Judkins Downgrading Picks

[Dave The Man]

The 2 examples are:

1) Downgrading Pick 3 in 1999 to Pick 7.
2) Downgrading Pick 7 in 2004 to Pick 10


1st one Cost us Pavlich and out 2nd one cost us Jordan Lewis. I just can't figure out why you would downgrade you picks.

The only reason I can think of is that the player you want can get later in the 1st round and you can get something extra by downgrading your pick,

Your Thoughts?

 

[King Woodie]

Of course that is why, Dave the Man.

In 2000 we wanted a ruckman, so downgraded and got McKee (and also gave up C King...)

In 2004 we wanted Morrison, so we downgraded (in a multi-club deal that involved Chick going to WCE) and got Egan.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Firstly, there is a big difference between downgrading from 3-7, and from 7-10. Primarily because there is a big difference in the expectation you have for that player at the time of drafting.

Pick #3 in this year's draft might get you Daniel Rich. Pick #7 certainly will not. However the player you might nab at #7 could be the same as at #10.

Certainly, in 2004 we were aiming for Chris Egan regardless of whether we had pick #7 or #10, and as such it made sense to utilise the "commodity" we had in those 3 draft positions to get something in return.

The only blunder we made was not trading down the draft order, it was selecting Chris Egan. We were never going to take Jordan Lewis, so get over it.

 

[EB&W Pieman]

And also we were NEVER going to get Pavlich.

Josh Fraser was always going pick 1.

If Collingwood had kept pick 3, Freo would have taken Pavlich with pick 2, because they preferred him to Haselby. But when Richmong got pick 3, they knew that Richmond were going to take Fiora, and so they took Haselby with 2, knowing that Pav would still be availlable at Pick 4.

So rest easy on that one.

Trading down may have cost us nothing - we may have taken Danny Roach anyway!!

 

[Big Bucks]

At the time we had taken Judkins from the Bombers, it was if we had appointed the best recruiter in the land, he was the man that identified and recruited what was to be known as the baby Bombers to go on to win multiple Flags.
It all went astray as Collingwood offered him a salary package that was way beyond anything that had ever been seen for a recruitment manager, hence the results we recruited a person who had lost his vision of recruiting players.
Same old Collingwood, most supporters, wealthiest Club, most dust in the Trophy cabinet.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Downgrading is not the problem. Its who we draft that is the issue. Pick 7 or pick 10, we would have taken Egan over Lewis anyway.

 

[Kirby]

At the time we had taken Judkins from the Bombers, it was if we had appointed the best recruiter in the land, he was the man that identified and recruited what was to be known as the baby Bombers to go on to win multiple Flags.
It all went astray as Collingwood offered him a salary package that was way beyond anything that had ever been seen for a recruitment manager, hence the results we recruited a person who had lost his vision of recruiting players.
Same old Collingwood, most supporters, wealthiest Club, most dust in the Trophy cabinet.

We were unlucky too because we weren't to know that Judkins would become "ill" for a few years there. An illness that did not become known until around 04 but left a trail of years of bad recruiting behind.

 

[kevind]

And also we were NEVER going to get Pavlich.

Josh Fraser was always going pick 1.

If Collingwood had kept pick 3, Freo would have taken Pavlich with pick 2, because they preferred him to Haselby. But when Richmong got pick 3, they knew that Richmond were going to take Fiora, and so they took Haselby with 2, knowing that Pav would still be availlable at Pick 4.

So rest easy on that one.

Trading down may have cost us nothing - we may have taken Danny Roach anyway!!

That is simply not true. Freemantle had committed themselves to Haselby and did not expect Pavlich to be still available at pick 3 because they thought we were going to take him and after we swapped our pick, expected Richmond to pick him.

If you don't believe me, I refer you to a draft program on Fox sports at the time in which 1. Haselby states that Freo had told him that he would be their first pick and 2. A Freo official stating that Haselby was going to be their first pick

If you had of seen highlights of Haselby from that time, you would have seen why he was their first pick. He didn't just play well ,but dominated games at junior level. If Collingwood honestly believed that Pavlich was no chance then they were very naive and hadn't done their homework which has been par for the course for the last 18 years. Even if Freo had of taken Pavlich at pick 2, we still would have been one hundred times better with Haselby rather than the duds we ended up with in Roach and McKee.

You say rest easy, well it has been disasters like thios that constantly repeat themselves that has led to the mediocre list we now have. Not an issue that you can rest easy over I would have thought.

 

[recon]

That is simply not true. Freemantle had committed themselves to Haselby and did not expect Pavlich to be still available at pick 3 because they thought we were going to take him and after we swapped our pick, expected Richmond to pick him.

If you don't believe me, I refer you to a draft program on Fox sports at the time in which 1. Haselby states that Freo had told him that he would be their first pick and 2. A Freo official stating that Haselby was going to be their first pick

If you had of seen highlights of Haselby from that time, you would have seen why he was their first pick. He didn't just play well ,but dominated games at junior level. If Collingwood honestly believed that Pavlich was no chance then they were very naive and hadn't done their homework which has been par for the course for the last 18 years. Even if Freo had of taken Pavlich at pick 2, we still would have been one hundred times better with Haselby rather than the duds we ended up with in Roach and McKee.

You say rest easy, well it has been disasters like thios that constantly repeat themselves that has led to the mediocre list we now have. Not an issue that you can rest easy over I would have thought.

thats how I remember it aswell nothing good can come of downgrading top ten draft picks.

 

[Rival_V]

It was Hine who was the head of recruiting when we did the 7 to 10 + Morrison downgrade and not Judkins.

 

[Skade]

It was Hine who was the head of recruiting when we did the 7 to 10 + Morrison downgrade and not Judkins.

Oh no, is that right

 

[Optimax]

Oh no, is that right

yeah i think he is, because it was hine that selected egan

 

[Kirby]

To be fair though, from memory Hine only just took over as head recruiter from Judkins at that time and wasn't long in the job, never-the-less, he stuffed up with Egan. But all recruiters have skeletons and we all thought when we first saw him play that he could develop into something pretty damn good.

 

[MarkT]

One of my absolute bug bears but surely MM has to be in the firing line more so than the bloke who makes the selections with the picks he has to operate with? Blame Judkins for who he too but not what he had to work with. Hine was the head recruiter when we downgraded to 10. Hated the idea at the time and still do. Saw Egan on the VFL game on TV at the weekend and nearly cried. Whether we would have taken Lewis is speculation. Whether Freo would have still taken Haselby is also speculation. Most of the arguments are based on hopeful self justification. Fact is two player who would suit us perfectly went with the picks we gave up and we got duds for them.

The sum of all our list management decision is what determines where we are today. The lack of accountability is why it perpetuates.