Jamar is A Grade...In a Top side he would dominate..

I don't think that's true. In my opinion, a ruckman is one of the only players that can play pretty much just as well in a weak side as in a strong one. His major job is almost always a one-on-one battle against the opposing team's ruckman, and any round-the-ground possessions or marks he takes are just as dependent upon everyone else in the team as your average player is.

Don't get me wrong - I think that Mark Jamar IS one of the best ruckman in the AFL. I just don't think his performance is all that dependent upon his team-mates. Cox and Sandilands, who are two of the best ruckmen in the game, recently made the all-Australian top 40 (or better) even though their sides performed poorly. I think that shows that their roles are not as dependent upon their team-mates as you might think

I don't think that's true. In my opinion, a ruckman is one of the only players that can play pretty much just as well in a weak side as in a strong one. His major job is almost always a one-on-one battle against the opposing team's ruckman, and any round-the-ground possessions or marks he takes are just as dependent upon everyone else in the team as your average player is.

Don't get me wrong - I think that Mark Jamar IS one of the best ruckman in the AFL. I just don't think his performance is all that dependent upon his team-mates. Cox and Sandilands, who are two of the best ruckmen in the game, recently made the all-Australian top 40 (or better) even though their sides performed poorly. I think that shows that their roles are not as dependent upon their team-mates as you might think

I tend to agree,I'd like WyLto explain his thoughts.

There's a large dose of luck involved.

For every Fyfe taken at around 20, or Hanneberry taken around 30, it ignores the fact that the team choosing him probably would've opted for a Tambling, a Farren Ray or a James Sellar instead, if they were still available at that point rather than being chosen top 10.

This is on the money. Some players are late bloomers (and it is very difficult to figure out which players these will be), while some appear to have enormous amounts of potential that they never actually reach. Although you have better odds of drafting a star if you have a higher draft pick, there's no reason you won't be able to find a diamond in the rough with a late pick. I think in recent years, BP has been able to do very well in unearthing players such as McDonald, Jurrah, Bail (who I think will be a star), Fitzpatrick, and McKenzie with late National Draft picks, PSD picks or through the rookie draft.

Our earlier picks under BP earlier picks have also, in my opinion, been quite good. Leading up to the 2009 National Draft, just about every scout in the country had Trengove/HWMNBN as the 1/2 picks with Martin behind them. I'm happy with his later selections of Gysberts, Tapscott and Gawn as well, who all look like they'll be 150 gamers. In 2008 the jury was out on a consensus number 1 pick, and despite criticism in his first couple of seasons, Watts is gaining confidence and looking to be worthy of that title. In 2010 we drafted Cook because we desperately needed a KPP, and he appears to be a work in progress. However, with our second pick it looks like BP unearthed an absolute jet in Howe, who seemed to be relatively unknown to many in the football community at the time.

I think BP has done as well as any other scout during his tenure at Melbourne, and I'm sure Neeld realizes the quality of work that he has done for the Demons.

Do you actually believe that?

You asked me who the A graders were I told you if you don't agree then that's your prerogative.

BTW I said,

I would expect that Trengove will develop in to a top class player but he has a bit to prove before he could be considered one, same as Jack. Here's hoping.

No Turd coloured glasses there purely my opinion; as I said I expect Trenners and Jack to develop in to top line players but they aren't there as yet.

Yes. And so do other astute minds.

I don't see how you can say Trengove has a bit to prove, but then laud Martin and Hurley as A grade players, largely based on a lot of hype.

2009 Martin and Fyfe are two to start off with.

2008 NikNat, Hurley and Hanneberry must be close.

2007 Rioli, Harry Taylor's not to shabby.

BP wasn't in charge in 2007 from memory, pretty sure Watts was his first pick as head recruiter. There's only been 66 regular season games since BP took over. It's still a bit early to judge.

BP didn't pick Maric, his late first/early second rounders have been Blease, Strauss and Tapscott. All have had to deal with injuries in their short careers but all have shown glimpses of what they could be. Cook is a skinny KPP and they take a bit of time.

It's pretty hard to assess BP's peformance thus far, probably need another 2 years.

Interesting how much assessment of Prendergast in this thread is based on who we selected and not on who we didn't. I would have thought any proper in-house performance assessment would also consider who wasn't picked (and was available) and the reasons why Prendergast didn't select him. Of course, we know who wasn't selected, but we don't know why.

Interesting how much assessment of Prendergast in this thread is based on who we selected and not on who we didn't. I would have thought any proper in-house performance assessment would also consider who wasn't picked (and was available) and the reasons why Prendergast didn't select him. Of course, we know who wasn't selected, but we don't know why.

Plenty of threads have gone into that too...

IMO it is about getting resources to see as many kids as possible for the latter picks and having decent judgement to see which of the 15 best kids will rise above the rest when they are 24.

The latter is far more important and less costly.

Interesting how much assessment of Prendergast in this thread is based on who we selected and not on who we didn't. I would have thought any proper in-house performance assessment would also consider who wasn't picked (and was available) and the reasons why Prendergast didn't select him. Of course, we know who wasn't selected, but we don't know why.

It's one of the reasons why it's so difficult to assess the performance of recruiters from the outside, and why I generally avoid judgement of them - because 99% of what they do is invisible to me. If you judged a recruiter purely on who he picked and who he didn't, every recruiter ever known to the game would bomb out because every single one has missed some real gems.

It's one of the reasons why it's so difficult to assess the performance of recruiters from the outside, and why I generally avoid judgement of them - because 99% of what they do is invisible to me. If you judged a recruiter purely on who he picked and who he didn't, every recruiter ever known to the game would bomb out because every single one has missed some real gems.

I agree Nash and you also need to take into account the influence of the coaches gameplan on his selections. Judging by BP comments on the website the criteria has changed significantly since Neeld has joined and BP might have picked players on criteria rather than those he thought were "best" under Bailey.

My major worry about the last 5 years recruiting is that we may have missed our chance to build a premiership midfield. Whilst I think Blease and Strauss can be very good footballers we passed on Shuey and Redden. We took Tappy instead of Bastinac. They are not bad picks, but by passing on all those players I think we are a little short in midfield stocks. Much depends on Gysberts IMO.

I don't blame BP for missing Fyfe, IMO he will be the best player of 2009 and a champion player of the game, but given what he's shown and where I think he will finish, everybody missed him.

I agree Nash and you also need to take into account the influence of the coaches gameplan on his selections. Judging by BP comments on the website the criteria has changed significantly since Neeld has joined and BP might have picked players on criteria rather than those he thought were "best" under Bailey.

My major worry about the last 5 years recruiting is that we may have missed our chance to build a premiership midfield. Whilst I think Blease and Strauss can be very good footballers we passed on Shuey and Redden. We took Tappy instead of Bastinac. They are not bad picks, but by passing on all those players I think we are a little short in midfield stocks. Much depends on Gysberts IMO.

I don't blame BP for missing Fyfe, IMO he will be the best player of 2009 and a champion player of the game, but given what he's shown and where I think he will finish, everybody missed him.

We still have 3 first rounders better than 15 roughly to use, one on Viney minimum, we could have quite a good midfield.

Trouble is this may be 2 years to late.

* BUMP *

I've got this theory that Neeld doesn't rate Prendergast. I think its why he didn't trade Bate for a second round pick or delist anymore than the minimum players. Sure Bate is training well, but he's still got a lot of work to do to prove he's got an AFL future.

I also think it was part of why he was decisively willing to trade for Clark.

Now you can't sack a recruiter in October/November, it would just throw you into disarray, but I wouldn't be surprised if this was Predergast's last draft for the MFC. Also if he found himself replaced by someone, it could possibly be from Collingwood (although head recruiter Hine is contracted). Fatguts Phil Scully need not apply.

Anyone else think I'm crazy? I just don't think the players we have recruited fit well with the players Neeld wants. That and the sweeping changes in coaching at the club make me think Neeld may as well start from basics with the recruiting. It certainly would have helped someone like Wallace at Richmond.

Or maybe a Cat stalker?

LOL

I've got this theory that Neeld doesn't rate Prendergast. I think its why he didn't trade Bate for a second round pick or delist anymore than the minimum players. Sure Bate is training well, but he's still got a lot of work to do to prove he's got an AFL future.

I also think it was part of why he was decisively willing to trade for Clark.

Now you can't sack a recruiter in October/November, it would just throw you into disarray, but I wouldn't be surprised if this was Predergast's last draft for the MFC. Also if he found himself replaced by someone, it could possibly be from Collingwood (although head recruiter Hine is contracted). Fatguts Phil Scully need not apply.

