Opinion Hinesight v Knightsight v Hindsight 2018

Carringbush2010

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Posts
4,193
Likes
2,321
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
Knightmare and Scodog10

A little off the side but still relevant re the development of GC concession provided players..................... and how they'd probably be better under a more established (stable) footy department.

Right now I'm more for Beams than Lyons and Hall, KM disagrees however had they been developed say under our current panel I'd argue (confidently!) that they'd be better players and may tip my thinking the other way.

Point is I fear for Lukosius/Rankine/King/Brodie/Bowes/Ainsworth/Crossley/Ballard - the raw new players in the system. KM alluded to earlier that there's a possibility that the suns have not properly developed their players since inception and we're not seeing the potential of those players. Yeah I know it's not that simple and there are lot's of variables from player to player.

However it's almost visual to me that there's a waste of talent due to poor development, and yeah we certainly haven't been sparkling in that area either - certainly under the previous regime but GC seem consistent in the poor development and certainly with the concession provided players they've had they should be equal or better than the giants.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Knightmare

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Posts
15,728
Likes
13,700
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Thread starter #302
I see that argument for Hanley being ahead of Harbrow as similar to the one for Wells earlier in this thread. IMO, you’re placing too much stock in what guys once were over what they currently are in discussions about who’s the better right now.

Hanley’s the wrong side of 30, has only had one 500+ possession season (2014) and his body is failing him. Harbrow on the other hand is like a fine wine and is maturing into a very good footballer. Each of his past 3 seasons has been better than the prior, he’s durable (61 of the past 66), has the leadership traits and is currently giving GC what they hoped they were getting in Hanley.

I agree with the rest in terms of where their list is at, but would probably include both Thompson and Sexton in that established group with Young and Murdoch on the cusp.
I don't disagree Gold Coast will get more value out of Harbrow playing given his durability. Availability is the best ability.

But when Hanley has played he has been the better and more influential.

If I can add one for one game to win tomorrow and they're both healthy. Hanley is the one I'm picking. But in terms of actual value likely over this season and upcoming seasons, Hanley would rate low given it's unclear how often he will be available to play.

Thompson I don't consider AFL quality.

He lacks durability averaging 12.88 games per season which is poor. Only the one season with 20 or more games from his 8.

He's a key defender overall who doesn't intercept or rebound and in 2017 was out-marked in 19% of one-on-one contests (9th worst of the top-60 players for total contested defended). So he shouldn't be on an AFL list let alone be viewed as AFL standard.

Sexton has a case. I find him outside and for someone who is there to kick goals 28 goals from 22 games isn't nearly enough with 2 goals per game from a forward what I want or much closer to. Though delivery and lack of it is a factor. What I like about him is he can get you metres gained. He's one I'd like to see have another good season if not take another step before I come out and call him an established player. It's a bit like with Peter Wright. Had a very respectable season in 2017 with 121 marks and 31 goals and wasn't bad in 2016 either, but was a shadow of his former self last year. They both need that one extra good season or even better season before I feel confident in their play. Sexton has been playing all over the place in all parts of the ground never feeling like he had found a home, so if he can continue to build on last season as a forward then I'll call him established.

Aaron Young is servicable. Good in 2016 for Port, but that's the one good season from him. Like with Sexton/Wright, he needs to deliver every season and I don't look at him yet as someone I can rely on for that each year. 2018 was a passable year, but his performances weren't of a standard where he would be best 22 on every team which is what I expect when I talk about established AFL quality players.

Jordan Murdoch is another serviceable player who can contribute at AFL level but hasn't found that clear best position he can play every week/every year to that best 22 standard.

I think the lesser used Anthony Miles actually is better than Young/Murdoch. He's another who has only really had the one good year with Richmond in 2015 but he can rack it up and win it at the coal face to a high level. He's just another of those one dimensional types who is your classic ball winner/accumulator but without anything else. Though Gold Coast already had that with Michael Barlow who they didn't use and just cut.
 

Knightmare

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Posts
15,728
Likes
13,700
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Thread starter #303
Knightmare and Scodog10

A little off the side but still relevant re the development of GC concession provided players..................... and how they'd probably be better under a more established (stable) footy department.

Right now I'm more for Beams than Lyons and Hall, KM disagrees however had they been developed say under our current panel I'd argue (confidently!) that they'd be better players and may tip my thinking the other way.

Point is I fear for Lukosius/Rankine/King/Brodie/Bowes/Ainsworth/Crossley/Ballard - the raw new players in the system. KM alluded to earlier that there's a possibility that the suns have not properly developed their players since inception and we're not seeing the potential of those players. Yeah I know it's not that simple and there are lot's of variables from player to player.

However it's almost visual to me that there's a waste of talent due to poor development, and yeah we certainly haven't been sparkling in that area either - certainly under the previous regime but GC seem consistent in the poor development and certainly with the concession provided players they've had they should be equal or better than the giants.
I'm not sure Gold Coast have much of a case that they're developing players.

Imagine this. David Swallow, Jaeger O'Meara and Jack Martin. Since Bryce Gibbs in 2006, no three players as juniors have been more hyped. Each also had a year of development with Gold Coast. The expectation was that each would become best 5 in the competition players in their prime. None of them are best 50 in the game and probably won't be. That's a monumental failure. Swallow and O'Meara haven't made any major improvement since their first seasons with O'Meara only now with Hawthorn looking slightly better. Martin is progressing, but he was so light to start and still is only good but not great.

How about Sam Day not coming along to an AFL standard as a former pick 3?

Harley Bennell peaking in his second season.

Trent McKenzie, Zac Smith and Brandon Matera showed signs in their first seasons but never took the next step.

Seb Tape, Maverick Weller, Luke Russell, Josh Toy, Daniel Gorringe, Matt Shaw. More guys who never developed.

Tom Nicholls looked like something not far off a young Nic Nat early days and he can't get a game and hasn't improved.

Josh Caddy was nothing much for Gold Coast and it took his third team in Richmond to come good.

Sexton is still finding his spot and may only just now as a forward - though he needs another good season to prove it.

