List Mgmt. Luke Jackson - Yay or Nay?

[theGav56]

You guys do realise that being a "reach" doesn't mean he is bad


He was literally a "reach" though, he moved up rankings late because we were picking a forward, that's how it works


I don't know why everyone is taking such offense on this, I'm not saying he is bad

You do know that not buying the idea that a player was a 'reach' has nothing to do with thinking they are either good or bad?

 

[freo_leo29]

You do know that not buying the idea that a player was a 'reach' has nothing to do with thinking they are either good or bad?

People are getting offended because they think I'm saying he is bad


I actually think it was a good reach in the end


Doesn't change the fact that he was a reach


As we got closer to the draft, the analysts were clued in that we were taking a forward and started accounting for that in their rankings, even still a couple weeks out there were murmurs we would go for JVR

 

[King Huskii]

You guys do realise that being a "reach" doesn't mean he is bad


He was literally a "reach" though, he moved up rankings late because we were picking a forward, that's how it works


I don't know why everyone is taking such offense on this, I'm not saying he is bad

I'm not suggesting you are calling him a bad choice. He dominated the goal kicking at colts and was the most accurate shot at goal accross the under 18s.

 

[theGav56]

People are getting offended because they think I'm saying he is bad


I actually think it was a good reach in the end


Doesn't change the fact that he was a reach


As we got closer to the draft, the analysts were clued in that we were taking a forward and started accounting for that in their rankings, even still a couple weeks out there were murmurs we would go for JVR

I don't think anyone is offended. I think they are disagreeing with your idea that he was a reach.

You seem offended by that (and here talk about it as a 'fact' but offer no evidence, and now talk about sourceless 'murmurs).

Every year media analysts are shown to be wrong. The media has a different agenda to recruiters.

 

[Taylor]

Every year analysts are shown to be wrong.

The same ones who don't hold a paid position at the places getting all the benefit of a correct choice and all the risk of a bad one.

Again, with the greatest respect, it's like taking key forward coaching advice from a pool of players who exclude all the AFL level key forwards.

 

[freo_leo29]

I don't think anyone is offended. I think they are disagreeing with your idea that he was a reach.

You seem offended by that (and here talk about it as a 'fact' but offer no evidence, and now talk about sourceless 'murmurs).

Every year media analysts are shown to be wrong. The media has a different agenda to recruiters.

The evidence was in the lead up to the draft last year, anyone who was around at the time would know

 

[theGav56]

The evidence was in the lead up to the draft last year, anyone who was around at the time would know

Some people who listened to trade radio. Ok then.

 

[Docker82]

Personally I was saying Amiss was top five talent this time last year.

If he didn’t need to put on kgs that’s exactly what would’ve happened. It’s literally the only reasonable justification why he didn’t go top five. It’s probably fair enough tbh as he may never put on that weight but I cannot agree he was a reach at all.

Everything else about him is elite. Has great skills, is a very good athlete and is a very smart footballer. Those three qualities together rarely make it out of the top 10 on draft night unless said player is a midget.

 

[King Huskii]

Personally I was saying Amiss was top five talent this time last year.

If he didn’t need to put on kgs that’s exactly what would’ve happened. It’s literally the only reasonable justification why he didn’t go top five. It’s probably fair enough tbh as he may never put on that weight but I cannot agree he was a reach at all.

Everything else about him is elite. Has great skills, is a very good athlete and is a very smart footballer. Those three qualities together rarely make it out of the top 10 on draft night unless said player is a midget.

Some players are lean because they are tall. He's a tall young lad who will fill out in the next few years.

I like him as a pyre forward in the Josh Kennedy role. As much as I dislike WC I have to acknowledge Kennedy was a class act. This is a big call but Amiss protects to be a similar player if JLO plays him as a pure forward.

I would have hated missing out on him to get Eurasmus instead. Freo have both and I couldn't be happier with that draft.

 

[Docker82]

Some players are lean because they are tall. He's a tall young lady who will fill out in the next few years.

I like him as a pyre forward in the Josh Kennedy role. As much as I dislike WC I have to acknowledge Kennedy was a class act. This is a big call but Amiss protects to be a similar player if JLO plays him as a pure forward.

I would have hated missing out on him to get Eurasmus instead. Freo have both and I couldn't be happier with that draft.

