Emma Quayle - Are The Bulldogs Mad?

[Sedat]

Fantastic thread with some great discussion.

Just coming from a slightly different perspective, isn't there some level of risk in every single playing list decision? We are all very aware of the risks associated with players that are traded to the club because they have an AFL history we can all revert to. Relevant to drafted players, it ultimately doesn't matter what number any player is drafted at - they are all a risk that involves (once you add coaches time and resource allocation to that player over and above their actual contract) an up-front investment of at least 400k in the first two seasons alone before there is any major return on the initial investment (honorable exceptions to the likes of Joel Selwood who made an immediate impact when drafted). It ultimately doesn't matter if the player was drafted at pick 70 or pick 7, if they do not become medium-to-long-term senior players of value, they ultimately represent a poor investment.

Using that logic, if the recruiting staff identified specific players that possess the necessary skills-set that they believe will become senior players of longevity, with medium-to-long-term value for the club, I personally don't care what number they are drafted at. The theory behind the talent identification process, as alluded to by Doc and mjp, is a different topic altogether and one worthy of a separate thread. But the actual draft number a player is picked at is really of no consequence once they get to the club. Opportunity costs are a little over-rated and over-analysed when you consider how many quality AFL footballers are running around today that were rookie listed or taken late in the draft - the likes of Harbrow, Boyd and Morris were overlooked by every single club (including ours) multiple times over before making their way onto the list. Are they lesser individuals that the likes of Cooney and Griffen, purely because of their draft position?

[Twodogs]

To be fair to Emma the headline would have been written by a sub-editor wouldnt it? Fair enough we can ascribe the ''drinking" quote to her text but she then goes on to discuss the (fairly good) reasons for her scepticism.

[LongWait]

Pick 15 in a shallow draft placed our recruiters in a difficult spot in my opinion. Had they had a pick in the first ten or so, Howard would not have been considered by us in the first round.

According to Eade, the club had a clear view on who made up the top dozen and, after those twelve, the prominent/well known candidates all have significant flaws or are not good fits for us.

We had a couple of kids in mind whose skills sets perfectly fit the clubs future needs (seriously good kicks, abundant pace with good endurance, great decision-makers) who also importantly have the personal qualities and character the club values (and they pass the ‘no d*ckheads’ rule). Most others do not rate these kids as highly as us, however there were at least two clubs who would take a similar view to us and rate them fairly highly (Adelaide and West Coast in the case of Howard.)

The conservative course of action is to use pick 15 to take one of the prospects rated by most clubs, the media and the armchair expert Phantom Draft devotees as a reasonable prospect. We could have played safe, even though the club has significant doubts about the suitability, character, physical or playing deficiencies or whatever of these well known prospects. In taking this ‘conservative’ approach we would have jeopardised the prospect of getting either of the lesser known kids we really wanted: another club may have swooped on either or both before our next selection (West Coast at 22 and Adelaide at 29.)

Imagine us wanting Howard and Tutt and getting neither because we didn’t have the balls to buck the conventional wisdom of whom we should have picked at 15 and 31. We could easily have ended up with Panos by following the herd mentality, as he certainly was rated by many “experts” as a possible first or second round selection. If we had chosen Panos at 31, or even at 15, would the experts have bagged us? Hardly. Would the other clubs have admitted they wouldn’t have selected Panos at all, with any of their picks? No. We would have over-payed dramatically for a high profile prospective draftee and no-ne would be any the wiser.

It is easy but I believe wrong to say our staff were conned, that their inexperience showed, that our new recruiters wanted to make a mark and a name for themselves etc. We did not follow the usual script. We said damn the torpedoes and acted with the courage of our convictions. Perhaps we’ve started the AFL version of Moneyball. Bloody good stuff I say!

[comrade]

Nice, Long Wait.

[LostDoggy]

Nice, Long Wait.

Ditto

[The Underdog]

It is easy but I believe wrong to say our staff were conned, that their inexperience showed, that our new recruiters wanted to make a mark and a name for themselves etc. We did not follow the usual script. We said damn the torpedoes and acted with the courage of our convictions. Perhaps we’ve started the AFL version of Moneyball. Bloody good stuff I say!

While I don't disagree with a lot of what you said, can I point out that Moneyball teams haven't won jack and most of them have floundered in recent times. the A's have been terrible and the majority of their personnel moves have backfired recently. J.P Ricciardi a disciple of Billy Beane was recently fired as GM of the Blue Jays. Theo Epstein of the Red Sox came from a Moneyball background but has been the head of a team with one of the highest payroll's in the majors. In the end resources in scouting and development and finance plus talent are more likely to win out.
It's fine to think and act differently and to have the courage of your convictions but the proof will be in the pudding. Smartest guy in the room picks are fine if they work but he won't be employed for long if they don't.

