Thanks Thanks:  3
Likes Likes:  3
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 40
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Doglands
    Posts
    39,500
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Some of the discussions have moved to a more list management theme than best available.

    I still don't see the issue with taking the best available (with some common sense applied) with early picks.
    If you recruit the best player and back the training a club can provide clubs should see improvement
    Western Bulldogs Football Club "Where it's cool to drool"

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    18,741
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Quote Originally Posted by GVGjr View Post
    Some of the discussions have moved to a more list management theme than best available.

    I still don't see the issue with taking the best available (with some common sense applied) with early picks.
    If you recruit the best player and back the training a club can provide clubs should see improvement
    Isn't drafting and list management intrinsically linked?

    Some elite talent is unbelievably difficult to acquire via trade.
    Nobody's looking for a puppeteer in today's wintry economic climate.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    E.J. Whitten Stand
    Posts
    17,162
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Quote Originally Posted by westbulldog View Post
    re the comment about Jack Redpath i.e "one has dodgy knees and an even dodgier off field attitude", could the poster elaborate on this ? Redpath is by all accounts pretty popular at the Club. I think you need to back up that comment or withdraw it.
    I'm happy for the comment to remain exactly where it is.
    Our 1954 premiership players are our heroes, and it has to be said that Charlie was their hero.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wherever the dogs are playing
    Posts
    60,880
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Quote Originally Posted by jeemak View Post
    So what you're saying is that hard and fast rules are the way to go?

    What if we had pick four, and we closely rated an inside mid as the fourth best player over a genuinely talented KPF at five. We went through the analysis and found there was only a marginal percentage difference in our scoring criteria.

    We have a glut of inside midfielders, and a shortage of key position forwards.

    Would you still choose the inside midfielder?
    The other consideration is how do you determine the best available? Players that look great in under age football, often don't turn out the best in senior footy. The top five or even the top ten I guess are going to be pretty good players and as you say, they could be a mixture of mids, forwards, backs talls etc, so there is a bit of an element of going with needs.
    FFC: Established 1883

    Premierships: AFL 1954, 2016 VFA - 1898,99,1900, 1908, 1913, 1919-20, 1923-24, VFL: 2014, 2016 . Champions of Victoria 1924. AFLW - 2018.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    27,890
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Quote Originally Posted by jeemak View Post
    So what you're saying is that hard and fast rules are the way to go?

    What if we had pick four, and we closely rated an inside mid as the fourth best player over a genuinely talented KPF at five. We went through the analysis and found there was only a marginal percentage difference in our scoring criteria.

    We have a glut of inside midfielders, and a shortage of key position forwards.

    Would you still choose the inside midfielder?
    In that case you'd spend pick 4 to get a pick 5 rated player. I'm meaning more reaching for second or third round standard players and taking them with first round picks. (A big hello to Footscray premiership hero Christian Howard at this stage of the thread)
    Have you been reading those Roddy Doyle books again, Dougal!?


    I have, yeah Ted, you big gobshite

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,574
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Always take the best player, how you determine the best may change year on year though, where certain attributes are weighted differently based on list management needs, changes in game plan or game style and general evolution based on what successful teams have found that success with.

    When you look at our draft clusters, we seem to value certain attributes more highly at times.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Doglands
    Posts
    39,500
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Quote Originally Posted by jeemak View Post
    Isn't drafting and list management intrinsically linked?

    Some elite talent is unbelievably difficult to acquire via trade.
    Yes but there is a difference. Draft for the best available, trade for the gaps within the list.

    I agree elite talent is very hard to acquire via a trade and that is why clubs typically use the best available approach with early selections.
    You wouldn't necessarily trade for a player where you already have that position covered.
    Western Bulldogs Football Club "Where it's cool to drool"

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Wheelers Hill
    Posts
    4,200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Quote Originally Posted by comrade View Post
    A) Young is a defender for now.
    B) Adams has played his best footy in defence, his ability as a forward is unproven.
    C) Fine, Dickson and Smith are small forwards. As a collective, we've got too many mid sized and small forwards then.
    So why do you think we should be looking at Coughlan from St Kilda?
    I thought I was wrong once but I was mistaken.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    E.J. Whitten Stand
    Posts
    17,162
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Quote Originally Posted by always right View Post
    So why do you think we should be looking at Coughlan from St Kilda?
    Because I think he'd be a value Moneyball pick as a rookie.
    Our 1954 premiership players are our heroes, and it has to be said that Charlie was their hero.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Wheelers Hill
    Posts
    4,200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Quote Originally Posted by comrade View Post
    Because I think he'd be a value Moneyball pick as a rookie.
    Wouldn't he add to the problem of too many tall defenders?
    I thought I was wrong once but I was mistaken.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Hobart
    Posts
    5,864
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dry Rot View Post
    Well we must have too many of something else given the holes in our list.
    Quote Originally Posted by comrade View Post
    Too many of these:

    Tall defenders (Collins, Young, Adams, Roberts, Cordy)
    Mid size forwards (Dickson, Stringer, Greene, Lipinski, Crameri, Clay Smith)

