Review Hamish 2021

Remove this Banner Ad

Murray2503

Brownlow Medallist
May 10, 2016
13,126
10,899
AFL Club
Adelaide
Can’t believe you blokes didn’t draft Logan McDonald. He looks incredible.
I can't believe we didn't take a lot of players over the last 10 years. Ogilvie needs to go.

McDonald does look great but it's not a race. Will take 5 years to know if we took the right player. The concern with McDonald was the go home factor which could occur at swans as well. I think he will give them 7 or 8 years service before he takes up the godfather offer back west.
 
Last edited:

WeedsMullet84

Club Legend
Oct 31, 2018
1,245
1,938
Dublin, Ireland
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Celtic, Glenelg
Can’t believe you blokes didn’t draft Logan McDonald. He looks incredible.
Thilthorpe will get games this year, don't you worry. McDonald looks class but ultimately we had slightly different needs, and we have a few emerging forwards that are a smidge in front of him. Might even get a game against Gold Coast as Frampton was terrible.

The real crime here is North Melbourne not taking him...
 

Sanders

Horne of plenty
Nov 1, 2012
29,253
40,852
AFL Club
Adelaide
Interesting from Leppitsch


That it often isn’t development, it isn’t talent, sometimes teams just take the wrong type of player for them

and what happens if there isn’t agreement on what sort of player should be taken?

its all good and well to say there is a certain type of Richmond player, but before you can draft in that vein you need buy-in, and agreement of what exactly that is

Given how poor Hamish’s record is compared to say, Rendell, perhaps part of the problem is that there is now a difference in what type of player is considered an Adelaide Crows player?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Golumless

I'm kind of a big deal on the east side
Jul 12, 2013
31,636
37,982
Wherever the ESH clubrooms are
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Newcastle, Rockies, Oceanics
Interesting from Leppitsch


That it often isn’t development, it isn’t talent, sometimes teams just take the wrong type of player for them

and what happens if there isn’t agreement on what sort of player should be taken?

its all good and well to say there is a certain type of Richmond player, but before you can draft in that vein you need buy-in, and agreement of what exactly that is

Given how poor Hamish’s record is compared to say, Rendell, perhaps part of the problem is that there is now a difference in what type of player is considered an Adelaide Crows player?
Is there a Rendell player here (or at Collingwood)?

That said, its' certainly possible. 4 different coaches, 4 very different styles of players needed (5 if you want to include that Pyke ended up being an absolute mess of a coach after 2017 who spoke of wanting to play a fast paced game, and ended up going slower and slower). We certainly haven't had an identity, and really, we probably haven't ever had a identity of what player you'd call an Adelaide one (outside of "he's South Australian" for the first 5 years).

The biggest issue Hamish faced though is that he was the unfortunate person to be the head recruiter when off-field we just fell apart and started to bleed one capable person after another, and kept digging into the bargain bin. On top of having utter dross at the top of the food chain (Burton, Pyke, Fagan, Roo, Campo etc). I don't think it's too surprising that his record goes bad around 2016 once you had draft groups spending a lot of time in that period of just garbage off field management.


Edit: I rewrote it, as I misunderstood the question initially.
 
Last edited:

Sanders

Horne of plenty
Nov 1, 2012
29,253
40,852
AFL Club
Adelaide
Is there a Rendell player here (or at Collingwood)?

That said, its' certainly possible. 4 different coaches, 4 very different styles of players needed (5 if you want to include that Pyke ended up being an absolute mess of a coach after 2017 who spoke of wanting to play a fast paced game, and ended up going slower and slower). We certainly haven't had an identity, and really, we probably haven't ever had a identity of what player you'd call an Adelaide one (outside of "he's South Australian" for the first 5 years).

The biggest issue Hamish faced though is that he was the unfortunate person to be the head recruiter when off-field we just fell apart and started to bleed one capable person after another, and kept digging into the bargain bin. On top of having utter dross at the top of the food chain (Burton, Pyke, Fagan, Roo, Campo etc). I don't think it's too surprising that his record goes bad around 2016 once you had draft groups spending a lot of time in that period of just garbage off field management.


