting since 2003 (taken from the Myers thread)

[lamaros]

Your obviously happy with our drafting in the past 10 or so years?

Would you rather 3 players playing 150+ AFL games, or 7 players playing 70 games?

Every club seems to pick up a star, with lots of misses, we keep picking solid picks..

Dont think im spouting crap at all, but thanks for the kind words lamaros

Yet again with the weasel words: "every club seems".

Put up examples or shut up.

Ryder, Stanton, Hurley, Heppell.

I'll back us against any other club when it comes to first round picks.

 

[Old Campaigner]

I guess I'm disappointed we keep picking run of the mill type players when there are genuine stars to be drafted..

I don't think anyone here wouldn't want our recruiters to be more successful. But at the end of the day you can only tell so much about an 18 year old, and I'd argue the most important phase of their development only begins when they reach their new club so you can't tell for sure how they're going to respond to that until they actually front up to training. So much of modern footy comes down to the players' attitude and as far as I know there is no way of determining how their attitude will look after a couple of years in the system and what the implications are for that player. Finally they have to deal with the potential for injuries; because nothing these kids have faced before being drafted can compare with the stresses of AFL there is no way to predict if a previously healthy player will develop some sort of susceptibility to injury later on down the track that shortens their playing career.

Being a recruiter must be an absolute campaigner of a job with so much uncertainty, so much money and so many fans hanging on your every action. From looking at the breakdown of the drafts that various people have posted here I don't think we can be too critical of our recruiters. To be honest I think the real test of recruiting comes with the later picks when their potential might be a bit less obvious.

 

[Yoda_]

Yet again with the weasel words: "every club seems".

Put up examples or shut up.

Ryder, Stanton, Hurley, Heppell.

I'll back us against any other club when it comes to first round picks.

My apologies, I will validate my statement then..

every club does pick up a star!!

Perhaps Heppell in a year or two, Hurley in a year or two would be the two best players we have drafted in the first round..

But during the 2000's, our drafting was very ordinary..

(and yes, we have gone over Ryder. Yes we have gone over Stanton)..

Im just going to have to agree that your prosphecy is right and that we should be happy to hope our later round picks are going to be better than our early picks.

 

[rines]

Okay, so at least we've established there is a grey area, and not just straight wins or fails.

I would look at it something like this:

2011- Kavanagh- grey- too early
2010- Heppell- win
2009- Melksham- grey
2008- Hurley- win
2007- Myers- grey
2006- Gumbleton, Jetta- both grey
2005- Ryder- win

How you could have Ryder as anything but a clear 'win' has me baffled.

Ryder is still far from 'A Grader'.. on his good days he is a gun but unfortunately he still turns in a bad one every 2-3 games... if he gets it together I truly believe Ryder could be in the top 10 big men in the league (Rucks or Key Position).. however at this stage he is still far too inconsistent and prone to fade outs. However early NAB form shows that he might be ready for a really really big year!!

I would see it like this:
2011- Kavanagh- grey- but leaning towards 'solid' player rather than 'superstar' (which is fine)
2010- Heppell- win - no argument... hands down winner.
2009- Melksham- grey - I would have this in the 'solid' but not 'superstar' group and not sure he will reach the heights we need/want him too.
2008- Hurley- grey - I would not be confident to say 'win' yet.. although he is my fave player after Watson. Hasn't shown it out on the park and injuries appear to plague him.
2007- Myers- fail - epic epic fail when you consider what was on offer around him. I was baffled at the time and still get upset wondering what the hell we were thinking to take this plodding HBF with a turning circle bigger than a bus. (But that is just my opinion)
2006- Gumbleton, Jetta- epic epic fail on Gumby (injuries don't change the fact that he has, on output along, been unsuccessful) and Jetta is 'solid' but looks like never going to be 'superstar' despite my claims he will 'break out' for three years now!!
2005- Ryder- grey - see above.

So 1 win, 5 grey and 2 fails.

I guess I would hope for a spread closer to 4 wins, 3 greys, 1 fail with our first rounders... and that is the discrepancy we are discussing in this thread.

