Simon Dalrymple Performance Analysis

[The Doctor]

Many argue that the job of the recruiting manager is the most important in the AFL. Unless I'm mistaken, all clubs expect, the person in charge of their recruiting has the job of delivering to the club players that will eventually win them a premiership.

Let's turn the spotlight on Simon Dalrymple, Recruiting Manager, of the Western Bulldogs. How well has he performed in his 5 years in this role at the club and whether he has delivered players that will form the nucleus of a premiership winning team. Surely that is enough time to decide whether his selections earn him an appraisal that warrants his retention in this critical role or not.

The following are Simon Dalrymple's selections at each respective draft since his appointment;

Father/Sons
Mitchell Wallis (pick 22, 2010)
Thomas Liberatore (41/2010)
Lachlan Hunter (49/2012)

I have intentionally highlighted & excluded father/sons from the following analysis as they are players we have had first access to. PLayers we have been able to monitor, access exclusively to other clubs (or as some say gifted to us) and form decisions well in advance of their recruitment.

The following focus's on Simon Dalrymple's live selections ;

In total

34 selections - 18 National Draft selections, 1 pre season draft selection & 15 rookie draft selections

2009 National Draft
15. Christian Howard
31. Jason Tutt
63. Lukas Markovic
76. Shane Thorne

Rookies
19. Brodie Moles
35. Andrew Hooper
48. Matthew Panos
59. Eddie Prato
68. Patrick Rose

2010 National Draft
74. Jayden Schofield
88. Zephaniah Skinner
89. Tom Hill

Rookies
22. Luke Dahlhaus
39. Jason Johannisen
55. Ed Barlow
70. Mitch Hahn

2011 National Draft
17. Clay Smith
39. Michael Talia
49. Daniel Pearce
57. Tory Dickson

Pre-Season Draft
11. Fletcher Roberts

Rookies
9. Lin Jong
27. Tom Campbell
45. Alex Greenwood
62. Jack Redpath
76. Mark Austin

2012 National Draft
5. Jake Stringer
6. Jackson Macrae
21. Nathan Hrovat
50. Joshua Prudden

Rookies
4. Brett Goodes

2013 National Draft
4. Marcus Bontempelli
42. Matthew Fuller
60. Mitch Honeychurch


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the following discussion I would like to ackowledge the following;

Some selections, to my knowledge, may have been influenced by coaches (Eade or Macartney). Possibly including but not limited to;

RD 70. Mitch Hahn
ND 57. Tory Dickson
RD 27. Tom Campbell
RD 62. Jack Redpath
RD 4. Brett Goodes

Whether or not these players were recruited at the request of the coach or someone else in the football dept, the Recruiting Manager has the responsibility to argue the case, for or against, based on the players options he has to chose instead.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Key Observations

* From the 09/10 drafts only 4 of 16 players remain listed, these are; Howard, Tutt, Dahlhaus & Johannisen.

- Only 1, Dahlhaus has established himself as a regular AFL player

- Only 1 player (Tutt) in the 2 national drafts was chosen from the elite national pathway. And he was from the 2nd tier competition.

- 3 of these are midgets (180cm or below) & 1 suburban footballer (Howard)

- Howard was chosen in the first round, ahead of players who were proven elite players recognised in the elite national pathway, including; Ben Griffiths, Nat Fyfe, Ryan Bastinac, Jake Carlisle, Aaron Black, Mitch Duncan, Jack Gunston, all proven players through the elite national pathway and/or state leagues

- Tutt was chosen ahead of others in the National Draft (ND) OR rookie draft (RD) including; Sam Reid, Allen Christensen, Nat Vardy, Ben Stratton, Jake Fitzpatrick, Taylor Duryea, Ben Howlett, Matthew Wright, Stewart Crameri, Levi Casboult, Matthew Jaensch, James Podsiadly,

Questions - On what basis was Howard chosen as the 15th best player in the country when he was deemed not good enough to play for his state at u/18 level, nor invited to the ND camp. or State camp?
- On what basis was Howard chosen ahead of even Tutt?
- On what basis was Schofield, Skinner and Hill chosen ahead of Dahlhaus when Dahlhaus was an excellent player for Vic country at u/18 level and the others did not play rep football that year.

* An inability to select Small Defenders – 8 have been chosen. These include; Howard, Tutt, Schofield, Johannisen, Pearce, Jong, Goodes, Fuller.