Edit: I rewrote it, as I misunderstood the question initially.
I don’t buy any of that. Hamish just doesn’t have a good record. And it’s not good as soon as he took over in 2012
 

Danger in Texas

DID I STUTTER?
Mar 28, 2011
23,607
15,967
Pluto
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Reds, Lakers, Gold City, Knights
It's a funny one with Hamish. He's been pretty decent with plucking out some later draft gems, but his strike rate at the top of the draft is starting to look rougher and rougher. It's tough, as a rebuilding side, to have no-one on our list that I'd consider in the best '22 under 22' side in the comp

I'd hope, over this rebuild, to have picked up at least one elite forward and one elite midfielder to build around. Obviously tough to judge who will fit that mould yet, as we've still got some guys to develop, but a few of our recent draftees would want to kick on sooner rather than later
 

BunjiMac

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 20, 2007
5,866
8,165
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
I've always thought that a guy like Hamish, needs a guy a like Rendell to challenge and give an alternative perspective.

At the top end Hamish clearly goes for a particular type, let's call it statistically safe. I think he feels the pressure of big picks and would pick the safer option 9 times out of 10. The problem is these statistically safe players may have good numbers across a variety of categories but nothing really elite. These good to very good traits haven't developed into elite traits at AFL level for us.

We seem to ignore the player who appears to have elite talent and star potential, but has been less consistent at junior level. These players are perhaps higher risks, but higher reward type players. Rendell probably would have taken the risk.

I think having strong opposing opinions like that is what our recruitment team actually needs, rather than the group think that it probably has at the moment.
 

MRB37

Brownlow Medallist
May 17, 2009
26,954
38,943
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Glenelg
It's a funny one with Hamish. He's been pretty decent with plucking out some later draft gems, but his strike rate at the top of the draft is starting to look rougher and rougher. It's tough, as a rebuilding side, to have no-one on our list that I'd consider in the best '22 under 22' side in the comp

I'd hope, over this rebuild, to have picked up at least one elite forward and one elite midfielder to build around. Obviously tough to judge who will fit that mould yet, as we've still got some guys to develop, but a few of our recent draftees would want to kick on sooner rather than later
It could just be there's traits he overvalues in players, ones that mean we pick certain guys too early, but also allows us to pick up players later others might ignore.

We seem to ignore physical attributes quite a lot, which has caused us to take small midfielders with no physical standout traits, but ignoring those things later in the draft gets us a Rory Laird for example where other teams may say he was too small to make it.
 

Mutineer

Premium Platinum
Aug 9, 2019
14,125
25,719
Victorian Central Highlands
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
The mighty Panthers, GWV Rebels, Be
I've always thought that a guy like Hamish, needs a guy a like Rendell to challenge and give an alternative perspective.

At the top end Hamish clearly goes for a particular type, let's call it statistically safe. I think he feels the pressure of big picks and would pick the safer option 9 times out of 10. The problem is these statistically safe players may have good numbers across a variety of categories but nothing really elite. These good to very good traits haven't developed into elite traits at AFL level for us.

We seem to ignore the player who appears to have elite talent and star potential, but has been less consistent at junior level. These players are perhaps higher risks, but higher reward type players. Rendell probably would have taken the risk.

I think having strong opposing opinions like that is what our recruitment team actually needs, rather than the group think that it probably has at the moment.
Darcy Fogarty doesn't fit that bill?

Lever didn't fit that bill?

Even Milera goes close to fitting that bill and Tom Doedee most certainly does.
 

