Review Hamish 2021

Remove this Banner Ad

Scorpus said:
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.
Click to expand...
Milera had some game-breaking performances at senior SANFL level in 2015. If you watched him that year, you'd argue he might have had some of the highest star power, and especially 'wow factor' in the draft with his sublime skills. Caldwell I'll admit was, in my opinion, a more game-breaking midfielder than Jones, but it's hard to say Caldwell was riskier than Jones due to injuries, when in fact Jones had some of his own serious ankle problems in the two years leading up to the draft

Personally, I'm not sure we have a 'type' - our first-rounders have seen us select both high-talent types as well as some 'safer' picks, as you say. IIRC Hamish said he would've selected Rayner at 1 in 2017, even as being seen as one of the more 'boom or bust' types out of that top group of players selected (Brayshaw, Dow, LDU, Cerra). We've carved out a pretty even balance I reckon, and the reality is (with any high selection), sometimes they work out, sometimes they don't
 
Scorpus said:
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.
Click to expand...
Milera had star written all over him post SANFL finals
 
moogerfooger said:
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?
Click to expand...
What?
He’s had one game at the end of 2019, against the bulldogs where he looked any good.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Scorpus said:
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
Click to expand...
Bit rough lumping Sam Shaw in with those others, he was exceptionally talented with attributes that put him above that lot.....you can't help bad luck in Rendell's defence on that selection.
 
BunjiMac said:
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.
Click to expand...
Hamish always does well with later pick because of their certain skills. Determined, skilled or whatever else. But that may not work for top talent, they are naturally skilled and found footy easy because of natural talent. They don’t work as hard either, we need to pick some of those players because they can win you a flag.
He also seams to almost pick a player he wants after following him from junior level, under 16s instead of fully committing to watching his under 18 level instead. Maybe I’m wrong but I just get that feel with him.
We need him to be able to pick some top end talent now, no excuses because he now has the draft picks. Before he didn’t, now he does
 
Sanders said:
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
Click to expand...

That's rewriting history.

Hamish absolutely killed 2012/2013 seeing our limited draft hand. To get 100 games of service out of Hartigan, Atkins and Kelly* and two players with an AA jumper in Crouch and Cameron. As hot of a start as you could have for a recruiter who is cutting his teeth in draft sanctions. Deserves every platitude and then some for these years seeing his best pick in that period was 23, and a period where we only took 4 ND picks (1 < 40), and 6 RD picks (not including list management picks, i.e. delisting and reselecting in the PSD, or promoting a rookie to the main list).

2014. Lever has been a good pick when he's been on the park and has quietly developed into a two-way key defender we thought he would, despite his injury issues. ROB has established himself as a solid first ruck. McGovern had the talent to be a star, unfortunately the drive either wasn't there or disappeared once he moved on to Carlton. Solid draft, all things considered.

2015: Milera and Doedee are really the same story as Lever for Hamish, good picks when they've been healthy. Greenwood and Keath as Cat B rookies as well and both have become mainstays in the league. I doubt either Greenwood or Keath get to 100 games due to their advanced age, but again, a pretty solid draft.

I want to stress that I do not care if someone had success at another club when judging Hamish record (as you can see, because I included it) because that's on other (and more important) people at the club to make sure these players either want to stay or decide if they stay (GM, coach, list manager etc). Not the recruiter. All I care about is if the players Hamish is picking have a realistic chance of succeeding at this level, and success, no matter where, well and truly covers that condition.

Hamish record is what I said it was. Solid before 2016, then it falls off a cliff in 16-17, where the best player we've picked up in those years is Lachie Murphy (though McPherson should eventually overtake him).

*Providing he doesn't have a major injury in the next 7 games.
 
Last edited:
Golumless said:
That's rewriting history.