Jesse Lonergan never came good. Kade Kolodjashnij never developed after his first season. Jarrod Garlett went home and didn't develop.

Peter Wright regressed last year and after a good 2017 season it's unclear who he is and whether he'll improve much beyond that.

Callum Ah Chee isn't AFL standard yet.

Jack Scrimshaw couldn't earn games.

It took Charlie Dixon moving to Port Adelaide to find the next level to his play.

These are all failed first round picks or guys if not for prelisted/other methods who haven't developed as expected.

You can count on one hand the success stories in Lynch/May/Miller where you can say they've developed beyond expectation.

They've got an incredible amount of work to do to get on track and to prove they can develop talent to an at or near expected level.

They've just drafted Lukosius who is the best I've seen in my 10 years following the U18s and Rankine is better than anyone other than Lukosius picked these past three years. While I can have those views of those two pre-draft. I'm worried about those projections on Gold Coast selecting them due to the above evidence that Gold Coast have proven inept at developing talent.
 

Carringbush2010

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Posts
4,193
Likes
2,321
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
I'm not sure Gold Coast have much of a case that they're developing players.

Imagine this. David Swallow, Jaeger O'Meara and Jack Martin. Since Bryce Gibbs in 2006, no three players as juniors have been more hyped. Each also had a year of development with Gold Coast. The expectation was that each would become best 5 in the competition players in their prime. None of them are best 50 in the game and probably won't be. That's a monumental failure. Swallow and O'Meara haven't made any major improvement since their first seasons with O'Meara only now with Hawthorn looking slightly better. Martin is progressing, but he was so light to start and still is only good but not great.

How about Sam Day not coming along to an AFL standard as a former pick 3?

Harley Bennell peaking in his second season.

Trent McKenzie, Zac Smith and Brandon Matera showed signs in their first seasons but never took the next step.

Seb Tape, Maverick Weller, Luke Russell, Josh Toy, Daniel Gorringe, Matt Shaw. More guys who never developed.

Tom Nicholls looked like something not far off a young Nic Nat early days and he can't get a game and hasn't improved.

Josh Caddy was nothing much for Gold Coast and it took his third team in Richmond to come good.

Sexton is still finding his spot and may only just now as a forward - though he needs another good season to prove it.

Jesse Lonergan never came good. Kade Kolodjashnij never developed after his first season. Jarrod Garlett went home and didn't develop.

Peter Wright regressed last year and after a good 2017 season it's unclear who he is and whether he'll improve much beyond that.

Callum Ah Chee isn't AFL standard yet.

Jack Scrimshaw couldn't earn games.

It took Charlie Dixon moving to Port Adelaide to find the next level to his play.

These are all failed first round picks or guys if not for prelisted/other methods who haven't developed as expected.

You can count on one hand the success stories in Lynch/May/Miller where you can say they've developed beyond expectation.

They've got an incredible amount of work to do to get on track and to prove they can develop talent to an at or near expected level.

They've just drafted Lukosius who is the best I've seen in my 10 years following the U18s and Rankine is better than anyone other than Lukosius picked these past three years. While I can have those views of those two pre-draft. I'm worried about those projections on Gold Coast selecting them due to the above evidence that Gold Coast have proven inept at developing talent.
Oh dear, that doesn't read well and just reiterates the magnitude of the problem up there.

You know I've been banging on how important development is since I've signed on to BF, particularly in the Buckley threads where it seemed it was keep Buckley vs not keep Buckley - when it reality it's not that simple and come across as a little naive.

If anything Collingwood and Richmond have proven with tweaks to your FD your player development can shine. Just look at these players who no one has heard of 12 months ago or were considered meh at best.........just off the top of my head

  • Josh Thomas
  • Brayden Maynard
  • Tom Langdon
  • Tom Phillips
  • Mayne (reinvention)
  • Mason Cox*
  • Mihocek
  • Brayden Sier
  • Jack Crisp
* Some may argue he's ordinary but I see more development / improvement - even at 28. Has already had impact in games even if inconsistent.

Probably others but these are off the top of my head, but it proves the difference in player development. Look at us 2013 - 17, we were a one dimensional grunt team that turned it over continuously (on face value) then look at this year with a near identical list......... one kick away from a flag.

In those Buckley threads I speculated that our player development was poor and that there was huge potential in the list and huge potential in Buckley given his game knowledge. I'm not here to blow my own trumpet I'm just stating that player development is so readily dismissed as a cause of poor performance by so many that I find it bemusing.
 

Knightmare

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Posts
15,728
Likes
13,700
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Thread starter #306
Availability is the best ability.

Knightmare this is the best and most succinct way I've seen this concept put and I completely agree.

Durability is incredibly important and is so often just overlooked as a key attribute of a player.
Absolutely. It's also when looking at the best players a real separator when comparing players and something that in any of my talent evaluations is included in the weighting.

That's why I was somewhat hesitant in going all-in with Steven May. Incredibly May has never played 20 games in his 8 seasons with averages of 15.38 games per season. So while he'd obviously be terrific to have, it's one of those things that makes me pause and lower the price I'd be willing to pay by quite a bit.

Similarly Beams. He's played enough finals footy for Collingwood and despite being a regular from his first season only has career averages of 16.8 games per season which isn't much more than May when it's considered that he played finals footy during each of his first five seasons with Collingwood.

It's a concept I'm sure a lot of experienced fantasy football coaches would be well versed in.

Oh dear, that doesn't read well and just reiterates the magnitude of the problem up there.

You know I've been banging on how important development is since I've signed on to BF, particularly in the Buckley threads where it seemed it was keep Buckley vs not keep Buckley - when it reality it's not that simple and come across as a little naive.

If anything Collingwood and Richmond have proven with tweaks to your FD your player development can shine. Just look at these players who no one has heard of 12 months ago or were considered meh at best.........just off the top of my head

  • Josh Thomas
  • Brayden Maynard
  • Tom Langdon
  • Tom Phillips
  • Mayne (reinvention)
  • Mason Cox*
  • Mihocek
  • Brayden Sier
  • Jack Crisp
* Some may argue he's ordinary but I see more development / improvement - even at 28. Has already had impact in games even if inconsistent.

