Rate our Drafting/Trading from 2000-2003

[CaptainDangerfield]

Rate as either PASS or FAIL for the year.

I didn't include 2004 and 2005 as it's too early to call. Although, already losing the only KPP's we drafted in those two years is already cause for concern.
I only inlcuded rookie and preseason picks that are still at the club.

2000:

Pick 7 – Laurie Angwin
Pick 10 or 11 Traded for Matthew Bode ( S Burgoyne )
Not sure of the rest. I'm sure someone can fill in the blanks.

Rookie:

Doughty – I think.


2001:

Pick 12 – Brent Reilly.
Pick 44 – Ben Finnin.
Pick 59 – Jacob Schuback.

Pre-season

Trent H

Rookie

Bock,
Mattner,
Rutten

2002:

Pick 2 and 18 – Wayne Carey (D Wells & K Shore)
Pick 32 – L Jericho
Pick 56 – R Shirley
Pick 68 – James Begley

2003:

Pick 14 – Fergus Watts.
Pick 31 – Josh Kruger.
Pick 58 – Ben Hudson

My Rating:

2000: Main and pre-season
FAIL
2000: Rookie
PASS: 1 out of 4. As far as the Rookie draft goes a good result.

2001: Main and PS
PASS:
2001: Rookie
PASS: Outstanding result.

2002: Main and PS
FAIL
2002: Rookie
FAIL

2003: Main and PS
FAIL
2003: Rookie
FAIL

Thank god for 2001 - Reilly, Trent H ( I think ), Bock, Rutten and Mattner.

 

[Mad Dog]

2002:

Pick 2 and 18 – Wayne Carey (D Wells & K Shore)
Pick 32 – L Jericho
Pick 56 – R Shirley
Pick 68 – James Begley

Shirley came to the club at the end of 1999

 

[CaptainDangerfield]

Shirley came to the club at the end of 1999

Wasn't he delisted and then redrafted?

 

[Mad Dog]

Wasn't he delisted and then redrafted?

yes - you're right...

 

[Vader]

2000 ND:
7 Laurence Angwin
38 Michael Handby
48 Matthew Smith
53 Hayden Skipworth
67 Graham Johncock

I'd give that a pass, purely on the drafting of Stiffy. Skippy wasn't too bad either.

Angwin was a disaster. Handby never played a game. And then there's Matthew Smith .

 

[- PC -]

2002:

Pick 2 and 18 – Wayne Carey (D Wells & K Shore)
Pick 32 – L Jericho
Pick 56 – R Shirley
Pick 68 – James Begley

I think this has to be a pass atm

Carey was recruited specifically for a reason and we came that close.... because we missed on a GF spot the last 2 years is no reason to bag the recruiting for 2004-05 is it? So why blame Careys drafting? At the time it was what was needed. The issue I see is the failure of Perrie and co to learn from Carey..

Jericho.. While I think he has deeper issues than a lack of ability I will sit back and let the season unfold before I pass final judgement

R Shirley...Shirley your kidding if you think he has been a bust? While not the flashiest I feel he does the job required by the coaching staff...

J Begley ... looks good on tv.

I think this one is still developing. While I see this as being no more than a 50/50 draft I think there is more to come

 

[King Elvis]

PerthCrow, the Carey experiment has to be marked as a failure due to the cost.

Carey, at that age, with his body how it was, was not worth the Number 2 pick, and was definitely not worth the Number 2 pick AND the Number 18 pick.

I love Carey, and was stoked when he came over here, but I think we got carried away and we let ourselves get ripped off.

 

[conVINCEd]

How did we end up with both #7 and #12 in 2000?

 

[Stiffy_18]

How did we end up with both #7 and #12 in 2000?

Pick 7 was ours and we got pick 12 from Hawthorn for Shaun Rehn.

 

[Tas]

PerthCrow, the Carey experiment has to be marked as a failure due to the cost.

Carey, at that age, with his body how it was, was not worth the Number 2 pick, and was definitely not worth the Number 2 pick AND the Number 18 pick.

I love Carey, and was stoked when he came over here, but I think we got carried away and we let ourselves get ripped off.

It was pick 4, Adelaide didn't know Carlton would get caught cheating after the trade period. As it was, there were not a lot of standout players in that draft, pick #4 was picked up by Bulldogs (Tim Welsh) who doesn't look all that good and we de-listed Shore last year, couldn't get on the park, ended up being too injury prone.

If Adelaide had pick #2 in their hands and were looking at Goddard or Wells then I am sure the trade would have been different.

 

[Crow-mo]

the pick was richmonds - and they have said repeatedly that they would never have given it to adelaide had they known it would become pick 2.

 

[macca23]

2000 ND:
7 Laurence Angwin
38 Michael Handby
48 Matthew Smith
53 Hayden Skipworth
67 Graham Johncock

I'd give that a pass, purely on the drafting of Stiffy. Skippy wasn't too bad either.

