Review Geoff Parker and the recruitment team

[RussellEbertHandball]

philthy05, one thing that would elevate this department to elite is banning the rookie listing of has beens.

Imagine if we could have:
- rookied Sydney Stack instead of Cam Hewett in 2018
- rookied Nathan Krueger instead of Lindsay Thomas in 2017
- 2016 I'm happy with our rookies.
- 2015 Kane Mitchell for a fringe tall
- 2014 Logan/Krakeour for a fringe tall

They just seem like a waste of a pick.

The average rookie top 60 picks plays about 30 games, then it drops away to about 20 games. So given you get the odd 200 gamer, and odd 100 gamer and a few around 50 games, it means if you get about 1 in 4 or 5 playing 50+ games then you have done well. See

https://www.draftguru.com.au/picks

 

[Jonts]

It's easy to forget Hewett. In the last few years when people bring up delistings, they completely forget he exists.

At this stage i figure whatever photos he has of Ken will see him not leave until Hinkley does

 

[bomberclifford]

I mean thats Matthew Westhoff right

I actually think it might be Fabian Deluca.

 

[Butters Made Me Do It]

I actually think it might be Fabian Deluca.

Can’t be, thats too early in Choco’s reign

Honestly it might be Ben Jacobs in his last draft, which would explain why he didnt do it again

Barring that, it has to be the inferior brother/cousin draft

 

[Macca19]

Choco definitely convinced the recruiters to take Matthew Westhoff

 

[Butters Made Me Do It]

Yeah but I realise now that hoff jr can’t be it, because if the recruiters said he was a dud then why did he get a contract extension

oh bad list managers too? cool cool cool

 

[Butters Made Me Do It]

Could be Nick Lower

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Can’t be, thats too early in Choco’s reign

Honestly it might be Ben Jacobs in his last draft, which would explain why he didnt do it again

Barring that, it has to be the inferior brother/cousin draft

Choco got sacked a few months before we took Jacobs in 2010 draft.

Hartley's last draft was 2009 and Parker started in 2010.

In 2008 Hartley assured Choco Stephen Motlop would be around for pick our pick 42 in 2008. We took Broadie at pick 38 and then Geelong took Motlop at pick 39 and we used 42 on Banner, so it might have been before this draft, and he decided to back off in 2008 draft.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

4 picks in the top 50 that draft and we ended up with Matthew Lobbe, Marlon Motlop, Matt Westhoff and Mitch Farmer. Wowee.

Without picking Mitch Famer, who do we trade to Richmond for Jay Schulz?

 

[NoddyHolder]

Without picking Mitch Famer, who do we trade to Richmond for Jay Schulz?

whoever we picked instead of Mitch Farmer

 

[Tibbs]

The drafting has been a pass. I'm hopeful we've learned from the Wines pick.
The development has been slow if we ignore this year's recruits. The development slowed last season.
We've been too slow on culling the players that are not going to make it.

What are you talking about! Wines was a steal at #6 ... the only pick we possibly could have made better was to go for Grundy. But that was NEVER going to happen. A) We didnt need rucks at that point 2] No one picks a ruck at #6, and 3] Grundy had publicly stated he wanted to go interstate.

These are the 10 picks after Wines:
Nick Vlastuin
Troy Menzel
Kristian Jaksch
Jesse Lonergan
Aidan Corr
Taylor Garner
Jackson Thurlow
Josh Simpson
Brodie Grundy
Ben Kennedy

 

[Ishikawa]

What are you talking about! Wines was a steal at #6 ... the only pick we possibly could have made better was to go for Grundy. But that was NEVER going to happen. A) We didnt need rucks at that point 2] No one picks a ruck at #6, and 3] Grundy had publicly stated he wanted to go interstate.

These are the 10 picks after Wines:
Nick Vlastuin
Troy Menzel
Kristian Jaksch
Jesse Lonergan
Aidan Corr
Taylor Garner
Jackson Thurlow
Josh Simpson
Brodie Grundy
Ben Kennedy

I'm glad someone called that post out. Saw it and thought just can't be bothered jumping down that rabbit hole.

Wines has been tremendous for this footy club and will continue to be for years to come. Grundy is the only player on that list who you'd take ahead of him in hindsight. Vlaustin, Corr & Thurlow should all have pretty good careers. Even his often compared mate in Viney, would take Wines every day of the week.

 

[PA88]

What are you talking about! Wines was a steal at #6 ... the only pick we possibly could have made better was to go for Grundy. But that was NEVER going to happen. A) We didnt need rucks at that point 2] No one picks a ruck at #6, and 3] Grundy had publicly stated he wanted to go interstate.