 

[Kong]

And as I mentioned earlier, that is why I am a little disappointed with our recruiting. Yes we got lucky picking up a Bellchambers in the tail end of a draft (correction: PSD

So it's lucky when we nail a pick, but poor recruiting when we don't?

but the true top end players, do come from the early rounds.

Ablett, Black, Akermanis, Swan, Watson, Goodes, Kennedy, Cox from recent years say otherwise.

Look at these names at our club alone that have been taken outside of the first round:

Bellchambers, Zaharakis, Crameri, Carlisle.

 

[lamaros]

My apologies, I will validate my statement then..

every club does pick up a star!!

Perhaps Heppell in a year or two, Hurley in a year or two would be the two best players we have drafted in the first round..

But during the 2000's, our drafting was very ordinary..

(and yes, we have gone over Ryder. Yes we have gone over Stanton)..

Im just going to have to agree that your prosphecy is right and that we should be happy to hope our later round picks are going to be better than our early picks.

So after all your blather about this you still don't have the balls to name a single club that has done better than us.

Weak and pathetic.

 

[Kong]

I just don't see Gumby or Myers ever getting to be A graders.. and I think that is the main point Yoda, and others, are trying to make.. Two top 10 draft picks that are either outside the best 22 or 'on the edge'... ideally you would have HOPED (wished, desired, desperately wanted) for both of them to become true stars of the comp.

Could apply to any club:

Carlton: Russell, Lucas
Hawthorn: Dowler, Thorp
St Kilda: Clarke, Clarke
Bulldogs: Ray, Williams

etc.

All pretty decent sides during their peak, too.

 

[eth-dog]

So it's lucky when we nail a pick, but poor recruiting when we don't?Ablett, Black, Akermanis, Swan, Watson, Goodes, Kennedy, Cox from recent years say otherwise.

Look at these names at our club alone that have been taken outside of the first round:

Bellchambers, Zaharakis, Crameri, Carlisle.

Sandilands, Fyfe, Enright, Mitchell, Swallow, Montagna, Kerr, Priddis and LeCras also stake claims as "stars" of the game not taken in the first round.

 

[Yoda_]

So after all your blather about this you still don't have the balls to name a single club that has done better than us.

Weak and pathetic.

Is that what your after? Me naming clubs that have done better than us?

Who would have thought but all the top sides have multiple first round picks that are genuine stars/superstars.

Hawks, Pies, Eagles, how have the Saints and Tigers gone?

To be honest, only Melbourne and Brisbane didn't really have a 'winner' like we have (even if it isn't a star) with there first rounders during the 2000's..

 

[bombermick]

We don't have as many busts as other clubs, you only have to look at the Hawks and Freo as a comparison for picking first rounders. But neither do we have as good a record of picking stars of late. Hopefully the trend has turned and Daniher, Gleeson and Hams will all be guns.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

Who would have thought but all the top sides have multiple first round picks that are genuine stars/superstars.

Hawks, Pies, Eagles, how have the Saints and Tigers gone?

They've also all had a swathe of high picks to play with.

Read this post: http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threa...n-from-the-myers-thread.993188/#post-27374377

Read it again.

If you still don't get it, just keep reading it over and over and you'll get there eventually.

 

[lamaros]

Is that what your after? Me naming clubs that have done better than us?

Who would have thought but all the top sides have multiple first round picks that are genuine stars/superstars.

Hawks, Pies, Eagles, how have the Saints and Tigers gone?

To be honest, only Melbourne and Brisbane didn't really have a 'winner' like we have (even if it isn't a star) with there first rounders during the 2000's..

Xavier Ellis? Beau Dowler? Max Bailey? Mitch Thorp? Schoenmakers? Or do you give them a free pass for failing on those purely because they picked up Franklin?

Waters? Hurn? Brown? Masten? Ebert? Sheppard? No out and out duds there, but no massive stars - about the same as us I'd say.

Tambling? Meyer? Pattison? JO-N? Vickery? Conca? LOL?

