Hot Topic The Rebuild, est. 2023 and/or 2025

[FootyGuru]

I thought most of Bomber's Geelong side came through drafting, except Ottens.

How many father sons?

I seriously think that everything is so even in this competition, access to super stars in fa or academy that no other club gets access to and a clear bill of health is the difference between top and bottom.

 

[FootyGuru]

Kind of. I think the point is to get a core of players together via the draft and any alternate pathways like academies, father-son, priority picks, etc. Once you have the elite core you can target the missing piece through whatever means. But you don’t build a core via trade.

The three examples you’ve chosen are probably the three strangest scenarios of the last twenty years (up there with Hawthorn’s accidental 3peat).

Geelong drafted their core from rookie pathways and father-sons from back when you paid a third round pick to sign them (Hawkins, Ablett and Scarlett). They then topped up successfully after Scarlett retired and Ablett went to the Suns, bringing in Dangerfield, Cameron and others. But they were gifted a couple of essential pieces without paying for them and then capitalised on it.

Hawthorn’s essential pieces were gifted to them via priority picks way back when. Similar vintage to Geelong’s core of father-sons, but Hawthorn’s top up of 2016 failed, while Geelong just kept topping up and keeping their old cogs going for way past the usual retirement age, and eventually managed to collect a new set.

Collingwood likewise struck gold with a trio of father-son picks recently (Moore and the Daicoses are the success stories). In their case though its a list built on top of the 2018 Grand final team, which was built on the 2010 premiership team, which in turn came from the early 2000s bridesmaid team featuring father-sons (Shaws, Clokes) alongside some high draft picks like Didak, Swan, Tarrant, and later Pendlebury, Thomas and Sidebottom. (Nathan Buckley gets a mention as being acquired via a rather spectacular trade.)

All three of those clubs have kept the ball rolling since well before the current list management rules were dreamt up. We haven’t and we don’t get a redo.

Sydney isn’t a list I’ve studied closely but I think they’ve benefited a lot from northern academies, as well as having father sons and being an old, well-established, well-run club that basically catches all the strays that want to live in a well connected city but didn’t like the footy bubble of Melbourne (at least until Brisbane became attractive more recently).

If Essendon wants to follow in their footsteps we’ll have to wait for young Bewick to be draft eligible, coz I don’t think any priority picks are headed our way. Failing that, we need to get a bit smarter about making the most of the assets we do have.

Didn’t get to reading post before posting my previous one. Well said!

In terms of a priority pick, hopefully afl add some herbs and spices to Oscar Allen, which then gives Essendon a lower bar or an argument for our free agent Draper.

I would be filthy is Oscar is band 1 and Draper doesn’t get it.

 

[Vindicater]

Need to smash this draft and then start to add more pieces in a year or two.

So glad Dodo is not here as you know he would be all over Curnow right now.

 

[Keystone agony]

I thought most of Bomber's Geelong side came through drafting, except Ottens.

I dont see much point looking back 20-30 years ago

The whole dynamic has changed since then. Player movement is far greater and FA ect

 

[Keystone agony]

Kind of. I think the point is to get a core of players together via the draft and any alternate pathways like academies, father-son, priority picks, etc. Once you have the elite core you can target the missing piece through whatever means. But you don’t build a core via trade.

The three examples you’ve chosen are probably the three strangest scenarios of the last twenty years (up there with Hawthorn’s accidental 3peat).

Geelong drafted their core from rookie pathways and father-sons from back when you paid a third round pick to sign them (Hawkins, Ablett and Scarlett). They then topped up successfully after Scarlett retired and Ablett went to the Suns, bringing in Dangerfield, Cameron and others. But they were gifted a couple of essential pieces without paying for them and then capitalised on it.

Hawthorn’s essential pieces were gifted to them via priority picks way back when. Similar vintage to Geelong’s core of father-sons, but Hawthorn’s top up of 2016 failed, while Geelong just kept topping up and keeping their old cogs going for way past the usual retirement age, and eventually managed to collect a new set.

Collingwood likewise struck gold with a trio of father-son picks recently (Moore and the Daicoses are the success stories). In their case though its a list built on top of the 2018 Grand final team, which was built on the 2010 premiership team, which in turn came from the early 2000s bridesmaid team featuring father-sons (Shaws, Clokes) alongside some high draft picks like Didak, Swan, Tarrant, and later Pendlebury, Thomas and Sidebottom. (Nathan Buckley gets a mention as being acquired via a rather spectacular trade.)

All three of those clubs have kept the ball rolling since well before the current list management rules were dreamt up. We haven’t and we don’t get a redo.

Sydney isn’t a list I’ve studied closely but I think they’ve benefited a lot from northern academies, as well as having father sons and being an old, well-established, well-run club that basically catches all the strays that want to live in a well connected city but didn’t like the footy bubble of Melbourne (at least until Brisbane became attractive more recently).

If Essendon wants to follow in their footsteps we’ll have to wait for young Bewick to be draft eligible, coz I don’t think any priority picks are headed our way. Failing that, we need to get a bit smarter about making the most of the assets we do have.

Those states with 2 teams, when their is a poor side and a good side, really adds a domino effect.

Player wants to get home they can decide between poor side or good side. ~90% of the time choose good side. Even more so at 26 when free agent

 

[BrunoV]

You can't build an entire 18 player side through the draft. That's just not possible. Also, not all draft picks are hits. It's common knowledge that about 50% of picks land. You also can't be finishing on the bottom for 5 years straight unless you're norf and have no supporters to burn the place down.

Almost all sides that have been successful have had a chunk of battlers, a mix of later picks, an existing core of good 200+ game players from a past era and traded in stars. Then you have a few teams that have barely finished out of the 8 in a decade (Geelong, Swans, Collingwood) that have always had elite older talent left over and leveraged their ability to top up with stars or rehashing rejects.

This idea that we should "build with high picks" is fantasy talk and doesn't happen in real life.

What will make or break us in the coming years is not the draft, it's knowing when to time our decision to attract a couple big fish/being able to do so, knowing how to reinvent rejects from other clubs in a way that suits our plan, squeezing the most out of the experience left on the list and investing in the proper development of the youth.

The foundation of Geelong's dynsaty is built on Corey (#8), Bartel (#8), Kelly (#17), Ablett (F/S), Scarlett (F/S), Hawkins (F/S) and Selwood (#6). Maybe Ablett and Scarlett were not considered top picks at the time of drafting but Hawkins was and was essentially the catalyst for the change in rules requiring us to use a first round pick on Dainher.

Hawthorn's 4 premierships were built on Hodge (1), Roughead (2), Franklin (5), Lewis (7) and Rioli (~10).

Richmond's 3 premierships were built on the Cotchin (2), Dusty (3), Rance (early teens?) and Riewoldt (~8) quartet. Just off the top of my head even Vlaustin was a top 10 pick.

Collingwood 2010 to date was built on Pendlebury, Thomas, Sidebottom, De Goey, Moore and Daicos who were all top 10 (but there are a lot top 5/6 picks there) and Cloke (F/S taken with a late pick when that was still possible).

Sydney's current team is essentially unviable without its academy delivering top 3-5 players in drafts on 4 occasions betweeen 2014 and 2020 (i.e. Heeney, Mills, Blakey and Gulden). It's also otherwise got McDonald and Campbell (top 5 picks) and Hayward and Florent who mid-first round picks.

The draft is used to create the core to get a team close enough to the action that a big fish can make a differnece. The Essendon experience is unique because in 2 separate phases spanning 10 years we've not been able to use the top end of the draft to propel the team to anything. Yes, there are scorched earth rebuilds, such as what happaned at Melbourne under Bailey and even when St Kilda dismantled that 09/10 side. But the problem there, as it has been at Essendon, is the competence of the people in charge of using the early selections.

 

[BrunoV]

I dont see much point looking back 20-30 years ago

The whole dynamic has changed since then. Player movement is far greater and FA ect

Geelong of the late 90s/early 00s is relevant because that core of drafted players set the foundation for this 20 year period of success it is enjoying. It was also expanded / replenished 6-years later andin time for the 07-11 premiership run with Selwood and Hawkins. Following the premierships there was still a heavy focus on the draft to fillout the team (as you woudl expect) but it was not based on the first round.

2019 to 2023 will be the next real boom period for Geelong's early drafting which delivered SDK, O'Sullivan, Conway, Holmes, Knevitt, Neale and maybe still O Henry and Bruhn (who are essentially still players Geelong drafted) all of whom were picked inside 25. There will be Dempsey, Humphries and Edwards, too.

 

[Old Campaigner]

Geelong of the late 90s/early 00s is relevant because that core of drafted players set the foundation for this 20 year period of success it is enjoying. It was also expanded / replenished 6-years later andin time for the 07-11 premiership run with Selwood and Hawkins. Following the premierships there was still a heavy focus on the draft to fillout the team (as you woudl expect) but it was not based on the first round.

2019 to 2023 will be the next real boom period for Geelong's early drafting which delivered SDK, O'Sullivan, Conway, Holmes, Knevitt, Neale and maybe still O Henry and Bruhn (who are essentially still players Geelong drafted) all of whom were picked inside 25. There will be Dempsey, Humphries and Edwards, too.

Dunno if Bruhn is part of their future plans anymore

 

[King Patty]

But the problem there, as it has been at Essendon, is the competence of the people in charge of using the early selections.

Or maybe more having bad years in poor drafts
if you picked our selections for our top 10 in the last 10 drafts

2013 (no picks saga)
2014 (no picks saga)
2015 parish + Francis - say we got McKay + Curnow
2016 McGrath - say we got McLuggage
2017 SSS - say we got Ed Richards
2018 Shiel - say we got Zak Butters
2019 Shiel - say we got Mitch Georgiades
2020 Cox, Perkins, Reid - say we got Reid, Max Holmes
2021 Hobbs - say we got Darcy Wilmot
2022 Tsatas - say we got Bailey Humphrey
2023 Caddy - If we had Curnow,Georgiades + McKay we probably select O'Sullivan and then get Mannagh too
2024 Kako - leave as is


we are still feeling punishment of saga penalties from 13-14 losing 2 x first rounders.
plus trading for SSS + Shiel, when liekly should ahve went to the draft.
Plus having players walk in a dud draft (Daniher + Saad) Covid effect, had they left in better years, would have got more value.
Plus other players leaving earlier than we expected - walla, McKenna, fantasia, Mosquito, Munkara, etc


b: Roberts Reid Ridley
hb:Redman O'Sullivan Wilmot
c: McLuggage Butters Duursma
hf: Martin Curnow Humphrey
f: McKay Georgiades Kako
r: Draper Merrett Richards
int: Mannagh, Johnson, Clarke, Durham

 

[Old Campaigner]

We whiffed so many first round picks I’m not sure additional picks would have produced a better outcome. We potentially just draft more spuds

 

[Lore]

Or maybe more having bad years in poor drafts
if you picked our selections for our top 10 in the last 10 drafts

2013 (no picks saga)
2014 (no picks saga)
2015 parish + Francis - say we got McKay + Curnow
2016 McGrath - say we got McLuggage
2017 SSS - say we got Ed Richards
2018 Shiel - say we got Zak Butters
2019 Shiel - say we got Mitch Georgiades
2020 Cox, Perkins, Reid - say we got Reid, Max Holmes
2021 Hobbs - say we got Darcy Wilmot
2022 Tsatas - say we got Bailey Humphrey
2023 Caddy - If we had Curnow,Georgiades + McKay we probably select O'Sullivan and then get Mannagh too
2024 Kako - leave as is


we are still feeling punishment of saga penalties from 13-14 losing 2 x first rounders.
plus trading for SSS + Shiel, when liekly should ahve went to the draft.
Plus having players walk in a dud draft (Daniher + Saad) Covid effect, had they left in better years, would have got more value.
Plus other players leaving earlier than we expected - walla, McKenna, fantasia, Mosquito, Munkara, etc


b: Roberts Reid Ridley
hb:Redman O'Sullivan Wilmot
c: McLuggage Butters Duursma
hf: Martin Curnow Humphrey
f: McKay Georgiades Kako
r: Draper Merrett Richards
int: Mannagh, Johnson, Clarke, Durham

If it wasn’t McGrath it would’ve been Setterfield, and Shiel would’ve been Caldwell + ?

