Draft Watcher Knightmare's 2012 Mock Draft

[THE MOEMAN]

your entitled to your opinion knightmare as is everyone. I look forward to revisiting your analysis at the end of the year and see how well your opinion of us stacks up to the results we put forward in 2012.Think you will be in for a surprise

 

[Knightmare]

Knightmare, you seem to have some reasonable views about North (although I do think they do have some really good midfield talent and doubt they'll finish bottom 5) and it would be interesting to hear (both positively and negatively tinted) your views on Melbourne as a whole.

The thing I like about Melbourne right now is the new coaching group. For me that screams future success. I think this will help the development of the younger players on the list allot and progress will really start happening from now with few less BIG losses happening. Neil Craig in particular as an assistant coach I think is a particularly underrated acquisition. He was a massively underrated coach and I have a big respect for what he achieved with Adelaide. Will be a very, very good assistant for Melbourne.

I haven't liked the direction Melbourne have gone over the past 10 years at all. But from now I do see a big culture overhaul under Neeld and I think he is doing allot right (culture I don't believe is something that talking about will fix. it's something that happens through strong discipline and the right group of leaders and group of coaches who drive it through work ethic and leading by example *if your best player does it. Everyone else will follow). I think this is a really big factor in success and you see it with clubs like Geelong who over the past 5 years have really built that up, Sydney who have had it over the past 10-15 years, Adelaide, Collingwood, Hawthorn all have it right now and I see Melbourne joining that group in a couple of years time who should continually do well and Carlton under Chris Judd's leadership is also heading in the right direction.

The young talent on the Melbourne list is solid without being great. Watts should develop into much more than just a soft flanker and I see him starting to break out from this year probably in the 2nd half of the season with 2013 being is big breakout season. Trengove will be an A grader, possibly as early as this year. Grimes should probably this year or next get over injury issues with some luck and I could see a James Magner breaking into the side from this year and having a strong influence. I don't have Melbourne in the top 8 this year. Still a bit young and a bit inexperienced. But I don't see the big blowouts happening nearly as often from this year and I can see Neeld being the big reason for that change.

I have you just outside of the top 8 this year (still the core group is too young and inexperienced for my liking) but I don't see the big blowouts happening nearly as often this year. Under Neeld I think from 2013 you'll really start your climb and a real winning culture will start to form. Melbourne at this stage is probably one of the 2-3 clubs I see with any potential of taking a premiership off GWS/Gold Coast when they really start to become quality teams in 5+ years time.

So in my view exciting times are on their way for Melbourne.

 

[Old Skool]

to leadership (on the whole very young and inexperienced, few on the list have experienced success so I don't really see that basis for success or that real hard working, winning culture you might get at a Sydney or Geelong who I consider to be among the best run clubs in the league right now).

Wayne Carey took up the captaincy of a side that had finished 9th, 6th, 8th and 12th in his previous seasons at the club and moulded the side in to the team of the decade.

to player development (haven't developed young core group to the standard of some of the other clubs who have players at similar ages who have developed significantly quicker - look at the way Geelong and Hawthorn are developing their young players right now or how Collngwood did 2 years ago),

A plethora of our kids have been the midfield, whereas the Geelong, Hawthorn and Collingwood kids have all had the luxury of walking in to sides with very good seasoned midfielders (Ablett, Bartel, Ling, Kelly, Mitchell, Hodge, Sewell, Swan, Pendlebury etc).

The North kids could have performed just as admirably if they had been drafted by those sides.

We have had Harvey playing forward, Rawlings playing in the back pocket and Wells just managed to string his first fit season together. We also gave Harris the flick.

I don't think you understand our list very well.

 

[Chris25]

I dislike North as much as the next person, but not even I can agree with any of that.

Assessing a team based on not having any relative 'big name' assistant coaches is kind of stupid. Just because someone wasn't a senior coach, or hasn't been talked up as a future coach, doesn't mean they aren't good. And there is not really any point comparing North to a top team like Hawthorn or Geelong in terms of player development - two of those teams are at the top of their game and have genuinely elite players to take the pressure off. Hell, I would look good playing in either of those teams.

North should be pushing for that 7th/8th position this year. And with their mixture of young talent and experience, questions would be asked if they weren't pushing finals.

Anyway, this is supposed to be a draft topic. So yeah...how 'bout those kids?

 

[Knightmare]

Young lists can be deceiving.

