Moo's Clues - Drafting Review

[Moo]

I’m bored so here is a review of our drafting history – as I hear quite often people bagging Smarty and saying why do we still have him? Well I have looked at each draft and in my opinion ranked how the footy dept did with the picks that were left to them.

First up we got of to a ***** start, traded too much and yes we have traded in an average manner from time to time.

It is all very subjective but the listing below –

First column is how I saw the footy dept going (eg 2002 we got Schammer and Crowley from 13, 48, 55 & 63 …is an OK result as the talent was thin anyway and 48 is hard to do anything with).

Second column is the actual players delivered (regardless of draft position) and finally if trades were made

2007 A : A No trades
2006 – C : D Taz
2005 – B+ : B No trades
2004 – D : F Josh Carr
2003 – C :C Trade up to 10 for Croad (out)
2002 – B/C : C/D Des Headland
2001 – D - : D Trent Croad (in)
2000 – B : C Bell
1999 – B : A No Trades
1998 – C : C No Trades
1997- B/C : B/C Fletcher
1996 – B : B …
1995 – C/D : D ….
1994 – B : B …

Now from my reckoning the drafting team:
Very well – 2007, 2005, 1999, 1996
Ave – 2006, 2003, 2002, 2000, 1998, 1997, 1994
Poor - 2004, 2001, 1995

The 2 most recent years we did Clivehouse …we traded high end picks for Carr (04) & Trent Croad (01)

The 3 most recent years we did very well we did not trade (07), did not trade (05) and did not trade (1999)….mmmmm see a pattern.

Now if our drafting team have done well with what they have been handed with very good years in 2 out of the last 3 and not a poor year since 2004 and obviously a pretty good network ….why the hell would we even be thinking about changing?

I am not going into Rookies here either but in Sandi, Foster, Webster, Haddrill, Grover, Gilmore & Dodd add weight to this debate that our drafting is pretty good.

 

[Moo]

If you are bored here are my boring crib notes.

In 2007 we had 7, 24, 40, 55 & 69 – too early to tell yes but I would rate this currently as an A as it is my thread and I am rating all the drafts so it will become clearer.

We had our earliest pick in a while and in Palmer it looks as though we have found a keeper. Chinks at 24 looks solid and to find someone who is capable of playing in his first year taken at 40 pushes this draft up as pretty good in the Moo Rankings

In 2006 – we traded out of any position that you could expect Smart & Co to be able to do anything with ….31, 52 & 77…still early but I would give this a C (with the chance of an upgrade).

Collard – bust, BOB looks capable of being a contributor and Calib well the jury is out but at least it has not delivered an electric chair order yet.

In 2005 – we had 3 moderate picks in 10,26 & 42 ….you would hope to get 2 players out of this ….Smart scored Drum, Ibbo and Warnock I’d give this a B+ with still the chance of an upgrade.

Drum was the sensible choice and Ibbo and Warnock demonstrate a good eye for future talentt.

In 2004 – we traded heaven and earth for Carr and Smart was left with 59, 67 & 69. It should have been a bust and it was in Copping, Stibling and a re-drafted Haines. What do you give this a D to be fair …OK a D and only because Haines was a could have been who copped injury after injury?

Hard to give it an outright F as it was not the recruiting offices problem that Carr cost us 11, 27 & 43 (Adam Thompson, Pat Garner & Michael Newton) . Incidentally when we talk about bad trades we should remember that Carr on face value was a pretty good one.

In 2003 we had 10, 12, 19, 27 & 43 (F/S).

A disappointing one in delivering Dunn, Murphy, Mundy, Campbell and Peake (with MJ in the PSD). Now whilst we still have these guys on the list …only Mundy and Johno have really established themselves in our best 25. Dunn appears to be a bust, Murphy looks like having the curse of being a great WAFL player and Campbell there is hope but it would want to be delivered on soon. Peake is at the cross roads.

I still rate it as a borderline C

The reason I rate this higher than most is look at the quality of the draft. Who was taken after 10 that is better than Mundy (who appears to be our best player from the draft excluding PSD and FS).

Waters at 11, Stanton 13, Butler 20, Nash 28, Symes 30Adcock 33, Blake 38, buchanan 45, Heath Shaw 48, Fisher 55, Bannister 69, Tuck 75 ……a couple of handy names on this list sure but Dunn at 10 certainly was a very good prospect who has had injury problems on his injury problems …an unlucky rather than a poor choice. Mundy at 19 is an OK pick.

Not our finest moment but grabbing MJ in the PSD at least added something.

2002 – saw us trade for Dessie again pushing Smart down the order to 13, 48, 55 & 63.

We gave up 3 & 19 to Brissy (Brennan and T Selwood) …got 13 for Brown and 55 for McPhee but pretty much ended up with a later 1st round and then chump change from a drafting perspective.

We took Schammer (OK) Edgecombe (bust), Crowley (finally Good), Doswell (bust) …..I would rate this a B.

Why – Schammer was a no brainer to draft on junior form. I still think Schammer is OK and I rate him in our best 25 (insert insults here) and Crowley at 55 was exceptional. Again looking at the other names taken after 13 …only a handful would qualify as a better pick T Selwood (19), Jerhico (32) Watson (40), Ebert (42).

2 players out of 13, 48, 55 & 63 is OK.

2001 …OK huge swings and roundabouts – I don’t need to go into the horse trading of Croad/McPharlin/Farmer/Simmonds/Bandy.

We ended up with 4, 52, 56 …from Smart’s viewpoint we needed to get at least 100 – 150 gamer at 4.

We got Polly, Browne and Medhurst.

I would rate this as a D minus (maybe too harsh)..I was gunning for us to get Polak too so I can’t open my big trap. Browne and Medhurst were good choices just body and mind respectively have hurt us. I won’t go through the names of who was taken after our 4 pick as it is nightmarish when compared to the above (OK OK - Hale, Bartel, Del Santo, James Kelly, Steve Johnson, Mitchell, Schenider, Swan).

Geelong killed this draft too…the only thing to comfort me is if we had kept 1 & 4 …I am sure we would have taken Polak and Sampi ….meaning the Eages probably would have added Hodge to Judd. Hey at least we gave them fatcat.

2000 ….the year we corrected the sins of the past and got Belly back. Again from a trade stand point it has been a success but in the same year Clement ….well that is the great thing about being a Freo supporter – God never lets you just enjoy a moment in the sun without combining it with a near fatal lightening strike, a bee landing in your ice cream or noticing in the light that hot blonde you have been working on all night has hands bigger than Pav and Adam’s apple that looks like it might have a last name of McPhee or Cooney.

OK we had 39, 51 & 66 …which in trading terms is a pile of steaming manure and if you got 1 reasonable player you would be happier than something that is normally pretty happy.

We took McPhee, Woods and Scotty Thornton – which to me is pretty good and I give it a B.

Names taken after 39 ...Mark Williams 43, Josh Hunt 44 ….after 51 ..Amon Buchanan 52, Chris Newman 55, Corey Jones 60, Johncock 67. We did OK as there are a pile of no names consigned to the rubbish bin of AFL careers lost.

In 1999 …we had picks (yay) and we kept most of them (yay).

2,4,5,46 & 49

Hase and Pav …..I give this a B …. we had 3 top 5 picks and we picked up a good player, a Superstar and a serviceable one. Butler and Cunningham …well they were fodder. Yeah, yeah if Pav ahd gone this would be a bust but if mother had a willy she would be my father …it didn’t happen and we are judging this on what did happen.

I tell you look at Geelong again if you want to know why they are killing it …Joel Corey 8, Chapman 31, Ling 38 & Corey Enright 47

1998 – 2, 18, 49 & 64.

Got Mods and ripped the middle out of our draft. Picks 2, 18, 49 & 64.

JLo, Schell, Garth Taylor (isn’t he a country singer now?) and Shipp.

I’d rate it a C …even though the draft was hardly a science back then ….hardly household names. We got a very good player in JLo (Fosdike 3, Fitzgerald 4, Michael Stevens 5, Murray Vance 6).

Misses at 18 hurt and nothing really at 49 & 64 …I can’t rate it higher.

1997 – 6, 21, 26 & 32

OK not a bad mix of draft picks …we got Fletch for 5 or it would have been even better.

We took James Walker, Clem, Brodie Holland and Troy Johnson.

I would rate this as a borderline B/C ….however with our first pick …we didn’t get a superstar but we got a serviceable player. Sure it wasn’t Christ Tarrant (8), Chad Cornes (9) but it also wasn’t a bust.

Clem was an unlucky break rather than a poor player and Brodie was a pretty good pick at 26 …though Black 31 or Goodes 43 would have been nice. Still Adam Chatfield 23 or James Wasley 24 would have been worse.

