Remove this Banner Ad

Toast Harry Taylor

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Re: Taylor for AA CHB

So far yes I agree with you. He has been able to cover for Mathew Scarlett and has begun to rack up the disposals now on a regular basis.

He should dominate against Carlton.
 
Kid has taken it to a whole 'nother level. Best CHB in the league by some distance at the moment.

Just kills me that Ego isn't out there with him - would be unstoppable.


Although I guess we may not have drafted H if Matt didn't go down.
 
Hinkley29 said:
Recruits that can contribute to a team as soon as they are drafted are worth their weight in gold.....


.....If Pods keeps on at the current rate, he will be the bargain of the season. Minimum wage for a serious output. I am surprised clubs havne't done this sort of equation with mature aged players sooner.
Click to expand...

Its posts like this that makes it worthwhile reading on this board

I haven't read it myself but its sound like "Moneyball" logic , which Sydney have used to stay near the top in the Roos era.

What I like is that we don't prescribe to there's only one way to do it. Draft good kids build them into great players , draft mature players that might have been late bloomers , trade in players who can fix a hole on your list . All have a role and with FA and the new teams we might well see more attempts using trading and mature guys.
 
Turbocat said:
I haven't read it myself but its sound like "Moneyball" logic , which Sydney have used to stay near the top in the Roos era.
Click to expand...

It is similar to Moneyball logic.

In Moneyball, the Oakland A's put in place a system where they re-evaluated how baseball players were valued, and how their outputs contributed to the team winning or losing. They found that there were certain outputs that contributed to winning that the market did not value highly. Thus they were able to target players who possessed these undervalued qualities, and put together a productive playing list on the cheap.

So, say if a club in the AFL figured out that there were a group of players who possessed attributes that contribute to winning, but somehow are undervalued by the market, they could target these players and get them into the system for less than what they are worth. The blind quest for youth at all costs potentially means that there is a group of "older" players outside of the system that can meaningfully contribute to winning, and could be had on the cheap.

Geelong have done this to a degree, but from a public relations perspective it is a risky strategy. If we had taken a highly rated 18 year old draftee in Harry Taylor's draft spot, and he didn't work out, the club might be criticised, but it would be quickly forgotten. If Harry Taylor as a 21 year old draftee in the first round ended up as a bust, the club would have been crucified.

What the general footy public (and media) don't take into consideration is the cost of having a developing player on your list for 3 years before he does anything, and the cost from a salary cap perspective of not having any cheap players contributing to wins.
 
Hinkley29 said:
..
Geelong have done this to a degree, but from a public relations perspective it is a risky strategy. If we had taken a highly rated 18 year old draftee in Harry Taylor's draft spot, and he didn't work out, the club might be criticised, but it would be quickly forgotten. If Harry Taylor as a 21 year old draftee in the first round ended up as a bust, the club would have been crucified.
Click to expand...

Risk is relative is it not. Geelong having just won the Flag saw the need that a player like Taylor could fill. If it went all Aup I doubt we would really have been too harsh criticised , cause the runs where on the board.
In a way , its the same with Pods. Could you imagine the reaction if Rich or Melb had drafted him and it didn't work? The success of previous endeavors give one the chance to up the risk , just like recent failure makes it much harder to break away from common perceptions.

To some degree , your money ball example is exactly how we have built our list at the draft table. The players who has lost favour due to form or injury or whatever. Selwood for instance or Varcoe , we obviously valued something slightly different to other clubs. Maybe we had to due to our late picks , just like the A's had to due to no $$$
 
Gentlemen.

The Q9 has arrived.

Loved his form so far this year. Would have absolutely lost my shit if he had dobbed that goal from 55 after a running bounce from an intercept.

I would probably marry his left foot if it were possible/legal.
 
Turbocat said:
Risk is relative is it not. Geelong having just won the Flag saw the need that a player like Taylor could fill. If it went all Aup I doubt we would really have been too harsh criticised , cause the runs where on the board.
In a way , its the same with Pods. Could you imagine the reaction if Rich or Melb had drafted him and it didn't work? The success of previous endeavors give one the chance to up the risk , just like recent failure makes it much harder to break away from common perceptions.

To some degree , your money ball example is exactly how we have built our list at the draft table. The players who has lost favour due to form or injury or whatever. Selwood for instance or Varcoe , we obviously valued something slightly different to other clubs. Maybe we had to due to our late picks , just like the A's had to due to no $$$
Click to expand...

I totally agree with what you are saying. And you are probably right about the club not being too badly criticised if the Taylor pick hadn't worked out, but there are not many other clubs in the comp who would have been afforded the same leeway from their fans and the media. Sucks to be them, hey!:D

And I totally agree that we have built our list by picking up undervalued players. As you rightly point out, we took Varcoe and Selwood who had injury concerns, we took a fair few somewhat older guys, but we have also pulled some guys from nowhere. Mackie was a mystery as a first rounder who had been hidden playing reserves for Glenelg. Enright came from a very small country town and hardly anyone knew anything about him. Ling was drafted as a fat FF, but the club knew he had a big engine, exceptional leadership qualities and could be converted to a mid some day. The list goes on...

Whereas the A's were handicapped by a lack of $$$ compared to their rivals, we were handicapped by a lack of high draft picks (and to a lesser degree salaray cap space in recent years) compared to our rivals. We have had to get creative, and we have done it beautifully IMO.

I don't think it will take long for other clubs to take a look at what has been successful and adjust their thinking. The smart MLB teams did this with the A's. What that will mean is that we need to keep trying to stay ahead of the curve and if the market shifts too far one way, that you then can find undervalued players elsewhere.

Keep zigging whilst everyone else is zagging.
 
Glassjaw said:
Needs to keep his feet.
Click to expand...

Probably one of the bigger issues he's had to deal with in his career to date, but he's improved tenfold this season. Holding his ground alot better, and contesting much better in one-on-one duels. His bodywork has been pretty good - holding his ground fairly well when playing in front, and knowing when to go for the grab when playing from behind.

I'm not sure if he can maintain his current form for another 20+ games (he's been exceptional over four rounds), but I love his personal drive to constantly improve. Love it.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Doing ok on Before The Game right now.
Would love to see him in contention for a captaincy role post Ling
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom