Analysis Making the Top 4 and building to a flag. 4TH is IRRELEVANT, MAKE IT TOP 3

[mic59]

There's not really any way that we can compare the drafts that made Geelong, Hawthorn, Collingwood have success with ours. For one thing they were more experienced with drafts. Second, the priority pick was available when they bottomed out. Third, the father/son has been available to them. Particularly Geelong, they picked up at least 4 top players because of the third round father/son rule. And fourth, they did not have a selection that was compromised by a new club. Having to take sixteenth pick when in a normal year you would have seventh can be a double disadvantage. Not just because the lower pick is likely to be better but also because the likelihood of a bad pick increases as the pick gets higher. This was proved when we picked Ben Jacobs. And there's not really much way we will be able to trade to a high pick in the coming years, I would expect us to be around 14 or higher for the next few years.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

There's not really any way that we can compare the drafts that made Geelong, Hawthorn, Collingwood have success with ours. For one thing they were more experienced with drafts. Second, the priority pick was available when they bottomed out. Third, the father/son has been available to them. Particularly Geelong, they picked up at least 4 top players because of the third round father/son rule. And fourth, they did not have a selection that was compromised by a new club. Having to take sixteenth pick when in a normal year you would have seventh can be a double disadvantage. Not just because the lower pick is likely to be better but also because the likelihood of a bad pick increases as the pick gets higher. This was proved when we picked Ben Jacobs. And there's not really much way we will be able to trade to a high pick in the coming years, I would expect us to be around 14 or higher for the next few years.

Geelong never bottomed out. they finished 12th but with 9 and 7.5 wins respectively the 2 times they finished 12th. They didn't get free pre rd 1 priority picks like Hawthorn and Collingwood did several times. The Geelong drafts vs the Port drafts are very comparable.

Don't get the more experienced with drafts thing. Before 1994 draft the draft was mickey mouse as it had so many exclusions for state zones, metro and city zones, U/19 players etc. So we didn't have any real lack of experience between 2006 and 2009 compared to 1999 and 2002.

Third Geelong only benefited from 2 real father sons to help win the 2007 flag. One Ablett was drafted between 1999 and 2002 and the other Scarlett came along in 1998 I think. There were plenty of duds - Martin Blake, Larry Donahue's son etc and Hawkins impact was well after 2007.

The compromised club argument is meaningless when comparing how Geelong took their 1999 to 2002 draftees and used them as the foundation of their 2007 flag. The equivalent in 2014 for Port is the 2006 to 2009 draftees.

 

[mic59]

Geelong never bottomed out. they finished 12th but with 9 and 7.5 wins respectively the 2 times they finished 12th. They didn't get free pre rd 1 priority picks like Hawthorn and Collingwood did several times. The Geelong drafts vs the Port drafts are very comparable.

Don't get the more experienced with drafts thing. Before 1994 draft the draft was mickey mouse as it had so many exclusions for state zones, metro and city zones, U/19 players etc. So we didn't have any real lack of experience between 2006 and 2009 compared to 1999 and 2002.

Third Geelong only benefited from 2 real father sons to help win the 2007 flag. One Ablett was drafted between 1999 and 2002 and the other Scarlett came along in 1998 I think. There were plenty of duds - Martin Blake, Larry Donahue's son etc and Hawkins impact was well after 2007.

The compromised club argument is meaningless when comparing how Geelong took their 1999 to 2002 draftees and used them as the foundation of their 2007 flag. The equivalent in 2014 for Port is the 2006 to 2009 draftees.

I realise that Geelong never bottomed out. I was simply bringing that up as part of the debate as it did apply to two clubs.

Where I was talking about more experienced I meant they had been longer in a system where selection of players was done. The VFL had always been trolling other leagues for the best so they had been looking around for some years, whereas South Australian teams generally recruited from their zones and the occasional interstate player

Geelong benefited from the father/son in that they were able to get top player but still the f/s pick. So by getting Tom Hawkins as f/s in the 2006 draft they did have an affect by 2007. That was that they still had their first round pick which they could use on Joel Selwood.