Scorpus

Only Way Is Up
Apr 16, 2014
42,561
100,818
AFL Club
Adelaide
We seem to ignore physical attributes quite a lot, which has caused us to take small midfielders with no physical standout traits, but ignoring those things later in the draft gets us a Rory Laird for example where other teams may say he was too small to make it.
I actually think the opposite. We overvalue physical and psychological traits and undervalue football ability. Eg we end up with Combine stars (Gallucci) and guys with elite physical attributes (eg McHenry's big tank) and the classic "comes from a good family" over the outright best all-round footballer
 

Danger in Texas

DID I STUTTER?
Mar 28, 2011
23,607
15,967
Pluto
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Reds, Lakers, Gold City, Knights
I actually think the opposite. We overvalue physical and psychological traits and undervalue football ability. Eg we end up with Combine stars (Gallucci) and guys with elite physical attributes (eg McHenry's big tank) and the classic "comes from a good family" over the outright best all-round footballer
Unsure on this. Guys like Fogarty, Milera, Worrell etc I'd argue were picked on untapped footballing ability and talent. Although it could be said that each of those guys were, at the time of drafting, 'too good to pass up' according to where they were predicted to be selected
 

Scorpus

Only Way Is Up
Apr 16, 2014
42,561
100,818
AFL Club
Adelaide
Unsure on this. Guys like Fogarty, Milera, Worrell etc I'd argue were picked on untapped footballing ability and talent. Although it could be said that each of those guys were, at the time of drafting, 'too good to pass up' according to where they were predicted to be selected
Looking back on our drafting I'd say there are only a small handful of players drafted on raw football star power and potential. I'd have Fogarty as one.

There's actually a couple of examples where I think we overlooked the risky potential star for the safe player with the physical or "good bloke" traits we wanted. I'd have Milera, Gallucci, Jones and McHenry all in that category. I think McAsey will end up there as well although too early to tell on that draft.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Sanders

Horne of plenty
Nov 1, 2012
29,253
40,852
AFL Club
Adelaide
Is there a Rendell player here (or at Collingwood)?

That said, its' certainly possible. 4 different coaches, 4 very different styles of players needed (5 if you want to include that Pyke ended up being an absolute mess of a coach after 2017 who spoke of wanting to play a fast paced game, and ended up going slower and slower). We certainly haven't had an identity, and really, we probably haven't ever had a identity of what player you'd call an Adelaide one (outside of "he's South Australian" for the first 5 years).

The biggest issue Hamish faced though is that he was the unfortunate person to be the head recruiter when off-field we just fell apart and started to bleed one capable person after another, and kept digging into the bargain bin. On top of having utter dross at the top of the food chain (Burton, Pyke, Fagan, Roo, Campo etc). I don't think it's too surprising that his record goes bad around 2016 once you had draft groups spending a lot of time in that period of just garbage off field management.


Edit: I rewrote it, as I misunderstood the question initially.
what I should also say, or clarify is that Richmond reject the talent order.

they don’t have a defined talent order like some clubs, they have a type. And that plays a role.

where there type doesn’t exactly match the assumed talent order, they rely on their development team to round off the rough edge to get that player up to snuff

that’s nothing like what we appear to do. We seem to value character and certain personality traits - which is not in anyway the same as a ‘Richmond type’.

their type is based on playing characteristics, not their family life

this guy “plays” like a Richmond player
Vs.
This guys comes from a “good family”
 

Sanders

Horne of plenty
Nov 1, 2012
29,253
40,852
AFL Club
Adelaide
It's a funny one with Hamish. He's been pretty decent with plucking out some later draft gems, but his strike rate at the top of the draft is starting to look rougher and rougher. It's tough, as a rebuilding side, to have no-one on our list that I'd consider in the best '22 under 22' side in the comp

I'd hope, over this rebuild, to have picked up at least one elite forward and one elite midfielder to build around. Obviously tough to judge who will fit that mould yet, as we've still got some guys to develop, but a few of our recent draftees would want to kick on sooner rather than later
every club plucks decent players late in the draft or from the rookie list. That’s a given

we overrate Hamish’s late round successes because we don’t recognise that every club has a few of them.

our early picks, the high talent injections have failed miserably. That is not something any team with aspirations of success can endure successfully
 

Danger in Texas

DID I STUTTER?
Mar 28, 2011
23,607
15,967
Pluto
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Reds, Lakers, Gold City, Knights
Looking back on our drafting I'd say there are only a small handful of players drafted on raw football star power and potential. I'd have Fogarty as one.

