Strategy Rookie draft

[thejester]

To me, this draft strategy was completely ill-conceived. I'd love to listen to Wells or Scott justify it. It surely can't be on the basis of talent. No one else had these players anywhere near where they were taken. To use a yacht racing analogy, Wells has headed by himself to the other side of the course to the rest of the fleet hoping to pick up a wind shift that the forecasts suggest won't happen.

I've been turning this over in my head - one possible explanations is contracts, but given clubs can now pay rookies as much as they want and (IIRC) give them more than one year it doesn't seem likely. I think the likeliest explanation is that they did see them as the most talented players available for the positions they wanted. It's hardly unusual for Wells to chart his own course on stuff like this (Brown, Taylor, Thurlow, Hayball, Enright come to mind immediately). You can also make a case, although not sure I fully believe it myself, that the reason guys like House and Abbott weren't publicly discussed as ND picks was because of the leagues they played in rather than an objective assessment of their talent.

 

[thejester]

Its possible that when they finally get the new CBA done that the rookie list will go in 2018 and be replaced with bigger senior lists.

At the moment it does seem to basically exist as a device for wage suppression.

 

[year of the cat]

I've been turning this over in my head - one possible explanations is contracts, but given clubs can now pay rookies as much as they want and (IIRC) give them more than one year it doesn't seem likely. I think the likeliest explanation is that they did see them as the most talented players available for the positions they wanted. It's hardly unusual for Wells to chart his own course on stuff like this (Brown, Taylor, Thurlow, Hayball, Enright come to mind immediately). You can also make a case, although not sure I fully believe it myself, that the reason guys like House and Abbott weren't publicly discussed as ND picks was because of the leagues they played in rather than an objective assessment of their talent.

Perhaps you are correct. Being mature aged, if that's the case, you'd hope and expect them to have a very quick impact really from next year on or at least in 2018 to justify their selection in front of younger, talented kids.

I still find it amazing that the 3 mature players that Wells identified as worthy of AFL listing are all from Geelong. Obviously he would have greater access to watching them, but you'd expect in a well resourced club that there would be others identified throughout Australia that may be better. Or at least one! Unless Abbott and House have been told to "play dead" and have more talent than what's been immediately obvious from their VFL matches then I'm still flummoxed by it.

What will be galling will be if a couple of rookies taken before our first go on and have meaningful careers at other clubs. Though it could be argued that if that happens, it may not be necessarily an issue with draft strategy but with talent identification....

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Now, it's been suggested we need these mature types for positional depth. I'd suggest that IF we are relying on the likes of House and Abbott to win a flag then it just isn't going to happen. Secondly if one accepts that we do need that positional depth then do it through the rookie draft - those two would have lasted until then. Abbott wouldn't have be taken in either I'd say.

I'd ask the question, who said rely on?
Why couldn't Abbott be like Naismith or Nankervis who whilst limited were able to temporarily fill the void and make do whilst the first choice rucks were out?

So, why couldn't he simply be more able depth than a skinny 18yo whippet?
As for House, he's never going to be able to fill the void of Hawkins. Lose Tom for a sustained period and we're stuffed.

I guess he may be competing with Black?

 

[GHS33]

I'd ask the question, who said rely on?
Why couldn't Abbott be like Naismith or Nankervis who whilst limited were able to temporarily fill the void and make do whilst the first choice rucks were out?

So, why couldn't he simply be more able depth than a skinny 18yo whippet?
As for House, he's never going to be able to fill the void of Hawkins. Lose Tom for a sustained period and we're stuffed.

I guess he may be competing with Black?

We've done well without Tomahawk before. It makes our forward line a lot less predictable when he's out.

 

[thegerman]

Yep, a few went off in the holster.

Shooting blanks no doubt

 

[Art Vandelay_]

We've done well without Tomahawk before. It makes our forward line a lot less predictable when he's out.

Every now and then, sure, I can see that.
For 8, 10, 15 weeks. Nah, I think we'd struggle.

 

[year of the cat]

I'd ask the question, who said rely on?
Why couldn't Abbott be like Naismith or Nankervis who whilst limited were able to temporarily fill the void and make do whilst the first choice rucks were out?

So, why couldn't he simply be more able depth than a skinny 18yo whippet?
As for House, he's never going to be able to fill the void of Hawkins. Lose Tom for a sustained period and we're stuffed.

I guess he may be competing with Black?