1996 – 12, 31 & 46. ….delivers Heath Black, Jess Sinclair & Clucas.

I give this a B ….there was some junk back then on the lists. Black is easily a top 10 pick in this draft and Sinclair would not be far behind him.

1995 – 1,7,13 & 23

OK 1995 when drafting consisted of spinning a large wheel in the recruiting tent and firing the latest Enfield musket at it (reloading time only 3 minutes).

We took Clive, Ben Edwards (not Ben Ten), Brad Rowe and Jay Burton.

I rank this a C …because and only because of Crazy Horse the albino warrior D if I am being honest.

Our only saving grace was no one knew what they were doing ….Bamford 4, Healy 6, Gowling 12, Trew 14 …..I mean we could have had a complete bust and not been lonely. Trouble is we had next to no list …others had a state of or, I mean had strong lists.

1994 …..1, 22, 42, 56, 72 & 73

White, Winston Abraham, Douglas headland, Ryan Smith, Dean Grainger & Sam McFarlane.

This is where no trade screams but again the club can only draft what picks we are left with after the footy dept wheel and deal.

White was a great first pick, and Winnie a good choice seeming a rather large load of no names was taken after him with only a few names that even die hard supporters would remember.

Lets be kind and give this a B.

 

[E Shed]

Terrific effort Moo, very interesting reading. Doesn't look so bad when you see it all in context.

 

[dominguez]

How can 2006 be a C with the chance of an upgrade when 12 months after that draft only one of the drafted players remained on our senior list? Good work apart from that Moo.

 

[Quinz]

Quality work Moo, I wouldn't have had the balls to look through your trading history.

Good effort.

 

[Moo]

How can 2006 be a C with the chance of an upgrade when 12 months after that draft only one of the drafted players remained on our senior list? Good work apart from that Moo.

Because from picks - 31, 52 & 77 I would not expect much (and was not dissapointed )...BOB looks like he is a better chance to be a contributor than not in the long term...nice pick from 52 and the basis of the C.

Mourish is still in the system (albeit as a rookie) and I think the jury is well and truly out on whether he is even of AFL calibre (but he was a smokey and a half – if he comes on he will is the upside as unlikely as it may be) and Collard is still in the system but no better or worse than all the other players taken after 31.

I actually rated the calibre of the players as a D - however the footy dept with no early picks have done average (The C is for the footy dept)

If you look at how other clubs went after 31 ...this is how I came to my C – comparing our drafters to the rest of the comp on the basis of the strength of the draft.

Clubs who did better after pick 31 is based primarily on a stand out player (a Tippett, Goldsack, Westhoff) – on this I would clearly place 6 clubs well ahead (at this point in time – remembering this draft is still maturing). Those below us …it is not a science and unfair on some clubs who had picks in the 60’s – but as I view it we were middle of the table after 31 – On the strength of BOB so far we are better than or equal to the other 9 clubs who drafted after 31…therefore my average rating.

For the record Clubs ahead –
Adelaide Tippett/Campbell/Mackay/Gill
Collingwood Goldsack/Dick
Essendon Alwyn Davey/Houli/Reimers
Port Westhoff/Krakouer/Ryan Williams/Gray
Roos Aaron Edwards/Goldstein/Thomas/Warren
Hawks J Morton/ J Kennedy/Moss

It was just a quick look - but even if I have missed 1 or 2 ..I stick with my C.

 

[Billy Hunt]

A = Excellent
B = Average
C = Poor
D = Bent over the barrel and shafted with the rough end of a pineapple.

2007 – A … Rhys Palmer Clayton No trades
2006 - D … Chris Tarrant
2005 - B … No trades
2004 - C … We got Josh & Blackie. Drafted Benet Copping & Toby Stribling
2003 – C … Got rid of Trent Croad
2002 – C … We got Headland at a big cost
2001 – D … Trent Croad… enough said
2000 – B … We got Bell at a big cost
1999 – A … Paul Hasleby & Matthew Pavlich
1998 – A … Justin Longmuir & Tony Modra
1997 – C… We got Adrian Fletcher … they got Luke Power
1996 – C… Heath Black
1995 – C… Cliiiive
1994 – D… Enough said

 

[raffrox]

Good effort Moo but unfortunately it is all about context.