Ideally McGrath should’ve been Taranto anyway though. Everyone gets excited by McCluggage but Taranto fulfils and would have fulfilled a long term need in the midfield

 

[Call Me Cake]

Richmond's 3 premierships were built on the Cotchin (2), Dusty (3), Rance (early teens?) and Riewoldt (~8) quartet. Just off the top of my head even Vlaustin was a top 10 pick.

Yeah so read what I said properly. All of those bar Dusty came before 2009. Only one was a pick pick that would be considered the scope of "bottoming out/years of rebuild". 2009 to 2017 is a long time between drinks. That's 8 years. A lot of the players they took between that were busts, picks in the middle or reinvented players, mixed in with good development and usage of battlers.

The foundation of Geelong's dynsaty is built on Corey (#8), Bartel (#8), Kelly (#17), Ablett (F/S), Scarlett (F/S), Hawkins (F/S) and Selwood (#6). Maybe Ablett and Scarlett were not considered top picks at the time of drafting but Hawkins was and was essentially the catalyst for the change in rules requiring us to use a first round pick on Dainher.

We're not just talking about their dynasty though. Again if you read the whole post instead of cherry picking to move goalposts around as you always do (ad hominem, don't care) then you'd know I was talking about teams that haven't bottomed out for a decade but didn't have to build an 18 player team using the draft and explained the reaons why. In fact more teams have won more flags in the last 10 years who haven't had to rely on a "build a chunk of the team by bottoming out" fantasy than those that have.

Hawks are an exception they've won flags in every decade.

 

[BrunoV]

We whiffed so many first round picks I’m not sure additional picks would have produced a better outcome. We potentially just draft more spuds

It's not just that picks didn't work out it's the way in which picks don't work out.

In Parish, Francis and McGrath you've got significant queries on their abilities to evolve an elite game at AFL level. A small, possession accumulating mid who is average by foot and a third tall defender who is emotionally immature and who can't run at all was how we started our post-SAGA rebuild. That's not hindsight - they're the things Essendon had conditioned itself to overlook when using early picks. 12 months later we're using the number 1 pick on a guy with a view to developing him in his secondary role as a junior.

How many sides of the last 20 years start a build or a rebuild without a specialist hard ball winning mid from 3 picks in the top 6? Francis was 190/191cm when he was recuitred. The only job a player of that size and with that running capcity can really do is stand at half back and intercept. Why would you use a high pick on that?

Yes, 2020 was difficult for recruiters but we also took a bizarre approach to that draft. Cox, Reid, Eyre and Brand were all players who would be most likely to make it as tall defenders and we always had Eyre and Brand thanks to the NGA. We know that Eyre was good enough that Collingwood gave him a second chance when his body failed him. There are other little insights you get into serious philosophical problems Dodoro had like when his example of how good Cox could be was his ability to take set shots with both feet. How does that help a side win matches? What about selecting 2 painfully thin players at 200cm+ with the picks you've got for losing 2 of your best players? Was any thought given to risk mitigation? I can forgive Perkins as a failure (if that's how it ends) becasue he had/has all of the tools and would have played midfield in 2020 if not for Covid idiocy. Maybe that season is what Perkins needed to develop his midfield craft or maybe it would have exposed him as not being able to play midfield.

In Hobbs you've got a small inside player who can't run and who can't really kick. How dramtically does that reduce the roles he can usefully play in an AFL match? In Tsatas you've got a midifelder who can't run or kick who is being developed in a first touch distrubitor role when his burst from a stoppage is what we being talked up pre-draft?

The proof is in the pudding. Over a span of 7 years we used pick 5, pick 1, pick 9, pick 13 and pick 5 on players for the midfield and the midfield is still our biggest weakness / unknown.

 

[BrunoV]

Yeah so read what I said properly. All of those bar Dusty came before 2009. Only one was a pick pick that would be considered the scope of "bottoming out/years of rebuild". 2009 to 2017 is a long time between drinks. That's 8 years. A lot of the players they took between that were busts, picks in the middle or reinvented players, mixed in with good development and usage of battlers.



We're not just talking about their dynasty though. Again if you read the whole post instead of cherry picking to move goalposts around as you always do (ad hominem, don't care) then you'd know I was talking about teams that haven't bottomed out for a decade but didn't have to build an 18 player team using the draft and explained the reaons why. In fact more teams have won more flags in the last 10 years who haven't had to rely on a "build a chunk of the team by bottoming out" fantasy than those that have.

Hawks are an exception they've won flags in every decade.

Read the post I quoted?


"You can't build an entire 18 player side through the draft. That's just not possible. Also, not all draft picks are hits. It's common knowledge that about 50% of picks land. You also can't be finishing on the bottom for 5 years straight unless you're norf and have no supporters to burn the place down.

Almost all sides that have been successful have had a chunk of battlers, a mix of later picks, an existing core of good 200+ game players from a past era and traded in stars. Then you have a few teams that have barely finished out of the 8 in a decade (Geelong, Swans, Collingwood) that have always had elite older talent left over and leveraged their ability to top up with stars or rehashing rejects.

This idea that we should "build with high picks" is fantasy talk and doesn't happen in real life.

What will make or break us in the coming years is not the draft, it's knowing when to time our decision to attract a couple big fish/being able to do so, knowing how to reinvent rejects from other clubs in a way that suits our plan, squeezing the most out of the experience left on the list and investing in the proper development of the youth."

 

[Lore]

Speaking of picks being hits or not, there's a few pages on draftguru that are really useful for that Call Me Cake, the URL is that funny IP address looking one that faible posted a page or two back, and then under the picks tab you can see every player ever picked at pick 6 or pick 24 or whatever, and also how many games they ended up playing, any major accolades during their careers, and the games average for each pick as well.

 

[Call Me Cake]

Or maybe more having bad years in poor drafts
if you picked our selections for our top 10 in the last 10 drafts

2013 (no picks saga)
2014 (no picks saga)
2015 parish + Francis - say we got McKay + Curnow
2016 McGrath - say we got McLuggage
2017 SSS - say we got Ed Richards
2018 Shiel - say we got Zak Butters
2019 Shiel - say we got Mitch Georgiades
2020 Cox, Perkins, Reid - say we got Reid, Max Holmes
2021 Hobbs - say we got Darcy Wilmot
2022 Tsatas - say we got Bailey Humphrey
2023 Caddy - If we had Curnow,Georgiades + McKay we probably select O'Sullivan and then get Mannagh too
2024 Kako - leave as is


we are still feeling punishment of saga penalties from 13-14 losing 2 x first rounders.
plus trading for SSS + Shiel, when liekly should ahve went to the draft.
Plus having players walk in a dud draft (Daniher + Saad) Covid effect, had they left in better years, would have got more value.
Plus other players leaving earlier than we expected - walla, McKenna, fantasia, Mosquito, Munkara, etc


b: Roberts Reid Ridley
hb:Redman O'Sullivan Wilmot
c: McLuggage Butters Duursma
hf: Martin Curnow Humphrey
f: McKay Georgiades Kako
r: Draper Merrett Richards
int: Mannagh, Johnson, Clarke, Durham

We wouldn't have got Zak Butters cos he went before our pick. If anything we might've actually picked Caldwell who we eventually got for some extra change and we also now have Duursma from the same draft. 2018 isn't so much of a bust in hindsight. Also all of this talk of picks is ridiculous because there can equally be 5 or so other clubs that would have passed on said player. This is usual in the draft, it's not a hit as so many people say it is, especially in the middle.