I can see what you mean about the compromised club argument being meaningless when you do the 5 year comparison for the flag. But that was not my point at all, everyone does not have the same opportunity to get a flag in the same number of years after some good drafting. And if that was the case then I suppose you would have to say that our best opportunity will come 5 years after the Wingard draft, or 2016.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

..
I can see what you mean about the compromised club argument being meaningless when you do the 5 year comparison for the flag. But that was not my point at all, everyone does not have the same opportunity to get a flag in the same number of years after some good drafting. And if that was the case then I suppose you would have to say that our best opportunity will come 5 years after the Wingard draft, or 2016.

Nope our window is 2014-17 maybe 2018. That is when the 2006 to 2009 guys are hitting their peak and we have 8 guys from 2 super drafts. We miss that window then 2025 is the next window.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Geelong benefited from the father/son in that they were able to get top player but still the f/s pick. So by getting Tom Hawkins as f/s in the 2006 draft they did have an affect by 2007. That was that they still had their first round pick which they could use on Joel Selwood.
.....

Who knows who they would have taken with pick 7 if they didn't get Hawkins under the father son. Bottom line it was marginal in their efforts to win the flag - Selwood or no Selwood. Hawkins personally had no impact on them winning 2007. Matthew Egan - being AA CHB in 2007 and breaking his foot against us in the Rd 21 thriller had more impact on their premiership claims in 2007 than them playing Selwood all year.

 

[Canoogs]

Geelong didn't bottom out, but they certainly did get blessed in 2001 with what has to be close to the best number 40 pick in history. Not to mention Jimmy Bartel and Steve Johnson as steak knives. And as well as that another pretty nice 45th pick in 1997. I think Geelong would have found life a bit more challenging in the late 90s if the father-son system that we have now had always been in place.

 

[tribey]

Geelong didn't bottom out, but they certainly did get blessed in 2001 with what has to be close to the best number 40 pick in history. Not to mention Jimmy Bartel and Steve Johnson as steak knives. And as well as that another pretty nice 45th pick in 1997. I think Geelong would have found life a bit more challenging in the late 90s if the father-son system that we have now had always been in place.

Gary Ablett probably would've only cost them the equivalent of a second or third rounder under today's bidding system.

He was a promising enough small forward but was never a junior adonis and certainly showed no hint of becoming the all-time great he is today.

He's actually recounted stories where a significant number of people believed he was only picked for his local U18 team on brand name alone.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Yep Gary Ablett wasn't a top 10 ranked kid and did not make all australian from the u/18 national champs. I think he made the TAC cup u/18 team of the year so 20ish -30ish is probably where he would have gone based on output and not name back in 2001.

 

[ExpectToWin]

Nope our window is 2014-17 maybe 2018. That is when the 2006 to 2009 guys are hitting their peak and we have 8 guys from 2 super drafts. We miss that window then 2025 is the next window.

REH.............How very dare you!!!!!

We are Port Adelaide

We exist to win premierships

Our window is 2014 - Infinity and beyond

Write that out 100 times young man and go to bed without your supper

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Chris Scott - On the Couch last night - made a comment about that many premiership players have retired or moved to other clubs and how they have rebuilt.

It made me think of my post in post#24 of this thread about my discussion with D_One last year about where are teams 7 years after they win a flag. Geelong look like doing a Sydney or being close to winning again.

Last year I did a list of the Geelong players who had played in GF's during 2007-11 period. I was surprised when i checked this arvo and 15 of those 2007 flag players are no longer at Geelong. They have regenerated their list very well, as well as hanging on to 7- 2007 flag players of which - which of 6 are great players and All Australians. Sydney only had 3 2005 flag players repeat in 2012.