Its like a real estate agent saying,"if you ignore the nuclear power plant the view is just great."

I think a more relevant assessment would be a 'recruiting' assessment (.i.e. trading and drafting). That would find that we backed the wrong pony way way too often.

Overall though I think Phil Smart is good at his job and is often trying to make the most of crappy draft picks and your assessment shows that.

 

[Moo]

Good effort Moo but unfortunately it is all about context.

Its like a real estate agent saying,"if you ignore the nuclear power plant the view is just great."

I think a more relevant assessment would be a 'recruiting' assessment (.i.e. trading and drafting). That would find that we backed the wrong pony way way too often.

Overall though I think Phil Smart is good at his job and is often trying to make the most of crappy draft picks and your assessment shows that.

Trading has hurt us more than helped us - no doubt.

My point was simply that we have a good drafting team - in them we should trust.

Clear out the rookie list as much as possible (Dunn in or out, Foster maybe up and 1 more spot from Shaunny Mac) ...add 3 more kids ...3/4 more draft picks - it does not take too long to build up.

 

[Billy Hunt]

Neesham = great coach, lousy recruiter
Drum = lousy coach, great recruiter
Connolly = lousy coach, lousy recruiter

 

[sabre_ac]

I agree with most of what has been said so far..

However...

Bell was for Dylan Smith, Sinclair and Motlop....Happy with that deal in the end, anyone else know who was drafted in the top 10 that year?

The biggest pet peeve for me is the fact we didn't learn from the Croad debacle, players of potential without consistent run's on the board should not have everything but the kitchen sink thrown at them. Specially key forwards....

 

[bigkev bleeds purple]

1995 was an A+++. I would've given all four of our picks and my left arm for Clive.

Nice summary, Moo.

 

[PapaJ]

Good work Moo. Minor technical points, some of the lower draft picks that you compared ours too included F/S picks - two I noticed were Watson and Tuck (I think). In theory this makes the higher picks look a little better, if you know what I mean.

 

[Moo]

Good work Moo. Minor technical points, some of the lower draft picks that you compared ours too included F/S picks - two I noticed were Watson and Tuck (I think). In theory this makes the higher picks look a little better, if you know what I mean.

Acknowledged mate

 

[Stronzo]

Good work moo, was an interesting read.

 

[PintofPale]

Why is trading for Luke McPharlin and another bloke always referred to as the "Trent Croad Trade"?

 

[theGav56]

The failures of Polak, L Brown (who was not on your list despite being pick 5), Dunn and Murphy, are the biggest thing that hurts us. Far bigger than the trading issues, which are also below par for AFL clubs. It is a poor record for the selections that they were in the draft. The sooner we can become a first class recruiting club the better.

 

[PapaJ]

The failures of Polak, L Brown (who was not on your list despite being pick 5), Dunn and Murphy, are the biggest thing that hurts us. Far bigger than the trading issues, which are also below par for AFL clubs. It is a poor record for the selections that they were in the draft. The sooner we can become a first class recruiting club the better.

You're concentrating on the negatives - the drat is always a lottery (though less so these days) all teams have had some wins and losses, some more than others of course. Moo's taken the big picture and on that it doesn't look all that bad given the restriction of picks we've had at times due to trading.

BTW, the only real dud I would concede in your examples is Brown. His 'mistake' was less noticeable because we got Hase and Pav in the same draft. If we didn't get Polak I can guarantee he would have gone somewhere in the top 10, he was much sought after at the time. Dunn was injury issue more than poor choice, though he perhaps wasn't quite worth top 10, and Murphy was prob worth lower than 12, but not that much lower given what else was around.

 

[rotto]

Good balance view. The problem is the silly trades and how we develop talent.

 

[dominguez]

Sabre- Clement and Holland were also part of the Bell deal. North Melbourne wanted 2 x top ten picks and Sinclair so we traded Clement and Holland to the Pies to get the other top ten pick.

 

[sabre_ac]

Sabre- Clement and Holland were also part of the Bell deal. North Melbourne wanted 2 x top ten picks and Sinclair so we traded Clement and Holland to the Pies to get the other top ten pick.

I totally forgot about that...

Obviously Clement went on to have an excellent career but I am still very happy with what Bell brought the club.

 

[estibador]

I'm just glad we got rid of Holland.

I would have been happy to trade him for a used party popper.

 

[dogeatdog]

great post, most interesting read in a long time. I've saved it!