I’m saying that’s why he was available in the first place. On talent he should’ve gone top five.

Some people can put on weight and others can’t. That was the only potential risk with Amiss. If he does put on weight he’ll be a steal. If he doesn’t I’m still comfortable he can perform a decent role at AFL level.

 

[CapitalA]

You guys do realise that being a "reach" doesn't mean he is bad


He was literally a "reach" though, he moved up rankings late because we were picking a forward, that's how it works


I don't know why everyone is taking such offense on this, I'm not saying he is bad

Doesn't change the fact that Richmond would have picked him instead of Gibcus, they need to replace Riewoldt soon and they already have good defenders.

 

[theGav56]

Doesn't change the fact that Richmond would have picked him instead of Gibcus, they need to replace Riewoldt soon and they already have good defenders.

If 2 clubs rate a player around the same mark then that's the definition of not being a 'reach' in my opinion.

 

[Wobbly Punt]

Reach is the most over-used and misunderstood term in draft discussion. Gav56 is spot on and it actually extends a bit even beyond that. According to the guys who make a living and get assessed on it, if you've identified a player or a need and you know he won't be there before your pick in the next round (ie other clubs will grab him before your next chance) then it is not a reach. As Gav said, it's not even close to a reach if another club or 2 ranks them around the same pick you do - as was the case with Amiss.

So many define a reach as "he wouldn't have gone in the next few picks, we grabbed him at 5 and he would've been there at 10 so it's a reach" which is just garbage.

The last real reach (I can remember) was Tom Doedee

12

Tom Doedee

Age

27

Ht

190cm

Wt

90kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.1

4star

K

8.5

3star

HB

8.6

5star

M

5.6

5star

T

2.6

4star

MG

228.8

4star

D

15.3

4star

K

9.5

4star

HB

5.8

3star

M

6.3

5star

T

1.3

2star

MG

228.8

3star

D

19.8

5star

K

10.4

4star

HB

9.4

5star

M

6.6

5star

T

1.4

4star

and even that worked out OK for Adelaide. I will have forgotten some I'm sure.

Reaches do exist but at nowhere near the frequency us normies think they do.

To say Amiss was a reach is classic misuse of the term. If we grab Ras before Amiss then Jye may not have even been there 2 picks later let alone at our 2nd round pick which ended up being Johnson. Erasmus was certain to be there when we took him, Amiss was a chance to go the very next pick if we didn't call him. In my uninformed opinion Richmond still take Gibcus so we could have gone Ras then Jye but noone outside the Tigers war room knows for sure.

As soon as they'd decided Amiss was a higher grade than JVR, running the risk of Amiss not being there and knowing for sure Erasmus was going to be would have been a huge stuff-up. I guess they thought JVR might have been there at 23 but couldn't risk both Amiss and JVR going before we pick again at 23.

Even those who preferred JVR (like me ) knew we had to grab Amiss at our first if that's who we preferred. Personally, I let Ras go too and grab JVR with our next pick and we end up with Amiss, JVR and Johnson but I totally understand not doing that because I don't think we believe Johnson lasts to 23. I'll always wonder that if we'd known for sure Johnson was going to last until when we got him and JVR wasn't whether we still grab Ras or go Amiss then JVR. We'll never know.

FWIW I have been told our mate Colon Young had told Johnson (via his MacDougall puppet) he was certain the Eagles were grabbing him with their Chesser pick. Glad they didn't.

 

[theGav56]

Reach is the most over-used and misunderstood term in draft discussion. Gav56 is spot on and it actually extends a bit even beyond that. According to the guys who make a living and get assessed on it, if you've identified a player or a need and you know he won't be there before your pick in the next round (ie other clubs will grab him before your next chance) then it is not a reach. As Gav said, it's not even close to a reach if another club or 2 ranks them around the same pick you do - as was the case with Amiss.

So many define a reach as "he wouldn't have gone in the next few picks, we grabbed him at 5 and he would've been there at 10 so it's a reach" which is just garbage.

The last real reach (I can remember) was Tom Doedee and even that worked out OK for Adelaide. I will have forgotten some I'm sure.

Reaches do exist but at nowhere near the frequency us normies think they do.