Probably others but these are off the top of my head, but it proves the difference in player development. Look at us 2013 - 17, we were a one dimensional grunt team that turned it over continuously (on face value) then look at this year with a near identical list......... one kick away from a flag.

In those Buckley threads I speculated that our player development was poor and that there was huge potential in the list and huge potential in Buckley given his game knowledge. I'm not here to blow my own trumpet I'm just stating that player development is so readily dismissed as a cause of poor performance by so many that I find it bemusing.
I'm not sure who wouldn't have player development near the top of the list of reasons clubs don't win. Player development is just as important as good talent identification. If you don't draft/trade well. You're not going to be good. If you don't develop talent well. You're not going to be good either. Tick both of those boxes, and you're on your way. And development comes in part from good coaching and a good culture but in my view in larger part from good veteran leadership as they have the greatest baring on both of those factors and can set the standard for the younger players to follow and set the tone for leadership to develop other leaders from within - see Hodge's impact at Brisbane. Alex Witherden did a great piece I think it was for playersvoice that backs up this notion.
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2015
Posts
41,269
Likes
32,041
AFL Club
Collingwood
Veteran leadership is something Knightmare has banged in about, with great merit.
Setting standards when newbies come in, is vital.
Critical even.

Whilst I’d suggest we don’t seem to do that well with players post 30 (falling off a cliff at times) nonetheless our leadership standards seems very good.

Scott Pendlebury would certainly set high standards.
Lynden Dunn certainly does.
Tyson Goldsack.
Levi Greenwood excels in work ethic.

I think our seasoned players at least are demanding and setting high value standards.

Witness, Jordan De Goey following Pendlebury around like a puppy. This stuff means players at least know the levels required.

This must be of great benefit.


Separately: it’s time we invest in ensuring our latter day talent keeps at high standards for much longer.
Probably why (at the time) taking Brent Harvey on would have been of untold benefit.
Observing how meticulous is his preparation and work ethic.
 

Knightmare

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Posts
15,728
Likes
13,700
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Thread starter #308
Veteran leadership is something Knightmare has banged in about, with great merit.
Setting standards when newbies come in, is vital.
Critical even.

Whilst I’d suggest we don’t seem to do that well with players post 30 (falling off a cliff at times) nonetheless our leadership standards seems very good.

Scott Pendlebury would certainly set high standards.
Lynden Dunn certainly does.
Tyson Goldsack.
Levi Greenwood excels in work ethic.

I think our seasoned players at least are demanding and setting high value standards.

Witness, Jordan De Goey following Pendlebury around like a puppy. This stuff means players at least know the levels required.

This must be of great benefit.


Separately: it’s time we invest in ensuring our latter day talent keeps at high standards for much longer.
Probably why (at the time) taking Brent Harvey on would have been of untold benefit.
Observing how meticulous is his preparation and work ethic.
I feel like Collingwood have a lot of leaders outside of those. Beams back is one. But Adams, Sidebottom, Grundy, Moore. Those guys all bring leadership value.

Our other vets are of good character. Wells/Varcoe/Howe. Reid being less visable it's harder to say but he's certainly not a problem guy and an experienced premiership player.

So Collingwood have plenty of veteran and emerging leaders.

Brent Harvey would have been terrific and there may not be any more professional in the competition. Young players seeing his attention to detail would have benefited immensely and learnt lots off of him. I would have offered him a two year deal was my line at the time and he's still two years on producing locally and remaining durable as expected. Could he have helped in the club's run at a premiership last year? He'd have been a pretty easy in for Aish I would have thought.

No one in the competition had more disposals and goals in combination than Harvey in his final season. And he's an elite user who still had his speed/endurance. He still had and may still have more good football left. He's incredible.
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2015
Posts
41,269
Likes
32,041
AFL Club
Collingwood
I feel like Collingwood have a lot of leaders outside of those. Beams back is one. But Adams, Sidebottom, Grundy, Moore. Those guys all bring leadership value.

Our other vets are of good character. Wells/Varcoe/Howe. Reid being less visable it's harder to say but he's certainly not a problem guy and an experienced premiership player.

So Collingwood have plenty of veteran and emerging leaders.

Brent Harvey would have been terrific and there may not be any more professional in the competition. Young players seeing his attention to detail would have benefited immensely and learnt lots off of him. I would have offered him a two year deal was my line at the time and he's still two years on producing locally and remaining durable as expected. Could he have helped in the club's run at a premiership last year? He'd have been a pretty easy in for Aish I would have thought.

No one in the competition had more disposals and goals in combination than Harvey in his final season. And he's an elite user who still had his speed/endurance. He still had and may still have more good football left. He's incredible.
Totally on Harvey with you.
Just untold unmeasurable value in prep and dedication for the group to observe.

I didn’t mean to suggest those you listed (and others) aren’t setting standards. I was mainly focusing on a few older ones and how they set standards. Howe, Varcoe are beauties. Contrary to this boards feeling, Wells is a quality human being and be terrific for younger types.

Grundy to me is beyond terrific, sings out “Captain.”
Though t seems it’s not something he particularly is keen on. That’s fair enough too. He might like his mountains, his freedoms not being in meetings etc; but when on track he’s as hard a worker as you’d get. Great guy and worker. Loves to learn and continue to improve.

Looking at our whole list all of these seem to exhibit some degree of possible leadership role (now or in the future).
Some in different ways, quiet but diligent. Some more out there.
I’ll probably have missed a few (sorry). I’ve left out not obvious best 22.
Beams we’ll leave out as likely to concentrate on playing but will lead anyway as very senior.
Leaving out some that seem to unluckily miss that official leadership group eg Varcoe, Greenwood.

Augurs well.

Stephenson, Grundy, Treloar, Langdon, Pendlebury (c), Adams, Dunn, Phillips, Sidebottom, Crisp, Moore,
Hoskin-Elliott, Maynard, Howe, Cox.
 
Last edited:

left at home

Premium Gold
Joined
Mar 17, 2015
Posts
27,323
Likes
7,432
Location
qld
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
miami dolphins
Totally on Harvey with you.
Just untold unmeasurable value in prep and dedication for the group to observe.

I didn’t mean to suggest those you listed (and others) aren’t setting standards. I was mainly focusing on a few older ones and how they set standards. Howe, Varcoe are beauties. Contrary to this boards feeling, Wells is a quality human being and be terrific for younger types.

Grundy to me is beyond terrific, sings out “Captain.”
Though t seems it’s not something he particularly is keen on. That’s fair enough too. He might like his mountains, his freedoms not being in meetings etc; but when on track he’s as hard a worker as you’d get. Great guy and worker. Loves to learn and continue to improve.

Looking at our whole list all of these seem to exhibit some degree of possible leadership role (now or in the future).
Some in different ways, quiet but diligent. Some more out there.
I’ll probably have missed a few (sorry). I’ve left out not obvious best 22.
Beams we’ll leave out as likely to concentrate on playing but will lead anyway as very senior.
Leaving out some that seem to unluckily miss that official leadership group eg Varcoe, Greenwood.

Augurs well.

Stephenson, Grundy, Treloar, Langdon, Pendlebury (c), Adams, Dunn, Phillips, Crisp, Moore,
Hoskin-Elliott, Maynard, Howe, Cox.
Mmmm
Steel not best 22, or not leadership material?
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Knightmare

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Posts
15,728
Likes
13,700
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Thread starter #312
Totally on Harvey with you.
Just untold unmeasurable value in prep and dedication for the group to observe.

I didn’t mean to suggest those you listed (and others) aren’t setting standards. I was mainly focusing on a few older ones and how they set standards. Howe, Varcoe are beauties. Contrary to this boards feeling, Wells is a quality human being and be terrific for younger types.

Grundy to me is beyond terrific, sings out “Captain.”
Though t seems it’s not something he particularly is keen on. That’s fair enough too. He might like his mountains, his freedoms not being in meetings etc; but when on track he’s as hard a worker as you’d get. Great guy and worker. Loves to learn and continue to improve.

Looking at our whole list all of these seem to exhibit some degree of possible leadership role (now or in the future).
Some in different ways, quiet but diligent. Some more out there.
I’ll probably have missed a few (sorry). I’ve left out not obvious best 22.
Beams we’ll leave out as likely to concentrate on playing but will lead anyway as very senior.
Leaving out some that seem to unluckily miss that official leadership group eg Varcoe, Greenwood.

Augurs well.

Stephenson, Grundy, Treloar, Langdon, Pendlebury (c), Adams, Dunn, Phillips, Sidebottom, Crisp, Moore,
Hoskin-Elliott, Maynard, Howe, Cox.
I think with this group and other groups it's not essential to be part of the 'leadership group' to be a leader and I expect a lot outside of that will lead anyway in their different ways. I haven't followed Beams' intentions of being part of the leadership or not, but irrespective he will be a leader.

Perhaps others beyond those we have listed already emerge. Who knows. It's something that on good teams as with the great Geelong/Hawthorn teams of the past 12 or so years can snowball into a lot of the group.
 
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Posts
56
Likes
69
AFL Club
Collingwood
Gold Coast have been all about defensive run under Dew.

The problem is - when you're not winning it. That's all you're doing. And if you're getting flogged every week, that's hard to do so much every game. And when that's what you're being measured on, on a bad team above all else. There will be some poor identification of a players usefulness. And that's what I feel has happened with Lyons/Hall. And it's not unlike the poor ID of all those Carlton players who left over a series of years and went on to other clubs and had success - Kennedy/Jacobs/Betts/Waite/Henderson/Grigg/Garlett/Robinson. I think it was for a stage there there may have even been more goals kicked among those playing for other teams than there were remaining with Carlton or some silly stat like that. Then Gibbs/Tuohy are now gone.

Running defensively is a component of the game, but it's just a component of one of the three phases of the game - with the other two being when the ball is in dispute to win and when you're in possession and driving the ball forward.

I'm not fussed if a guy is below average in a particular phase.

If they're elite in a phase. And Lyons is elite when the ball is in dispute and Hall is elite when in possession offensively. You're bringing something positive to the table and you let a guy play to their strengths and put them in positions to use those strengths to help you win games.

I feel the issue has been overstated with both. Lyons isn't quick getting back, but at stoppages if the other team win it, he's tackling at a high level.

Hall is more an offensive runner, unquestionably, but he's still covering a lot of ground in a hurry and the net offence gained I feel outweighs what is lost defensively as he's creating a lot of meaningful offence a lot of times each game. He's sort of your reverse Varcoe - Varcoe giving you little offensively but defensively he'll bring it and make a difference to winning, and Hall does it the other way.

On the comparison between Lyons/Sier. Lyons spent large portions as a forward only getting a regular go as a mid more so, though still getting forward minutes in his final Adelaide season in 2016. It was 17/18 that Lyons became a full time midfielder with Gold Coast. Clearances/contested possessions/tackles/use by foot and capacity to play forward are all better from Lyons. Sier like Lyons is one dimensional as a stoppage specialist but is still developing and even in his one trick not on that same level at this stage. I don't feel it's a fair comparison for Sier yet with this the first season he has played to an AFL standard v Lyons who has been of that or better standard these past three years.
I may be wrong but Sier has a healthy inside 50 average. Not sure how Lyons stacks up. Sier’s ability to stand in a tackle and put the team in a better position with his handballs is something to watch and build on.

Obviously needs to work on his tank, however, that will come. I don’t think there are many 21 year olds who can do what he does and he has size. Lyons at 26-27yrs has limited potential.

Although I do agree that Hall would have been a good get.
 

regpies

Club Legend
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Posts
2,176
Likes
2,669
AFL Club
Collingwood
I'm not sure Gold Coast have much of a case that they're developing players.

