Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

[Guido]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

Just on Brett Goodes, if we hadn't butchered out first round pick in 2009 on Christian Howard, we would not have had to shore up a critical area of weakness with a 29yo in 2013. Actually we could have gotten Goodes as a rookie back then and used our first pick on, you know, someone like Fyfe or Carlisle, players that actually had form and history at the highest level in U18's.

Goodes himself was a punt. There was no guarantee he was going to walk straight into the top 22, there was no guarantee there was going to be a long term injury. From memory he really wasn't knocking the door down with insanely good performances demanding a spot on an AFL list that past year, it was more a feel good type recruiting story, so I don't think this idea that he was picked up with an expectation to straight away move in to sure up our defense is accurate.

I made this point elsewhere, but IMO we need to go easy on the Howard one off.

Sure, if there were signs that systematic screw ups like this where occurring quite often, go to town, but on every level it seems to be a one off.

It was a ballsy punt that failed.

Andrew Mackie was the ballsiest of punts on a SA player outside of the state u/18s system too, a decade later it's a crazy-smart selection resulting in THE ONLY multiple AA player available at that point of that draft. There was a rumour that we were a chance to take Mackie at 4 ... lucky we went the safe, traditional option with Walsh.

In 2007 most recruiters couldn't believe Geelong would select a 20 year old from WA that barely anyone had heard of at pick 17 either. Geelong knew most wouldn't touch him before their next pick, they didn't want to take the risk that someone would take him at 30, 31, 32 before their next pick. Top 3 standard, multiple AA, Harry Taylor picked up for a bargain of pick 17. Had they gambled and he got picked up one pick before their second rounder, they'd be kicking themselves for the next 10 years.

Exact same situation with Clayton and Minson - no name, knew 95% of the league hadn't heard of him and 95% wouldn't take him before 50, but was worried Essendon was going to pounce at about 27/28 so pulled the trigger to have the bird in the hand.

The recruiting department ****ed up with Howard. They know it. They seem to have addressed it, the picks since have been smart and paying dividends.

This is a very different criticism to continually picking up fringe players, which no matter how many examples of it failing, the club continue's down the path on.

Howard is simply a really unlucky example of having how a recruiter's reputation is largely down to how the cards can fall on the day.

We lose to Sydney in that final, we take Jetta, our recruiting department are lauded as geniuses, no one on this forum the wiser that the next name on their list was Christian Howard, sandwiched in between the next name on his list, Nat Fyfe.

[Go_Dogs]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

Lower added so much in this element that the club (100% correctly) delisted him 10 months after recruiting him.

I'm not going to debate the decision, but I'm pretty confident in saying that Lower set a very high standard on the track and was a well liked teammate. I understand he spent a lot of time with Griff, playing hard as a tagger would which culminated in Griff being better equipped to break the tag and have his best season yet.

The fact we worked so hard to keep him involved at VFL level is a testament to the above - I guess it's easy to underrated the impact a player can make in such a short period of time, but I think it was a worthwhile move for us.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

Goodes himself was a punt. There was no guarantee he was going to walk straight into the top 22, there was no guarantee there was going to be a long term injury. From memory he really wasn't knocking the door down with insanely good performances demanding a spot on an AFL list that past year, it was more a feel good type recruiting story, so I don't think this idea that he was picked up with an expectation to straight away move in to sure up our defense is accurate.

I made this point elsewhere, but IMO we need to go easy on the Howard one off.

Sure, if there were signs that systematic screw ups like this where occurring quite often, go to town, but on every level it seems to be a one off.

It was a ballsy punt that failed.

Andrew Mackie was the ballsiest of punts on a SA player outside of the state u/18s system too, a decade later it's a crazy-smart selection resulting in THE ONLY multiple AA player available at that point of that draft. There was a rumour that we were a chance to take Mackie at 4 ... lucky we went the safe, traditional option with Walsh.

The recruiting department ****ed up with Howard. They know it. They seem to have addressed it, the picks since have been smart and paying dividends.