Richmond is one example where they just haven't been able to move up over such an extended period.

They keep rebuilding and rebuilding with young pieces and end up just churning through them year after year without much luck. I tend to believe that this is through lack of experience on the list, lack of leadership and not that quality of coaching and player development to really help drive the list to become anything significant.


My arguement is that you need that combination of experienced leader, star power - with those star players motivated to further drive the list forward, a strong group of coaches - senior coach as well as the assistant coaches and strong player development programs.

Right now I have North Melbourne in this basket and I have doubts that the next step will be as easy to make as people tend to assume.

Just because a young core group is one year older, you cannot assume that develop will just happen, it certainly can but doesn't happen as much as you'd think. There has to be a driver to this development. At Richmond and North Melbourne right now I don't see it. Port Adelaide also fits this category and for me right now is probably the most alarming of the three.


Or to take it away from AFL since people will get sensitive. Look to the NBA.
The Charlotte Bobcats are a great example. Check out all those high draft picks they had over the years and how that worked out for them:
Emeka Okafor (pick 2, 2004 - behind Dwight Howard), Raymond Felton (pick 5, 2005 - behind Deron Williams and Chris Paul), Adam Morrison (Pick 3, 2006 - behind LaMarcus Aldridge).
Despite all those years of not making the playoffs they never could develop any of their draft picks into anything signficant.
Worth noting:
Adam Morrison can't make a roster on the NBA now.
Emaka Okafor hasn't shown development since making the NBA and has stayed much the same his whole career despite coming in as a potential no.1 overall selection.
Raymond Felton only started to have notable success when he signed with New York and before then was a below average starter.

Then look back at the Richmond drafting history. (Will just go through 1st round picks to save time)
1999: Aaron Fiora - pick 3 overall.
2000: Kayne Pettifer - pick 9 overall.
2002: Jay Schulz - pick 12 overall.
2004: Brett Deledio - pick 1 overall. *Success
2004: Richard Tambling - pick 4 overall.
2004: Danny Meyer - pick 12 overall.
2004: Adam Pattison - pick 16 overall.
2005: Jarrad-Oakley Nicholls - pick 8 overall
--
From then on with Jack Riewoldt and Trent Cotchin among others Richmond have obviously done significantly better and been good pickups and the club is going in a much better direction than they were - though until they achieve anything (top 8 for 2+ seasons) it can't yet be considered a success but hopefully for them they are on the way. But over this period where there were a number of very good drafts and with the drafting system not nearly as bad as it was in the early days. Lack of success might have been due to more reasons than just questionable drafting.
My belief is that the conventional wisdom should be challenged and greater research is always necessary and in Richmond's case I believe that lack of success over that extended period comes down to more than just poor drafting and that the player development over that period along with a poor coaching group and below average leadership group also were big reasons behind this.


I believe moves such as Carlton trading for Chris Judd (adds a serious on field leader - and look at the improvement since, the culturing is turning around from the Brendan Fevola days and those young players are now blossoming because they now have a great leader to follow).
Luke Ball to Collingwood (fantastic trainer. was a captain at his previously club. brings leadership and helped Collingwood to a premiership).

Then for coaching look at how Mick Malthouse turned Collingwood around from the content team of the 90s into an better than acceptable team during the 00s and more recently into a premiership side.
Check out the success Leigh Matthews had with Brisbane and how he achieved those 3 premierships.
Kevin Sheedy with Mark Harvey (was always a great assistant coach) check out the success they had in the late 90s.
Geelong had a great coaching group (Sanderson, McCartney, Hinkley) during those premiership years. I don't view this as a co-incidence.

It could be argued that success is what made these coaches known and famous, and that is certainly not wrong (though in the case of Leigh Matthews he had already won a premiership earlier with Collingwood. Malthouse won premierships at West Coast before Collingwood. In the NBA Phil Jackson with the Chicago Bulls before the Lakers), but if you look at the dynamic of successful teams over the years in any sport the correlation between a great coaching group and a great group of leaders who lead by example have as big a correlation with winning relative to any factor and I think both factors are massively underrated.

Or in the NBA those who watch the Chicago Bulls. Look at what Derrick Rose has done with his team. Young leader, but none the less as the star player he has led the culture with his work ethic and his desire to win along with a great coach - Tom Thibodeau (who really drives his players to develop and play hard every night) and all the players are following and now an ultimate team culture has been formed where players play for eachother and to win rather than for themselves to inflate their stats cards and with this has come the serious improvement of their whole team roster from their best player to their 14th player (So again it's the coaching and leadership factors that are leading to success).