Imagine this. David Swallow, Jaeger O'Meara and Jack Martin. Since Bryce Gibbs in 2006, no three players as juniors have been more hyped. Each also had a year of development with Gold Coast. The expectation was that each would become best 5 in the competition players in their prime. None of them are best 50 in the game and probably won't be. That's a monumental failure. Swallow and O'Meara haven't made any major improvement since their first seasons with O'Meara only now with Hawthorn looking slightly better. Martin is progressing, but he was so light to start and still is only good but not great.

How about Sam Day not coming along to an AFL standard as a former pick 3?

Harley Bennell peaking in his second season.

Trent McKenzie, Zac Smith and Brandon Matera showed signs in their first seasons but never took the next step.

Seb Tape, Maverick Weller, Luke Russell, Josh Toy, Daniel Gorringe, Matt Shaw. More guys who never developed.

Tom Nicholls looked like something not far off a young Nic Nat early days and he can't get a game and hasn't improved.

Josh Caddy was nothing much for Gold Coast and it took his third team in Richmond to come good.

Sexton is still finding his spot and may only just now as a forward - though he needs another good season to prove it.

Jesse Lonergan never came good. Kade Kolodjashnij never developed after his first season. Jarrod Garlett went home and didn't develop.

Peter Wright regressed last year and after a good 2017 season it's unclear who he is and whether he'll improve much beyond that.

Callum Ah Chee isn't AFL standard yet.

Jack Scrimshaw couldn't earn games.

It took Charlie Dixon moving to Port Adelaide to find the next level to his play.

These are all failed first round picks or guys if not for prelisted/other methods who haven't developed as expected.

You can count on one hand the success stories in Lynch/May/Miller where you can say they've developed beyond expectation.

They've got an incredible amount of work to do to get on track and to prove they can develop talent to an at or near expected level.

They've just drafted Lukosius who is the best I've seen in my 10 years following the U18s and Rankine is better than anyone other than Lukosius picked these past three years. While I can have those views of those two pre-draft. I'm worried about those projections on Gold Coast selecting them due to the above evidence that Gold Coast have proven inept at developing talent.
There are plenty of other blokes at established clubs who were high draft picks that never developed as expected. Some take a long time to fulfil their potential (Caddy).

It wasn’t really fair for some of these guys to be on the field with 12-14 other 18-20yrs olds.

A guy drafted by an established club has experienced and seasoned players on the field surrounding them, essentially protecting them. They come in and play minor to small roles while they develop. All those GC players never had that, along with the terrible club structure, they didn’t really have a chance.

I feel sorry for a few of them.
 

Nuwanda

Debutant
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Posts
56
Likes
69
AFL Club
Collingwood
I'm not sure Gold Coast have much of a case that they're developing players.

Imagine this. David Swallow, Jaeger O'Meara and Jack Martin. Since Bryce Gibbs in 2006, no three players as juniors have been more hyped. Each also had a year of development with Gold Coast. The expectation was that each would become best 5 in the competition players in their prime. None of them are best 50 in the game and probably won't be. That's a monumental failure. Swallow and O'Meara haven't made any major improvement since their first seasons with O'Meara only now with Hawthorn looking slightly better. Martin is progressing, but he was so light to start and still is only good but not great.

How about Sam Day not coming along to an AFL standard as a former pick 3?

Harley Bennell peaking in his second season.

Trent McKenzie, Zac Smith and Brandon Matera showed signs in their first seasons but never took the next step.

Seb Tape, Maverick Weller, Luke Russell, Josh Toy, Daniel Gorringe, Matt Shaw. More guys who never developed.

Tom Nicholls looked like something not far off a young Nic Nat early days and he can't get a game and hasn't improved.

Josh Caddy was nothing much for Gold Coast and it took his third team in Richmond to come good.

Sexton is still finding his spot and may only just now as a forward - though he needs another good season to prove it.

Jesse Lonergan never came good. Kade Kolodjashnij never developed after his first season. Jarrod Garlett went home and didn't develop.

Peter Wright regressed last year and after a good 2017 season it's unclear who he is and whether he'll improve much beyond that.

Callum Ah Chee isn't AFL standard yet.

Jack Scrimshaw couldn't earn games.

It took Charlie Dixon moving to Port Adelaide to find the next level to his play.

These are all failed first round picks or guys if not for prelisted/other methods who haven't developed as expected.

You can count on one hand the success stories in Lynch/May/Miller where you can say they've developed beyond expectation.

They've got an incredible amount of work to do to get on track and to prove they can develop talent to an at or near expected level.

They've just drafted Lukosius who is the best I've seen in my 10 years following the U18s and Rankine is better than anyone other than Lukosius picked these past three years. While I can have those views of those two pre-draft. I'm worried about those projections on Gold Coast selecting them due to the above evidence that Gold Coast have proven inept at developing talent.
I think you’re being way too hard on GC and some of those players mentioned. O’meara, Swallow got hit hard by injury. Some of O’meara’s games pre-injury were better than any played at the Hawks. Bennell was great but we know his off-field issues prevented him from being the superstar he looked like he could be. His move to Freo hasn’t helped.
Wright is another who looked good until injury hit him.
Dixon and Caddy where young. Dixon had a number of big games at GC.

It’s fair to say Ablett was a disaster. He wasn’t a leader and, in my view, was a major negative in the development of players on field. The amount of times he demanded the ball rather than supporting teammates with it was farcical.

This is where they got it wrong. These kids never had the role models, leaders etc to play and develop alongside. Caddy, Dixon and most other players will naturally have a better gonat it as they got to play alongside with more experienced teammates. Malceski was poor. Hanley injures.

GC would look a very different team if O’Meara, Caddy, Dixon, Swallow, Bennell, Lynch, Mayne etc we’re fit and still there.

I hope after such a good draft, they can bring in some experienced leaders to the club.
 

Knightmare

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Posts
15,728
Likes
13,700
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Thread starter #316
I may be wrong but Sier has a healthy inside 50 average. Not sure how Lyons stacks up. Sier’s ability to stand in a tackle and put the team in a better position with his handballs is something to watch and build on.