Hamish absolutely killed 2012/2013 seeing our limited draft hand. To get 100 games of service out of Hartigan, Atkins and Kelly* and two players with an AA jumper in Crouch and Cameron. As hot of a start as you could have for a recruiter who is cutting his teeth in draft sanctions. Deserves every platitude and then some for these years seeing his best pick in that period was 23, and a period where we only took 4 ND picks (1 < 40), and 6 RD picks (not including list management picks, i.e. delisting and reselecting in the PSD, or promoting a rookie to the main list).

2014. Lever has been a good pick when he's been on the park and has quietly developed into a two-way key defender we thought he would, despite his injury issues. ROB has established himself as a solid first ruck. McGovern had the talent to be a star, unfortunately the drive either wasn't there or disappeared once he moved on to Carlton. Solid draft, all things considered.

2015: Milera and Doedee are really the same story as Lever for Hamish, good picks when they've been healthy. Greenwood and Keath as Cat B rookies as well and both have become mainstays in the league. I doubt either Greenwood or Keath get to 100 games due to their advanced age, but again, a pretty solid draft.

I want to stress that I do not care if someone had success at another club when judging Hamish record (as you can see, because I included it) because that's on other (and more important) people at the club to make sure these players either want to stay or decide if they stay (GM, coach, list manager etc). Not the recruiter. All I care about is if the players Hamish is picking have a realistic chance of succeeding at this level, and success, no matter where, well and truly covers that condition.

Hamish record is what I said it was. Solid before 2016, then it falls off a cliff in 16-17, where the best player we've picked up in those years is Lachie Murphy (though McPherson should eventually overtake him).

*Providing he doesn't have a major injury in the next 7 games.
Click to expand...

I’m not going to re-write what I’ve already written in this thread before, but no Hamish’s record in that early period is NOT good.

you’re massively overrating the hits, if you can call them that; and ignoring the fact that there isn’t much to show for it

if all you have is hanging extra credit for getting a few back end of the 22 players late, then my point rests
 
I think the final step is to fix our list management and talent identification areas. Our coaching and fitness dept (with Burgess coming onboard) is now very good. Time to move Ogilvie and Reid on along with a new football director.
 
My unedited, off the top assessment:

*The guys who are getting games from the draft since 2016 ...

2016 - Himmelberg has played in the best 22, but it's 50/50 as to whether he will be a long term best 22 player. Davis has shown small flashes, but hasn't got a regular game to this point.

2017 - McPherson and Murphy are currently in the best 22. Fogarty could still be anything (especially if he's able to play that De Goey type mid/fwd role as it looks like they are now trying to newly teach him to do in the SANFL against a decent South side - he was actually mentioned in the best on the weekend playing that exact role), but will need to show something soon.

2018 - McHenry, Hamill, Sholl and Butts have all been in our best 22 over the last few seasons, and all have shown signs of legitimately making it. Jones is 50/50, but is leaning more towards a bust at this stage.

2019 - Schoenberg getting a regular game. Keays getting a regular game as a rookie pickup. Worrell is showing promising signs in the SANFL (got in the best on the weekend). McCasey has been very up and down with more down at this stage (but was very solid in the SANFL on the weekend, and also got in the best), and could be headed home. Gollant and OConnor were always going to take time to develop, and need more time for assessment.

2020 - far too early to get an assessment on this crop yet, but Berry is already getting a regular game. Newchurch and Thilthorpe are already showing flashes.


*Potential Misses

The thing about saying you want to get rid of a recruiter, is that they either have to have guys from draft classes not getting a game, which from above, has not really been the case.

The other thing you can look at is how much they've both missed out on talent, and also missed out on talent that was obvious at the time of the draft.

2016 - Gallucci was definitely a monumental bust. There was a quantity of good talent (some obvious, some not as obvious) that went in the 10 or 20 picks after him - Marshall, Berry, English, Hayward, Ridley, Parfitt, Bolton, as a few example.

2017 - Fogarty is still up in the air, and not a bust yet. But, I remember this draft fondly. The only two guys picked in the 15 picks or so after Fogarty that I thought were decent value at draft time were Higgins and Ryan. Balta was a complete unknown. So, I don't think Ogilvie can take much heat here - he didn't have a lot of obvious talent to pick from.

2018 - No doubt about it, Jones looks like a bust and mistake at this stage. There were definitely better known talents to pick from, with Caldwell being a prime example. Although, an interesting question - does he still end up going home to Victoria? He may well have (but we would have got compensation or a draft pick for him)

2019 - Serong, Young, Flanders and to a lesser extent Day, were all highly rated at draft time, and Hamish went with McCasey. The jury is out on this one - we don't know what McCasey will be at this stage, and whether he will stay or not. Flanders isn't getting a game yet either, so, I can't fully put the blame on Hamish here. Obviously a KP player was the priority too. Worst case scenario, I'd imagine though that if McCasey does go, we get a first rounder for him - especially if he keeps racking up best ons in the SANFL, and maybe even without that, given his age and draft position.

2020 - Thilthorpe was a very risky pick purely considering who else was available. Thilthorpe could end up being fantastic, but he was always less of a sure thing than McDonald at draft time (due to a range of factors such as production, his boom/bust range, and also injuries). Unless the Crows had some type of inside information that McDonald was 100% a flight risk to go back to WA (which I never saw or heard any legitimate evidence he was), that pick was quite clearly a massively unreasonable gamble. As was mentioned at draft time, even if McDonald did go home (which was no foregone conclusion), you'd get a king's ransom for him in return - look at what Geelong got for Tim Kelly. Two first rounders at a minimum.
Phillips - too early to tell on him. Cox (who looks good for Essendon so far) is a different player to Thilthorpe, and I don't think anyone would have had the balls to take him at Number 1, so you can rule him out of the conversation. Obviously guys like Campbell and Ugle Haden were ruled out.


* Overall subjective opinion on Hamish

I'd say calls to get rid of Hamish are definitely not warranted at this stage.

At a bare minimum, I'd give him an average pass mark, and if we were to hand out grades - probably somewhere around a C up to maybe a B, if we are doing school gradings.

A big reason for giving him at least a pass is that of the last 5 drafts (the ones people mainly question), 2016 looks like the only one where he almost completely missed. If Himmelberg doesn't end up making it, it will basically be a complete goose egg for that draft class.

You certainly mark him down for the big misses he has had at the top of the draft since 2016. With the exception of Fogarty's draft year where I give him the benefit of the doubt, the other years were clear errors on his part.

But, you then bring his grade back up for what he's done with other later picks, and the fact that he's generally added to our best 22 each year.

He hasn't been in as hot form as say for example the Port recruiters the last 5 or so years, but, he hasn't been as bad as clubs like North Melbourne

* Going forward

It will be interesting to see how Hamish adapts going forward

The best recruiters need to have both foresight into where the game is going, and also have the adaptability to pick those sorts of suitable players as the rules and game change

The game is less congested in some ways now as there's less stoppages per game on average, so contested ball winners are less a necessity, and skillful/penetrating kickers, good runners, and lead up forwards and big forwards with smarts are finding more space to be much more effective now. This is in addition to the necessary defensive pressure and speed you need to win games in the modern game. With less interchanges now, midfielders also not only need to play both inside and outside, but are a massive advantage if they can go forward (and be a mid/fwd).

Hamish will need to show he understands where the game is going, and draft the right TYPES of players, in addition to players purely with the talent to play. Positional value also plays a key role in this too.

One example I'll give of this is McCasey vs Serong. Even though Hamish thought we needed key backmen at the time, was the player value dropoff between McCasey, and then Worrell and Butts, as big as the drop off between Serong and the very very average and slow midfield we had at the time (Sloane, both Crouches, etc), especially considering Serong can play forward too? You can say it's easy to say the answer to that now, but, if you apply the positional value of even the game at the time (where mid/fwds like Dusty are game winners), as a recruiter, you might lean towards taking the top mid/fwd talent available (which would have been Serong or Flanders), and then you can get at least an average big man another way. We even had other options such as keeping on Hartigan, or look at Port - they ended up taking Aliir Aliir without having to spend a draft pick.

