List Management - Ordinary at Best?

[hoopla 418]

I shouldn't really be raising a "less than positive" thread on the day we found a sponsor - but I can't help but hark back to the concerns I expressed after the draft about the balance of our recruiting efforts over the last 2 years.

Mark Jamar is out for 4-6 weeks. If the injury is more serious than that he may go on the long-term injury list - which will allow us to promote Jake Spencer. But Jamar has had foot problems before.If the injury is that bad- his season is in jeopardy.This would leave us with three ruckmen to get us through 22 rounds: PJ ( who is better suited to a support role) and Meeson and Spencer ( who are not even proven at VFL level!). I don't really rate Jamar - but the balance of our list is such that we need him.

From the perspective of the season as a whole, we'll be better off if it is only a 4 week injury. This means going into the first two rounds with an underdone PJ to carry the rucks on his own - without the likes of a Neitz or a Holland to save him running deep into the forward line. The option is to put Meeson into the 22 as relief ruckman.

Deano's recent attempt to boost Meeson up ( http://www.melbournefc.com.au/news/newsart...0/default.aspx) is pretty sad. " His last couple of weeks haven't been too bad" ...." His ruckwork was adequate" ...."His pre-Xmas work was pretty ordinary but he's done everything right in the last two weeks".Don't go overhead about this guy Dean!

As a direct result of our approach to list management over the last few years ( including this year) it looks like we are going to have put a bloke into our team whose recent training "hasn't been too bad"! I guess Stefan Martin might be a ruck option - but we've just spent 18 months trying to develop him as our only big-bodied defender. There is simply no other choice than to play a bloke who is not up to it. How will that affect the morale of the many promising (smaller) guys who will miss out?

What if PJ comes up a bit sore after the first round?

You can win a game of modern footy without dominating the ruck - but its a hell of a lot easier if you can at least compete in the hitouts.

[Vipercrunch 2,818]

A viable extra ruck option for now would most likely have needed to be recruited longer than two years ago, given "how long they take to develop" (yeah, that old cliche). It would appear that Spencer is deemed to be the long term solution with Jamar and Meeson to fill the breach.

Personally I think having more than 4 ruckmen on a AFL list (including rookies) would be too much. Having more than 2 really good ones is also very difficult to manage as we saw with Simmonds and Jolly opting to leave so they could get regular games.

Hopefully Jamar can be placed on the long term injury list as is being mooted in other threads so Spencer can play.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Hoopla, what list management strategies would you have implemented to address this problem? Who would you have targetted and who would you have realistically had to give up to resolve it?

And just for the record, Jamar has not had a history of foot injuries that are anything unusual for a player of his type. This injury is not a recurrence but a new injury.

[Darren Cuthbertson 0]

Hoopla, what list management strategies would you have implemented to address this problem? Who would you have targetted and who would you have realistically had to give up to resolve it?

And just for the record, Jamar has not had a history of foot injuries that are anything unusual for a player of his type. This injury is not a recurrence but a new injury.

Hoopla you know heaps about football so I'm sure you can reply to Rhino -just don't let your dislike of the Russian cloud your post. Spida Everitt is not a realistic option and Nik Nat will prove to be a headless chook -no football nous.

[Redleg 38,025]

And just for the record, Jamar has not had a history of foot injuries that are anything unusual for a player of his type. This injury is not a recurrence but a new injury.

I believe that Jamar has had a few leg or foot injuries. I stand to be corrected on this point.

We were always going to be in trouble in the ruck if he went down as we all knew that PJ wasn't really a ruckman and Meesen isn't an AFL footballer.

[phoenix 32]

I shouldn't really be raising a "less than positive" thread on the day we found a sponsor - but I can't help but hark back to the concerns I expressed after the draft about the balance of our recruiting efforts over the last 2 years.

I think it would be silly to suggest that our ruck position is strong but this is not an issue for the last 2 years. In the 2008 Rookie Draft we recruited Spencer. Good get I'd have thought. In the same year we traded for Meesen. We spent pick 37 on him. He was originally a top 10 draft pick who hadn't kicked on. Looks like a bad get in my book. So we picked up TWO ruckmen in one of the two years you refer to.

This year we didn't pick up a ruckman but that is not impacting us now. Are you really suggesting a skinny first year draft pick could play senior footy?? If you are I'd suggest you rethink.

Our error was 4 or so years ago where we didn't recruit a ruckman. Anyway Hoops, what is the point of picking someone because they are a ruckman if they are never going to make it? That doesn't help you.