Angwin was a disaster. Handby never played a game. And then there's Matthew Smith .

Too kind.

To blow pick 7 on a head case after being pre-warned is stupidity. To follow that up by trading pick 12 in the same year for a useful but 2nd tier player in Bode is unforgivable.

Our shortage of talls can be partly traced back to that year when we picked 3, NONE of which played even one game for us. A drug using thief, an undersized tall and an absolute unco - what a marvellous trio.

We followed that up with a bantam weight mid-fielder who does try his guts out, but is only just up to it in Skippy, before striking gold with the outsider pick in 67.

Was that last pick luck or good management?? Given what happened to the first 4 picks and the trade for Bode, one would favour the luck theory.

3/10 from me for that year, which in totality was a failure IMO.

 

[Vader]

Must admit I was never in favour of the Bode/#12 trade. No objections to trading for Bode, but we paid WAY over the odds. Probably only worth a 3rd rounder.

By all accounts, the decision to draft Angwin at #7 rested with Ayres - who went against the advice of the recruiting staff. On that basis, the club's recruiting was bad, but you can't blame the staff.

Skippy was probably fair value for #53, so I wouldn't be complaining about him.

That leaves Handby & Smith. The less said the better.

It's borderline. If Stiffy were only as good as Skippy it would be a fail, but Stiffy was such a great pick-up that I'm tempted to call it a pass. Only just.

 

[Macca19]

Must admit I was never in favour of the Bode/#12 trade. No objections to trading for Bode, but we paid WAY over the odds. Probably only worth a 3rd rounder.

I still cant figure out why you would have offered us pick 12 for Bode. Its not like he was a dominant player for us. He was a handy forward pocket who played under 30 games in 3 years.


Also, wasnt Handby only drafted to keep Angwin happy?? Being best mates and all it was considered it would keep Angwin here. Didnt they also change the rules of the SANFL mini draft so they could play at the same SANFL club together?

 

[Streaker]

I know it doesn't relate to the years above but why was Obst delisted?

 

[Mong]

Also, wasnt Handby only drafted to keep Angwin happy?? Being best mates and all it was considered it would keep Angwin here. Didnt they also change the rules of the SANFL mini draft so they could play at the same SANFL club together?

Handby was very well regarded prior to the draft. We needed key position players. Angwin was to be used as a forward. A defender was also needed. Handby was one.

If you're looking for confirmation that Handby was taken just to keep Angwin happy then you won't find any. That is wild speculation and in my opinion, extremely unlikely.

 

[GoSarge]

I still cant figure out why you would have offered us pick 12 for Bode. Its not like he was a dominant player for us. He was a handy forward pocket who played under 30 games in 3 years.

Ahhh, everyone is an expert with the aid of hindsight. If Bode turned out to be a good solid midfielder who turned out similar to a Scott West type player we'd be laughing, also if Burgoyne turned out to be another Ashley Sampi, we'd be ecstatic. The trade looks worse when Port pulled off a drafting coup with Burgoyne, something we couldn't predict.

Remember in similar circumstances, we recruited Scott Thompson back to our club (40 games in 4 years) and he turned out great.

Just as always, pick 12 has an equal chance of getting you a good player (Brent Reilly), an exceptional talent (S Burgoyne), or a bust - Luke Molan, Brandon Hall, Michael Stevens - Imagine picking Michael Stevens with a first rounder ?

 

[WheresGroomgone]

Springchoke yep you are spot on with your initial assessment
2000 fail
2001 pass purely on the rookies we acquired
2002 fail
2003 fail
hopefully we will look back at 2006 in a couple of years and say "f... how good did we do there!!!"

 

[tribey]

Ahhh, everyone is an expert with the aid of hindsight. If Bode turned out to be a good solid midfielder who turned out similar to a Scott West type player we'd be laughing, also if Burgoyne turned out to be another Ashley Sampi, we'd be ecstatic. The trade looks worse when Port pulled off a drafting coup with Burgoyne, something we couldn't predict.

Remember in similar circumstances, we recruited Scott Thompson back to our club (40 games in 4 years) and he turned out great.

Hindsight is exactly what we should have used when we traded for Bode though.

Bode had already played three seasons of AFL football by the time we traded #12 for him - and was far from impressive. In and out of an ordinary Port Adelaide side, small and inconsistent. So we're not exactly talking about an unknown draftpick or a raw kid with very little time in the system. Hindsight?

Even at the time it was a gamble at best and an unnecessary one at that. You say "if he'd become a Scott West-type" but our midfield circa 2000/1 was already arguably the best in the competition - wasn't he recruited to be a small forward?

Either way you look at it, we paid well over the odds given what we knew at the time. It could've turned out to be a masterstroke, but realistically, what the chances of this happening? Six subsequent years of additional hindsight have only served to reinforce this view.

Burgoyne on the other hand was an unknown entity where hindsight wasn't available whatsoever, yes it was a punt as all drafting is, but given his form at junior level and his bloodlines it was assumed he'd turn out to be something and was duly taken with a first rounder - that we gave away for a somewhat known entity who hadn't done much. Lo and behold he's turned out to be a very good footballer with the potential to be a superstar.

You've also mentioned the Scott Thompson trade as "similar circumstances" but the respective circumstances are like chalk and cheese.

Thompson was extremely highly-rated at Melbourne and was considered their prime inside midfield prospect, very injury-prone in that time but still very much worth a punt given the extra first-rounder in our hands and added midfield requirements as a result of Stenglein going home.

Again, Bode was deemed surplus to requirements by a Port Adelaide side that had just finished 14th.

 

[Macca19]

Ahhh, everyone is an expert with the aid of hindsight. If Bode turned out to be a good solid midfielder who turned out similar to a Scott West type player we'd be laughing, also if Burgoyne turned out to be another Ashley Sampi, we'd be ecstatic. The trade looks worse when Port pulled off a drafting coup with Burgoyne, something we couldn't predict.

Hindsight has nothing at all to do with this really. If Burgoyne was a dud then it would still seem like a strange decision to trade a first round draft pick for a bloke that hadnt really done a whole lot and was/is almost solely a forward pocket.

Remember in similar circumstances, we recruited Scott Thompson back to our club (40 games in 4 years) and he turned out great.

Thompson was a high draft pick and his problem was injury based. By the time he left he was an integral part of the Melbourne midfield. Bode was a forward pocket.

 

[macca23]

Hindsight has nothing at all to do with this really. If Burgoyne was a dud then it would still seem like a strange decision to trade a first round draft pick for a bloke that hadnt really done a whole lot and was/is almost solely a forward pocket.



Thompson was a high draft pick and his problem was injury based. By the time he left he was an integral part of the Melbourne midfield. Bode was a forward pocket.

Agree on both points Macca.

The judgement on Bode is based purely on what he was at the time of the trade - a good average footballer not worth pick 12.

The same applies to Thompson and if he hadn't had the degree of injury that he did with Melbourne we would never have got him with that pick.

 

[crows_4_life]

one guy u have all forgot is ronnie burns!!

he came, kicked some great goals, rolled his car and then retired to go bush walking

 

[mymansyd]

one guy u have all forgot is ronnie burns!!

he came, kicked some great goals, rolled his car and then retired to go bush walking

Yeah, good 'ol Ronnie. We traded Ben "No games" Finnin for him. So, in other words, thankfully, we didn't lose anything in that deal.

 

[GoSarge]

Hindsight is exactly what we should have used when we traded for Bode though.

Bode had already played three seasons of AFL football by the time we traded #12 for him - and was far from impressive. In and out of an ordinary Port Adelaide side, small and inconsistent. So we're not exactly talking about an unknown draftpick or a raw kid with very little time in the system. Hindsight?

Even at the time it was a gamble at best and an unnecessary one at that. You say "if he'd become a Scott West-type" but our midfield circa 2000/1 was already arguably the best in the competition - wasn't he recruited to be a small forward?

Either way you look at it, we paid well over the odds given what we knew at the time. It could've turned out to be a masterstroke, but realistically, what the chances of this happening? Six subsequent years of additional hindsight have only served to reinforce this view.

Burgoyne on the other hand was an unknown entity where hindsight wasn't available whatsoever, yes it was a punt as all drafting is, but given his form at junior level and his bloodlines it was assumed he'd turn out to be something and was duly taken with a first rounder - that we gave away for a somewhat known entity who hadn't done much. Lo and behold he's turned out to be a very good footballer with the potential to be a superstar.

You've also mentioned the Scott Thompson trade as "similar circumstances" but the respective circumstances are like chalk and cheese.

Thompson was extremely highly-rated at Melbourne and was considered their prime inside midfield prospect, very injury-prone in that time but still very much worth a punt given the extra first-rounder in our hands and added midfield requirements as a result of Stenglein going home.

Again, Bode was deemed surplus to requirements by a Port Adelaide side that had just finished 14th.

Perhaps I should clarify. Firstly we are looking at the trade Bode for pick 12 which I agree was a pretty ordinary trade at the time. Many look at it like we traded Bode for Burgoyne which is untrue. Not suggesting Macca19 or you are - just many others, which is what I wanted to clarify.

Now I agree it was a weird move at the time, but obviously the AFC recrutiing team deemed him a good enough player (based on potential maybe??) to make it in to the Crows midfield and thought that pick 12 was fair compensation.

The comparison to Thompson was that both averaged 10 games per year for the first few years and the AFC deemed both had the potential to be excellent players, and ironically both were traded for pick 12. In hindsight, it looks like Bode has turned out ok (but probably still didnt justify pick 12), and we got the Thompson trade right (albeit in favourable circumstances), but we weren't to know that at the time.

Just wanted to clarify.