I think this is an area I want Hamish to nail down in addition to making better use of early draft picks - to show he is on top of and ahead of the trends, and he's not picking based on an old antiquated traditional player value mindset, but rather a changing/dynamic value mindset based on how and when the game changes
 
Last edited:
FNeighbourhoodSpiderman said:
My unedited, off the top assessment:

*The guys who are getting games from the draft since 2016 ...

2016 - Himmelberg has played in the best 22, but it's 50/50 as to whether he will be a long term best 22 player. Davis has shown small flashes, but hasn't got a regular game to this point.

2017 - McPherson and Murphy are currently in the best 22. Fogarty could still be anything (especially if he's able to play that De Goey type mid/fwd role as it looks like they are now trying to newly teach him to do in the SANFL against a decent South side - he was actually mentioned in the best on the weekend playing that exact role), but will need to show something soon.

2018 - McHenry, Hamill, Sholl and Butts have all been in our best 22 over the last few seasons, and all have shown signs of legitimately making it. Jones is 50/50, but is leaning more towards a bust at this stage.

2019 - Schoenberg getting a regular game. Keays getting a regular game as a rookie pickup. Worrell is showing promising signs in the SANFL (got in the best on the weekend). McCasey has been very up and down with more down at this stage (but was very solid in the SANFL on the weekend, and also got in the best), and could be headed home. Gollant and OConnor were always going to take time to develop, and need more time for assessment.

2020 - far too early to get an assessment on this crop yet, but Berry is already getting a regular game. Newchurch and Thilthorpe are already showing flashes.


*Potential Misses

The thing about saying you want to get rid of a recruiter, is that they either have to have guys from draft classes not getting a game, which from above, has not really been the case.

The other thing you can look at is how much they've both missed out on talent, and also missed out on talent that was obvious at the time of the draft.

2016 - Gallucci was definitely a monumental bust. There was a quantity of good talent (some obvious, some not as obvious) that went in the 10 or 20 picks after him - Marshall, Berry, English, Hayward, Ridley, Parfitt, Bolton, as a few example.

2017 - Fogarty is still up in the air, and not a bust yet. But, I remember this draft fondly. The only two guys picked in the 15 picks or so after Fogarty that I thought were decent value at draft time were Higgins and Ryan. Balta was a complete unknown. So, I don't think Ogilvie can take much heat here - he didn't have a lot of obvious talent to pick from.

2018 - No doubt about it, Jones looks like a bust and mistake at this stage. There were definitely better known talents to pick from, with Caldwell being a prime example. Although, an interesting question - does he still end up going home to Victoria? He may well have (but we would have got compensation or a draft pick for him)

2019 - Serong, Young, Flanders and to a lesser extent Day, were all highly rated at draft time, and Hamish went with McCasey. The jury is out on this one - we don't know what McCasey will be at this stage, and whether he will stay or not. Flanders isn't getting a game yet either, so, I can't fully put the blame on Hamish here. Obviously a KP player was the priority too. Worst case scenario, I'd imagine though that if McCasey does go, we get a first rounder for him - especially if he keeps racking up best ons in the SANFL, and maybe even without that, given his age and draft position.

2020 - Thilthorpe was a very risky pick purely considering who else was available. Thilthorpe could end up being fantastic, but he was always less of a sure thing than McDonald at draft time (due to a range of factors such as production, his boom/bust range, and also injuries). Unless the Crows had some type of inside information that McDonald was 100% a flight risk to go back to WA (which I never saw or heard any legitimate evidence he was), that pick was quite clearly a massively unreasonable gamble. As was mentioned at draft time, even if McDonald did go home (which was no foregone conclusion), you'd get a king's ransom for him in return - look at what Geelong got for Tim Kelly. Two first rounders at a minimum.
Phillips - too early to tell on him. Cox (who looks good for Essendon so far) is a different player to Thilthorpe, and I don't think anyone would have had the balls to take him at Number 1, so you can rule him out of the conversation. Obviously guys like Campbell and Ugle Haden were ruled out.