Obviously needs to work on his tank, however, that will come. I don’t think there are many 21 year olds who can do what he does and he has size. Lyons at 26-27yrs has limited potential.

Although I do agree that Hall would have been a good get.
Sier will get the ball i50 but he's not finding it in that portion of the ground at this point as Lyons has proven he can.

Sier's best work is winning it and delivering by hand and he has the strength to stand up through tackles.

Lyons at his age has improved year on year, and at his age it's unclear how much improvement he has left, but who he is presently I'd love to have with very few better at stoppages and that includes the whole Collingwood playing list.

I think you’re being way too hard on GC and some of those players mentioned. O’meara, Swallow got hit hard by injury. Some of O’meara’s games pre-injury were better than any played at the Hawks. Bennell was great but we know his off-field issues prevented him from being the superstar he looked like he could be. His move to Freo hasn’t helped.
Wright is another who looked good until injury hit him.
Dixon and Caddy where young. Dixon had a number of big games at GC.

It’s fair to say Ablett was a disaster. He wasn’t a leader and, in my view, was a major negative in the development of players on field. The amount of times he demanded the ball rather than supporting teammates with it was farcical.

This is where they got it wrong. These kids never had the role models, leaders etc to play and develop alongside. Caddy, Dixon and most other players will naturally have a better gonat it as they got to play alongside with more experienced teammates. Malceski was poor. Hanley injures.

GC would look a very different team if O’Meara, Caddy, Dixon, Swallow, Bennell, Lynch, Mayne etc we’re fit and still there.

I hope after such a good draft, they can bring in some experienced leaders to the club.
Those pre-injury games from O'Meara is exactly my point about being an incredible talent from the start but not coming on like was expected.

Swallow has had plenty of years and games to develop but like O'Meara hasn't.

The amount of talent Gold Coast had was serious and that whole group has been highly disappointing other than a very small number.

Mayne didn't play for Gold Coast, you're thinking of May.

I don't look at Ablett as a negative for Gold Coast. Just as at Geelong during the premiership years, he's someone you lean on to produce on matchday rather than lead. That's the key understanding with Ablett that Gold Coast didn't adequately account for or understanding when recruiting him and then forming their list. And when you get someone thinking they're someone they're not (in Ablett's case a captain) you're setting yourself up to fail.
 

Nuwanda

Debutant
Joined
Nov 21, 2018
Posts
56
Likes
69
AFL Club
Collingwood
Sier will get the ball i50 but he's not finding it in that portion of the ground at this point as Lyons has proven he can.

Sier's best work is winning it and delivering by hand and he has the strength to stand up through tackles.

Lyons at his age has improved year on year, and at his age it's unclear how much improvement he has left, but who he is presently I'd love to have with very few better at stoppages and that includes the whole Collingwood playing list.



Those pre-injury games from O'Meara is exactly my point about being an incredible talent from the start but not coming on like was expected.

Swallow has had plenty of years and games to develop but like O'Meara hasn't.

The amount of talent Gold Coast had was serious and that whole group has been highly disappointing other than a very small number.

Mayne didn't play for Gold Coast, you're thinking of May.

I don't look at Ablett as a negative for Gold Coast. Just as at Geelong during the premiership years, he's someone you lean on to produce on matchday rather than lead. That's the key understanding with Ablett that Gold Coast didn't adequately account for or understanding when recruiting him and then forming their list. And when you get someone thinking they're someone they're not (in Ablett's case a captain) you're setting yourself up to fail.
Yes I obviously meant May as opposed to Mayne.

I’m a little dumbfounded on your view that O’meara didn’t develop while at GC. He only played 2 years and didn’t play a game in 2015 and 2016. He has been at the Hawks for the past 2 years. Who is to say if O’meara wasn’t injured and played in 2015 and 2016 he wouldn’t have been a better footballer than when he started in 2013?

Not a great example.

Out of interest, why do you think GC was happy to let Lyons go? Surely there would have been other clubs willing to offer something reasonable for him if he is that good.
 

Knightmare

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Posts
15,728
Likes
13,700
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Thread starter #320
Yes I obviously meant May as opposed to Mayne.

I’m a little dumbfounded on your view that O’meara didn’t develop while at GC. He only played 2 years and didn’t play a game in 2015 and 2016. He has been at the Hawks for the past 2 years. Who is to say if O’meara wasn’t injured and played in 2015 and 2016 he wouldn’t have been a better footballer than when he started in 2013?

Not a great example.

Out of interest, why do you think GC was happy to let Lyons go? Surely there would have been other clubs willing to offer something reasonable for him if he is that good.
O'Meara is only one component of all but around five who have developed at or of an above expectation standard for Gold Coast.

When I'm talking about O'Meara not being better than in his first season, his game has not quantitatively improved since then.

He's not the example to spend too much time on because he only had the two healthy seasons. But after 476 disposals and 16 goals played while spending greater time forward a (marginal) regression (22 games both years) to 472 disposals and 11 goals is not what you'd hope for.

Moving forward to present day. Contested marking is much worse than his first two seasons and he's not taking as many marks i50 as he did in his first season. And his other numbers are much of a muchness. Otherwise he's not as extremely explosive as he was in his first two seasons pre-injury. So no one is going to say he has improved much if at all since his first season.

The better examples are those who aren't even AFL standard after looking like future stars in their first season or projecting as long term players as juniors. And there are a whole lot from that list. Josh Toy I didn't mention because of his heart issues and if not for that he was expected to be something like if not a slightly better Shannon Hurn, but the likes of Maverick Weller, Luke Russell, Zac Smith, Trent McKenzie, Brandon Matera, Matt Shaw, Tom Nicholls, Sam Day. If I was to have told myself any of these guys let alone all of them wouldn't be best 22 quality players today I'd be asking whether they've done ACL's, ankles or shoulders.

It's an awful situation.

Gold Coast in my view have drafted well and to an above average standard overall since their inception. But when you have these kinds of guys who look AFL quality from their first season or as juniors project to be best 10 on list quality guys as pretty much all of them did. It's staggering.