    And the holes are there due to lack of quality. Look at our key forward stocks: Cloke, Redpath and Boyd. 3 is probably ok to have on a list but those names are shocking. One is almost on the retirement scrap heap, one has dodgy knees and an even dodgier off field attitude, and Boyd is a hybrid ruck/forward.
    This is a very old fashioned way of doing it, with a 190cm cutoff between small and tall, and no regard for flexibility or AFL readiness, but as a starting point:

    Small Defenders (5/7) - Suckling, Wood, Biggs, Williams, Johannisen
    Tall Defenders (6/4) - Cordy, Roberts, Adams, Collins, Young, Morris
    Inside Mids (6/7) - Wallis, Dahlhaus, Dunkley, Liberatore, Honeychurch, Jong
    Outside Mids (6/7) - Bontempelli, Hunter, Macrae, McLean, Webb, Daniel
    Rucks (3/4) - Campbell, Roughead, English
    Small Forwards (7/7) - Smith, Crameri, Lipinski, Dickson, Dale, Greene, Picken
    Tall Forwards (4/4) - Stringer, Cloke, Boyd, Redpath

    Retired/Delisted - Murphy, Boyd, Hamilton

    Based on that we probably need a ready made ruck, some developing mids and small defenders and fewer tall defenders. But then downgrade Morris to small, move Adams forward and trade Stringer and things look different
    If you kicked five goals and Tom Boyd kicked five goals, Tom Boyd kicked more goals than you.

    Formerly gogriff

  12. Thanks GVGjr thanked for this post
  13. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    sydenham
    Posts
    12,608
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Quote Originally Posted by boydogs View Post
    This is a very old fashioned way of doing it, with a 190cm cutoff between small and tall, and no regard for flexibility or AFL readiness, but as a starting point:

    Small Defenders (5/7) - Suckling, Wood, Biggs, Williams, Johannisen
    Tall Defenders (6/4) - Cordy, Roberts, Adams, Collins, Young, Morris
    Inside Mids (6/7) - Wallis, Dahlhaus, Dunkley, Liberatore, Honeychurch, Jong
    Outside Mids (6/7) - Bontempelli, Hunter, Macrae, McLean, Webb, Daniel
    Rucks (3/4) - Campbell, Roughead, English
    Small Forwards (7/7) - Smith, Crameri, Lipinski, Dickson, Dale, Greene, Picken
    Tall Forwards (4/4) - Stringer, Cloke, Boyd, Redpath

    Retired/Delisted - Murphy, Boyd, Hamilton

    Based on that we probably need a ready made ruck, some developing mids and small defenders and fewer tall defenders. But then downgrade Morris to small, move Adams forward and trade Stringer and things look different
    And add Trengove.
    Bring back the biff

  14. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    27,890
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Quote Originally Posted by comrade View Post
    Because I think he'd be a value Moneyball pick as a rookie.
    Is that Nick Coughlan that was at Footscray? He is a good footballer. He plays well.
    Have you been reading those Roddy Doyle books again, Dougal!?


    I have, yeah Ted, you big gobshite

  15. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wherever the dogs are playing
    Posts
    60,880
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Quote Originally Posted by boydogs View Post
    This is a very old fashioned way of doing it, with a 190cm cutoff between small and tall, and no regard for flexibility or AFL readiness, but as a starting point:

    Small Defenders (5/7) - Suckling, Wood, Biggs, Williams, Johannisen
    Tall Defenders (6/4) - Cordy, Roberts, Adams, Collins, Young, Morris
    Inside Mids (6/7) - Wallis, Dahlhaus, Dunkley, Liberatore, Honeychurch, Jong
    Outside Mids (6/7) - Bontempelli, Hunter, Macrae, McLean, Webb, Daniel
    Rucks (3/4) - Campbell, Roughead, English
    Small Forwards (7/7) - Smith, Crameri, Lipinski, Dickson, Dale, Greene, Picken
    Tall Forwards (4/4) - Stringer, Cloke, Boyd, Redpath

    Retired/Delisted - Murphy, Boyd, Hamilton

    Based on that we probably need a ready made ruck, some developing mids and small defenders and fewer tall defenders. But then downgrade Morris to small, move Adams forward and trade Stringer and things look different
    Good list Boydogs, however, another element needs to be factored in and that is experience. If you look at the tall defenders Morris has the most experience followed by Roberts, and that's it. The other guys are all young which means we may need another tall defender, and I guess that is where Trengove comes in.

    A further factor to consider is pace in the midfield. We may have plenty of inside and outside mids, but they all lack pace.
    FFC: Established 1883

    Premierships: AFL 1954, 2016 VFA - 1898,99,1900, 1908, 1913, 1919-20, 1923-24, VFL: 2014, 2016 . Champions of Victoria 1924. AFLW - 2018.

  16. Likes boydogs liked this post
  17. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Bendigo
    Posts
    9,365
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Do you still believe in drafting best available? Then do you also accept the consequences of that?

    Quote Originally Posted by Twodogs View Post
    Is that Nick Coughlan that was at Footscray? He is a good footballer. He plays well.
    Forgotten about him. Loved him at the Scary. I really like Gowers from the VFL. Wouldn't mind it if we gave him a spot on the list.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •