Leppas hypothetical vision (2017) - Play da kidz?

[lukiuslion]

I apologise for Spelling mistakes.. hoping my point gets across ok.

I was thinking about the perceived need to get as many games as possible into our kids, so I decided to fast forward to round 1, 2017 (roughly 62 games and 3 years from now assuming we don't play finals) to see what the players on the list now, might be doing.

I understand that this could be picked to pieces, i.e. - assumptions about players improvements, who we may trade, some players might not play the bulk run of games, some of the age and game predictions might be out or slightly off.. but it is all near enough. I understand not every player can play the possible 62 games, I understand theres a chance 10 or so of the players that I'm making a prediction about might not be on that list.. but I am still working with what Leppa would have to work with when undertaking a similar exercise. I only did our potential top 30 or so and I haven't built drafting in (its a snap shot). This isn't intended to be my prediction as to who might 'make it' or who won't, it is just trying to paint a basic picture, based on current trends, to show how we might look in 3 years or so.

I haven't done every player on our list, For example.. I am not going to assume Weardon will be delisted or a superstar by then, just a potential look at our top 30 or so.

Round 1 - 2017, lets say leppa has done enough to get a 2 year extension on his first 3 year contract.

retired -

Maloney
Brown
Staker
Mcgrath
Raines
Mcguire
Polkinghorn

Ageing/ older heads (browns of this year)

Merrett - Age 32 (217 games)
Patfull - Age 32 (228 games)
Adcock - Age 31 (232 Games)
Mcguane - Age 30 (148 games)
One potential recruit/ player traded in over 30 (Maloney of this year)

Core/ senior in their prime

Rich - Age 27 (163 games)
Redden - Age 27 (161 games)
Rockcliff - Age 26 (147 games)
Luenburger - Age 28 (145 games)
West - Age 29 (110 games)
Zorko - Age 27 (92 games)
Hanley - Age 28 (154 Games)
Bewick - age 27 (110 games)
Recruit/ Player traded in (hopefully FPF) - Age 27 (150 Games)
Recruit/ Player traded in (hopefully elite Mid) - Age (150 games)

Support players/ verging on (Core/ prime players) -

Beams - Age 25 (55 Games)
Mayes - Age 22 (78 games)
Lester - Age 23 (85 games)
Green - Age 23 (80 games)
Golby - Age 25 (95 games)
Harwood - Age 25 (76 games)
Paperone - Age 22 (52 games)
Clarke - Age 22 (70 games)

Young Players - the Lesters and Harwoods of this year

Robertson - Age 21 (0 - 50 games)
Aish - Age 21 (0 - 50 games)
Taylor - Age 21 (0 - 50 games)
Paine - Age 23 (0 - 50 games)
Cutler - age 21 (0- 50 games)
Smith - Age 21 (0 - 50 games)
Gardiner - Age 21 (0 - 50 games)

Then obviously there will be 25-30 new additions and draft picks who need experience in this time.

So IMO, this snap shot shows a few things.

- in 3 years or potential senior core has the potential to be far better than it is now.. Hanley, Rockcliff, Rich, Redden, Luey, Zorko, >>>>>>>> Adcock, Merrett, Patful, Raines, Mcgrath,

- Our under class has a lot of elite potential, ATM Rocky, Redden, Rich and Zorko represent the real strength in our 70-110 games crop, in 3 years we have Beams, Mayes, lester, Green, Harwood, Clarke all hopefully sitting on that 80-110 game mark together.

- That crop of young players has potential left right and centre, we need them to be at that 40 - 60 games mark ASAP, to provide that spread, foundation and depth that a premiership winning list requires, especially given the exodus of players and our inability to attract talent.

- when looking at the core and its future, and the current structure of our list, it would be hard to justify Leppa playing Raines and Goose or anyone else that he doesn't see being a part of this list in 2017.

- We have a serious lack of KP talent, that 2017 'Core' group doesn't have 1 KPP amongst them, hence our drafting and pumping games into KPP's this year and potentially persisting with Lisle when it seems almost unjustifiable. We need to trade at least 2 senior KPP players over the next 2 draft periods.

- Our current list structure is a ****ing mess due to the Fev saga, poor recruitment, failed drafts between 2006 - 2010, and the recent player exodus.. I can understand why leppa has come in and decided to burn the current list to the ground, we should expect more radical changes over the next off season. whilst sacrificing the potential playing finals next year.. I can see this being rectified largely by 2017, if we continue to persist with Lester, harwood, Golby and pump games into da Kidz.

- any pain with a game plan now, IMO would be the vision of this group full being on top of it by the start of the 2017 season.

- This IMO is a potential Premiership winning core, I'm sure something similar was shown to Rich, redden, Rocky before they signed up.. we need the layers of support to be built under them asap.

- I didn't realise the need to do this was so strong until I under took this exercise, we can have a finals team in 2-3 years, but leppa needs to do what he is doing now to get us there.... in Leppa we trust.

 

[Elixuh]

I agree with the jist of what you're saying in that we should focus on long term development. I think there is however a fine line to be struck with how many kids you play (barring necessity). I don't think there's any point playing all of the outliers of the list (those who are set to retire and aren't part of the core frame and those who are to be delisted). So an example of those outliers might be Goose (retire) and Polks (delist).

 

[jjami15]

Just want to say thanks for a thorough analysis of what the next few years could look like. A lot of effort.

 

[lukiuslion]

Yep - I'd love to find a middle ground too, I hope this can turn into a discussion about our plan

 

[Crawb]

I just want 'that' group to be half successful. Eg - make the finals two years a in a tow/make the top 4 once.

We've played in 1 finals series in the last decade...

 

[AFLQLD]

I think the analysis is fairly sound. Games do have to get into young players and it will hurt sometimes as a result.

Already I think some of the very young guys are understanding what is required. We do have enough good players in general. Forwards remain a concern but I think we may be seeing the start of a renaissance of our defenders with Cutler, Gardiner, Clarke, Harwood etc all likely to add some stability and counter-attack as they get experience.

It is easy to forget that Simon Black alone had as much experience as about half the team we put on the park last night. In fact, without checking, Browny was probably similar.

The play-the-kids mantra is not the be all and end all. We still have to put our best team on the field. But every game into a young guy now may pay off in two or three years time in a way that will make us forget the current pain fairly quickly.

If there were encouraging signs now, just give it time. This is nearly the part of the cycle you will look back on with a lot more fondness in the future. The improvements will come, slowly at first, then faster and stronger. The journey is worth enjoying. To say you were there supporting these young guys in their first games and watched them rise to the top - that is the best part of it. The band wagoners will begin arriving in a year or so but we will all have this greater satisfaction - watching the team rise from the bottom to the top.

 

[lukiuslion]

Yeah I probley steered the convo too much in the way of discussing playing the kids, it could have as easily been titled "potential premiership" core - after taking a look at the next few years I actually got excited.. 7 years ago the 'growing core' lacked a fair bit of talent. That is not the case now, there is the makings of a finals team there, we just need to keep them together. This little exercise will make me feel better about the prospect of only winning 3-4 games this year.

 

[lukiuslion]

If you compare it to now, it looks a lot more attractive -

Older heads

McGrath
Brown
Maloney
Maguire
Staker

Core prime

Adcock
Patful
Raines
Mcguane

Verging on core/ prime (experience, size etc)

Hanley
Rich
Zorko
Redden
Luey
West
Polks

Young players

Mayes
Hardwood
Beams
Lester
Golby
Lisle
paperone

Then the draftees all looking good -

No wonder we are struggling. I understand rocky and rich are core players but not core in they haven't hit that 150-200 game mark. They are still young

 

[Yesterday]

I was pleased to see that Lisle wasn't on the list...

 

[Balony_pony16]

Polkinghorne would be delisted not retired

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[Balony_pony16]

On drafting we need fast mids and tall forwards

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

 

[a mayes ing]

On drafting we need fast mids and tall forwards

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

yep, we are set for inside and outside mids. Possible could also have another small hbf. We are lacking in some genuine pace, we need a riouli.

 

[Nunez]

I actually love the pace Zorko, Aish and Taylor will bring.

 

[a mayes ing]

I actually love the pace Zorko, Aish and Taylor will bring.

aish isnt fast. taylor and zorko and green have good pace but they dont really break the lines that hanley can.

 

[Hank Scorpion]

Good analysis.

Playing kids is important to an extent. We still need to remain competitive, but pumping games into our recent draftees should be done where reasonably possible.

I feel that getting a core of 10 or so players is vital to our success. IIRC, there was a high number of Cats' players in their GF teams that had played >50 games together. Getting a similar core of Rich, Rockliff, Redden, Zorko, Hanley, Mayes etc., as you've alluded to will be crucial.


KPPs definitely a concern. From what I've heard this draft has plenty to choose from so hopefully we can bag a KPF there, have one of Close or Freeman develop well, and make something out of a recycled player (McGuane or someone else traded in later).

 

[scott_the_man]

If we can keep our players, and find a good key forward, we will be a force in 2017

 

[lukiuslion]

That was my biggest concern, we have been drafting and trading for talls for the last couple of years, but our developing senior core does not look to have one KP talent, forward or back, the two tiers under that are also thin with question marks over Paine, lisle, close etc.. I remember Leppa on SEN the night he got the job saying he and the coaches were doing in depth list analysis and he kept mentioning a big problem with our list and talls over the next few years, obviously we were all aware of this but gee - we need to trade for a couple of proven talls ASAP.. Clearly this is a big concern.

Looking at this it is essential we build around this core and a plan for 2017-20, Kerr has put together a good wave of talent, we need to capitalize and not let it dissolve to nothing again. Not saying that means we have to send 14 kids to the slaughter each week for the next 2 years, just that planning, coaching and drafting needs to be centered around this group, not stop gap measures or the like (IMO)

 

[BigEasyPeasy]

I find the whole notion of 'looking to the future' and 'premiership windows' a really interesting concept. Wiser people than I could correct me but I tend to think this is something unique to AFL, potentially due to the nature of the draft and limited free agency. I don't want to turn this into a thesis (plenty of people have previously outlined their thoughts on 'playing the kids' versus fielding a more experienced side) but looking more generally across the entire competition, I reckon one could justifiably say that the league suffers because of it. I get that teams want to try and bring through a group of players together, and peak at a particular time (the 'premiership clock'), but I feel the cyclical nature only increases the divide between teams at the top and teams at the bottom at any given time. From a supporters perspective, that just ain't cool. If you look at the NRL, any team could legitimately beat any other team on their day. I'm not sure we could say that atm in the AFL.

Of course the opposite extreme is in the EPL or the Spanish Primera Liga. Want to win? Buy the best players.

I guess the school of thought here is 'we might be really poor for a while, but hopefully this group of players will eventually peak at such a height that we will challenge for the flag'.

Case in point: Everyone knows how young our team was against Richmond. Yes I realise injuries have hurt us and we would not normally field so many rookies, however were there 10 better players in the VFL that could play in our youngsters positions? Probably. Why aren't they in the AFL system? Could be several reasons, age, 'potential', commitment issues etc. Would they make Brisbane an improved side RIGHT NOW? Probably. Will they help us win a premiership more than the youngsters? Probably Not. Could our game have been closer than it was with them in? Potentially. Would the neutrals prefer that? Yep.

Devil's advocate: Why aren't more youngsters made to play in lower, senior tiers before they're drafted? Won't it improve the average performance of teams toward the bottom of the ladder?

I tend to think that some young players develop 'better' in the AFL itself and that is what makes the elite teams so good. But what do you think?

 

[lukiuslion]

I find the whole notion of 'looking to the future' and 'premiership windows' a really interesting concept. Wiser people than I could correct me but I tend to think this is something unique to AFL, potentially due to the nature of the draft and limited free agency. I don't want to turn this into a thesis (plenty of people have previously outlined their thoughts on 'playing the kids' versus fielding a more experienced side) but looking more generally across the entire competition, I reckon one could justifiably say that the league suffers because of it. I get that teams want to try and bring through a group of players together, and peak at a particular time (the 'premiership clock'), but I feel the cyclical nature only increases the divide between teams at the top and teams at the bottom at any given time. From a supporters perspective, that just ain't cool. If you look at the NRL, any team could legitimately beat any other team on their day. I'm not sure we could say that atm in the AFL.

Of course the opposite extreme is in the EPL or the Spanish Primera Liga. Want to win? Buy the best players.

I guess the school of thought here is 'we might be really poor for a while, but hopefully this group of players will eventually peak at such a height that we will challenge for the flag'.

Case in point: Everyone knows how young our team was against Richmond. Yes I realise injuries have hurt us and we would not normally field so many rookies, however were there 10 better players in the VFL that could play in our youngsters positions? Probably. Why aren't they in the AFL system? Could be several reasons, age, 'potential', commitment issues etc. Would they make Brisbane an improved side RIGHT NOW? Probably. Will they help us win a premiership more than the youngsters? Probably Not. Could our game have been closer than it was with them in? Potentially. Would the neutrals prefer that? Yep.

Devil's advocate: Why aren't more youngsters made to play in lower, senior tiers before they're drafted? Won't it improve the average performance of teams toward the bottom of the ladder?

I tend to think that some young players develop 'better' in the AFL itself and that is what makes the elite teams so good. But what do you think?

This is a very interesting post, in the NBA you have to be drafted from collage now, so your career starts at 22 - Lebron James was the last guy drafted out of high school and it is for this reason exactly. Not sure the reason for this.. My guess is we don't have a uniformed national unders league in each state.. Maybe the TAC cup could be set to have people graduating for draft eligibility at 21? The advent of mature aged recruiting lends to your post, I
Personally love when we bring guys in at 23 lol

 

[lukiuslion]

Essentially we need a senior core, we haven't had one since the premiership era.. And Kerr saying "things are in place to make a competitive list" makes more sense, he did in effect set us up to have a good senior core in 3 years time.

As mentioned above 'retention' is absolutely key to our success, we can't continue to have each tier ravaged each off season, you add yeo, doc, longer into my initial post and things actually look even better..

 

[SizeMatters]

I think we are still 1 classy fast mid of a premiership midfield. Someone like a Wells/Bennell/Hill etc. Doesn't have to be as talented as those mentioned but someone who the opposition need to worry about when ever there is some space that they can run into. We are lacking a genuine line breaking outside mid.

 

[Viceregal]

If we can keep our players, and find a good key forward, we will be a force in 2017

Every time I read one of your posts your avatar catches my (peripheral) eye and I initially read it as coming from a Carlton supporter visiting our board's perspective

 

[dlanod]

Every time I read one of your posts your avatar catches my (peripheral) eye and I initially read it as coming from a Carlton supporter visiting our board's perspective

I must say I'm the same.

 

[lukiuslion]

This thread never got any love, but things already look even stronger now, I could almost go over it and make even more predictions. Funnily enough, Martin didnt even rate a mention for me in April. Funny game football.

 

[Nunez]

I loved this post when it was originally done, and as you said Lukiusmacsimus it is a funny game. Our list looks stronger now than it did when it was originally posted due to our big bodied Rover (Martin ).

If we can add someone like Beams to our list and draft well, I see one hell of a spine developing and a genuine top 4 team. I won't be shocked (assuming we avoid injuries next year) if we finish with over 10 wins. I absolutely love how much this group plays for each other. Including Aish the anti-smiler