Then David Swallow/Jaeger O'Meara/Jack Martin not being best five in the competition players and being only good-very good but not great players. A lot has gone horribly wrong.

And as I've continually come back to in this thread. The lack of leadership with Ablett not captain material and no established support around him or enough young emerging established leaders like GWS had with Ward/Davis/Scully etc. Even with little money, below standard facilities. They haven't maximised their chances though not having that leadership base. And now Gold Coast aren't even evaluating their own talent correctly.

I've been looking at Gold Coast and GWS largely as recruiting grounds in recent years, in a similar way to how you'd track state leagues to see if there are talents ripe for the picking. And year on year there are guys from both clubs who can be had and there are some talents worth getting. Lyons/Hall were the two Suns I felt were hugely undervalued. And from GWS Scully/Setterfield. Beyond those guys as a lesser known name, Lachlan Tiziani I'd be bringing onto the VFL list. Seriously developable medium forward who did his ACL in April but is a good talent who if not for the ACL could have earnt games.
I'd be happy for people in a year or two to come back in hindsight and review whether Lyons/Hall and Scully/Setterfield go and how good/bad/indifferent as recruiting choices they all turn out. I'm bullish on the four of them.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2018
Posts
237
Likes
517
AFL Club
Collingwood
At this stage of his career I don't agree Beams is better than Shiel. Today or long term with Shiel the more durable, younger and better both ways. Beams is better forward of centre but not the better mid.

Roughead I feel was a wasted use of a list position and May I would have been open to but as with Beams he's not one I would have overpaid for. Had I been able to get two of Lewis Young/Sam Taylor(GWS)/Harrison Petty at a lower price I'd be tempted by those guys ahead of May. They're three I'd track strongly this year and consider as end of season trade targets.

Thomas I'd have been open to moving if it meant getting someone better. Moore at the prices being bandied around was a keeper, no one made a reasonable offer comparable to who he projects to become or even already is.[/QUOTE]

As always, thanks for sharing your perspectives.

Re Shiel vs Beams
Shiel was about the 4th or 5th best mid at GWS Kelly, Ward, Coniglio, Scully are all superior. Whitfield too these days. Never finished inside their Top 3 in the B&F despite playing 20 games a season pretty consistently. Treloar beat him consistently in the club B&F when he was there too.
He's quick but he doesn't hit targets that reliably. He has very little scoreboard impact either (9 goals a season on average the past 2 years from ~24 games). He has averaged 26 disposals a game.

Beams is a multiple club B&F winner, club captain, has averaged 20 games a season the past 2 years in a team which hasn't played finals (of which one game missed was due to mental health issues as he dealt with the immediate passing that year of his father). He has averaged 28 disposals a game and 19 goals a season. One of only 2 options you'd apply a tag to at Brisbane.

Beams is the superior player for mine at present. Pretty easily.

Roughead cost us virtually nothing in draft picks or salary. He provides important cover for Grundy and possibly Dunn until he returns. Recruiting for depth is entirely sensible and every club does it. If they're all superstars, you simply can't fit them into your salary cap and we have Pendles, Steele, DeGoey, Treloar and in time Grundy all commanding big dollars. In recent times you've seen guys like Keeffe to GWS, Preuss to Melbourne (basically didn't get a game at North and have Gawn), Adams to Lions, Leuenberger (when recruited to the Bombers), Mihocek as mature, big bodied players who may not have been considered best 22 but could play a vital role.
 

Knightmare

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Posts
15,728
Likes
13,700
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Thread starter #322
At this stage of his career I don't agree Beams is better than Shiel. Today or long term with Shiel the more durable, younger and better both ways. Beams is better forward of centre but not the better mid.

Roughead I feel was a wasted use of a list position and May I would have been open to but as with Beams he's not one I would have overpaid for. Had I been able to get two of Lewis Young/Sam Taylor(GWS)/Harrison Petty at a lower price I'd be tempted by those guys ahead of May. They're three I'd track strongly this year and consider as end of season trade targets.

Thomas I'd have been open to moving if it meant getting someone better. Moore at the prices being bandied around was a keeper, no one made a reasonable offer comparable to who he projects to become or even already is.
As always, thanks for sharing your perspectives.

Re Shiel vs Beams
Shiel was about the 4th or 5th best mid at GWS Kelly, Ward, Coniglio, Scully are all superior. Whitfield too these days. Never finished inside their Top 3 in the B&F despite playing 20 games a season pretty consistently. Treloar beat him consistently in the club B&F when he was there too.
He's quick but he doesn't hit targets that reliably. He has very little scoreboard impact either (9 goals a season on average the past 2 years from ~24 games). He has averaged 26 disposals a game.

Beams is a multiple club B&F winner, club captain, has averaged 20 games a season the past 2 years in a team which hasn't played finals (of which one game missed was due to mental health issues as he dealt with the immediate passing that year of his father). He has averaged 28 disposals a game and 19 goals a season. One of only 2 options you'd apply a tag to at Brisbane.

Beams is the superior player for mine at present. Pretty easily.

Roughead cost us virtually nothing in draft picks or salary. He provides important cover for Grundy and possibly Dunn until he returns. Recruiting for depth is entirely sensible and every club does it. If they're all superstars, you simply can't fit them into your salary cap and we have Pendles, Steele, DeGoey, Treloar and in time Grundy all commanding big dollars. In recent times you've seen guys like Keeffe to GWS, Preuss to Melbourne (basically didn't get a game at North and have Gawn), Adams to Lions, Leuenberger (when recruited to the Bombers), Mihocek as mature, big bodied players who may not have been considered best 22 but could play a vital role.[/QUOTE]

I have different ratings of the GWS mids. Kelly and Ward are their two best. Coniglio on 2018 form was better but Shiel's 2017 play was of a comparable standard and I don't see any meaningful separation. Shiel the better two-way mid. Shiel as a mid I consider clearly better than Scully and also better than Whitfield. With Scully and Whitfield they're along with Kelly those premier runners GWS have had, but Scully and Whitfield aren't the same ball winners or stoppages players as those others. Whitfield distinguishes himself from Scully as a higher level accumulator but also a much better ball user and now also the more versatile.

If Beams is on that 2018 GWS midfield, I would at this stage of his career rate him behind Kelly/Ward and slightly behind Coniglio/Shiel - all of whom have more advanced games at stoppages and are even better contested ball winners by comparison. Though Beams does have slightly different strengths and is the better forward. So his value when available would be comparable to Coniglio/Shiel.

If you ask me who I want out of those. From a long term perspective or for a whole season, I'd go with any of Kelly/Ward/Coniglio/Shiel/Whitfield ahead of Beams on the basis that they're all more durable and project to have more football left as they're all younger. Ward not meaningfully younger as only a couple of months Beams' junior, but he averages three games a season more and over the past 10 seasons has only dropped below 20 games once (2010) which is a great indicator not only of durability but probable long jeopardy. I also regard Ward the superior leader in a comparison to Beams with his inside stuff also better.

Scully with the ankle issue and even at the peak of his powers I don't consider in Beams' class as much as I continue to talk him up. He's not elite but he's a high level component who makes any team better and post injury while he probably isn't quite the same runner I feel can still be a valuable contributor.

You're right to bring up Beams (like Zorko) will sometimes cop a tag, and that lessens his numbers but Zorko I feel distinguished himself as Brisbane's number one option and the guy most important to stop on that Brisbane team and as a smaller guy he was easier to tag and had some really low with x8 sub 20 disposal games last season and particularly weak start and end to the season. And Beams has achieved plenty as you bring up and deservedly.

Why I talk about Roughead as an unnecessary addition (and he's much better than Rory Thompson who I spoke about earlier so I'm not going to diminish him completely - whether it's back or ruck) but Roughead also I don't consider best 22 at AFL level standard. There isn't a good team that should need to use him. In Collingwood's situation why I view Roughead as unnecessary is a combination of Grundy's durability in combination with Moore in my view being best suited to playing ruck and the guy I'd move in if Grundy has to miss at any stage, then there is the tallest guy in the AFL in Cox who I also feel would be very effective through the ruck and possibly better than he is as a forward. The game with so many guys these days being versatile is a next man up game. You don't need a key forward today. Cox could play through the ruck, Mihocek could play back and De Goey, Stephenson and Elliott could be your token key forwards and play that marking go-to target role. And with Moore/Dunn/Reid/Mihocek/Scharenberg all able to play key defence as well as Goldsack when desperate. In terms of Collingwood's tall stocks, ruck I feel is entirely covered and needs no further investment, Max Lynch I feel should actually have been cut as a low level unnecessary ruckman. For key forwards and key defenders I don't see the numbers as the issue, only the lack of quality with no high level KPPs, just a lot of guys who are adequate for AFL play but suboptimal by position. I hear Roughead is a good quality character guy who only adds to the club culture, but I'd have much preferred Alex Johnson be taken on as a rookie - even knowing he's out for the first half of the season, he at least wouldn't take up a list position on the senior list, but additionally is arguably an even greater character guy with no one in the competition wanting it as badly as him arguably and a better performer at AFL level. But again, seeing better options I don't feel even Johnson this offseason would have been necessary with Jon Marsh a better option again and now mentally ready to take his chances as a genuine AFL quality defender or midfielder with greater talent.
 

Prochard123

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 28, 2014
Posts
4,269
Likes
2,503
AFL Club
Collingwood
Hey knightmare,

Just wondering what your thoughts on the rule changes.

The 6-6-6 rule in particular, do you expect key position players to have more or less impact than before? How does it affect how midfielders set up around the contests? And do you expect #1 rucks like Grundy to play even longer periods of ruck than before given how it may restrict rotations?
 

Knightmare

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 22, 2010
Posts
15,728
Likes
13,700
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Chicago Bulls
Thread starter #324
Hey knightmare,

Just wondering what your thoughts on the rule changes.

The 6-6-6 rule in particular, do you expect key position players to have more or less impact than before? How does it affect how midfielders set up around the contests? And do you expect #1 rucks like Grundy to play even longer periods of ruck than before given how it may restrict rotations?
On KPPs I'm expecting faster and cleaner movement of the ball in which helps the key forwards - as there is the more time and space around stoppages and it's going to help the fast and skillful types and give those pure stoppage beasts without the skills/speed less of an advantage relative to what we've been seeing. Collingwood liking to have the extra around stoppages probably are hurt by this relatively and need to change more than most.

The new ruck rules will be interesting. In Collingwood's case little I see no change likely with Cox able to relieve through the ruck. Not many teams will be affected. Richmond won't be rucking Grigg anymore I can't imagine so it will force those kinds of teams to use at least a tallish KPP to relieve the ruckman. Overall minutes of ruckmen may increase slightly for a few if they can manage it, but I'm not seeing any major changes for many sides.
 
Joined
Aug 17, 2018
Posts
237
Likes
517
AFL Club
Collingwood
On KPPs I'm expecting faster and cleaner movement of the ball in which helps the key forwards - as there is the more time and space around stoppages and it's going to help the fast and skillful types and give those pure stoppage beasts without the skills/speed less of an advantage relative to what we've been seeing. Collingwood liking to have the extra around stoppages probably are hurt by this relatively and need to change more than most.

The new ruck rules will be interesting. In Collingwood's case little I see no change likely with Cox able to relieve through the ruck. Not many teams will be affected. Richmond won't be rucking Grigg anymore I can't imagine so it will force those kinds of teams to use at least a tallish KPP to relieve the ruckman. Overall minutes of ruckmen may increase slightly for a few if they can manage it, but I'm not seeing any major changes for many sides.
The club's perspective on this from what I have heard is
- we tend to structure up with 6/6/6 at centre bounces anyhow as our preferred approach (the rule is only for centre bounces, so not that significant and just means a team can't flood back to stem a run on or protect a lead)
- we think that Grundy, as a good clearance player, may be even more useful under the new ruck rules
 
Top Bottom