* Overall subjective opinion on Hamish

I'd say calls to get rid of Hamish are definitely not warranted at this stage.

At a bare minimum, I'd give him an average pass mark, and if we were to hand out grades - probably somewhere around a C up to maybe a B, if we are doing school gradings.

A big reason for giving him at least a pass is that of the last 5 drafts (the ones people mainly question), 2016 looks like the only one where he almost completely missed. If Himmelberg doesn't end up making it, it will basically be a complete goose egg for that draft class.

You certainly mark him down for the big misses he has had at the top of the draft since 2016. With the exception of Fogarty's draft year where I give him the benefit of the doubt, the other years were clear errors on his part.

But, you then bring his grade back up for what he's done with other later picks, and the fact that he's generally added to our best 22 each year.

He hasn't been in as hot form as say for example the Port recruiters the last 5 or so years, but, he hasn't been as bad as clubs like North Melbourne

* Going forward

It will be interesting to see how Hamish adapts going forward

The best recruiters need to have both foresight into where the game is going, and also have the adaptability to pick those sorts of suitable players as the rules and game change

The game is less congested in some ways now as there's less stoppages per game on average, so contested ball winners are less a necessity, and skillful/penetrating kickers, good runners, and lead up forwards and big forwards with smarts are finding more space to be much more effective now. This is in addition to the necessary defensive pressure and speed you need to win games in the modern game. With less interchanges now, midfielders also not only need to play both inside and outside, but are a massive advantage if they can go forward (and be a mid/fwd).

Hamish will need to show he understands where the game is going, and draft the right TYPES of players, in addition to players purely with the talent to play. Positional value also plays a key role in this too.

One example I'll give of this is McCasey vs Serong. Even though Hamish thought we needed key backmen at the time, was the player value dropoff between McCasey, and then Worrell and Butts, as big as the drop off between Serong and the very very average and slow midfield we had at the time (Sloane, both Crouches, etc), especially considering Serong can play forward too? You can say it's easy to say the answer to that now, but, if you apply the positional value of even the game at the time (where mid/fwds like Dusty are game winners), as a recruiter, you might lean towards taking the top mid/fwd talent available (which would have been Serong or Flanders), and then you can get at least an average big man another way. We even had other options such as keeping on Hartigan, or look at Port - they ended up taking Aliir Aliir without having to spend a draft pick.

I think this is an area I want Hamish to nail down in addition to making better use of early draft picks - to show he is on top of and ahead of the trends, and he's not picking based on an old antiquated traditional player value mindset, but rather a changing/dynamic value mindset based on how and when the game changes
Click to expand...

Appreciate the effort, and thought that has gone into this even if I disagree (which I do). a proper, thoughtful argument will never see you go too far wrong.

the analysis though revolves around a central premise (see bold). if that's not correct, then the rest struggles to hold up.

I don't think you can say that recruits getting a game is a reasonable standard, for 2 reasons:
1. getting a game at the wooden spoon team is different to being best 22 at a flag contender.
2. more importantly, there is a difference between getting a good ordinary 20-25 ranked player, and a top 5-10 player on a list.

if you continually recruit players who are not flops, are contenders for the back end of the 22 you will pass this test and end up in the bottom section of the table as we are. part of good, is how good and what cost. and what is the base rate of such successes across the league, the bayesian success.

comparing to other talent taken at around the same place, is built into the base rate.

there is a portfolio approach here, where successes and failures are given, but over a period of time you need some big wins to pay for the expected losses. we don't have too many big wins, not at the high cost of the pointy end of the draft, nor the occasional windfall at the end.

you cannot fund your stake if all you get is small wins and a usual amount of losses. Hamish, in place since 2012, has an unusual amount of bigger stake losses (first round losses cost more than 4th round flops) than he has small wins. a first round pick who gets a game, but is a back end of the 22 player is still a loss.