Having said that we also had a shit guy at the helm. So we can't keep looking back in the past pre-2023. It's what happens post-2022 that counts. And even then it's inconcievable that we'll be at the bottom for 5 years straight from here, we've got no time for that and we're past that.

 

[Call Me Cake]

draftguru

That site doesn't exist anymore

 

[faible]

That site doesn't exist anymore

It does. Someone has snagged their domain, but the site is still up on the webserver (promise it's not a virus)

https://119.42.53.217/

 

[Mercurial89]

If it wasn’t McGrath it would’ve been Setterfield, and Shiel would’ve been Caldwell + ?

Ideally McGrath should’ve been Taranto anyway though. Everyone gets excited by McCluggage but Taranto fulfils and would have fulfilled a long term need in the midfield

I don't think any of them reach what their full potential is/was if they are picked by us.

What happens to McGrath if he goes to a team that properly develops him and teaches him how to see the field better as a mid? I don't think his role is reduced to a lockdown defender who you don't want the ball in the hands of.

Mcclugage would have been a bust if we had of picked him and Taranto would have been paired with parish. Not sure that midfield would have gone very far given our issues have been balance.

Whilst I agree with Bruno that our talent identification has been poor during this period, our development has been just as bad. We still need to prove we have turned the corner there.

 

[King Patty]

We wouldn't have got Zak Butters cos he went before our pick. If anything we might've actually picked Caldwell who we eventually got for some extra change and we also now have Duursma from the same draft.

 

[Lore]

That site doesn't exist anymore

It does but not at the usual domain name which seems to have been hacked or something… hence I said to refer to faibles post with the temporary site address that looks like an IP address

It does. Someone has snagged their domain, but the site is still up on the webserver (promise it's not a virus)

https://119.42.53.217/

 

[Call Me Cake]

https://119.42.53.217/

View attachment 2375276

Touché, I still think we probably would've picked Caldwell though

Also Cal's phantom draft from 2018:





Of course Twomey's knife would be a little sharper nowadays but it kind of sets the scene of that time.

 

[Keystone agony]

Geelong of the late 90s/early 00s is relevant because that core of drafted players set the foundation for this 20 year period of success it is enjoying. It was also expanded / replenished 6-years later andin time for the 07-11 premiership run with Selwood and Hawkins. Following the premierships there was still a heavy focus on the draft to fillout the team (as you woudl expect) but it was not based on the first round.

2019 to 2023 will be the next real boom period for Geelong's early drafting which delivered SDK, O'Sullivan, Conway, Holmes, Knevitt, Neale and maybe still O Henry and Bruhn (who are essentially still players Geelong drafted) all of whom were picked inside 25. There will be Dempsey, Humphries and Edwards, too.

Yeh that is true

Really since FA the only team that has fallen over that was at the top is probably Melbourne and WCE (one being a melbourne based club that hasnt been able to attract players and has lost some like Jackson during that time - before we question culture)

I dont think their recent drafting is anything amazing

And we need to remember when questioning our top 13 picks, just about every other club was picking that player within a couple of spots of where we did. Its not like we completely went against the majority of the comp with those picks

 

[Yoda_]

Need to smash this draft and then start to add more pieces in a year or two.

So glad Dodo is not here as you know he would be all over Curnow right now.

the notion of putting the cart (Harley Reid) before the horse (winning finals) has been played out before. We should be warned off. Its not the be all and end all if we miss out

 

[Keystone agony]

the notion of putting the cart (Harley Reid) before the horse (winning finals) has been played out before. We should be warned off. Its not the be all and end all if we miss out

I dont think weve brought in a 20 yr old kid of high talent before though

And also this draft looks pretty ordinary for us. If it was an elite top level then i may have a different view, it also depends how much we have to give away, but im certainly happy to give away picks 5 and 6

Shiel and maybe dev smith are the most similar when it comes to giving away capital for a quality player. These guys were basically free agents, giving away quality draft capital for guys aged around free agency isnt the best idea. Keep the picks and get a guy 10% worse for free/money. Especially when in building phase