*Long post. But my belief is that the general consensus is not correct that young players just develop from year to year. It's not that quick and there needs to be something to stimulate that growth (which back to the point I don't see at North Melbourne right now or more specifically in 2012).

 

[Knightmare]

Wayne Carey took up the captaincy of a side that had finished 9th, 6th, 8th and 12th in his previous seasons at the club and moulded the side in to the team of the decade.



A plethora of our kids have been the midfield, whereas the Geelong, Hawthorn and Collingwood kids have all had the luxury of walking in to sides with very good seasoned midfielders (Ablett, Bartel, Ling, Kelly, Mitchell, Hodge, Sewell, Swan, Pendlebury etc).

The North kids could have performed just as admirably if they had been drafted by those sides.

We have had Harvey playing forward, Rawlings playing in the back pocket and Wells just managed to string his first fit season together. We also gave Harris the flick.

I don't think you understand our list very well.

And how much would it help to have a strong group of experienced mids to help those young mids develop?

You win with men.

Look how good Joel Selwood developed playing with that star Geelong midfield. It very much helps.

North Melbourne don't have that to propel the list forward at this stage. You only have to look at the list with the major born in 87 and later with few experienced leaders of stature. And with nothing to propel the list forward at this stage it's going to take time.

 

[Chris25]

Young lists can be deceiving.

My argument is that you need that combination of experienced leader, star power - with those star players motivated to further drive the list forward, a strong group of coaches - senior coach as well as the assistant coaches and strong player development programs.

I didn't say North's young players would miraculously develop into stars, and carry their team into the finals.

But it just seems like you're writing them off because their current list doesn't fit the textbook image of what a developing list should look like. They might not have as many star players as some other teams, but they have experience, big bodies and a strong structure.

And they might not have hired coaches with big names, but that means nothing - one could easily argue the current assistant coaches at North will be the next big names, the ones who get talked about as future senior coaches. Just because you haven't heard of them, it doesn't mean they aren't good.

And I think unless you follow them week in and week out, you can't really comment on their leadership - or a lack thereof. I know at Fremantle, some of our best leaders (on and off the field) are ones that opposition supporters wouldn't even think about.

They finished in 9th spot last year, and only lost one player of note during the off-season. They should and I believe will be pushing for finals this year.

*Also, my use of the term 'you' is more as a general term. As opposed to singling you out.

 

[THE MOEMAN]

My arguement is that you need that combination of experienced leader, star power - with those star players motivated to further drive the list forward, a strong group of coaches - senior coach as well as the assistant coaches and strong player development programs.

we have all those things, our experienced leaders/ star players are petrie,boomer,swallow,wells,McIntosh, Goldstein these players have all made the AA squad or team. Other experienced players include firrito,mcmahon,thompson, grima and edwards.
Then there is the youth such as ziebell,bastinac,harper,atley,cunnington,adams,greenwood, wright,hansen,black etc.

We have the best assistant coach Darren crocker who was named so at the 2011 Coaches association awards.

 

[Knightmare]

I didn't say North's young players would miraculously develop into stars, and carry their team into the finals.

But it just seems like you're writing them off because their current list doesn't fit the textbook image of what a developing list should look like. They might not have as many star players as some other teams, but they have experience, big bodies and a strong structure.

And they might not have hired coaches with big names, but that means nothing - one could easily argue the current assistant coaches at North will be the next big names, the ones who get talked about as future senior coaches. Just because you haven't heard of them, it doesn't mean they aren't good.

And I think unless you follow them week in and week out, you can't really comment on their leadership - or a lack thereof. I know at Fremantle, some of our best leaders (on and off the field) are ones that opposition supporters wouldn't even think about.

They finished in 9th spot last year, and only lost one player of note during the off-season. They should and I believe will be pushing for finals this year.

*Also, my use of the term 'you' is more as a general term. As opposed to singling you out.