These are the 10 picks after Wines:
Nick Vlastuin
Troy Menzel
Kristian Jaksch
Jesse Lonergan
Aidan Corr
Taylor Garner
Jackson Thurlow
Josh Simpson
Brodie Grundy
Ben Kennedy

Yeah no issue with the fact that he was one of the better prospects when it was our pick but since then his skill execution should be telling the club to pick alternatives. I think this year and last year they have adjusted. Farrell Garner Rozee Butters Duursma have better skills.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

What are you talking about! Wines was a steal at #6 ... the only pick we possibly could have made better was to go for Grundy. But that was NEVER going to happen. A) We didnt need rucks at that point 2] No one picks a ruck at #6, and 3] Grundy had publicly stated he wanted to go interstate.

These are the 10 picks after Wines:
Nick Vlastuin
Troy Menzel
Kristian Jaksch
Jesse Lonergan
Aidan Corr
Taylor Garner
Jackson Thurlow
Josh Simpson
Brodie Grundy
Ben Kennedy

Lol and if we had picked Kennedy and he was delisted as he is now the sages would have been queuing up to belt the club for being unable to develop players

 

[Incarnate]

Wines has been unbelievably serviceable and then some since he was drafted, to think otherwise is just a short sighted knee jerk comment. SPP also has been quite amazing for his time. They aren't silk clutch purses. They are day one get'n's**t done types who provide.
Im super impressed with Dursma to be honest, his stats are pretty impressive, especially since I didn't think he would get more than 3 or 4 games this year.
Impey was ****ed around with by the coach, should never of played deep forward. HBF'er to wing with a pinch hit in the middle every quarter for 5. Had no idea about him at our selection but liked the cut of his jib. Also had externalities that are hard to resolve. He is one that burns.
I think that all though players seem to be getting accustomed to the pace of AFL sooner these days a solid pinch of patience and shut the damn up is in order for most supporters especially when it comes to our club. I mean, or supposed mature leaders are some of our most inconsistent players.

 

[Andre]

I'd rate our recruitment team as good, but not great. And as per other areas of the club, what brings down the mark is talls. Specifically tall forwards. Except for Marshall all our talls have been taken at picks where if they don't come on it's easy for them to go 'Well it was pick 50-100'.

Taking talls early requires balls. You're going to get many more busts then you will taking smalls early. These guys want to look good, to continue employment at Port or for when finished at Port, getting snapped up elsewhere. If your resume has the players you've drafted were ok - great, that looks good. If you've got a few more busts in there, it doesn't look so great.

So there's a disconnect to some degree between what's best for the club and what's best for the recruitment team. For the club 'trading' 6 'wins' on smalls for 3 wins on talls alongside 3 busts is a win IMO. For the recruiters, they risk 'Why did you pick so many duds?! You wasted our picks, get out!'.

We have a coach whose notoriously ambivalent (at best) on the value of tall forwards, so where's the direction going to come from to tell the recruitment team 'Target talls!' and have enough clout for them to not argue back 'Best available' (that's conveniently the safer smalls)?

 

[Janus]

Lol what talls?

Boyd was a bust, Schache got traded and is doing nothing, McCarthy would rather play for an amateur club than stay with GWS...the list goes on. That’s who was taken early.

We drafted talls. Mason Shaw and Mitch Harvey. How did they work out?

 

[OneGreatClub]

What are you talking about! Wines was a steal at #6 ... the only pick we possibly could have made better was to go for Grundy. But that was NEVER going to happen. A) We didnt need rucks at that point 2] No one picks a ruck at #6, and 3] Grundy had publicly stated he wanted to go interstate.

These are the 10 picks after Wines:
Nick Vlastuin
Troy Menzel
Kristian Jaksch
Jesse Lonergan
Aidan Corr
Taylor Garner
Jackson Thurlow
Josh Simpson
Brodie Grundy
Ben Kennedy

Grundy needs to make up his mind then. He wanted to go interstate, he can ******* stay interstate thank you.

 

[Fade to Gray]

The story I heard was we were very interested in Rory Sloane. He has said in an interview that the club he spoke to most pre-draft was Port Adelaide. However, Williams was keen on Mitch Banner, and overruled the recruiting staff.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

The story I heard was we were very interested in Rory Sloane. He has said in an interview that the club he spoke to most pre-draft was Port Adelaide. However, Williams was keen on Mitch Banner, and overruled the recruiting staff.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Choco was pissed off that we missed Stephen Motlop as Hartley told him he would be available at 42. We took Broadbent at 38 and Geelong took him at 39, so Choco probably demanded his pick at 42.

 

[Joelg]

I actually think it might be Fabian Deluca.

 

[Joelg]

Absolutely and categorically Pelchen pick was Fabian Deluca.............

 

[Sleezy]

philthy05, one thing that would elevate this department to elite is banning the rookie listing of has beens.

...

They just seem like a waste of a pick.

Bump... Farken

 

[EskimoPAFC]

I'd rate our recruitment team as good, but not great. And as per other areas of the club, what brings down the mark is talls. Specifically tall forwards. Except for Marshall all our talls have been taken at picks where if they don't come on it's easy for them to go 'Well it was pick 50-100'.

Have we not taken talls? Or have we actually had the guts to take talls but just totally failed to develop them?