This is a very different criticism to continually picking up fringe players, which no matter how many examples of it failing, the club continue's down the path on.

Howard is simply a really unlucky example of having how a recruiter's reputation is largely down to how the cards can fall on the day.

We lose to Sydney in that final, we take Jetta, our recruiting department are lauded as geniuses, no one on this forum the wiser that the next name on their list was Christian Howard, sandwiched in between the next name on his list, Nat Fyfe.

Agree that they seem to have rectified, but if they had of read Moneyball (some of which translates to AFL), they would have seen the stats that picks like Mackie are rare, most kids who come straight from school comps fail, the Moneyball guys never recruited guys like Howard or Mackie, they would be much more likely to go for a Harry Taylor.

[Remi Moses]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

I believe Faulks is back at Willy now.

Showed more than Faulks . He's played 4 games and looks promising.
Think he's behind Reid and Brown, but after what I saw on Sunday you'd swear Tom had only played 4 games

[Maddog37]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

If he looks good then we could do a Mumford type deal and throw the cash at him. Let the good clubs develop them for us.

[Bornadog]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

I'm not going to debate the decision, but I'm pretty confident in saying that Lower set a very high standard on the track and was a well liked teammate. I understand he spent a lot of time with Griff, playing hard as a tagger would which culminated in Griff being better equipped to break the tag and have his best season yet.

The fact we worked so hard to keep him involved at VFL level is a testament to the above - I guess it's easy to underrated the impact a player can make in such a short period of time, but I think it was a worthwhile move for us.

For a team that is rebuilding we should never have added Lower or Goodes. Fuller could be a mistake as well, but lets see what happens.

[GVGjr]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

For a team that is rebuilding we should never have added Lower or Goodes. Fuller could be a mistake as well, but lets see what happens.

I disagree, neither of them cost us much at all and provided leadership for a young and developing side. Cut our losses with Lower once the decision was made to go with Wallis and Smith in tagging roles and Goodes has the balance of the season to prove his worth.

Savvy list management is how I see it. No use in selecting players like Thorne or Skinner with late picks when just because they fit an age profile for the supporters. We play a lot of youngsters and we needed to balance that with some more seasoned players even if they end up at Footscray.

[Twodogs]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

Does Fuller have the type of age profile and state league experience that you were talking about Guido? The jury is still out on whether he will make it but if he does you'd think he'd have 7 or 8 years to play as opposed to the 2, 3 or maybe 4 that Goodes offers.

[Happy Days]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

Agree that they seem to have rectified, but if they had of read Moneyball (some of which translates to AFL), they would have seen the stats that picks like Mackie are rare, most kids who come straight from school comps fail, the Moneyball guys never recruited guys like Howard or Mackie, they would be much more likely to go for a Harry Taylor.

The difference between Howard and Mackie is that we got spooked by Adelaide into drafting him early; we rated Mackie good enough to be pick 4, and Howard good enough to be gone 5 picks later, if not at 15.

Also I'm with you (I think); the moneyball meme is being applied totally incorrectly and needs to die.

[GVGjr]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

Does Fuller have the type of age profile and state league experience that you were talking about Guido? The jury is still out on whether he will make it but if he does you'd think he'd have 7 or 8 years to play as opposed to the 2, 3 or maybe 4 that Goodes offers.

With Goodes I can't help but think that by round 4 last year most of thought he was a great selection. Once his form tapered off his age was once again an issue. Given the state of our list I don't have a problem with us bringing in a player of his age providing we don't just give him senior games for the sake of it. Who is he actually holding back?

I would have preferred a different player to Fuller but if he can transition his game into that of a senior footballer then he might have that skill level that the club has been looking to improve. As you say, he could still have a long career with us.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

With Goodes I can't help but think that by round 4 last year most of thought he was a great selection. Once his form tapered off his age was once again an issue. Given the state of our list I don't have a problem with us bringing in a player of his age providing we don't just give him senior games for the sake of it. Who is he actually holding back?