To say Amiss was a reach is classic misuse of the term. If we grab Ras before Amiss then Jye may not have even been there 2 picks later let alone at our 2nd round pick which ended up being Johnson. Erasmus was certain to be there when we took him, Amiss was a chance to go the very next pick if we didn't call him. In my uninformed opinion Richmond still take Gibcus so we could have gone Ras then Jye but noone outside the Tigers war room knows for sure.

As soon as they'd decided Amiss was a higher grade than JVR, running the risk of Amiss not being there and knowing for sure Erasmus was going to be would have been a huge stuff-up. I guess they thought JVR might have been there at 23 but couldn't risk both Amiss and JVR going before we pick again at 23.

Even those who preferred JVR (like me ) knew we had to grab Amiss at our first if that's who we preferred. Personally, I let Ras go too and grab JVR with our next pick and we end up with Amiss, JVR and Johnson but I totally understand not doing that because I don't think we believe Johnson lasts to 23. I'll always wonder that if we'd known for sure Johnson was going to last until when we got him and JVR wasn't whether we still grab Ras or go Amiss then JVR. We'll never know.

FWIW I have been told our mate Colon Young had told Johnson (via his MacDougall puppet) he was certain the Eagles were grabbing him with their Chesser pick. Glad they didn't.

Draft day tactics certainly come into play. We saw that clearly when we grabbed Haselby and Pavlich, and again with Polak.

Without knowing, we may have considered taking Amiss and JVR but when Erasmus was still there went in another direction. Love to know.

Geelong almost routinely seem prone to left field selections, but are shown to be very shrewd in their assessment of players.

 

[Wobbly Punt]

Draft day tactics certainly come into play. We saw that clearly when we grabbed Haselby and Pavlich, and again with Polak.

Without knowing, we may have considered taking Amiss and JVR but when Erasmus was still there went in another direction. Love to know.

Geelong almost routinely seem prone to left field selections, but are shown to be very shrewd in their assessment of players.

Yeah the strategy stuff is fascinating to me. I even enjoyed the little vignette of the Carlton draft room during the Stocker trade/draft. Really interesting. As a guy who spends a lot of time with people about how to think through things and judges them on the logic they used as much as the results they got I was amazed at how poorly thought out their approach was but so intrigued at listening to them bid against themselves. What doesn't surprise me is the fact Silvagni doesn't have a gig anymore. In terms of reasoning and a strong thread in the strategy behind the decisions, he showed in that clip alone in anything strategic, he's the mental equivalent of a chicken trying to get a tennis ball pregnant.

Getting back to us though. What I'd love to know, and what we'll never get close to knowing is if Wallsy had been offered a choice between Amiss, JVR and Johnson in exchange for picks 6, 8 & 23 or the haul we ended up with, which one he'd have taken. Even after the fact I'm not sure which one I prefer.

Anyway, back to the OP - Jackson at the price we paid - it's a Yay from me.

 

[Taylor]

Might be a reverse Stocker trade going on this year on draft day by the way.

 

[Nodgey]

I remember when Melbourne called out Clayton Oliver

13

Clayton Oliver

Age

26

Ht

189cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

27.8

5star

K

9.5

4star

HB

18.4

5star

M

3.2

3star

T

6.3

5star

CL

6.3

5star

D

25.1

5star

K

11.1

4star

HB

14.0

5star

M

3.6

4star

T

5.6

5star

CL

5.9

5star

D

19.2

5star

K

4.6

2star

HB

14.6

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

4.4

5star

CL

3.8

5star

's name in the draft, the commentary team were all abuzz that this was the first selection that came in earlier than expected. Was he therefore a reach at the time? Depends on the experts' draft orders, I guess. And in hindsight it was a cracking selection. My take from all this discussion is that so much of this, of everything actually, is subjective.

 

[Wobbly Punt]

I remember when Melbourne called out Clayton Oliver's name in the draft, the commentary team were all abuzz that this was the first selection that came in earlier than expected. Was he therefore a reach at the time? Depends on the experts' draft orders, I guess. And in hindsight it was a cracking selection. My take from all this discussion is that so much of this, of everything actually, is subjective.

Its the draft "experts" who most often misuse the term "reach" because they are only looking at "rankings" and not taking in to account team lists, draft strategy and the like. Oliver a great example of it.

