Recruiting List Development 2017 - How do we develop our list?

[Killer_Mike]

Ah right yep, probably all the more reason to keep McKernan on the rookie list if we already are going to have 2 spots available.



I think if we're looking at the development of our list, delistings is a part of that. I want to see Morgan succeed and while there may have been some improvement, improvement from 2/10 to 3/10 is still not gonna cut it. However he is still young and yet to be able to string a pre-season and season together so I think the thing in his favor would be a large amount of perceived room for improvement if he can get his body right for an extended period.
Because of this in order to develop our list I would prefer to see us look at delisting the likes of Bird, (who is a good bit older) and Jerrett (who has had the opportunity to show more development) before him.

It is possible they may retain McKernan as insurance but personally I don't see the value in it.

I like the old formula of picking players that have upside and developing them rather than pouring resources into a player that is already at his optimum development and is only retained as insurance.

Using Adelaide as an example these are some of their rookie listed players that are now regulars in the firsts;
-Kyle Hartigan
-Rory Laird
-Charlie Cameron
-Josh Jenkins

We also have a very good record of developing players off the rookie draft.

I would retain Bird on the list above a few others as I think he still has something to offer.

 

[BrunoV]

It is possible they may retain McKernan as insurance but personally I don't see the value in it.

I like the old formula of picking players that have upside and developing them rather than pouring resources into a player that is already at his optimum development and is only retained as insurance.

Using Adelaide as an example these are some of their rookie listed players that are now regulars in the firsts;
-Kyle Hartigan
-Rory Laird
-Charlie Cameron
-Josh Jenkins

We also have a very good record of developing players off the rookie draft.

I would retain Bird on the list above a few others as I think he still has something to offer.

McKernan appears to be playing as a KPF at VFL level and it's about time.

Kicking two or three each week and being able to provide a contest is potentially useful depth because that's something that is always of value in the AFL.

In my view Bird was found out last years as almost being Howlett light (but a smarter player). He's a small inside midfielder whose best asset is tackling. He struggles big time to do anything with the ball when in congestion.

 

[Killer_Mike]

McKernan appears to be playing as a KPF at VFL level and it's about time.

Kicking two or three each week and being able to provide a contest is potentially useful depth because that's something that is always of value in the AFL.

In my view Bird was found out last years as almost being Howlett light (but a smarter player). He's a small inside midfielder whose best asset is tackling. He struggles big time to do anything with the ball when in congestion.

I agree about McKernans ability to create a contest. He's a competitive beast but I still believe he is an undersized ruck and not a forward.

Forwards today have to have a very good understanding of game plans and also an ability to read the play and I don't think he displays any of those attributes.

Although top line midfielders are more valuable today than ever before a great KF can still be an asset that separates you from the pack. My question is if he is going to be developed as a key forward which I personally is more of convenience at the moment (because Sam Draper is getting a go in the ruck) then how much upside does he have? I think Stewart has already gone past him and he is 4 years younger and then their is Francis who I believe is a forward.

 

[Jivin Jackel]

Not having a go at you but what makes you say our age demographic is not good?

My personal belief is its in great shape and developing towards our peak in approximately three years.

Here is my break down of the list. Some people will say I'm harsh or too easy on some players I'm sure.

The core group of players will be lead by Heppell and Zac Merrett in 2020.

We have quite a lot of players who show potential but that doesn't mean they will become AFL standard players in 3 years time. We have a lot of players currently close to or over 30 who won't be there. We don't have a strong core of players IMO in the age bracket of 21-25 on the list who will be the key to our side in 2020, in particular key position players. Hooker will be over 30 and even thought I think/hope he will still be a good player for us in 2020, being over 31 you can't guarantee it. Even Francis who I think will be a good player for us in the future can't be guaranteed, fitness and injuries can destroy the most promising players. It will be interesting to see what the club will do in the next year or two in regards to finding a ruckman.

 

[eth-dog]

Dea and Leuenberger have contracts for next year so won't be delisted. I seriously doubt Brown will be as well despite approaching whipping boy status.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

2020

 

[DERO]

Here is my break down of the list. Some people will say I'm harsh or too easy on some players I'm sure.