Anyone else think I'm crazy? I just don't think the players we have recruited fit well with the players Neeld wants. That and the sweeping changes in coaching at the club make me think Neeld may as well start from basics with the recruiting. It certainly would have helped someone like Wallace at Richmond.

Once again the case of the Melbournefc mob shooting the messenger. Well thought out THE MASTER.

Fair bump, play on.

I've got this theory that Neeld doesn't rate Prendergast. I think its why he didn't trade Bate for a second round pick or delist anymore than the minimum players. Sure Bate is training well, but he's still got a lot of work to do to prove he's got an AFL future.

I also think it was part of why he was decisively willing to trade for Clark.

Now you can't sack a recruiter in October/November, it would just throw you into disarray, but I wouldn't be surprised if this was Predergast's last draft for the MFC. Also if he found himself replaced by someone, it could possibly be from Collingwood (although head recruiter Hine is contracted). Fatguts Phil Scully need not apply.

Anyone else think I'm crazy? I just don't think the players we have recruited fit well with the players Neeld wants. That and the sweeping changes in coaching at the club make me think Neeld may as well start from basics with the recruiting. It certainly would have helped someone like Wallace at Richmond.

Nailed it.

Nailed it.

Maybe.

Can we be sure that the reasons stated in this thread, ie that Neeld doesn't rate BP is the reason that he walked?

There could be many other reasons - he seems to have been offered an opportunity to do something a bit different. Maybe a new challenge?

It is all theoretical at the moment. I guess more may come out in the wash.

Anyway, good luck to him. He did a pretty good job at MFC; not wishing him ill personally, but I hope he is less successful in his new job.

The master goes BOOM

Absolute carp. You can have your theories but this is one hare-brained one.

Bate wanting to go had nothing repeat nothing to do with Prendergast. BP didn't recruit Bate either. The players we got rid of were fringe players at best.

What are you smoking? BTW the list manager is Tim Harrington.

Whatever the master is smoking.....I want some

I like this post. I have no idea if there is any truth to the OP, but recruiting is so fundamental to the club its good to thrash it out.

Intreaging why Pendergast should leave a respected recruiting job to take up a low level coaching position. A recruiter with reputation amongst a small body of specialists should do better than join the army of the many 'never will go anywhere' assistant coaches. But then everyone to their own. My hunch is that there is an untold story, yes from dissatisfaction at Melbourne to more money at Carlton.

I reckon some good rumour will eventually surface

I like this post. I have no idea if there is any truth to the OP, but recruiting is so fundamental to the club its good to thrash it out.

Intreaging why Pendergast should leave a respected recruiting job to take up a low level coaching position. A recruiter with reputation amongst a small body of specialists should do better than join the army of the many 'never will go anywhere' assistant coaches. But then everyone to their own. My hunch is that there is an untold story, yes from dissatisfaction at Melbourne to more money at Carlton.

I reckon some good rumour will eventually surface

I was thinking along the poaching lines as well 'Harrisonrules'.

Carltoon I bet would love to even the score a bit & Prendergast has hit on some nice picks re Howe & Nicholson etc.

We must replace BP with a recruiter who will find Hard players the coach can use.

Just wanted to clarify in all this that I never meant that Prendergast was no good or that Neeld had it in for him, just to me if you get rid of practically all the assistants, the fitness guys and the casey coach you are odds on to find a new recruiter as well. And it was my opinion that Prendergast's work has been only reasonable, not outstanding considering the picks he's had. It's good to see Barry has a new job, just like our old assistant coaches do and our old sports science guy was heading to Carlton as well I believe.

If I had to now go against my own theory and provide other reasons as to Prendergast leaving then I'd look towards the amount of time and stress that recruiting has. I can understand that if Carlton offered the same level play for his new job then it would probably come with a heap less hours and a lot less stress.

Great get Master.

Re Bail recruitment I believe he was one of Dean Bailey's picks so BP should not get the credit.

I dont understand why everyone thinks that Barry would be so upset with Neeld wanting hard players ect

As a recruiter Barry's job was to find players the coach and club can use in their game plan, if the plan changes so what?

Do we really think Barry wouldnt know about over 100-200 players and their attributes, all with varying styles??? please

Barry left to coach else where imo, career change as done by many people every day

Also Neeld has said he doesnt know all the players abilities ect yet anyway so how can he judge Barry, around draft time, after being at the club for 2-3 weeks?

Seems pretty light on to me

Edited January 15, 201213 yr by Jordie_tackles