[LongWait]

While I don't disagree with a lot of what you said, can I point out that Moneyball teams haven't won jack and most of them have floundered in recent times. the A's have been terrible and the majority of their personnel moves have backfired recently. J.P Ricciardi a disciple of Billy Beane was recently fired as GM of the Blue Jays. Theo Epstein of the Red Sox came from a Moneyball background but has been the head of a team with one of the highest payroll's in the majors. In the end resources in scouting and development and finance plus talent are more likely to win out.
It's fine to think and act differently and to have the courage of your convictions but the proof will be in the pudding. Smartest guy in the room picks are fine if they work but he won't be employed for long if they don't.

Moneyball teams probably would be much worse performers than they are had they adopted conventional approaches - they generally don't have the resources to compete with the baseball equivalents of Collingwood and West Coast.

My post was not really about Moneyball anyway - a more important point was avoiding group-think and conservatism for fear of being criticised.

[boydogs]

C'mon gogriff - hold it right there. Better than Gilbee? He hasn't played a game yet.

Yet you are already judging our selection as a mistake. Of course he is not better than Gilbee today, but from the description of the type of player he is it sounds like he could be. For our recruiters to rate him above Black and others, you would have to think they are hoping for a similar quality of player as Gilbee

Like Doc I am fascinated how he didn't make the SA u18's side

Firstly, how is it possible that our first choice can be ranked the 13th best player in the draft by our recruiting team. Consider this, the player,

* was not selected in the SA under 18 representative team during the year
* was not selected among the best 30 players for an AIS academy placing
* Was not invited to the draft camp or incredibly the state screening
* was not on Kevin Sheehan's top 30 list or those of other notable draft experts
* to my knowledge did not play and prove himself at senior footy level.

What I see with Howard is a player who has come from the clouds in the 2nd half of the u18 season (and rose to prominence when the best 25 were on state duties)...

Not sure The Doctor actually questioned the SA selectors, but your point re. the timing of Howard's improvement seems to provide an explanation. This is from the horse's mouth:

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/s...016212,00.html

"Christian's virtually come from nowhere," said SA under-18 coach Brenton Phillips, who did not pick him in his State squad.

"He was getting 10-to-12 touches a game at under-18 level early in the year but by the end of the season he was winning the ball 20-to-22 times and using it well. He has turned into a dashing left-footer who is such an elite kick that he virtually nails them every time."

It also wasn't just the period the championships were running when he showed his wares:

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/s...016212,00.html

Howard, who joined Glenelg's junior program at 11 from Sacred Heart College, said he has no doubt his brilliant under-18 finals series has helped his draft standing. "If you play well in big games it certainly helps" he said.

All that said, I am happy if we identified him as our target and made sure we got him - no issues with the recruiters backing themselves in. But if we are going to be silly defending the pick by saying he is better than Gilbee then surely we need to reassess...

It honestly wasn't a Howard now v Gilbee now comparison I was trying to make. When you hear things like the below though, that is what I am hoping for when he has a chance to further develop and reach his potential

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/s...016212,00.html

Described as being a mix of Hawthorn's Luke Hodge (kicking skills), Geelong's Andrew Mackie (the way he patrols half-back) and Adelaide's Brad Symes (physique and running ability), Howard's star has risen so quickly he is being considered as high as a second-round pick.

Brought through Glenelg's junior grades as a midfielder but used this season as an attacking half-back flanker, the 187cm Howard was the Tigers' designated under-18 kicker. His kicking was so strong it drew comparisons to Norm Smith Medallist Hodge.

"He's got that depth and accuracy with his kicking, which is so important in footy these days," Glenelg football manager Ken Applegarth said. "And he's got that uncanny ability to read the play and find the footy. It's amazing how quickly he's developed this year and he works so hard on his game that it's no surprise to see AFL clubs chasing him. He really does tick all the boxes."

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsartic...1/default.aspx

Howard has shot up in recent times and now looks certain to be drafted. His foot skills are regarded among the best in the draft. He was Glenelg's designated kicker during its 2009 under-18 premiership season. A dashing half-back with good endurance, Howard simply got better as the year went on.

http://city-messenger.whereilive.com...eview-glenelg/

The surprise packet from the Bay looks like being midfielder Christian Howard, who plays a swooping role off half back similar to Hawthorn’s Luke Hodge.

According to Phillips, Howard has ``come from nowhere’’ to be one of the draft’s leading prospects.

``I reckon he’ll maybe go in the first round,’’ Phillips said.

``He’s come from nowhere, a left-footer who kicks the ball beautifully.

``He was getting his 10 touches a game at under-18 level early in the year but by the end of the season his stats were up to 20 possessions a game and he was using it.’’