I see North Melbourne's range as 7-15. I have North Melbourne finishing at the bottom of that range. It's very even and I don't see that many wins different. In that range it is dartboard. I see more improvement in a healthy Adelaide, a quickly developing Brisbane, a better coached Melbourne then Richmond and Western Bull Dogs are probably similarly placed near the bottom to North Melbourne. But every team needs to finish somewhere. Predictions are always going to be wrong to some degree. Accurancy isn't ensured. But there is no reason why you can't get closer and closer with every year if you delve deeper than the year before.

Unconventional lists can have success. But knowing which types of lists are more likely to have success and maximising these factors that can breed success vitally important.

With the coaching. You can often tell the success of the coaching program by how many land senior positions. Collingwood have had - Neeld, Watters, Buckley, McKenna, B.Scott. Geelong have had - Sanderson and McCarthy. This could be argued that this is from these clubs having success. Or it could be argued that they have been under probably the two best coaches from the best 5 years which is my view.

Certainly there can be coaches out there that are undervalued and unknown who can be quality. But if they are stuck at a bottom dweller as an assistant coach do you really know that they will become successful? Mark Neeld for me is like a prototype type coach - this doesn't mean every coach should be like him but with him coming from a teaching background and coming from a successful club, I think this combination in the future will be looked upon very favourably when Neeld experiences success. Then Nathan Bassett if given the opportunity I think when a club over the next year or two hires him will also experience serious success with the way he has developed such a large number his players. It's these results that suggest success and these are two examples of coaches who have produced results. Whether in 10 years time either or, or both go down as successful coaches is another question. But my belief is that both can and will.

To know about leadership at each club it certainly does help if you follow them week in week out. And many leaders do go unnoticed. You are right.
But at the same time with so much information available to the public and coming through the media, available on club websites among other things often you can get a feel for who leads, who doesn't. Who sets the example among other things.
When talking captains. Brett Kirk, Tom Harley and Nick Maxwell are in my mind the three standouts. All have had premiership success. Maybe not the traditional stars but all lead by example and make everyone else better. All three have experienced premiership success, but I also believe all three were big reasons for the success of their respective teams.

 

[MaddAdam]

I'll give Knightmare the 2010 mock. Had us taking Kieran Harper at 17 ... which we were going to ... until Atley slid. That we still managed to get KHarps 10 picks later shows how much we nailed that draft.

So kudos to Knightmare on that one, even if his 2011 was wildly off for us.

 

[Vtorians]

Knightmare- What are your thoughts on Ess this yr & also going forward with their current list & coaching set up?

 

[Knightmare]

Knightmare- What are your thoughts on Ess this yr & also going forward with their current list & coaching set up?

Essendon are interesting. Inside my top 8 at this stage for 2012. I see Essendon continuing to climb slowly up the top 8 but I don't see a list strong enough to really contend for a premiership at any stage with Carlton and Hawthorn the clubs more likely to be those "teams to beat" over these next 3-4 years and after that GWS and Gold Coast.

The thing I like for Essendon is Mark Thompson. In my view the guy is a genius. Close to if not the most brilliant mind in football over the past 5 years and was a massive acquisition.
James Hird on the other hand having not served as an assistant I don't rate super highly at this early stage of his coaching career but with the support of Thompson his learning is being fast tracked and Hird was fairly sharp of mind as a player, so I think he can have moderate success as a coach and develop into an ok and possibly above average coach. But having not been an assistant coach it is harder to calculate his likely success or otherwise because there just isn't anything to go by as for example we have seen with Nathan Bassett at Norwood who has developed allot of players into AFL footballers in such a short time.

Jobe Watson is a quality captain. Would like another 1-2 other high level leaders to crop up or alternatively a noted leader from another team added through trade or free agency if possible to really help drive the young group forward but the list is in good hands with some young quality key position players coming through and some strong, experienced inside midfielders who will continue to produce.
More star power would help. But perhaps that can come through the draft and perhaps Heppell, Kavanagh, Hurley, Melksham and Zaharakis can take that next step to drive the list further.

In terms of drafting I see Essendon as an improving team who have gone from below average 5+ years ago to above average over these past 5 years. Player development since James Hird and Mark Thompson have arrived also looks allot better now also going from below average to well above average now with Mark Thompson leading the way bringing his success from Geelong.

So I think Essendon are on the right track.

 

[Old Skool]

That is a very interesting analysis when I compare it to your North analysis.

 

[.Shotties.]

Well, thread was a good read for a while there.

 

[Slattery_20]

Well, thread was a good read for a while there.