whatever the reasons, a near ten year portfolio should have some wins that rise above all other factors, to compensate for the cost of the punt. and there is such a paucity of them, we've gone trod water, slipped back over a number of years until our nose was bust below the waterline
 
In Hamish's defence he has lost crucial members of his staff due to various reasons. That hasn't helped. Idiot management types pervaded the club.Draft sanctions. Coaches demanding the wrong type of players.
New clubs getting the first top 10 picks in a year when we were due a top ten picks in a normal draft. Northern academy picks worthy of being top 10 picks, we never get a sniff at. PP handed out to teams knocking our top picks down, so we miss on the elite talent in the top 5.
In spite of this he has still found some decent kids. Every recruiter misses on some first rounders, nothing new there.
On McAsey who was thrown to the wolves and destroyed. Along with Jones, leave them in the SANFL for the moment. Let them get some ball and put a smile back back on their faces. Last season should be discounted, forgotten about. No SANFL to develop in. Lousy coaches, all been changed thankfully. How many positions are we going to try Fogarty in before we give up on him?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

H
Ozzie said:
In Hamish's defence he has lost crucial members of his staff due to various reasons. That hasn't helped. Idiot management types pervaded the club.Draft sanctions. Coaches demanding the wrong type of players.
New clubs getting the first top 10 picks in a year when we were due a top ten picks in a normal draft. Northern academy picks worthy of being top 10 picks, we never get a sniff at. PP handed out to teams knocking our top picks down, so we miss on the elite talent in the top 5.
In spite of this he has still found some decent kids. Every recruiter misses on some first rounders, nothing new there.
On McAsey who was thrown to the wolves and destroyed. Along with Jones, leave them in the SANFL for the moment. Let them get some ball and put a smile back back on their faces. Last season should be discounted, forgotten about. No SANFL to develop in. Lousy coaches, all been changed thankfully. How many positions are we going to try Fogarty in before we give up on him?
Click to expand...
A lot of excuses here for Hamish. Surely he has to take responsibility for our failed high end draft picks. The one that stands out like the proverbial is Jones taken over Butters. He should go solely for that call as it clearly shows he is not a good judge of talent. I'm no expert and I could see from 15 minutes of Tassie league footage that Jones didn't have it. Throw in Fogarty, McAsey, Gallucci along with Milera who has shown very little and it's not good reading at all. Lucky for him that he did get some picks right in Doedee, McPherson, Sholl, Hamill, Schoenberg but there is too many missed players in the 1-20 range. I would not be blaming the club for McAsey and Fogarty's development. They just don't have it. In saying that I haven't seen a pair as disinterested as these two since the club's inception and clearly McAsey doesn't want to be here.

In my opinion we should have Berry, Butters, Ash on our list at the bare minimum. All three will be 200-250 game career players. Instead we had/have Gallucci, Jones and McAsey. How many clubs have genuinely come for Hamish? He needs to be cleaned like we did with Camporeale.
 
Last edited:
Murray2503 said:
I'm no expert and I could see from 15 minutes of Tassie league footage that Jones didn't have it.

In my opinion we should have Berry, Butters, Ash on our list at the bare minimum. All three will be 200-250 game career players. Instead we had/have Gallucci, Jones and McAsey.
Click to expand...
LOL

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, at least you admit you're no expert, mind you that's been pretty obvious for some time now.

Strange then that Chayce almost took out the Tassie Medal in the Tasmanian State League League off of only 7 games including 4 B.O.G.'s, not bad for an 18 year old coming off also making it as a starting midfielder in the 2018 All Australian U18 team. I reckon the All Australian selectors Luke Power, Marcus Ashcroft, Troy Selwood and Kevin Sheahan might have a few more clues than you or I.

www.foxsports.com.au

Under 18 All-Australian team announced: Including Izak Rankine, Jack Lukosius and Sam Walsh

Pocket profiles of every U18 All-Australian team member
www.foxsports.com.au www.foxsports.com.au

Chayce Jones (Allies): The Tasmanian is one of the best draft prospects to come out of the Apple Isle, and has done his first round chances no harm. Jones was an important player through the midfield, racking up plenty of the ball – including a big 27 disposals, seven tackles, five inside 50s and two goals performance against Vic Country in Round 1 of the carnival.