- None have established themselves as an AFL player

- Current mainstay small defenders in the team are Picken, Murphy, Wood, Higgins. All recruited previously

* Midgets 10 in total - Tutt, Hooper, Schofield, Dahlhaus, Johannisen, Pearce, Greenwood, Fuller, Hrovat, Honeychurch

Here is some interesting information;
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/af...-1226650225771


* State League Recruits – 14 in total; Lukas Markovic, Shane Thorne, Brodie Moles, Eddie Prato, Pat Rose, Zeph Skinner, Ed Barlow, Mitch Hahn, Tory Dickson, Tom Campbell, Jack Redpath, Mark Austin, Brett Goodes, Matthew Fuller

- It is likely that all 14 will not make it as good AFL players

- Between the State League Recruits and the Midgets 23 out of 34 have been recruited almost 75% of Dalrymples recruits yet very few are likely to mske it as an AFL player

* Inability to Select Key Position Players;

- Only 4 Key forwards selected overall; Panos, Hill, Redpath & Roberts.
- Only key forward selected in the ND, Tom Hill at pick 89. Then 1 in the PSD & 2 in the RD.
- Only 2 ruckmen selected overall and both in the rookie draft (Prato & Campbell)
- Prato, a former basketballer, had hardly played any competitive football
- Only 1 key defender chosen (Talia) inside first 3 rounds of ND.
- Ovarall in 5 years only 1 KP player chosen in the first 2 rounds of the ND

- Current KP's Minson, Morris, Roughead all recruited previously with, aside from Talia, Jones and Cordy the next in line option

Other Observations

- No Players with genuine pace have made it
- No players with elite kicking skill have made it
- Since Mcartney became coach emphasis on the 1st round selections on larger midfield capable types (Smith, Stringer, Macrae, Bontempelli)
- Limited use of rookie list in Macartney era

I could add more but it's 3am and I've worried enough about the Dogs for one night. Make up your own mind about whether Simon Dalrymple will recruit the players the Bulldogs need to win a premierhip. I have.

[Remi Moses]

How can you possibly make any judgements on drafts that have been murdered by the two franchise teams?
There's some hits, and some misses . We need speed, we need forwards.
I've said my bit on the list having to many one paced same types.

[The Doctor]

How can you possibly make any judgements on drafts that have been murdered by the two franchise teams?

You make the judgements on the players Dalrymple chose at the club's expense of those he didn't. Hindsight arguments don't come into it when you chose speculative types (Howard, Skinner) from state leagues in their respective drafts ahead of proven elite junior players (Fyfe, Dahlhaus) that are presented to all clubs at the National draft camp/combine.

I agree with you about too many one paced types. Dalrymple has had opportunities to address this but has either picked the wrong player (Tutt) or passed on the opportunity (e.g. Goodes instead of Sam Dwyer). Dwyer incidently tore Howard a new one in the VFL GF a few years ago. Funny how Colllingwood in a less privileged draft position get a better result than us. But in Dalrymple's defence this may have been a coach/club directive.

[Remi Moses]

Also what has to be taken into account is what money has been spent in the recruiting dept.
I know they've beefed it up ( absolute necessity) got Neville Stibbard ( Norf recruiter) on board
2009 was a stinker ( Howard) but to be honest we haven't had a level playing field with the two franchises and finances in recruiting

[The Doctor]

Also what has to be taken into account is what money has been spent in the recruiting dept.
I know they've beefed it up ( absolute necessity) got Neville Stibbard ( Norf recruiter) on board
2009 was a stinker ( Howard) but to be honest we haven't had a level playing field with the two franchises and finances in recruiting

In the instance of Dalrymple's first 2 drafts money has nothing to do with it but common sense does. In the national drafts of 09/10 he chose duds from state leagues at the expense of the best juniors in the country. There is no excuse for this. The best juniors are easily on show throughout the year via the state u/18 champs, the TAC, the respective state and national draft camps etc that even a 15 year old Bigfooty draft expert could have picked a better outcome.

We wasted money on sending all our experts to the national draft camps in those 2 years because we wasted our picks on state league duds.

Again the excuse of the new franchises doesn't stack up in this instance. If it is used it is a cop out.

[Topdog]

But our problems haven't been because of the new teams coming in, they have been because we have made ridiculous picks. Howard is still just a staggeringly stupid pick.

2011 doesn't appear to be much better at this stage and I still heavily question the Clay Smith pick.

I think he nailed the 2012 draft to be fair.

[soupman]

Interestingly if I am correct since BMac's arrival there has been a distinct change in where we get the players from.

Of the 18 players we have recruited in that time (excludes f/s) only 1, Matthew Fuller has been from an interstate club. There has been a far greater emphasis on recruiting good guys, from Victorian clubs, with a mixture of mature age and under 18 experience.
Completely contrary to many of Dalrymple's first two drafts nearly everyone has come through an established talent pathway or has played multiple games in the VFL.

I wonder if our scouting resources were redirected so instead of trying to cover the whole country (and try and snag an unknown like Skinner or Thorne) we are just playing the percentages and have decided that since Victoria produces so much talent, has no go home factor and is best located for scouts who can regularly meet up with the team out of our Melbourne base that we are best served putting the vast majority of our scouts in this state.

[azabob]

But our problems haven't been because of the new teams coming in, they have been because we have made ridiculous picks. Howard is still just a staggeringly stupid pick.

2011 doesn't appear to be much better at this stage and I still heavily question the Clay Smith pick.

I think he nailed the 2012 draft to be fair.

2011 was not a strong draft. After Clay Smith was selected I think you could make cases for two players only. It was also established that the coach wanted a hard body inside midfielder - not Crozier or Hill who are more outside players.

[Remi Moses]

But our problems haven't been because of the new teams coming in, they have been because we have made ridiculous picks. Howard is still just a staggeringly stupid pick.

2011 doesn't appear to be much better at this stage and I still heavily question the Clay Smith pick.

I think he nailed the 2012 draft to be fair.

You couldn't say that the compromised drafts haven't muddied the recruiting waters. He's had a few howlers, ( Howard) but he should be praised for Dahlhaus. The talent pool is extremely thin with the 18 teams.

[The Doctor]

YHe's had a few howlers, ( Howard) but he should be praised for Dahlhaus.

I disagree with this and it has nothing to do with Dahlhaus as a player.

In his draft year I thought Dahl was worthy of a 2/3 round National Draft pick. He slipped through to pick 22 in the rookie draft so good luck to the Dogs.

The issue I have with Dalrymple, as I alluded to in my opening post, is why did he chose Schofield, Skinner and Hill ahead of him. None of the 3 played rep footy that year or played it well like Dahl did and were more likely to be higher risk selections. Dalrymple got lucky in this instance and that luck has helped paper over the cracks of his judgement failures (just like having Wallis and Libba on his credit scorecard have).

Having said all that I will offer some acknowledgement that Johannisen, picked later in the rookie draft, was a good get as he was relatively unheralded and has probably exceeded expectation for someone drafted in his position.

[boydogs]

The issue I have with Dalrymple, as I alluded to in my opening post, is why did he chose Schofield, Skinner and Hill ahead of him.

You're not doing your argument any favours with the Dahlhaus example. Dahlhaus was overlooked by all other recruiters as well, and in fact we were the ones that rated him highest. Dalrymple may have known this and therefore didn't use an earlier pick on him. Dahlhaus also isn't the same player type as the other 3 - name another KPF we could have chosen over Tom Hill for instance that had a better pedigree

[Remi Moses]

You're not doing your argument any favours with the Dahlhaus example. Dahlhaus was overlooked by all other recruiters as well, and in fact we were the ones that rated him highest. Dalrymple may have known this and therefore didn't use an earlier pick on him. Dahlhaus also isn't the same player type as the other 3 - name another KPF we could have chosen over Tom Hill for instance that had a better pedigree

Incredible really

[The Doctor]

You're not doing your argument any favours with the Dahlhaus example. Dahlhaus was overlooked by all other recruiters as well, and in fact we were the ones that rated him highest.

Yet rated him lower than Schofield, Skinner and Hill? Why is the question I am asking as a supporter but more importantly what any Bulldog Manager in authority should be asking him?

[Remi Moses]

I disagree with this and it has nothing to do with Dahlhaus as a player.

In his draft year I thought Dahl was worthy of a 2/3 round National Draft pick. He slipped through to pick 22 in the rookie draft so good luck to the Dogs.

The issue I have with Dalrymple, as I alluded to in my opening post, is why did he chose Schofield, Skinner and Hill ahead of him. None of the 3 played rep footy that year or played it well like Dahl did and were more likely to be higher risk selections. Dalrymple got lucky in this instance and that luck has helped paper over the cracks of his judgement failures (just like having Wallis and Libba on his credit scorecard have).

Having said all that I will offer some acknowledgement that Johannisen, picked later in the rookie draft, was a good get as he was relatively unheralded and has probably exceeded expectation for someone drafted in his position.

So you can him for his dud selections, but Dahlhaus (after every club REJECTED him in the national draft)doesn't deserve a tick for picking him. Can't have it both ways

[The Doctor]

So you can him for his dud selections, but Dahlhaus (after every club REJECTED him in the national draft)doesn't deserve a tick for picking him. Can't have it both ways

The fact remains he wasted 3 picks in the ND on duds who were not considered elite juniors, all ahead of Dahl who was. So he got lucky.

Had the 3 he chose ahead of Dahl become good AFL players or even say 2 out of 3 then I would be praising him for his judgement. But none did.

It doesn't matter what other clubs did. Dalrymple needs to be held to account for his actions as I'm sure other clubs hold their recruiting managers accountable for theirs.

I find it difficult to believe you would support someone who has a proven reputation for wasting precious draft picks. Incredible really.