Doesn't that defeat the purpose if that's the case of drafting House? If we're stuffed if Hawkins goes down why have him in the first place? I think thejester is probably correct - Wells thinks he's actually a decent chance of being a player. Whether that is as a stop gap or depth player or something more substantial remains to be seen.

Btw, my issue was not so much with House and Abbott being drafted by Geelong - it was that they were taken in the ND rather than the rookie draft.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Doesn't that defeat the purpose if that's the case of drafting House? If we're stuffed if Hawkins goes down why have him in the first place? I think thejester is probably correct - Wells thinks he's actually a decent chance of being a player. Whether that is as a stop gap or depth player or something more substantial remains to be seen.

Not exactly my point as we don't have a replacement for Hawkins. Black and House are essentially replacements for Kersten and may be that makeshift CHF/3rd tall combo playing with Hawkins, not instead of.

Btw, my issue was not so much with House and Abbott being drafted by Geelong - it was that they were taken in the ND rather than the rookie draft.

We won't know if it was wise or wrong though will we?
I read today that West Coast were interested in Abbott.

 

[GHS33]

Doesn't that defeat the purpose if that's the case of drafting House? If we're stuffed if Hawkins goes down why have him in the first place? I think thejester is probably correct - Wells thinks he's actually a decent chance of being a player. Whether that is as a stop gap or depth player or something more substantial remains to be seen.

Btw, my issue was not so much with House and Abbott being drafted by Geelong - it was that they were taken in the ND rather than the rookie draft.

It was a smart strategy to take them in the ND. They were extremely late picks - the type of picks that are always long shots. It was a smart move to use those picks on players that are known quantities and use the rookie draft for our long shots, or young blokes that need time to develop.

 

[year of the cat]

It was a smart strategy to take them in the ND. They were extremely late picks - the type of picks that are always long shots. It was a smart move to use those picks on players that are known quantities and use the rookie draft for our long shots, or young blokes that need time to develop.

Interesting perspective. I would have thought the sensible strategy was, assuming that both House and Abbott would both be available in the rookie draft, would be to use your ND places to take the best young talent in the country. This draft more than most, had talent right to the end. But anyway, I think I've made this point ad nauseam now.

 

[GHS33]

Interesting perspective. I would have thought the sensible strategy was, assuming that both House and Abbott would both be available in the rookie draft, would be to use your ND places to take the best young talent in the country. This draft more than most, had talent right to the end. But anyway, I think I've made this point ad nauseam now.

I understand your point too, and it makes sense for sure. Though it's hard to say either way if there was AFL quality available at picks 68 & 69 but time will tell!

 

[Lana]

Btw, my issue was not so much with House and Abbott being drafted by Geelong - it was that they were taken in the ND rather than the rookie draft.

I was puzzled after the national draft especially with Abbott but given the way the rookie draft played out it seems as if we didn't grab him then we were risking not getting him in the rookie draft. Four ruckmen were taken before our first rookie pick not including one that was redrafted. Another 2 were taken before our 2nd again not including one that was redrafted. And another one before our 3rd. That represents a lot of teams looking for a ruckmen.

35 guys were taken in the rookie draft who weren't redrafted delisted players, seven of them were ruckmen. If they wanted a backup ruckmen they would have let him slip and grabbed one of the 7 that went in the rookie draft, it seems to me that they weren't looking for a ruckmen but rather they wanted Abbott. Now I don't know why the wanted him so much but I'm happy to give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Lana]

I understand your point too, and it makes sense for sure. Though it's hard to say either way if there was AFL quality available at picks 68 & 69 but time will tell!

There almost certainly will be someone who would have been worth taking but its always a long odds gamble that a couple of lucky clubs get to win. It was us last year and might still be us this year.

 

[_eop]

going

 

[GFrost]

That Geelong article did say two Melbourne clubs were interested in House and a couple, including West Coast in Abbott after word of his great secret testing leaked out.
Taking them in the 70's instead of the Rookie draft to avoid losing out doesn't seem like the biggest issue. Our trade period on the other hand, in comparison....

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

That Geelong article did say two Melbourne clubs were interested in House and a couple, including West Coast in Abbott after word of his great secret testing leaked out.
Taking them in the 70's instead of the Rookie draft to avoid losing out doesn't seem like the biggest issue. Our trade period on the other hand, in comparison....

There was nothing wrong with our trade period. If this forum overrates certain players that's their prerogative.