There's actually a couple of examples where I think we overlooked the risky potential star for the safe player with the physical or "good bloke" traits we wanted. I'd have Milera, Gallucci, Jones and McHenry all in that category. I think McAsey will end up there as well although too early to tell on that draft.
Not sure on that. If you watched Milera and Jones at U18 level, you'd definitely say they had some kind of 'star traits' (maybe not risky, but at the top end of the draft it's hard to call any pick super risky). Milera with his run and carry/goalkicking and Jones with just having a balanced inside/outside game that you more often than not see in star midfielders. Just because they haven't developed into top-line players, doesn't mean that they never had the traits or exposed form to call them simply a physical or "good bloke"-based pick
 

Sanders

Horne of plenty
Nov 1, 2012
29,253
40,852
AFL Club
Adelaide
I think having strong opposing opinions like that is what our recruitment team actually needs, rather than the group think that it probably has at the moment.
It is certainly true that a lot of people on here underplay the value of the guy making the final call

Rendell was very good at taking whatever information was fed into the process and making actual good decisions

Hamish, for whatever reason, hasn’t been able to relocate that success with his decision making

the buck stops with the guy making the call. Not the subordinates feeding in opinions
 

Sanders

Horne of plenty
Nov 1, 2012
29,253
40,852
AFL Club
Adelaide
Not sure on that. If you watched Milera and Jones at U18 level, you'd definitely say they had some kind of 'star traits' (maybe not risky, but at the top end of the draft it's hard to call any pick super risky). Milera with his run and carry/goalkicking and Jones with just having a balanced inside/outside game that you more often than not see in star midfielders. Just because they haven't developed into top-line players, doesn't mean that they never had the traits or exposed form to call them simply a physical or "good bloke"-based pick
no that’s not right.

Of course first round picks have talent, but that’s not the same as saying they have elite traits

given the fail rate in first round picks is still probably 50% or higher they can certainly still be called risky picks
 

Scorpus

Only Way Is Up
Apr 16, 2014
42,561
100,818
AFL Club
Adelaide
Not sure on that. If you watched Milera and Jones at U18 level, you'd definitely say they had some kind of 'star traits' (maybe not risky, but at the top end of the draft it's hard to call any pick super risky). Milera with his run and carry/goalkicking and Jones with just having a balanced inside/outside game that you more often than not see in star midfielders. Just because they haven't developed into top-line players, doesn't mean that they never had the traits or exposed form to call them simply a physical or "good bloke"-based pick
I'm more specifically talking about drafting Milera over Charlie Curnow and Jones over Caldwell, who were the very next picks in each of those drafts.

Milera has good qualities, but we passed over a player who in my opinion has clear top-line star power. Unfortunately Curnow ended up injury prone, but I don't think he is the sort of character we were after.

In 2018 a lot of draft watchers were calling Caldwell the superior, better skilled footballer, but had risks due to injury issues. Jones is your classic safe pick, comes from a good family, has pace as a physical trait, etc. We chose to pass on the risky (allegedly) higher skilled midfielder for the talented but safer pick.

I don't think we necessarily have gotten these calls wrong on every occasion, but in my opinion we do have a "type" under Hamish which is on the safer end of the scale.
 

Danger in Texas

DID I STUTTER?
Mar 28, 2011
23,607
15,967
Pluto
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Reds, Lakers, Gold City, Knights
every club plucks decent players late in the draft or from the rookie list. That’s a given

we overrate Hamish’s late round successes because we don’t recognise that every club has a few of them.

our early picks, the high talent injections have failed miserably. That is not something any team with aspirations of success can endure successfully
See where you're coming from on the first point, but even considering that, we've probably had a higher success rate late/rookie draft than most clubs?

C Cameron, Kelly, ROB, Hartigan, Atkins, Murphy, Sholl, Butts off the top of my head during Hamish's tenure (not counting Greenwood/Keath as they were targeted outside the draft). Can't think of a team that's done better, other than Richmond and Sydney?
 