Players in bold no longer play for Geelong

Player 2007 2008 2009 2011 Total
Harley W L W - 2W-1L
Scarlett W L W W 3W-1L
Hunt W L - W 2W-1L
Mackie W L W W 3W-1L
Milburn W L W - 2W-1L
Wojinski W - W W 3W-0L
Corey W L W W 3W-1L
Bartel W L W W 3W-1L
Enright W L W W 3W-1L
S. Johnson W L W W 3W-1L
Mooney W L W - 2W-1L
Selwood W L W W 3W-1L
Chapman W L W W 3W-1L
N. Ablett W - - - 1W-0L
Stokes W L - W 2W-1L
Ottens W L W W 3W-1L
Ling W L W W 3W-1L
G. Ablett W L W - 2W-1L
King W - - - 1W-0L
Byrnes W - W - 2W-0L
Kelly W L W W 3W-1L
Rooke W L W - 2W-1L
.============ .======= .======= .======= .======= .=======
Taylor - L W W 2W-1L
Varcoe - L W W 2W-1L
Lonergan - L - W 1W-1L
Blake - L W - 1W-1L
Hawkins - - W W 2W-0L
Podsiadly - - - W 1W-0L
West - - - W 1W-0L
Christensen - - - W 1W-0L
Duncan - - - W 1W-0L

 

[Janus]

Chris Scott - On the Couch last night - made a comment about that many premiership players have retired or moved to other clubs and how they have rebuilt.

It made me think of my post in post#24 of this thread about my discussion with D_One last year about where are teams 7 years after they win a flag. Geelong look like doing a Sydney or being close to winning again.

Last year I did a list of the Geelong players who had played in GF's during 2007-11 period. I was surprised when i checked this arvo and 15 of those 2007 flag players are no longer at Geelong. They have regenerated their list very well, as well as hanging on to 7- 2007 flag players of which - which of 6 are great players and All Australians. Sydney only had 3 2005 flag players repeat in 2012.

2004 premiership team (which was dominant since 2001) vs 2007 GF team - Warren Tredrea, Kane Cornes, Chad Cornes, Brendon Lade, Domenic Cassisi, Peter Burgoyne, Shaun Burgoyne, Dean Brogan, Toby Thurstans. A number of All-Australians and great players in that list too. What happened to that team soon after? It imploded, when all the star players who copped the heat retired and the younger players had to stand up. I'm expecting the same to happen to Geelong, purely because as Forzaport said on another thread, their top ten talent for this year consists of those same 2007 premiership players. Easy to look a million dollars when it's your team-mates taking the brunt of it.

You're right that there is a 7 year window - 5 years with the list you develop, then a couple of years to rejuvenate your list with youthful exuberance before a final tilt in year 7/8 before you have to head down the ladder again. Depending on how good your top tier talent is. With Sydney, their high end talent wasn't the same - they had Jack, Hannebery, Reid etc in their top tier.

Geelong has been fantastic at replacing their players as they move on with others that can do the job just as well - but they've always had a nucleus of elite talent. They've renovated...they haven't rebuilt. That will come when that talent retires, IMO.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

2004 premiership team (which was dominant since 2001) vs 2007 GF team - Warren Tredrea, Kane Cornes, Chad Cornes, Brendon Lade, Domenic Cassisi, Peter Burgoyne, Shaun Burgoyne, Dean Brogan, Toby Thurstans. A number of All-Australians and great players in that list too. What happened to that team soon after? It imploded, when all the star players who copped the heat retired and the younger players had to stand up. I'm expecting the same to happen to Geelong, purely because as Forzaport said on another thread, their top ten talent for this year consists of those same 2007 premiership players. Easy to look a million dollars when it's your team-mates taking the brunt of it.

You could argue Geelong's run started in 2004 with a stuff up in 2006. Our rubbish drafting in the 2001-05 period and trading away some decent picks to get short term premiership success was the reason why we dropped away so badly in 2011. None of those 9 players were drafted after the 2000 draft.

As I posted in post#24 we were abnormally bad 7 years after a flag when comparing premiers from 1997 to 2006 - seven years later. 7-10 wins in the season seven years after winning the flag was pretty standard - we had 3.

You're right that there is a 7 year window - 5 years with the list you develop, then a couple of years to rejuvenate your list with youthful exuberance before a final tilt in year 7/8 before you have to head down the ladder again. Depending on how good your top tier talent is. With Sydney, their high end talent wasn't the same - they had Jack, Hannebery, Reid etc in their top tier.

Geelong has been fantastic at replacing their players as they move on with others that can do the job just as well - but they've always had a nucleus of elite talent. They've renovated...they haven't rebuilt. That will come when that talent retires, IMO.

Geelong will dip but look at their 2006-2010 drafting and trading compared to our 2001-2005 draft and trading and I can't see them dropping to 3 wins in a season. But 8-10 wins for a couple of seasons would be normal and they are likely to stay above that level provided Hawkins, Selwood, Taylor, Motlop, Duncan and Christensen stick around for the rest of the decade. Blicavs could be a Westhoff given his height and massive endurance power and could be a great swingman for a decade or so.

 

[Portmanteau]

Geelong (and Hawthorn) have done a far better job than we have of managing the transition from one window to (potentially) another. With targeted recruiting, drafting + development and actually blooding their youth progressively they shown that the "win now" mentality doesn't need to extend to every spot in the 22, or list overall. When Geelong and Hawthorn's 2007 and 2008 premiership teams are fully turned over, I'm sure they'll dip but likely not as hard as we did. I mean Geelong's core of Selwood (25), Taylor (27), Hawkins (25), Motlop (23), Christensen (22), Caddy (21) aren't going anywhere for a while unfortunately.

What we need to do is be able to emulate these two teams (far easier said than done) in terms if both player culture and coaching/management culture.

Our period after the 2004 premiership was the blueprint of what not to do to rebuild/retool/reload. Complete arrogance, whiffing on trades, horrible mismanagement of players returning from injury, complete lack of development of younger players, pathetic drafting. Added to that that the flag came at the end of our window, whereas Geelong and Hawthorn got their's at the start of their window. We need to turn this promising new era into 8-10 years of consistency at the top of the table (Geelong and Hawthorn are into years 7 and 8).

 

[Forzaport]

Geelong will dip but look at their 2006-2010 drafting and trading compared to our 2001-2005 draft and trading and I can't see them dropping to 3 wins in a season. But 8-10 wins for a couple of seasons would be normal and they are likely to stay above that level provided Hawkins, Selwood, Taylor, Motlop, Duncan and Christensen stick around for the rest of the decade. Blicavs could be a Westhoff given his height and massive endurance power and could be a great swingman for a decade or so.

Yeah, I don't think they'll plunge - they'll be like the Crows in their lean years.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

What is truly important that this thread shows is the importance of building beyond a flag. The efforts of Geelong show that you can stay strong beyond bottoming out. The Cook Review put in place football structures and operations that ensure the development of juniors behind the star group. How well this holds up when the best of the core of stars is gone remains to be seen but it would be good to believe genuine hard work and development will overcome tanking. Teams that build on a culture of quicksand deserve to sink. I don't believe we ever went down that path, we truly were that bad.

Keith Thomas is our Brian Cook.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Our period after the 2004 premiership was the blueprint of what not to do to rebuild/retool/reload. Complete arrogance, whiffing on trades, horrible mismanagement of players returning from injury, complete lack of development of younger players, pathetic drafting. Added to that that the flag came at the end of our window, whereas Geelong and Hawthorn got their's at the start of their window. We need to turn this promising new era into 8-10 years of consistency at the top of the table (Geelong and Hawthorn are into years 7 and 8).

Our rubbish drafting was 2001-2005. Our poor rather than rubbish trading was 2004-2008 - we didn't do any trade in two of those years as teams where wary of trading with us.

Geelong were the 4th year into their climb up the ladder when they won in 2007. PF in 2004, lost the unlosable semi at the SCG in 2005 - and probably would have beaten St Kilda in the prelim final. 2006 was a disaster year - their recession they had to have year. They still won 10 and had a draw in 2006.

Hawthorn were ahead of schedule in 2008 and its no surprise what has happened since.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

What is truly important that this thread shows is the importance of building beyond a flag. The efforts of Geelong show that you can stay strong beyond bottoming out. The Cook Review put in place football structures and operations that ensure the development of juniors behind the star group. How well this holds up when the best of the core of stars is gone remains to be seen but it would be good to believe genuine hard work and development will overcome tanking. Teams that build on a culture of quicksand deserve to sink. I don't believe we ever went down that path, we truly were that bad.

Keith Thomas is our Brian Cook.

The great sides play in more than 1 GF, they back it up. That is also when a club makes some decent $$$ by playing in 2 or 3 consecutive GF's - premierships obviously help but its back to back or more GF's that get the cash flowing in.