 

[Joao]

For a "reach" to be a meaningful term, it assumes you have perfect knowledge of the quality of every player in the draft. Otherwise you are just saying you don't rate player X at the pick they were taken. For bigfooty punters this just means you've probably read the DT&FA board and have some combination of DPS, Bangers, Chris, MA etc opinion and they didn't rate them there.

Ergo, WGAF if someone was a "reach"?...

 

[Wobbly Punt]

There is a situation when it matters, at least to me. Thats if "reaching" costs you someone in the draft when you could have had both. I thought we'd done that when we took Ballantyne over Walters with 21 (I think) in their draft year. I wasn't alone there I don't think but then we ended up with Walters and was right back in the WGAF when they were taken camp. As soon as we got them both when we got them ceased to matter.

 

[King Huskii]

I prefer the old reach around than to reach but thats another topic.

 

[Paracleet]

I prefer the old reach around than to reach but thats another topic.

Reported, enjoy your ban.

 

[freo_leo29]

Reach is the most over-used and misunderstood term in draft discussion. Gav56 is spot on and it actually extends a bit even beyond that. According to the guys who make a living and get assessed on it, if you've identified a player or a need and you know he won't be there before your pick in the next round (ie other clubs will grab him before your next chance) then it is not a reach. As Gav said, it's not even close to a reach if another club or 2 ranks them around the same pick you do - as was the case with Amiss.

So many define a reach as "he wouldn't have gone in the next few picks, we grabbed him at 5 and he would've been there at 10 so it's a reach" which is just garbage.

The last real reach (I can remember) was Tom Doedee and even that worked out OK for Adelaide. I will have forgotten some I'm sure.

Reaches do exist but at nowhere near the frequency us normies think they do.

To say Amiss was a reach is classic misuse of the term. If we grab Ras before Amiss then Jye may not have even been there 2 picks later let alone at our 2nd round pick which ended up being Johnson. Erasmus was certain to be there when we took him, Amiss was a chance to go the very next pick if we didn't call him. In my uninformed opinion Richmond still take Gibcus so we could have gone Ras then Jye but noone outside the Tigers war room knows for sure.

As soon as they'd decided Amiss was a higher grade than JVR, running the risk of Amiss not being there and knowing for sure Erasmus was going to be would have been a huge stuff-up. I guess they thought JVR might have been there at 23 but couldn't risk both Amiss and JVR going before we pick again at 23.

Even those who preferred JVR (like me ) knew we had to grab Amiss at our first if that's who we preferred. Personally, I let Ras go too and grab JVR with our next pick and we end up with Amiss, JVR and Johnson but I totally understand not doing that because I don't think we believe Johnson lasts to 23. I'll always wonder that if we'd known for sure Johnson was going to last until when we got him and JVR wasn't whether we still grab Ras or go Amiss then JVR. We'll never know.

FWIW I have been told our mate Colon Young had told Johnson (via his MacDougall puppet) he was certain the Eagles were grabbing him with their Chesser pick. Glad they didn't.

Doedee wasn't just a reach, he was a full on bolter

Amiss was a reach as he was taken 5-10 picks earlier than expected initially (obvs things changed when we indicated we wanted a forward)

Earlier in the draft means less pick gap for a "reach" to be had

 

[Kram]

There is a situation when it matters, at least to me. Thats if "reaching" costs you someone in the draft when you could have had both. I thought we'd done that when we took Ballantyne over Walters with 21 (I think) in their draft year. I wasn't alone there I don't think but then we ended up with Walters and was right back in the WGAF when they were taken camp. As soon as we got them both when we got them ceased to matter.

Oh man for anyone not around here way back in 08 the melts on the draft day thread over that were epic.

I think it may have been ImperialPurple that pointed out that if it was Walters taken at 21 and Ballantyne at 53 would people be happy? If so then what's the difference.

 

[Paracleet]

Doedee wasn't just a reach, he was a full on bolter

Amiss was a reach as he was taken 5-10 picks earlier than expected initially (obvs things changed when we indicated we wanted a forward)

Earlier in the draft means less pick gap for a "reach" to be had

No he wasn't, stop pushing s**t up hill. You are wrong and doubling down makes you look small minded about it. Amiss went exactly in the range predicted in all the major phantom drafts released in the lead up to the draft.

If a player is a reach based on July phantom drafts then every year half the first round is a 'reach'.