In 2008 we addressed a couple of glaring shortcomings on our list. We didn't tick off all bases because there were just too many.

I'd think we may well look to trade for a ruckman next year. Whether we can get one of course is another issue.

[45HG 1,539]

On what basis can you possibly claim that his "season is in jeopardy"?

To claim this as overly dramatic would be an understatement (though a history of foot injuries could explain the kicking).

Do you honestly believe we should have recruited more Ruckmen recently?

Martin, as you say, is a possible ruck prospect, and Spencer has also been drafted. Above all, the role and impotance of the Ruckman is one under a considerable cloud at the moment. It would be naive to claim that it is poor list management to not recruit another ruckmen (of which, how many did we miss anyway) in favour of silky, skilled, pacy midfielders and a tall forward.

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Your points about the ruck are well made. Perhaps Bailey has a little bit of the Grant Thomas' about him. Perhaps Grant Thomas without the over-inflated noggin, in that he doesn't rate ruckmen as matchwinners. Which, let's face it, is probably fair enough as there are precious few banging around at the moment.

And as for placing the season in jeapordy, it never ceases to amaze me when I read dees fans on here who think we're going to "have a tilt." This year is not about winning flags, but developing a flag-winning core-list that we can recruit and trade around. The ruck situation is pretty awful, but then so is every other position on the ground. SOME people rate our defence as a great one of the future (I'm not there yet), our midfield is C-grade at best but is heading in the right direction, and the less said about our forward line the better. The point is we're developing kids everywhere. PJ isn't a kid, but Spencer is, and that's two that we can hang our hats on for the future.

Personally, I'm glad that we have two really good guys on the 200cm mark who won't be fighting off Jeff White or Darren Jolly to learn their craft. The worst they have to compete with is Jamar and Meesen.

I'm happy with the situation, personally.

[gOLLy 401]

I believe that Jamar has had a few leg or foot injuries. I stand to be corrected on this point.

We were always going to be in trouble in the ruck if he went down as we all knew that PJ wasn't really a ruckman and Meesen isn't an AFL footballer.

I believe Jamar has had foot issues in the past aswell.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Your points about the ruck are well made. Perhaps Bailey has a little bit of the Grant Thomas' about him. Perhaps Grant Thomas without the over-inflated noggin, in that he doesn't rate ruckmen as matchwinners. Which, let's face it, is probably fair enough as there are precious few banging around at the moment.

Check Phoenix's post. We rookied one and traded for one in the past year or so. We put out the feelers for Warnock. I dont think you can take that view of Bailey. What could he have realistically have done in the past year or so? Its another inherited list problem.

And as for placing the season in jeapordy, it never ceases to amaze me when I read dees fans on here who think we're going to "have a tilt."

Sorry I havent read them. Is there more than one that would not be sarcastic?

PJ isn't a kid, but Spencer is, and that's two that we can hang our hats on for the future.

It speaks volumes about PJ as a ruckman when Jamar goes down and people think we're screwed in the ruck. No one has put forward PJ as a replacement Maybe PJ just cant ruck. <_< . Spencer's raw but at least he is someone we can work on. IMO our No 1 ruck is a rookie.

Personally, I'm glad that we have two really good guys on the 200cm mark who won't be fighting off Jeff White or Darren Jolly to learn their craft. The worst they have to compete with is Jamar and Meesen.

One is just a rover one is still a rookie. I'll back the rookie.

I'm happy with the situation, personally.

I'm not. The side is very much WIP with some obvious holes with no out and out champion(s).

[Jarka 767]

We've known for 3 or 4 years that we've got problems with the big guys, specifically key forwards and rucks, you can't blame Bailey and co for our current situation. The problem lies with our recruiting and list management from around 5+ years ago.

[1858 237]

We've known for 3 or 4 years that we've got problems with the big guys, specifically key forwards and rucks, you can't blame Bailey and co for our current situation. The problem lies with our recruiting and list management from around 5+ years ago.

Agreed.

The horror of 2008 (to me anyway) was not that we were playing deplorable football but that we had too many under developed youngsters and too many seniors on the way out and the realisation that the solution to this was not going to be a quick one.

[Banter 0]

I'm with those that don't think that our list management has been too bad. I thought they may have had a go at Roughhead at pick 17 or 19 last year or Jarrod Redden at 36 or 51 but I'm not a recruiter and I don't know all the ins an outs of it.