Raph Clarke? McQualter? Armitage? McEvoy? Lynch? Cripps? Hardly a track record of success there...

Morrison? Egan? Brown? Trading for Wood? They've got a couple of quality players in top 5 picks, but they've not done much with others.

On average these clubs have picked more players than have failed with their first round picks than us. The few that have picked some out and out stars have nearly always had earlier picks than us, too.

 

[Ben the Gooner]

And Yoda is on the canvas.

 

[Yoda_]

You guys simply do not see what I'm trying to get across..

I must be more stupid trying to educate the idiots..

I'm fighting a losing battle here, you guys are happy with mediocrity, perhaps we keep Gumby on until we get him to 100 games, after all, he could be good.!

I would take the (in Hawthorns case) Thorp miss, Dowlers miss any day of the week to have a genuine superstar on our list..

Mediocrity does not get you to finals, and it certainly doesn't win you flags. That is why we haven't exactly been 'successful' The past decade.

 

[lamaros]

You guys simply do not see what I'm trying to get across..

I must be more stupid trying to educate the idiots..

I'm fighting a losing battle here, you guys are happy with mediocrity, perhaps we keep Gumby on until we get him to 100 games, after all, he could be good.!

I would take the (in Hawthorns case) Thorp miss, Dowlers miss any day of the week to have a genuine superstar on our list..

Mediocrity does not get you to finals, and it certainly doesn't win you flags. That is why we haven't exactly been 'successful' The past decade.

WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY NUMBER ONE PICKS!

WE DIDN'T GET A PICK BEFORE FRANKLIN WAS PICKED

WE DIDN'T GET A PICK BEFORE PENDLEBURY WAS PICKED

WE DIDN'T GET A PICK BEFORE X, Y, AND Z WERE PICKED

READ MY POST EARLIER: http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threa...n-from-the-myers-thread.993188/#post-27374377

WHO SHOULD BE HAVE GOTTEN INSTEAD YOU SILLY MAN? You're not getting anything across because there is no substance in anything you are saying.

Also: LOL. You're banging on about how we don't use our draft picks well enough and the say you'd be happy if we picked Thorp and Dowler...

 

[Ben the Gooner]

You guys simply do not see what I'm trying to get across..

I must be more stupid trying to educate the idiots..

I'm fighting a losing battle here, you guys are happy with mediocrity, perhaps we keep Gumby on until we get him to 100 games, after all, he could be good.!

I would take the (in Hawthorns case) Thorp miss, Dowlers miss any day of the week to have a genuine superstar on our list..

Mediocrity does not get you to finals, and it certainly doesn't win you flags. That is why we haven't exactly been 'successful' The past decade.

You've wasted half of this post on an ad hominem and a strawman.

As for your actual point, there is a middle ground between superstar and mediocrity. And superstars don't have to come out of first round picks. We've got a couple of superstars, a handful more with superstar potential and to competent that, no list cloggers of the Thorp or Dowler variety.

And it all comes back to a point that myself, lamaros and Kong have raised repeatedly and you've continued to ignore. Your standards are unrealistically high. If Lance Franklin is the standard, 17 clubs are below standard. It's utterly pointless.

Not to mention that we've only had two cracks at picks at or before the position Buddy was drafted in our entire history. And one of them is looking like being the best key position we could have possibly drafted at that pick.

 

[Duckworth]

I'll chime in as well. It's pointless comparing the franklin/pendlebury drafts anyway. There was a priority pick then, that let clubs effectively get two top 5 picks. Easy to make recruiting look good if you take a free pick at the start of the draft.

 

[yaco55]

I'm not sure why this is in the Myers thread??

How does where he was picked in the draft even remotely matter as to where he ranks against other rucks in the league?

Because you expect high draft picks to be very good/elite players - And Ryder is not in the top 5 rucks in the AFL - And not even close to AA.

 

[yaco55]

But you've always said the best ruckmen come from the rookie draft?

Yes

The figures show that the best rucks are either selected in the rookie draft or go top 5.