 

[TeeKray]

Geelong will fall by the way side like all great teams do eventually. The biggest thing with Geelong is how well nearly all of their stars have been able to carry on playing not just good but top line football up to 30 and beyond.

The draft order can't be dismissed as an equalisation tool. Sure, you can pick good or bad players at any pick, and development plays its part as the likes of Melbourne and Richmond prove. But over an extended period of time and an extended sample space of drafts, you are clearly better off picking earlier than later, and eventually that inability to access top line talent is going to hurt you, whether it's 3, 5 or 10 years down the track.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

The great sides play in more than 1 GF, they back it up. That is also when a club makes some decent $$$ by playing in 2 or 3 consecutive GF's - premierships obviously help but its back to back or more GF's that get the cash flowing in.

Like we should have done in the early 2000s.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Geelong will fall by the way side like all great teams do eventually. The biggest thing with Geelong is how well nearly all of their stars have been able to carry on playing not just good but top line football up to 30 and beyond.

The draft order can't be dismissed as an equalisation tool. Sure, you can pick good or bad players at any pick, and development plays its part as the likes of Melbourne and Richmond prove. But over an extended period of time and an extended sample space of drafts, you are clearly better off picking earlier than later, and eventually that inability to access top line talent is going to hurt you, whether it's 3, 5 or 10 years down the track.

Geelong FC is likely to be hit harder by Geelong the town losing jobs and economic activity than poor drafting and having access to players in the teens rather than top 5. They will slide down the ladder but having a bloke Stephen Wells as your head recruiting guy since 1995 and on the team since 1984 means they have built a great recruiting team and a bad year for them is to have 8-10 wins not 2-5 like so many other clubs have go thru.

 

[Canoogs]

Sometimes it's also about when teams begin to drop off our their top. Our worst years of drafting occurred during some incredibly shallow drafting years, when we didn't have high draft picks due to our position. If you're able to jag some good players in strong years, this can keep a club up for a bit longer in their window. Unfortunately, no clubs apart from GWS and Gold Coast have been particularly able to do this over the last 3 years, so as Janus has said, this has made it more difficult for other clubs to catch up to Geelong and Hawthorn.

Consider where we'd be now if instead of getting Jacobs at 16 we'd have picked up Dyson Heppell or Dion Prestia at 8. Or what would have happened had Patton, Greene, Tyson and Coniglio been up for grabs for Brisbane and Richmond in 2011. Some clubs have done alright, like us, but the clubs who would have had top 10 picks but have instead been kicked down to nearly 20 are the ones who have been really hurt by the expansion. These are the clubs that would have needed to add a few pieces to challenge Geelong and Hawthorn's dominance over the last 3 years, and haven't been able to do it.

 

[Janus]

You could argue Geelong's run started in 2004 with a stuff up in 2006. Our rubbish drafting in the 2001-05 period and trading away some decent picks to get short term premiership success was the reason why we dropped away so badly in 2011. None of those 9 players were drafted after the 2000 draft.

As I posted in post#24 we were abnormally bad 7 years after a flag when comparing premiers from 1997 to 2006 - seven years later. 7-10 wins in the season seven years after winning the flag was pretty standard - we had 3.

Geelong will dip but look at their 2006-2010 drafting and trading compared to our 2001-2005 draft and trading and I can't see them dropping to 3 wins in a season. But 8-10 wins for a couple of seasons would be normal and they are likely to stay above that level provided Hawkins, Selwood, Taylor, Motlop, Duncan and Christensen stick around for the rest of the decade. Blicavs could be a Westhoff given his height and massive endurance power and could be a great swingman for a decade or so.

Definitely agree that they won't drop - they'll hover around in the finals like the Crows do and try to recruit star players with FA to push them over the edge into contention. The new age allows a team to do that - to get the foundation in place and then recruit a couple of superstars from clubs that have underperformed into an environment that allows them to excel. We need to get to a stage where players KNOW that they will play better here. That's why signing up Hinkley and Burgess to long term deals, with the academy set up the way it is etc, is such a crucial development for our long term success.

Tom Watson is said to have replied, when asked about the success about IBM:

"IBM is what it is today for three special reasons. The first reason is that, at the very beginning, I had a very clear picture of what the company would look like when it was finally done. You might say I had a model in my mind of what it would look like when the dream - my vision - was in place.