With ruckmen IMO the best model is to have 2 senior rucks on the list a developing backup ruckman and a rookie. Having a ruckman as a rookie is a pearler I reckon because it allows them to develop without the pressure of being on the senior list as it seems these guys take a bit of time to "grow into their bodies" - I've heard that somewhere before!. CAC pulled off some coups there with Jolly, Jamar, and Troy Simmons all being rookied (I think). Now it appears that Spencer might be another of his gems though IMO it is way too early to pass judgement.

Anyway it appears the only problem is our backup ruck (Meesen) may be struggling but there's time to sort that out before we are having a go at a premiership.

Anyway I reckon its a bit to early to be passing judgement on list management. I think its better to think about it at the end of the season when something can actually be done about it.

[hoopla 418]

Just a few points

- Jamar has had foot trouble before. At the end of 2006 ( maybe 2005) ,he spent months walking around with a heavy protective boot

-I agree that our ruck situation is a product of poor list management over 4-5 years - and not just one or two. Its a problem that may take the same 4-5 years to fix. We have to start some time.

- I don't know enough about this year's draft market to categorically name some "talls" we should have taken - but I was surprised we let Roughead through and that we didn't try to rookie one of the '200cm plus' kids other teams snapped up after us.

- I agree that it can be difficult to effectively manage any more than 4 ruckman at any one time - as long as all 4 have either form or potential. One of ours, Meeson, is a very doubtful proposition at best. Deano's less than flattering comments about Meeson prompted much of my concern.I wouldn't class PJ just as a ruckman...much of his value lies in his ability to play back and forward

All of the positive responses to my thread are based on the assumption that Spencer will develop into a top class ruckman. Let's hope he does.

Our young midfielders will need effective ruck support if they are to achieve their full potential.

[The Emblem 1]

but I can't help but hark back to the concerns I expressed after the draft about the balance of our recruiting efforts over the last 2 years.

In the last 2 years we've added the following players

2 Ruckmen: Meesen and Spencer#

8 Midfielders / Utilities: Morton, Grimes, Blease, Strauss, Jetta, Bail, Bennell, Valenti#

2 Small Forwards: Maric, Wonaemirri

1 Small back: Cheney,

2 Tall backs: Martin, McNamara (I think he is still growing)

3 Tall forwards: Watts, Jurrah, Zomer#

Plus Mckenzie# and Healey#

Looking at that list I think the last two years has been quite balanced and that its been addressing the most critical holes that we have on our list...classy, pacy midfielders and key forwards.

Whilst it would be great if there was an all-Australian ruckman on our list (next year Jake?), from the last two drafts who would you suggest we have taken, and which player would we have had to have missed out on in order to get them?

[diesel 420]

I shouldn't really be raising a "less than positive" thread on the day we found a sponsor - but I can't help but hark back to the concerns I expressed after the draft about the balance of our recruiting efforts over the last 2 years.

Robbie Warnock was Melbournes' off season attempt to address our ruck issues. He is now on Carltons LTI list. What would you be saying had we got him? Injuries happen, ruckmen don't grow on trees. In lieu of a 'talent' we were right to stick with what we have. I don't share your view we will miss Jamar. Some exposure of Spencer to senior footy will be beneficial in the long term.

[hoopla 418]

In the last 2 years we've added the following players

2 Ruckmen: Meesen and Spencer#

8 Midfielders / Utilities: Morton, Grimes, Blease, Strauss, Jetta, Bail, Bennell, Valenti#

2 Small Forwards: Maric, Wonaemirri

1 Small back: Cheney,

2 Tall backs: Martin, McNamara (I think he is still growing)

3 Tall forwards: Watts, Jurrah, Zomer#

Plus Mckenzie# and Healey#

THankyou for this analysis. Bearing in mind that neither Jurrah nor McNamara are big men - and that McKenzie, Healey and Hughes are all smalls - I think it demonstrates my point very well, particularly when you bear in mind the young utilities from the previous year- Bartram, Buckley and Jones

Every post I read about our pre-season form seems to stress our lack of key forwards and our thin ruck stocks ... and our reliance on the ability of Garland, Rivers and Co to keeping fighting out of their weight division on the back line.

I don't want to nominate any of our inidvidual draftees as "duds" - but Casey is going to have to have a lot of big men on its list - if the Scorpions are going to field a balanced side>

[The Emblem 1]

THankyou for this analysis. Bearing in mind that neither Jurrah nor McNamara are big men - and that McKenzie, Healey and Hughes are all smalls - I think it demonstrates my point very well, particularly when you bear in mind the young utilities from the previous year- Bartram, Buckley and Jones

Every post I read about our pre-season form seems to stress our lack of key forwards and our thin ruck stocks ... and our reliance on the ability of Garland, Rivers and Co to keeping fighting out of their weight division on the back line.

