Welcome to the Dogs Jayden Schofield

[Topdog]

Re: Welcome to the Dogs Jayden Schofield

Potential does not a 'good pick' make -- surely you see the difference between a good prospect and a good player.

It was actually a "great pick" in the initial post which makes your point even more valid. You can't anoint someone a great pick this early. I'm very excited for Tutt's career but gee surely we've seen it all before.

[Mofra]

Re: Welcome to the Dogs Jayden Schofield

I'm just saying that it's far, far too early to call it one way or the other if he'll be a good AFL player or not, and that's just a fact. All we can say is that he has the potential to be one (which is how they get picked in the first place, to answer your question). Potential does not a 'good pick' make -- surely you see the difference between a good prospect and a good player.

I can understand your point, and it works in theory - in practice we have to judge players on potential and on what they've shown thus far.

How do we approach list management if we discount the output and potential of kids who have only played a handful of games? If a list has a number of young inside mids (eg we have Wallis and Libba establishing themselves as players) this will impact on who we target with our first round pick - all things being equal, we'd be more likely to choose a player that is not an inside mid. This is despite either player fully establishing themselves as yet (although Libba would be close).

[stefoid]

Re: Welcome to the Dogs Jayden Schofield

I can understand your point, and it works in theory - in practice we have to judge players on potential and on what they've shown thus far.

How do we approach list management if we discount the output and potential of kids who have only played a handful of games? If a list has a number of young inside mids (eg we have Wallis and Libba establishing themselves as players) this will impact on who we target with our first round pick - all things being equal, we'd be more likely to choose a player that is not an inside mid. This is despite either player fully establishing themselves as yet (although Libba would be close).

Personally I have gone off the idea of specifically requiring a mix of inside/outside mids.

If someone is labelled an inside mid, its because they have pace or kicking deficiencies.
If someone is labelled an outside mid, its because they have contested ball or pressure skill deficiencies.

So sure, your team might have some pure inside or outside players, but that shouldnt be by design, its a sign you have players who are working within their deficiencies.

So yeah, we might have a few inside midfielers - cross, wallis, boyd, libba, but that doesnt mean we should actively seek a pure outside midfielder to compliment them (even though I was saying just that a couple of months ago).

If the ONLY choice is between yet another inside midfiedler and an outside mid (with the deficiencies that those labels imply), then yes, go with the outside player for balance. BUT. If there are complete players who can win the ball AND dispose under pressure by hand or foot, then definately go for those players in preference.

And Im also coming around to the idea that reliable disposal in tight and under pressure is way more useful than reliable kicking under no pressure. To be a top team these days you need guys who can dispose well under pressure, regardless of the distance. Guys who are purely outside and look a million bucks with nobody on their hammer are worth less and less these days.

Thoughts?

[Mofra]

Re: Welcome to the Dogs Jayden Schofield

If someone is labelled an inside mid, its because they have pace or kicking deficiencies.
If someone is labelled an outside mid, its because they have contested ball or pressure skill deficiencies.

This probably raises another question in itself - Cooney & Griffen are often labelled as outside mids due to their pace & ball use, yet both are capable of winning their own ball.

Roles at the club are probably a little more opaque anyways - I've heard of set-ups where one mid is designated the "sweeper", another a "blocker" etc.

[Bornadog]

Re: Welcome to the Dogs Jayden Schofield

This probably raises another question in itself - Cooney & Griffen are often labelled as outside mids due to their pace & ball use, yet both are capable of winning their own ball.

Roles at the club are probably a little more opaque anyways - I've heard of set-ups where one mid is designated the "sweeper", another a "blocker" etc.

The most important thing at stoppages, (after getting the ball) is the ability to spread quickly, or, if you don't get it, follow your man as they will spread and take it away. This is an area we are not good at.

[stefoid]

Re: Welcome to the Dogs Jayden Schofield

Grif was very outside early in his career, but has added the contested element to his game big time since then. Cooney has always been 'complete'.

Snoop's phantom draft is on big footy, and he has Taylor Adams(!) dropping to us and McKenzie dropping past us. I sincerely hope one or both of these kids are available at our pick, Adams in particular looks like a tough as guts 'complete' midfielder, although not having Cooneys burst and spring.

# 17 Western Bulldogs – Taylor Adams (Falcons / 181 / 80 / 93)
Just a lovely player is Taylor Adams and apparently has many admirers in club land. AIS kid and he is a class act because he ticks nearly every box there is. Seen him so many times in traffic and yet he always seems to evade capture and execute to advantage. His hands in close are an absolute treat and he just strikes me as a kid who will get better and better in a club development programme. Can also play out of the contest and uses the ball at an elite level by foot as well. Is a natural leader from what have been told and is a kid you would want in your football environment for sure.
AFL Comparison – Trent Cotchin or Jim Bartel
Roughie – Thought about going tall here but just couldn’t get past who is Matt Boyds replacement and with the loss of Ward Adams seems to be perfect. If not him then maybe Sam Frost or Andrew Boseley or Hayden Crozier

# 18 North Melbourne – Hayden Crozier (Eastern Ranges / 184 / 68 / 93)
People talk about draft depth and the lack of it yet at #18 we have the human highlight reel. With a wonderful array of inside mids like Bastinac, Swallow, Greenwood, Cunnington, Ziebell etc it’s time to add to the x factor pool that really only Wells and Harper sit in for mine at Kanga land (not to say others aren’t but amongst the kids its my observation). Tested terrificly well and has pace, lateral movement, leap and elite finishing. Some of his passages of play are just incredible and he reminds me very much of a young Daisy. Whilst he has been up and down this year he has shown that his best is as good as anybody’s in this draft and he could prove to be one of the best players from this pool in 7 or 8 years time. By the way ..... North are building a very good list. Get on them for top 4 finishes in 3 years!
AFL Comparison – Dale Thomas
Roughie – Thought about Brad McKenzie here. I really believe a touch of outside class is required and he is the next best i rate.

# 19 Essendon – Brad McKenzie (Sturt / 188 / 75 / 93)
Dons are in the market for classy midfielders and will feel that they got one in Heppell who should be able to push up to the middle next year. Interestingly McKenzie is very similar to him and suspect will go down the same path insomuch as starting HB and pushing into the middle in years to come. Has played more back this year but I have seen him play middle and fwd as well at SANFL level and he has a heap of potential. His hands at stoppages are as good as Pendlebury’s and in fact his foot skills aren’t far off his as well. Has great agility and seems to be a really clever footy player from what I am told....huge improvement left in him. I rate him high and ultimately dropped him in ahead of Nelson and Markworth.
AFL Comparison – Leon Cameron
Roughie – Shane Nelson or Dan Markworth