The second reason is that once I had that picture, I asked myself how a company that looked like that would have to act. I then created a picture of how IBM would act when it was finally done.

The third reason IBM has been so successful was that once I had a picture of how IBM would look when the dream was in place and how such a company would have to act, I realized that, unless we began to act that way from the very beginning, we would never get there.

In other words, I realized that for IBM to become a great company it would have to act like a great company long before it ever became one."

For mine, Port Adelaide is a great club already, so the hard work is done for us. But for awhile there, we lost sight of what made our club great - we acted like a great SANFL club promoted to the AFL, instead of acting like a great AFL club until we finally became one. We became just as myopic as the AFC, too focused on South Australian petty squabbling instead of recognizing our god-given right to something better. Thankfully, we've got guys like Thomas, Koch and Hinkley on board that are starting to realize the fundamental truth: that the vision that Fos Williams and Bob McLean and all these Port Adelaide greats had for this club was never limited to the 5015 postcode. It was about being the ultimate club in Australian Rules Football.

What would a club like that look like? How would it act? With every post that people like REH and LR make, along with the way that Keith Thomas and David Koch speak and how Ken Hinkley coaches, I just have to nod my head and say, "Yes, this is how Port Adelaide should be."

 

[PAFC04]

Making the top 4 is one thing, building towards a flag and beyond is another.

Geelong has got it right, since 2006, Geelong have always been in the top 8 who have maintained there cred.

To build a team with depth takes 5 years just to become relevant and gain the respect of other AFL clubs, let alone win a Premiership. Some how we have gained 2 years since 2010 on and off the field since Kern&Ken had entered the scene. For Geelong, it was since 2002 under Bomber Thompson.

I don't think we have the cattle just yet, not until we have replacements for each player in our best 18 every week.

This is what I think we need to make TOP 4 and winning BACK to BACK:

We need to have a balance of players that can be manipulated and morphed into different positions at the drop of dime to give flexibility in a structure and we have one called Westhoff maybe two with Jack rucking well on game day, give us another 2 of them each and we will win a Premiership hands down.

Like for Likes
For example, S. Gray can and did do everything that Monfries would have provided. Redden/ Renouff has the ability to Ruck with passion to give Lobbe a rest in game time.

I cant say this for Schulz (maybe Butcher), Boak, Westhoff, Jonas, Ebert, Hartlett & Wines. So if they're injured, who is there that can slot into there spot with skills that they apply without having to gamble or provide opportunities for an up and coming recruit or build on which sounds ruthless, but you need results.

I don't want to compare, but if you look at the bench of a top EPL team such as a Liverpool, ManU, Chelsea club, there is one sitting there that can slot in with worries. Sometimes the bench is worth more than the selected team to play depending who the opponent is on game day.

For us this would mean that any player in the Magpies should be primed and ready to go that can slot into the Power which I think our club is heading down, I hope we can get this right. IMO, this is the most crucial part of our club to build the Magpies that is on par with AFL level. I don't want to see players selected from the Magpies given second chance should they perform below their best.

I believe this is the key to win consistently each week and or to provide a contest for the opponents.

We are halfway there, meaning that we have the KT, Koshie and Ken are working the reins brilliantly, we just now the cattle to steer us into GF's BACK to BACK..... with the MAGPIE team.

 

[philreich]

Like we should have done in the early 2000s.

Well let's hope that, when we get a qualifying final at Adelaide Oval (who knows - it may even happen this year), we can win the damn thing. I still have nightmares about those finals against Collingwood and Sydney: who knows what may have happened in 2002 and 2003 if we'd won those 2 games???

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Well let's hope that, when we get a qualifying final at Adelaide Oval (who knows - it may even happen this year), we can win the damn thing. I still have nightmares about those finals against Collingwood and Sydney: who knows what may have happened in 2002 and 2003 if we'd won those 2 games???

A big Port final at Adelaide Oval, wouldn't that be something to behold? The gentlefolk of North Adelaide might need to book interstate holidays.

I'm sure Ken wouldn't get cute on the day and we would go into the finals playing at full tilt in the lead up games.