I don't want to nominate any of our individual draftees as "duds" - but Casey is going to have to have a lot of big men on its list - if the Scorpions are going to field a balanced side>

In addition to Rivers and Garland we now have Martin, Warnock and Frawley in the mix and Tom McNamara is very young and I think will develop into another tall back, we have an embarrassment of riches down there now.

Our midfield stocks were undermanned and that's been addressed by the last two drafts.

Key forwards, we took the best player available and held back the PSD draft pick again for the best prospect available. With the club had a choice, tall forward with definite X factor V "God knows what ruckman", I'm happy with their choice.

They tried to address ruck stocks with Warnock, given his price tag, fitness, I prefer Spencer anyway.

[BAMF 3,809]

At the end of the year I would like to see us draft 2 ruckmen. 1 with our 3rd pick of the draft. And one in the rookie draft. Elevate Spencer as number 1 ruck. Delist Jamar this year, Meesen next year. They are not going to take us where we want to be.

2010

#1 Spencer

#2 Pj

#3 Meesen

#4 3rd Pick.

#5 Rookie

2011

#1 Spencer

#2 Pj

#3 3rd pick.

#4 Rookie

[hoopla 418]

In addition to Rivers and Garland we now have Martin, Warnock and Frawley in the mix and Tom McNamara is very young and I think will develop into another tall back, we have an embarrassment of riches down there now.

Our midfield stocks were undermanned and that's been addressed by the last two drafts.

Key forwards, we took the best player available and held back the PSD draft pick again for the best prospect available. With the club had a choice, tall forward with definite X factor V "God knows what ruckman", I'm happy with their choice.

They tried to address ruck stocks with Warnock, given his price tag, fitness, I prefer Spencer anyway.

Clearly I hope your optimism is justified.... and I agree that the backline options are beginning to look healthy.

At the end of the day, the balance of our list is such that virtually all of our young talls will have to come through - and stay fit - whereas we will be OK if only half of our young midfielders make it.Over the years , the success rate for 'talls 'has tended to be lower than the success rate for 'smalls/mid-sizers'.

We have more considerably more midfield depth than big man depth. Whether or not that becomes a real problem will depend upon the pattern of injuries over the next few years.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

At the end of the day, the balance of our list is such that virtually all of our young talls will have to come through - and stay fit - whereas we will be OK if only half of our young midfielders make it.Over the years , the success rate for 'talls 'has tended to be lower than the success rate for 'smalls/mid-sizers'.

We have more considerably more midfield depth than big man depth. Whether or not that becomes a real problem will depend upon the pattern of injuries over the next few years.

I think what we need are about the same in proportions to the positions to be filled on the ground.

Further, depth in numbers is only of value if you have quality within those numbers particularly at the top. Regardless of numbers we have a specific weakness in the big man and midfield areas. ATM, our best in the midfield (McLean) is serviceable at present and does not hurt opposition sides. It tails from there.

Phoenix is right about where the problem arose for our big men on the list. The current team in charge of list management inherited a list with a number of critical holes in it as evidence by our performance over the past couple of years. They have had less than two years to seek to rectify this.

What would you have done differently Hoopla?

[mo64 5,249]

The current team in charge of list management inherited a list with a number of critical holes in it as evidence by our performance over the past couple of years. They have had less than two years to seek to rectify this.

What would you have done differently Hoopla?

The premise behind hoopla's post was the paucity of our ruck situation. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the CURRENT team recruit Meesen and sign him to a 3 year deal? We wouldn't be debating this topic if Meesen was a half decent ruckman.

But true to form Rhino, you always blame the predecessors.

[Nasher 33,166]

The premise behind hoopla's post was the paucity of our ruck situation. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the CURRENT team recruit Meesen and sign him to a 3 year deal? We wouldn't be debating this topic if Meesen was a half decent ruckman.

Meesen was Craig Cameron's parting gift.

[Gorgoroth 12,352]

weren't Jamars foot problems his inability to kick (or get a touch at all)?

[Jarka 767]

Meesen was Craig Cameron's parting gift.

Everyone here knows (but probably doesn't understand) my views on CAC but I still think that Meesen was worth a shot. Ok it hasn't worked out the way we'd like but at the time we were desperate for rucks and here was a kid who had shown previous ok form and wanted to come back to Vic. It was a gamble that didn't work out, but at least they tried something and didn't pay too much for it.

Even for the best recruiters Not every decision will work ok, it's just trying to limit the damage of the bad ones.