I would have preferred a different player to Fuller but if he can transition his game into that of a senior footballer then he might have that skill level that the club has been looking to improve. As you say, he could still have a long career with us.

Tend to agree with most of this. I would've preferred we kept Goodes on the RL, but my attitude on Goodes is I want the likes of JJ, Tutt, Howard, Darley or Fuller to have made Goodes redundant by years end because their development exceeded Goodes limitations. I'm not sure why we took Fuller to be honest after recruiting Darley, keeping Howard and Tutty and thinking about keeping Picken & Bob down back with Higgins too.

[GVGjr]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

Tend to agree with most of this. I would've preferred we kept Goodes on the RL, but my attitude on Goodes is I want the likes of JJ, Tutt, Howard, Darley or Fuller to have made Goodes redundant by years end because their development exceeded Goodes limitations. I'm not sure why we took Fuller to be honest after recruiting Darley, keeping Howard and Tutty and thinking about keeping Picken & Bob down back with Higgins too.

JJ needs to improve his fitness and will be back in the mix once he does, Tutt has shown a bit and I'm comfortable enough that he is still on the list, Howard just needs to see if he can salvage his career, Darley got injured at a critical time and should show us something in the next month or so and Fuller probably won't be in contention until the 2nd half of the season.

I think there is a few expiring contracts at the end of this year for some of the players who haven't established themselves so it will be interesting to see if Macca can make the hard call after 3 years of his teaching and development plans for the playing list.
If he can't make the hard calls then we effectively play with a reduced list.

I went through the list on the way home on the train and think we could potentially lose 8 (or more) senior listed players which is a bit on the high side especially if we are likely to only promote 1 or 2 (at best) rookies.

[Twodogs]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

How many players including rookies do we have?

[Remi Moses]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

I disagree, neither of them cost us much at all and provided leadership for a young and developing side. Cut our losses with Lower once the decision was made to go with Wallis and Smith in tagging roles and Goodes has the balance of the season to prove his worth.

Savvy list management is how I see it. No use in selecting players like Thorne or Skinner with late picks when just because they fit an age profile for the supporters. We play a lot of youngsters and we needed to balance that with some more seasoned players even if they end up at Footscray.

Summed it up well.Whats the difference between a Fuller or a Skinner or Thorne?
We reached on Howard, it looks like a big mistake.

[Guido]

Re: Did we waste Draft Picks by picking Rejects from other clubs?

Does Fuller have the type of age profile and state league experience that you were talking about Guido?

Absolutely Twodogs.

There's no guarantee with him or with anyone gunning it at the next level down (if there was they'd go first round), but all historical percentages suggest that he's an even money shot of being a really good player for a number of years.

17/18 year olds picked up after pick 40 are probably a 1 in 5 shot, so I think it makes good sense to go the mature aged state league route if no juniors stick out (like Honeychurch, who we might have missed out on if we retained Lower another year).

Rookie listed 17/18 year olds are probably a 1 in 10 shot - people might argue that that in itself is reason enough go with recycled fringe players, but the latter is almost a guarantee to a middle of the road, mediocre outcome (between 10-50 games).

Alternatively, if you take your full complement of young rookies every year, the evidence shows that, with a good standard recruiting team at least, that you'll unearth a premiership standard (or better) player every couple of years. At the very least. Across 10 years, it equates to almost a quarter of a premiership side: Collingwood's 2010 premiership being a case in point, including their captain.

Just look at the quality players on our list that originally were rookied: Morris, Boyd, Dahlhaus, Picken, JJ, Jong, Crameri, and in the past Harbrow. If players of this quality they were again there this time around (experience suggests they will have been), how bloody stupid would it have been to take a Lower or Goodes rather than take a punt on an equivalent talent to these guys.

And the thing it's unlikely that any supporters will be any the wiser because who we would have taken doesn't get recorded anywhere for judgement. I'd imagine the internal footy department review of the recruitment would be much like the view in this thread; "20 odd games, great list management guys, Goodes achieved more than we expected, pat on the back". Not "cost us 10+ years of possible top level player".