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-new...1126-jux6.html

''He's been on our radar for a while,'' recruiter Simon Dalrymple said. ''We really targeted him. We rate him as a very good kick, a penetrating left-footer who can kick goals from 55, kicks with a firm foot and gets the ball from A to B very quickly. We're rapt to have him.''

OK guys, this is from someone who seriously would know.

Christian Howard getting drafted is simply fantastic because in our opinion he has always been a talented footballer, but this year really transformed himself into a really accomplished player. He is a great athlete and has a terrific motor and can run around 10.00mins flat for a 3 km time trial which shows his running ability. He was easily the best kick in the Under 18 competition and I have publicly stated that he is the best kick at the Glenelg Football Club in all grades as he hits targets from 50m and beyond.

Whilst always having a great weapon with his kicking prowess, Howie really worked hard on both his defensive and offensive actions this year and he became such a strong rebounding player in the last half of the year, that Port Adelaide tried to tag him in the Under 18 Grand Final. His finals series was outstanding, but his whole year was worthy of him being a Top 15 Pick.

Having watched the Under 18 Carnival, he was well above the standards that I saw, and whilst many people are saying that he is a smokey, in our opinion he always had the ability, he just needed to work harder and develop some confidence in his own ability.

He is unbelievably well suited to the Bulldogs – he is a left footed Lindsay Gilbee and has many attributes like Nathan Eagleton. It’s a great pick up by the Bulldogs and we are all just over the moon for him.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/af...-1225805517909

"He fits the profile of what we wanted -- a guy that can run and kick and set the play up. He ticked a lot of boxes, so we're certainly very pleased to take him at that level."

[The Underdog]

Moneyball teams probably would be much worse performers than they are had they adopted conventional approaches - they generally don't have the resources to compete with the baseball equivalents of Collingwood and West Coast.

My post was not really about Moneyball anyway - a more important point was avoiding group-think and conservatism for fear of being criticised.

I know your post wasn't really about Moneyball but it was a comparison you made so I thought it was worthwhile expanding slightly. I think the salary cap and lack of free agency in AFL makes it a somewhat moot point anyway as its not totally apples and apples. I agree with avoiding group think but it's a short trip from backing your instincts to reaching for the wrong guy. Anyway, history will tell. To be honest if we win the premiership this year then Howard could turn out to be a chicken in a man disguise and I wouldn't care.

[mjp]

Yet you are already judging our selection as a mistake. Of course he is not better than Gilbee today, but from the description of the type of player he is it sounds like he could be. For our recruiters to rate him above Black and others, you would have to think they are hoping for a similar quality of player as Gilbee

No - I'm not saying that the selection is a mistake. Never have.

What I have consistently said is that if he is the one we really wanted - great. We defied conventional wisdom and got him, so bully for us. I am just surprised we thought that way and presented a few reasons why I thought so. Like I said previously, it is great that Phillips said nice things about him...so why didn't he pick him in the u18's again?

Now - I appreciate all of the newspaper links but you know I make my judgements on what I see, not on what I read.

[aker39]

Now - I appreciate all of the newspaper links but you know I make my judgements on what I see, not on what I read.

What games did you see him play in?

[Sockeye Salmon]

No - I'm not saying that the selection is a mistake. Never have.

What I have consistently said is that if he is the one we really wanted - great. We defied conventional wisdom and got him, so bully for us. I am just surprised we thought that way and presented a few reasons why I thought so. Like I said previously, it is great that Phillips said nice things about him...so why didn't he pick him in the u18's again?

Now - I appreciate all of the newspaper links but you know I make my judgements on what I see, not on what I read.

Was Phillips the state coach as well as the Glenelg U18's coach?

I assume he would have been fairly aware of Howards abilities at the selection table.

[mjp]

What games did you see him play in?

Did a review of all the SANFL u18's finals games post-season. So I saw him play twice.

[Sedat]

Did a review of all the SANFL u18's finals games post-season. So I saw him play twice.

From watching Howard in action in those two SANFL U-18 finals matches, what are your personal perspectives on his strengths and weaknesses? Was it too hard to assess based on the standard he played against? Your opinions are highly valued on this board so it would be great to know. While we're at it, if you've seen our other 3 new tecruits in action, it would be great to hear your thoughts on their collective strengths and weaknesses as well.

[Throughandthrough]

Did a review of all the SANFL u18's finals games post-season. So I saw him play twice.

Filmed from one camera. High in the stands with no commentary. Dalyrmple was flying to the games to watch him.

Also, to answer another poster, Phillips was not Howie's Coach @ the Bays.

I believe that he (Howie) may not have shown as much commitment early in the season as he did later in the season. When he did, it all clicked.

Hence the non-selection in the State Team (that and Phillips has no idea, but I digress) and the stellar end of year form.