Dogs Make List Changes

[Ghost Dog]

Nobody at the club has “admitted” they got it wrong. Get over it.

Have to agree with you scragger. I think the club got it right. We needed some brute force. There was a thread on here about a year ago questioning our ticker and it was all up for debate. Lower was a means of giving us options, even if we didn't always use them.

[comrade]

The biggest mistake with Vez was keeping him on the list the past few years.

So picking him up was no problem but keeping him for too long was?

Why do you have a problem with the Lower selection then? And in this instance, we're moving him after the unexpectedly rapid development of some of our kids rather than keep him too long.

[bornadog]

So picking him up was no problem but keeping him for too long was?

Why do you have a problem with the Lower selection then? And in this instance, we're moving him after the unexpectedly rapid development of some of our kids rather than keep him too long.

On Vez - yes he shouldn't have been picked up in the first place and probably stayed two years too long.

On Lower - I said from day one that I didn't understand why we needed another inside mid as well as a tagger. With Boyd, Cross, Libba, Wallis, Smith and one of the best taggers in the AFL in Picken, we ended up wasting a spot on the list when maybe we should have been targeting an outside running type. However, while Lower played his 13 games, he helped the team and played some good games and some ordinary games.

That's all, no big deal.

[A Ford]

So picking him up was no problem but keeping him for too long was?

Why do you have a problem with the Lower selection then? And in this instance, we're moving him after the unexpectedly rapid development of some of our kids rather than keep him too long.

Huge difference.
Lower had already played at been twice delisted. Tagger at best. We already had one.
Vez was a high pick that never fulfilled his talent. Could always use a goal kicking forward.
The kids were always going to develop, it wasn't rapid, it was expected.

[bornadog]

Huge difference.
Lower had already played at been twice delisted. Tagger at best. We already had one.
Vez was a high pick that never fulfilled his talent. Could always use a goal kicking forward.
The kids were always going to develop, it wasn't rapid, it was expected.

You read my mind, I was going to say the same thing.

[G-Mo77]

The kids were always going to develop, it wasn't rapid, it was expected.

No it wasn't. A lot of questions were asked on our recruiting and youth over the past 2 - 3 years. It's a pity so many crystal balls weren't used back then. There is no guarantee a player is going to make it, absolutely none.

I don't think Wallis would have progressed so much in the last half of the year if Lower wasn't there. The policy of youth, youth, youth just doesn't work.

[Mofra]

The kids were always going to develop, it wasn't rapid, it was expected.

12+ months ago we had posters questioning whether Wallis would even make it, and now his rapid rise in the second half of the season was expected?

He was dropped to Willy during the year - was that expected as well?

Lower was brought in to cover for the kids as they developed - if mature players aren't required to help develop players, why do GWS & GCS bother with senior players at all?

We picked up a mature body - for nothing as a DFA pick after Freo let him go - he played more games than many draftees and we still have fans complaining.

[LostDoggy]

But, but, but, but he took up salary cap space !!!!

[jeemak]

12+ months ago we had posters questioning whether Wallis would even make it, and now his rapid rise in the second half of the season was expected?

He was dropped to Willy during the year - was that expected as well?

Lower was brought in to cover for the kids as they developed - if mature players aren't required to help develop players, why do GWS & GCS bother with senior players at all?

We picked up a mature body - for nothing as a DFA pick after Freo let him go - he played more games than many draftees and we still have fans complaining.

If I recall, 18 months ago Wallis was only a 50/50 chance to make it, then 12 months ago he was going to be a gun. 2 months ago he went back to about 65-35 and now he's up to around 90-10.

This is all getting a tad tiresome. In some ways getting Lower was a good decision, in other ways it was a bad decision. The club has moved him on now, and hopefully we will have a better list balance after the draft, rookie draft and preseason draft as a result.

Why things need to be placed in one of two columns, at opposite ends of the spectrum I'll never know............

[Mofra]

Why things need to be placed in one of two columns, at opposite ends of the spectrum I'll never know............

Most of the pro-Lower discussion has been centred around "he's played his role" as opposed to "what a star, great decision".

Role players do tend to get a raw deal in perception terms

[LostDoggy]

Why things need to be placed in one of two columns, at opposite ends of the spectrum I'll never know............

We gots to post about sumfink!

[A Ford]

Maybe Wallis would have starting tagging in round 1 not round 15? That would have been rapid development. Doubts on him were about his disposal and speed and that's still the case. Besides we are talking about the tagger role and not your no1 midfielder.
I don't buy the knowing more about Picken argument either. He had played 90 or so games. We already knew his disposal was poor and may be a liability in the back pocket.

[1eyedog]

No it wasn't. A lot of questions were asked on our recruiting and youth over the past 2 - 3 years. It's a pity so many crystal balls weren't used back then. There is no guarantee a player is going to make it, absolutely none.

I don't think Wallis would have progressed so much in the last half of the year if Lower wasn't there. The policy of youth, youth, youth just doesn't work.

Why? Do you think Lower on the fringes pushed Mitch to greater heights to keep his spot, or gave him an opportunity to rest his young body?

12+ months ago we had posters questioning whether Wallis would even make it, and now his rapid rise in the second half of the season was expected?

He was dropped to Willy during the year - was that expected as well?

Lower was brought in to cover for the kids as they developed - if mature players aren't required to help develop players, why do GWS & GCS bother with senior players at all?

We picked up a mature body - for nothing as a DFA pick after Freo let him go - he played more games than many draftees and we still have fans complaining.

There were many also who knew he was going to be good and expected an increase in output in 2013, which we got - same with Libba and Smith.

We have many many more mature bodies than GWS and GCS who are predominately just kids.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Maybe Wallis would have starting tagging in round 1 not round 15? That would have been rapid development. Doubts on him were about his disposal and speed and that's still the case. Besides we are talking about the tagger role and not your no1 midfielder.
I don't buy the knowing more about Picken argument either. He had played 90 or so games. We already knew his disposal was poor and may be a liability in the back pocket.

Picken has performed well in recent weeks in the back pocket and lends valuable experience to the likes of Murphy and Morris. The difficulty with Wallis I believe from the outset was the comparisons being made between him and Liberatore. It takes time sometimes to establish where players are best suited. Roughead is another example of having been moved to FB he has now grown in confidence, to be a top 10 place getter in our best and fairest.

[G-Mo77]

Why? Do you think Lower on the fringes pushed Mitch to greater heights to keep his spot, or gave him an opportunity to rest his young body?

I believe players like Goodes and Lower were recruited for these reasons. It astounds me that people think taking them on is wasteful.