The All-Australia side was picked by Kevin Sheehan (AFL Talent Ambassador), Luke Power (AFL Academy Head Coach), Marcus Ashcroft (AFL Talent Competition and Operations), Dom Milesi (Collingwood recruiting manager), Troy Selwood (Geelong recruiting manager), Matt Clarke (Richmond recruiting manager) and Chris Liberatore (St Kilda recruiting manager).
 
My gut feel is that when Jones came into the afl team, the coaches drummed into him about the defensive side of his game.
It became so much of a focus for him that he did that to the detriment of his ball winning ability.
Now he has lost all confidence in his footballing ability from the coaches messaging, that he is now left in no mans land.
 
Scorpus said:
And I'll make my point clearer with this comparison

Since 2016

Milera - 62 games
Doedee - 30 games
Gallucci - 27 games
Fogarty - 24 games
Jones - 23 games
McAsey - 10 games
McHenry - 8 games

Total - 184 games

Lyons - 20 games the year we trade him
Henderson - 9 games the year we delist him
Van Berlo - 3 games in his final year
Hampton - 12 games total
Menzel - 4 games total
Beech - 3 games total
Gibson - 5 games total
Cheney - 8 games in year we delist him
Douglas - 9 games in year we delist him
Greenwood - 14 games in year we trade him after refusing to match his contract demands
Keath - 18 games in year we trade him after refusing to match his contract demands
Ellis-Yolmen - 10 games in year we let him walk as a free agent
Jacobs - 5 games in year we let him walk
Otten - 3 games in his final year
Jenkins - 11 games in the year we trade him
Gibbs - 3 games in year he retires
Crocker - 7 games then delisted
Hartigan - 12 games in the year we let him walk as a FA
Brad Crouch - 12 games in the year we push him out the door
Atkins - 4 games in the year we him walk as a FA
Betts - 21 games in year we sent him to Carlton

Total - 193 games

We have spent more games on players that we immediately got rid of than we have on long term first round draft pick prospects, since 2016

Seems like serious resource mismanagement to spend more games on players we deem aren't good enough, than on players someone at our club has already deemed to be AFL quality
Click to expand...
Only just read thjis post today. I have to say this is a great post Scorpus
 
I've got a half finished spreadsheet somewhere with all teams' picks since 2012. He stacks up alright given the picks he's had. It highlights retention as our main issue along with the strategy of mid to late first rounders.

Gallucci stands out as may Jones in the first round. Too early to call McAsey, but 2020 already looking very good.

2018/19 has some good non first rounders already showing good signs as well.

Not saying he's the best, just not sure if he's a big issue when you look at it analytically.

I'll dig up that list.
 
StonesThrow said:
I've got a half finished spreadsheet somewhere with all teams' picks since 2012. He stacks up alright given the picks he's had. It highlights retention as our main issue along with the strategy of mid to late first rounders.

Gallucci stands out as may Jones in the first round. Too early to call McAsey, but 2020 already looking very good.

2018/19 has some good non first rounders already showing good signs as well.

Not saying he's the best, just not sure if he's a big issue when you look at it analytically.

I'll dig up that list.
Click to expand...

His record is poor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Cleric
  • Poll
Prediction Will Hamish move to the new Tasmanian team?
2
Replies
27
Views
976
Cleric
Cleric
Scorpus
  • Poll
Opinion Recruiting and List Management Team: Hamish Ogilvie, Justin Reid & Co
41 42 43 44 45
Replies
1K
Views
50K
Redleg Crow
Redleg Crow

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top