Strange how there seems to be a growing trend for recruiters not to pick rucks in the top 5.

 

[yaco55]

Meeson, Lobbe, McEvoy, Wood, Hampson, Kruezer, Leuenberger, these are the rucks taken in the first round two years either side of Ryder. I don't know about you, but that makes me pretty happy that we drafted Paddy.

But is Paddy in the top 5 rucks in the AFL ?

Lets face it Meeson/Wood are failures - So there clubs would be disappointed.

Lobbe and Warnock weren't top 10 picks so they are irrelevant.

McEvoy is tracking along well - He would be on the cusp of the top 10 rucks. And he is only 5 years in the system. StKilda will be happy at this stage.

Kreuzer - Needs to improve - May still come - or he will be a failed pick.

 

[yaco55]

I think we need to look at some of these draft numbers a bit more realistically. If a player is say pick 7, you can't say he's a fail if he is not in the top 7 players from his draft. It just doesn't work like that.

You want the aforementioned player to be Very good/elite That's the bottom line - If there happens to be 15 players who fill into that category and the pick 7 player is in that group - It's a win - It comes down to if the player is very good/elite.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

But is Paddy in the top 5 rucks in the AFL ?

He was before injury. But would I take 5 rucks before him, maybe. The three I named; definitely, Mumford, Jacobs and Maric would be next in line but haven't put together more than one good season, just like Ryder and he would be in that group. If Hird came out and said we will play Ryder as a stand alone ruckman I would, as thats when I think he plays his best football.

 

[eth-dog]

But is Paddy in the top 5 rucks in the AFL ?

Lets face it Meeson/Wood are failures - So there clubs would be disappointed.

Lobbe and Warnock weren't top 10 picks so they are irrelevant.

McEvoy is tracking along well - He would be on the cusp of the top 10 rucks. And he is only 5 years in the system. StKilda will be happy at this stage.

Kreuzer - Needs to improve - May still come - or he will be a failed pick.

Probably 6/7, but should be top 5 fairly soon

McEvoy is top 10 IMO (10th, but still top 10)

 

[yaco55]

Ryder is still far from 'A Grader'.. on his good days he is a gun but unfortunately he still turns in a bad one every 2-3 games... if he gets it together I truly believe Ryder could be in the top 10 big men in the league (Rucks or Key Position).. however at this stage he is still far too inconsistent and prone to fade outs. However early NAB form shows that he might be ready for a really really big year!!

I would see it like this:
2011- Kavanagh- grey- but leaning towards 'solid' player rather than 'superstar' (which is fine)
2010- Heppell- win - no argument... hands down winner.
2009- Melksham- grey - I would have this in the 'solid' but not 'superstar' group and not sure he will reach the heights we need/want him too.
2008- Hurley- grey - I would not be confident to say 'win' yet.. although he is my fave player after Watson. Hasn't shown it out on the park and injuries appear to plague him.
2007- Myers- fail - epic epic fail when you consider what was on offer around him. I was baffled at the time and still get upset wondering what the hell we were thinking to take this plodding HBF with a turning circle bigger than a bus. (But that is just my opinion)
2006- Gumbleton, Jetta- epic epic fail on Gumby (injuries don't change the fact that he has, on output along, been unsuccessful) and Jetta is 'solid' but looks like never going to be 'superstar' despite my claims he will 'break out' for three years now!!
2005- Ryder- grey - see above.

So 1 win, 5 grey and 2 fails.

I guess I would hope for a spread closer to 4 wins, 3 greys, 1 fail with our first rounders... and that is the discrepancy we are discussing in this thread.

Rines

Good summary. You have to give Stanton as a win considering it turned out to be a weak draft. Fairly certain that Hurley will be a win. But you are right - too many greys/fails ?

Question

When was the last time an EFC top 10 selection made the AA team ?

 

[eth-dog]

Yes

The figures show that the best rucks are either selected in the rookie draft or go top 5.

Strange how there seems to be a growing trend for recruiters not to pick rucks in the top 5.

maybe because they're not good enough to go top 5? Ever thought of that?