The core group of players will be lead by Heppell and Zac Merrett in 2020.

We have quite a lot of players who show potential but that doesn't mean they will become AFL standard players in 3 years time. We have a lot of players currently close to or over 30 who won't be there. We don't have a strong core of players IMO in the age bracket of 21-25 on the list who will be the key to our side in 2020, in particular key position players. Hooker will be over 30 and even thought I think/hope he will still be a good player for us in 2020, being over 31 you can't guarantee it. Even Francis who I think will be a good player for us in the future can't be guaranteed, fitness and injuries can destroy the most promising players. It will be interesting to see what the club will do in the next year or two in regards to finding a ruckman.

View attachment 366306 View attachment 366307 View attachment 366308

I have just worked out that I am colourblind.

 

[Jivin Jackel]

Dea and Leuenberger have contracts for next year so won't be delisted. I seriously doubt Brown will be as well despite approaching whipping boy status.

As fodzilla said I was talking about 2020. I think Brown is a fringe player and would be surprised if he was still playing for us in 2020.

 

[tesla1962]

It's interesting looking at who we might be de-listing at the end of the year.
OOC: (correct me if I'm wrong with the contract statuses)
Those I think we'll most likely look to re-sign (in order of age only)
Goddard
Baguley
Zaharakis
Brown
Ambrose
Green
Daniher
McKenna
Parish

Those with question marks:
Kelly - Does he go on? ( currently 33)
Watson - Does he go on? (32)

Stanton - Does he go on? (31)
Hocking - Isn't showing enough at his age for mine and seems too slow (29)

Howlett - Depth player (28)
Bird - Depth player (28)



Jerrett - Not showing enough (24)

Morgan - Hasn't shown much but has been plagued by injuries and is young so we might look to give him another chance (21)

Assuming we want to free up at least 3 spots - possibly more, especially if McNeice shows enough to be upgraded - who goes?
Will obviously depend if Kelly and Watson want to/can go on and whether we want them to. I'm not giving up on them just yet though.
If they stay then do we look at Bird, Jerrett, Hocking?

I expect Stanton, Hocking, Kelly and Jerrett will be gone
Howlett won't be far behind along with Baguely, who looks likely to be replaced by McNiece

 

[Killer_Mike]

Here is my break down of the list. Some people will say I'm harsh or too easy on some players I'm sure.

The core group of players will be lead by Heppell and Zac Merrett in 2020.

We have quite a lot of players who show potential but that doesn't mean they will become AFL standard players in 3 years time. We have a lot of players currently close to or over 30 who won't be there. We don't have a strong core of players IMO in the age bracket of 21-25 on the list who will be the key to our side in 2020, in particular key position players. Hooker will be over 30 and even thought I think/hope he will still be a good player for us in 2020, being over 31 you can't guarantee it. Even Francis who I think will be a good player for us in the future can't be guaranteed, fitness and injuries can destroy the most promising players. It will be interesting to see what the club will do in the next year or two in regards to finding a ruckman.

View attachment 366306 View attachment 366307 View attachment 366308

I think your assessment of where the list is at is pretty much spot on but I'm probably more optimistic of the quality of those players. Rather than discuss the quality of the players though which is admittedly the probably most important factor of building a successful team, its not the only factor!

These are some that I believe are integral to building a premiership team and I feel have been addressed over the last five years:

(a) Recruitment and List strategy.

I believe we are finally learning our lesson and are building through youth and not getting in short term fixes. For varying reasons James got in quite a few of these players and they have unfortunately had a negative effect on our list demographic. We have fortunately got most of those players off our list and have hit the draft hard over the last few years with the intentions of building a list of similar age demographic. With luck this should mean we have a sustained time at our peak and give ourselves every opportunity to win one or more premierships.

(b) Player Development

This to me is where over the last few years we are set ourselves up to really succeed. We now how have the equal or if not best facilities in the country with two ovals with the same dimensions as the grounds we play on predominately. This allows us the opportunity to work on different strategies and set ups to match the grounds and also for different opponents.

The other thing that we take for granted is that we now field a stand alone team in the VFL. This obviously gives us total control over where we play the kids and how we manage their workloads coming back from injury etc. A great example is how we have the flexibility to put Langford in midfield rather than HF and give him the opportunity to work on the things that will improve his game at senior level.

(c) Physical development and Medical department

Another factor which I have seen significant inroads in and our Medical team lead by High Performance Manager Justin Crow. I'm not sure if you have heard this guy speak on Bomber Radio but he is impressive. I think the improvement in keeping players on the ground speaks for itself and I believe this provides us with great opportunities. With some luck the days of our youth (Myers, Gumby, Dempsey etc.) breaking down and losing out on critical development years is a thing of the past and they can be working on skills and conditioning rather than rehab. A good example from this year I have noticed is that in some games our kids like Parish have only played 60-70% game time! It's a subtle change but one that may prevent them from doing a hamstring in the last 5 minutes of the game and being out for 3-4 weeks.

(d) Game plan

It's the hardest one to quantify because it's something that constantly evolves. We probably aren't going to know the end result of this for a couple of years. One thing I think most of us can agree on though is, that when we are playing well, its an attractive brand of football, and one that on its day could beat anyone. It is as I say a couple years away from being fully developed so will require patience as we have mostly young men trying to learn it with a senior core that have mostly been out of the game for a year or more. As the senior core leave and the young leaders take over(in my opinion the kids are the leaders now!) we hopefully have an end product that is not only good to watch, but also something that will stand up in finals.


I am clearly more optimistic than some on here but at the very least it's hard to argue that we have seen some significant changes develop from what has been the worse period in the clubs history.

 

[citizen-erased]

2020 team:
Gleeson Hartley Ambrose
Ridley Hurley ###
McGrath Heppell Merrett
Langford Daniher Colyer
Fantasia $$$ Tippa
*** Laverde ^^^
Parish Francis Begley Mutch
E: Clarke Stewart Zaka

*Ruck - We need someone who fits our game style and doesn't lumber around the ground. i.e. Ryder type.
#HBF - For all the HBF's we've recruited, the loss of Hibberd's rebound is yet to be covered. Would like a cheap, but AFL ready, recruit like Luke Brown/Harrison Wigg to cover this spot. The fact Ridley is yet to play AFL doesn't help our stocks either.
$FF - Hooker will 32 in 2020. Probably not ideal to be our primary deep forward.
^Clearance mid - Laverde looks like our sole option under 25 in this spot and should become a recruiting priority now we have some of the smaller, classier players covered. Maybe Francis and Begley give us options the way Bont & Stringer do the Dogs, we can have this covered. And Laverde is still an unknown in this position. A Hopper/Oliver type or 2 here

I have zero idea whats coming through the draft this year (haven't paid attention as ill miss a good chunk of the TAC)
Any keen draft watchers got ideas yet on who can fill the voids.

 

[eth-dog]

No McKenna?

 

[Killer_Mike]

No McKenna?

I would have McKenna over Gleeson personally.

 

[Jivin Jackel]

Losing players like Carlisle, Hibberd and Ryder and not having access to early draft picks has put us back.

I don't think the club went too overboard with mature players and the has invested in youth. Cooney was probably the only player we gave up a half decent pick for that I can think of off the top of my head since Mark Williams.

Our list strategy will surely have to be bring in some rookie talls and another mature ruckman. I actually liked what we had done with the list up until the drug saga. We had a lot of young talls (Ryder, Hurley, Pears, Hooker, Bellchambers, Carlisle, Darcy Danniher) which take longer to develop (Also knowing not all would make it) and then tried to bring in midfielders later to complement them (Heppell, Zaka, Melksham, Colyer) which in theory should be easier to find. I always like that idea because I thought the players would have peaked at the similar time.

 

[Killer_Mike]

Losing players like Carlisle, Hibberd and Ryder and not having access to early draft picks has put us back.

I don't think the club went too overboard with mature players and the has invested in youth. Cooney was probably the only player we gave up a half decent pick for that I can think of off the top of my head since Mark Williams.

Our list strategy will surely have to be bring in some rookie talls and another mature ruckman. I actually liked what we had done with the list up until the drug saga. We had a lot of young talls (Ryder, Hurley, Pears, Hooker, Bellchambers, Carlisle, Darcy Danniher) which take longer to develop (Also knowing not all would make it) and then tried to bring in midfielders later to complement them (Heppell, Zaka, Melksham, Colyer) which in theory should be easier to find. I always like that idea because I thought the players would have peaked at the similar time.

I personally believe its more of a midfielders game now and a good midfield come make the talls look better.

Having said that I believe talls of Hurley, Joe, Hartley, Ambrose, Stewart and Francis is still an AFL quality unit. With Draper developing and also Ridley, Langford and Laverde as those medium sized players that you can rotate through forward and back I dont think its an issue. Ruck is probably the biggest issue but you can trade for them.

 

[Lore]

This is interesting. Good thread, Killer_Mike

As far as list management, in the third tab of last year's spreadsheet there's a bunch of player stats, including how many games each player played at AFL level as a percentage of all AFL and VFL games played during the AFL season (rookies are only counted while they are upgraded). I struck off players that were delisted/retired/traded as we went, and updated the contracts when new ones were signed. All stats are up to date as of the end of last year, except ages which are linked to a formula (so they're always current).


I'm doing a similar thing in the 2017 spreadsheet, but it has 2017 and 2016 games played percentages. Both are sorted by 2017 percentage, then contract length, then age, then 2016 percentage.

There is clearly a correlation there between players being delisted and playing less than half of their available games, although first years (blue) and suspended players (pink) were obviously exempt from that. That might seem obvious, but clearly unnecessary depth players that aren't likely to force their way into the senior side are being turned over in favour of drafting more youth and bringing in depth players in areas that we're struggling.

There was a list squeeze last year, trying to upgrade Walla and McKenna, put Dea and Kelly on the regular list and still have room to bring in kids, (hence McKernan and Eades being delisted and rookied) so that might have had something to do with it, but having said that I would expect a similar philosophy to be used when looking to turn over the list again this year. It's still early days and it'll become more apparent in a few more rounds, but if you're near the bottom of that list and you don't have a contract, watch out.


p.s. If the spreadsheets load as a bunch of question marks or with the text missing from a bunch of cells (like they've been aligned underneath something else) then just refresh it and it should load properly. Google spreadsheets are being pieces of shit lately.

 

[Killer_Mike]

This is interesting. Good thread, Killer_Mike

As far as list management, in the third tab of last year's spreadsheet there's a bunch of player stats, including how many games each player played at AFL level as a percentage of all AFL and VFL games played during the AFL season (rookies are only counted while they are upgraded). I struck off players that were delisted/retired/traded as we went, and updated the contracts when new ones were signed. All stats are up to date as of the end of last year, except ages which are linked to a formula (so they're always current).


I'm doing a similar thing in the 2017 spreadsheet, but it has 2017 and 2016 games played percentages. Both are sorted by 2017 percentage, then contract length, then age, then 2016 percentage.

There is clearly a correlation there between players being delisted and playing less than half of their available games, although first years (blue) and suspended players (pink) were obviously exempt from that. That might seem obvious, but clearly unnecessary depth players that aren't likely to force their way into the senior side are being turned over in favour of drafting more youth and bringing in depth players in areas that we're struggling.

There was a list squeeze last year, trying to upgrade Walla and McKenna, put Dea and Kelly on the regular list and still have room to bring in kids, (hence McKernan and Eades being delisted and rookied) so that might have had something to do with it, but having said that I would expect a similar philosophy to be used when looking to turn over the list again this year. It's still early days and it'll become more apparent in a few more rounds, but if you're near the bottom of that list and you don't have a contract, watch out.


p.s. If the spreadsheets load as a bunch of question marks or with the text missing from a bunch of cells (like they've been aligned underneath something else) then just refresh it and it should load properly. Google spreadsheets are being pieces of shit lately.

I'm not at all surprised with the data that you are suggesting.

Gone are the days that you keep persisting with players like Myers who aren't delivering dividends on your investment.

We have been very slow on the uptake on that I believe and I think the direction has certainly changed in recent times.

This chart clearly indicates how ruthless we have been.

LIST CHANGES SINCE 2013
CLUB TOTAL
Carlton 51
Brisbane Lions 48
Essendon 43
Melbourne 41
Geelong 41
Collingwood 40
Gold Coast 38
Greater Western Sydney 36
Sydney 35
West Coast 34
St Kilda 34
Richmond 33
Hawthorn 33
Adelaide 33
Port Adelaide 31
Western Bulldogs 31
Fremantle 31
North Melbourne 31

As we identify more talent you would expect that to slow down of course but we still have some on our list that are clearly not part of our future plans.

 

[citizen-erased]

No McKenna?

Giving McKenna time before i decide he will make it or not
I like the glimpses i see when he uses pace and agility to break the lines.
Given his physical attributes, he would be the ideal HBF player if he can reach AFL output consistently.

I would still like us to draft in this spot in case he or Gleeson don't pan out.

 

[Killer_Mike]

This article summarizes it very well.
It is critical that you get those draft picks right when you are down the bottom or otherwise you can have a prolonged time down the bottom as Carlton, Melbourne and we have to a certain extent.
I'm comfortable that we are heading in the right direction and with two more drafts I believe we will have the depth required to really challenge.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport...t/news-story/d750726ec98045cdbb88f84fa9d2fe23

The Western Bulldogs have enjoyed the fruits of team stability, says Chris McDermott. Picture: Adam Trafford (AFL Media/Getty Images)
Chris McDermott
Success in the AFL is built from a stable base, says Chris McDermott
Chris McDermott, The Advertiser
April 15, 2017 6:30pm
Subscriber only
UNCONTRACTED players are suddenly a hot issue for several clubs as we head into only Round 4 of the 2017 season.

Under free agency, player movement is more fluid than ever. But it makes sense that stability breeds success, and a glimpse at each club’s recent player turnover returns an interesting snapshot of the competition.

It comes as little surprise that Carlton has made 51 changes to its playing list since 2013, as it juggles the players and their salaries looking for its next premiership contender. It still looks to be a long way off.

The Blues and Brisbane have been, by far, the two most unstable clubs on-field in the past five years and it is no coincidence both are stuck at the bottom end of the ladder.

Carlton has slumped from eighth place in 2013 to finish 13th, 18th and 14th in the last three seasons.

Brisbane has fared a little worse, finishing 12th in 2013 then 15th, 17th and 17th.

Essendon is excused, given the supplement saga that decimated them. Others are not.

Melbourne has been chasing its tail, but it is finally on the right track.

Geelong’s recent clean-out of its decorated senior group has escalated the number of players turned over and it doesn’t appear to be over yet.

The Gold Coast and Greater Western Sydney have had a relatively high turnover due to their newness. But the Giants have stabilised and their climb up the ladder is well and truly underway.

Gold Coast has committed several other sins and its future is in the lap of the football gods.

The other end of the table similarly endorses the theory.

The Western Bulldogs have got it right, player turnover is minimal and the premiership has come.

Matt Wright ... one of those entering through the rotating door at Carlton. Picture: Colleen Petch.
Hawthorn is the blueprint. Three premierships from four grand finals in the past five years. They got it right.

North Melbourne has been on the cusp for a few years now but appears to be on the slide.

Fremantle is the same and, while a minor premiership came, the ultimate prize has eluded it. A rebuild there is also underway.

Port Adelaide is the other club that has done it well but may also has just missed the boat. It is not over at Alberton but the Power must strike soon.

The Crows are in a similar boat and their window is open now. Keeping their list fit and healthy is the challenge.

Their recruiting and building of their list has been outstanding but the injuries they avoided in 2016 appear to be hitting them this year.

Depth will be a problem if the injury count continues to climb.

The player turnover table tells a very clear picture. The team that stays together, plays well together.

All five premiership teams and all grand finalists in the past four seasons have turned over 35 players or fewer.

The table must also tell the Crows and the Power something. Adelaide has just 29 AFL-ready players on its list. They have used 24 so far this year after just 29 in 2016.

They are vulnerable in the big-man department and any injury will hurt.

They have survived Josh Jenkins’ absence for the moment but with Mitch McGovern also missing, another challenge presents. Sam Jacobs must stay sound.

The Power has 32 players ready to go and is already up to player 25 this year.

Its defence is suddenly brittle and its lack of height is a major concern. Jackson Trengove will hold the key to its success. Time will tell.