I honestly didn't pay any attention at all to the clubs who the kids went to or the order they were in. Completely missed they were even there.

Knightmare mate - I don't think there's any point doing it as a mock draft at this point, just whack your profiles up, we'll all have a good read and no-one's going to be having a teary. (don't mention the war)

 

[Passmore]

That is a very interesting analysis when I compare it to your North analysis.

It's certainly very odd.

Peronally I can't see anything too unconventional about our list development. We've focused on putting an elite midfield on the park and this looks to be well and truly heading in the right direction.

Regardless, I really enjoy reading KM's analysis of the young talent.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

That is a very interesting analysis when I compare it to your North analysis.

How dare someone rate Essendon higher than the developing Kangaroos!!!!

 

[Knightmare]

I could be way wrong about any number of clubs. From year to year with new information and new things happening from coaching staff to different players my views on particular clubs change. Certainly North Melbourne with a young list have time to prove me wrong but I do have concerns that it will be difficult to make any meaningful progress at any stage in the immediate future. It's just a thing in hindsight that we will discover what we got right, what we got wrong.

Anyway back to the draft..

 

[Knightmare]

Lachie Whitfield. Dont really care about anyone else.

Still another year of footy to be played but right now Whitfield has to be the man to beat.

It will be a pleasure watching GC + GWS play in 5-6 years time.
Ablett (assuming still playing - certainly see him playing into his early - mid 30s), Swallow, O'Meara v Coniglio, Scully and possibly Whitfield if that happens. Allot to look forward to.

Even as a fan of an opposition club while it won't be allot of fun for the rest of us, it will still be a pleasure to watch two teams of such quality compete.

 

[Gibbo_88]

I'll give Knightmare the 2010 mock. Had us taking Kieran Harper at 17 ... which we were going to ... until Atley slid. That we still managed to get KHarps 10 picks later shows how much we nailed that draft.

Every recruiter says that they were surprised that player x was still available at pick y. IT shows that your recruiters rated those players differently to others is all. If you really think North 'nailed' that draft then every club has nailed every pick until the players are actually delisted.

 

[Knightmare]

Every recruiter says that they were surprised that player x was still available at pick y. IT shows that your recruiters rated those players differently to others is all. If you really think North 'nailed' that draft then every club has nailed every pick until the players are actually delisted.

Every club certainly thinks they nailed the draft directly after it happened.

The general process is take a list of say 50 draft prospects ordered from preference 1-50 into the draft. All clubs will have a different order so if you have pick 29 you might get player 17 on your list, or if you have pick 45 then you might get player 32 on your list just because different people will always rate different players differently.

With the North Melbourne 2010 draft. I like the first two selections in Atley and Harper. As a neutral observer I had my own order and had both listed at higher numbers than their eventual draft position.
This doesn't mean North Melbourne nailed their draft. Only hindsight will tell us this. But in the case of Atley and Harper I still rate both highly and see AFL careers ahead of them both.

 

[RedmanWasHere]

A few pages back, I saw bits of the U12's of 1991, 1996 and 2006.

Does anyone know where the links are for these and more?

 

[cash]

SLF and his cronies appear right on cue with their tissues.
STFU and let knightmare do his work.

 

[RedmanWasHere]

Subbed, for future reference.

Another name to look out for Knightmare, Eastern Ranges' Jai Jordan.

Went to school with him albeit a 3 year age gap.

Small profile.

Name: Jai Jordan.
Date Of Birth: 27/06/1994.
Position: Tall Forward.
Height: 190cm or 6'3''.
School: Mooroolbark College.

 

[gotassieboys]

Every club certainly thinks they nailed the draft directly after it happened.

The general process is take a list of say 50 draft prospects ordered from preference 1-50 into the draft. All clubs will have a different order so if you have pick 29 you might get player 17 on your list, or if you have pick 45 then you might get player 32 on your list just because different people will always rate different players differently.

With the North Melbourne 2010 draft. I like the first two selections in Atley and Harper. As a neutral observer I had my own order and had both listed at higher numbers than their eventual draft position.
This doesn't mean North Melbourne nailed their draft. Only hindsight will tell us this. But in the case of Atley and Harper I still rate both highly and see AFL careers ahead of them both.

Obviously all clubs have a list rating the players from 1 - ?. Under normal non compromised drafts clubs will pick what they consider the best player for the first round and then round 2 onwards pick players for specific roles and building their list for the future.