Scorpus

Only Way Is Up
Apr 16, 2014
42,561
100,818
AFL Club
Adelaide
However what I will say is I also think Rendell's record is overrated. He was decent but not a god tier recruiter that some make him out to be. He had two big successes with Dangerfield and Sloane but the rest of his picks were standard

Drafting guys like Jacky, Myke Cook, McKernan, Shaw, Kerridge, Grigg, Joyce is nothing to write home about. The majority of his rookie picks were (at best) role players, except for Laird. Some carved out good careers but his overall 2nd round record and later is inferior to Hamish in my opinion

I'd also class Jack Gunston's selection as a fail given he left immediately. Same reasoning many would call the McAsey pick a fail if he leaves immediately.

His other first rounders were Davis, Talia and Smith which are very good picks but more what you'd typically expect from a mid first round selection
 
Last edited:

moogerfooger

Club Legend
Sep 8, 2008
2,310
3,237
Pacific Northwest
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Sturt, Seattle Seahawks
I still believe our most pressing failure over at least the last 10 years is not so much who we draft - which is always speculative - but our failure to develop so many of them. Once they're in the door they're not speculative any more. Reviewing draft picks in hindsight needs to be more holistic. Look at Chayce Jones - he looked good in his first few games, straight out of the draft. Over time, since he's been at club, he's gotten worse with every year. Is that Hamish's fault? Or is that player development?
 

Danger in Texas

DID I STUTTER?
Mar 28, 2011
23,607
15,967
Pluto
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Reds, Lakers, Gold City, Knights
no that’s not right.

Of course first round picks have talent, but that’s not the same as saying they have elite traits

given the fail rate in first round picks is still probably 50% or higher they can certainly still be called risky picks
It's hard to find more than a couple of first-round prospects every year that would be considered high-risk, high-reward at the time - by that, I mean risk due to injury/perceived character, but high-end game-breaking talent with elite traits. Hollands was one last year due to injury, possibly Perkins due to go home factor. Not sure I'd call any other selection around where we took Thilthorpe and Pedlar 'risky' (or what I'd define risky anyway)

In addition, if you look at the traditional fail rate in first-round picks as a factor, that's bringing a lot of hindsight into it. By that definition, you could call 95% of picks 'risky', as every prospect comes with their warts which might mean they don't make it at AFL level

A lot of it obviously comes down to development/situation etc as well, but that's a given
 

Sanders

Horne of plenty
Nov 1, 2012
29,253
40,852
AFL Club
Adelaide
See where you're coming from on the first point, but even considering that, we've probably had a higher success rate late/rookie draft than most clubs?

C Cameron, Kelly, ROB, Hartigan, Atkins, Murphy, Sholl, Butts off the top of my head during Hamish's tenure (not counting Greenwood/Keath as they were targeted outside the draft). Can't think of a team that's done better, other than Richmond and Sydney?
thats my point. There is just an assumption

the WB won their flag off a team that was heavily built on late picks and the rookie draft

west coast have plenty too

everyone does
 

Sanders

Horne of plenty
Nov 1, 2012
29,253
40,852
AFL Club
Adelaide
It's hard to find more than a couple of first-round prospects every year that would be considered high-risk, high-reward at the time - by that, I mean risk due to injury/perceived character, but high-end game-breaking talent with elite traits. Hollands was one last year due to injury, possibly Perkins due to go home factor. Not sure I'd call any other selection around where we took Thilthorpe and Pedlar 'risky' (or what I'd define risky anyway)

In addition, if you look at the traditional fail rate in first-round picks as a factor, that's bringing a lot of hindsight into it. By that definition, you could call 95% of picks 'risky', as every prospect comes with their warts which might mean they don't make it at AFL level

A lot of it obviously comes down to development/situation etc as well, but that's a given
the fail rate is the fail rate

and the fail rate in the first round is high.

even getting a player worth the price paid could be as low as 1 in 3
 

Remove this Banner Ad