List changes since 2013
1 Carlton 51

2 Brisbane 48

3 Essendon 43

4 Melbourne, Geelong 41

6 Collingwood 40

7 Gold Coast 38

8 GWS 36

9 Sydney 35

10 West Coast, St Kilda 34

12 Adelaide, Hawthorn, Richmond 33

15 Port Adelaide, Fremantle, North Melbourne Western Bulldogs 31

 

[Lore]

I'm not at all surprised with the data that you are suggesting.

Gone are the days that you keep persisting with players like Myers who aren't delivering dividends on your investment.

We have been very slow on the uptake on that I believe and I think the direction has certainly changed in recent times.

This chart clearly indicates how ruthless we have been.

LIST CHANGES SINCE 2013
CLUB TOTAL
Carlton 51
Brisbane Lions 48
Essendon 43
Melbourne 41
Geelong 41
Collingwood 40
Gold Coast 38
Greater Western Sydney 36
Sydney 35
West Coast 34
St Kilda 34
Richmond 33
Hawthorn 33
Adelaide 33
Port Adelaide 31
Western Bulldogs 31
Fremantle 31
North Melbourne 31

As we identify more talent you would expect that to slow down of course but we still have some on our list that are clearly not part of our future plans.

Yeah. Lots of changes in the last two years in particular, following the sanctions we had a bit of dead wood to clear out (given turnover was inevitably difficult when you can't bring in many quality new players). It's a bit inflated with the top-up players though, like that's 8 players that we've brought in and then lost after a year.

 

[Zach Package]

As an experienced coach it's easy to identify Worsfold's go to brand of footy and in turn the types of players he needs around him for it to be successful, and if you look at our list and try to marry the two together you'll see that they're still a ways apart.

It's probably going to take two more years of Worsfold saying 'we need X, Y and Z' and for Dodoro to move heaven and earth to try and get him those players for the whole thing to start working.

Dogs were fortunate because they in essence got the coach who's philosophy fit the group they already had down to the ground, but these things take time.

 

[yaco55]

Which 8, out of curiosity? I'd say only Jackson Merrett and Craig Bird would be ahead as delisting candidates.

Kelly, Stanton, Hocking and Watson retire - J.Merrett and Bird delisted - Howlett is shaky - That's already 7 players - I'd be inclined to give Morgan another year if he develops more this year.

 

[Ambrosia]

Kelly, Stanton, Hocking and Watson retire - J.Merrett and Bird delisted - Howlett is shaky - That's already 7 players - I'd be inclined to give Morgan another year if he develops more this year.

Hocking won't retire and if we were only keeping one of Bird, Howlett and Hocking as midfield depth its Hocking every time IMO.

 

[Killer_Mike]

Hocking won't retire and if we were only keeping one of Bird, Howlett and Hocking as midfield depth its Hocking every time IMO.

Out of curiosity what makes you think Hocking wont retire?

If he only plays two or three games this year I cant see them keeping him.

Next year with further development in the young guys midfield roles are going to be impossible for him to get and I don't think he can play anywhere else.

It's even less likely that he will be kept on as depth or as a mentor for the young guys because list turnover is critical in today's footy and he would be essentially taking the spot of a young guy that has potential.

 

[BrunoV]

As an experienced coach it's easy to identify Worsfold's go to brand of footy and in turn the types of players he needs around him for it to be successful, and if you look at our list and try to marry the two together you'll see that they're still a ways apart.

It's probably going to take two more years of Worsfold saying 'we need X, Y and Z' and for Dodoro to move heaven and earth to try and get him those players for the whole thing to start working.

Dogs were fortunate because they in essence got the coach who's philosophy fit the group they already had down to the ground, but these things take time.

I had not thought about it like this and I think it helps to explain why trying to get a read on where things will end up by round 22 is getting harder by the week.

It might also explain why Worsfold has been coy when asked about finals and why he has refused to talk about anything other than the sort of side we want to be.

As it stands, we're looking at 10 list changes at the end of the year. Not a bad thing but it is surprising.

Someone mentioned a potential disconnect between Worsfold and list management and it's not an unfair observation, though I suspect that the "disconnect" is really between the post supplements saga PR campaign and the footy department.