Barry Prendergast gone

[Ron Burgundy 8,588]

  On 28/01/2012 at 07:39, Lutz said:

If you're going to talk "first round selections", you can't just choose to ignore that Grimes, Gysberts and Trengove were also "first round selections".

No, they weren't the first chosen, but surely those selections were also taken into account when making the first round selections the following year.

You're trying to be selective with your data to strengthen your argument, but it only makes it weaker.

Lutz, I think RobbieF's point is quite clear. It may not ultimately turn out to be correct, but he's hardly being selective with his data. We have actually spent a high proportion of our top 12 picks in recent years on tall, skinny kids. For instance, we overlooked the bigger bodies of Hurley and Darling, and took talented, arguably undersized, tall players instead. We also overlooked plenty of very, very good midfielders with those selections.

What I think weakens an argument is when a poster is so clearly partial, and potentially so emotionally aligned to an argument, that they appear unable to see, even acknowledge, different perspectives.

This thread is literally littered with you and bing181 ticking the 'like this' button every time another poster puts forward any argument, no matter how pedestrian, against the view that RobbieF has just advanced. To my mind, that approach lessens credibility, as it suggests that poster is losing objectivity.

There is no doubt that the club needed to rebuild its list and that we needed talls. There is also absolutely no doubt that certain talls take time. Everyone knows this. But IMO there is no doubt that this club needs to be competitive in 2012, having had a rather inglorious rebuild that's now entering its fifth year. And our recruiting needs to reflect this.

Despite many thinking here (a couple of years ago) that we could be a top 4-6 side in 2012 and then entering our premiership window in 2013, the reality is this IMO - absent the recruitment of Mark Neeld and his change in recruiting strategy, we would still have a list that lacks the physicality and on field presence to get us there. Thank God we managed to land Clark.

We've clearly had a lot of good picks in recent years, but that doesn't mean we've selected the right players, or even the right balance of players. And that is what some of us are trying to discuss here.

Personally, I think Watts will make it and will turn out to be a great pick. I still also have high hopes for Morton, but there have been some worrying signs in recent years. Misson could be the key here.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

  On 28/01/2012 at 10:24, bing181 said:

Where, as been pointed out, there were plenty of mids. You've chosen to take onboard the "facts" that support your argument, while ignoring the "facts" that don't.

My argument is that the first pick in any draft is the club's most important; it may later turn out that this is not the case but at the time of the draft you must ensure that you use your first pick to get the best available player. Let's be serious which pick do you think should yield the better player, pick 4 or pick 14?

Now which of the facts have I ignored; if you're suggesting that pick 1 or 2 is no more important than pick 12 why do club's tank?

[Lutz 76]

So now you've changed your argument?

It's like arguing with WYL...

Either way, it holds little merit.

[bing181 9,484]

  On 28/01/2012 at 20:44, Ron Burgundy said:

Lutz, I think RobbieF's point is quite clear. It may not ultimately turn out to be correct, but he's hardly being selective with his data. We have actually spent a high proportion of our top 12 picks in recent years on tall, skinny kids. For instance, we overlooked the bigger bodies of Hurley and Darling, and took talented, arguably undersized, tall players instead. We also overlooked plenty of very, very good midfielders with those selections.

I'll bite. Firstly, why are we suddenly talking about "top 12 picks" here? The original RobbieF post was about "first round selections". Where, it's very hard to see how there's a "high proportion" of tall skinny kids, when the only two that were cited were Morton and Cook - out of how many ... 8 or so? In the 2009 draft alone we had 3 first round picks, all the "very very good midfielders" that we're supposed to have overlooked.

And how did we overlook Hurley? We took Watts, and by our next pick that year, Hurley was well gone. Are you suggesting we should have taken Hurley instead of Watts? In any case, the next pick we took after Watts (or Hurley if you prefer) was Blease, not exactly a "tall skinny kid".

Finally, I didn't know that there were regulations on the use of the "Like" button. I'll try to avoid clicking it for "pedestrian" posts from now on.

[Hannibal 5,814]

  On 28/01/2012 at 01:33, old55 said:

That's quite wrong. Geelong needed a KPF because of the Mooney/Pods/Hawkins issues I explained (IMO they still do)

I've read a few of your posts in this thread regarding Geelong's recent recruiting, but each time for some reason you overlook Mitch Brown. At the beginning of last season Brown was a 20 year old promising 195cm key forward prospect. He's had a number of very good performances at VFL level and indeed was a first round draft pick. Like most young talls he's presently trying to build a body, but he managed to debut as a tall forward last year in a premiership season. Not bad. Throw in Vardy, who's also a promising ruck/key forward and their stocks in this department aren't nearly as bare as you assert. Well, not to me anyway.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

  On 28/01/2012 at 23:33, Lutz said:

So now you've changed your argument?

It's like arguing with WYL...

Either way, it holds little merit.

You talking to me? If so where have I changed my argument, perhaps it's your comprehension that needs a look at.

BTW I am stating an opinion I don't care if you disagree with it or not it won't alter it.

[Lutz 76]

Neither will I; that's why I gave up with a weak parting shot.

The end.

[Slartibartfast 18,125]

  On 29/01/2012 at 00:18, Ben-Hur said:

I've read a few of your posts in this thread regarding Geelong's recent recruiting, but each time for some reason you overlook Mitch Brown. At the beginning of last season Brown was a 20 year old promising 195cm key forward prospect. He's had a number of very good performances at VFL level and indeed was a first round draft pick. Like most young talls he's presently trying to build a body, but he managed to debut as a tall forward last year in a premiership season. Not bad. Throw in Vardy, who's also a promising ruck/key forward and their stocks in this department aren't nearly as bare as you assert. Well, not to me anyway.

Mitch Brown has so many injuries he's probably in the "Cook" catagory - unknown. Vardy showed a lot of promise I agree. Still Mooney is gone, Pod is old and Hawkins still unproven after a number of years despite a good finals series. Hawkins is a good example of a tall who other than FS would have been taken top 10 who has taken ages to progress.

The discussion here seems to be "take Darling as he's good and he's "now". I believe Cook was probably taken for the type of footballer he will be (most likely different to Darling) and the fact BP believed he would be better than Darling in the longer run. If this is in fact right I support it. Our premiership window will be from 2015 onward and we need to be as good as we can be then. If we suffer a bit now then that's ok by me as long as we are maximizing our chances to win a flag with this list.

[Ron Burgundy 8,588]

  On 29/01/2012 at 02:47, Fan said:

Mitch Brown has so many injuries he's probably in the "Cook" catagory - unknown. Vardy showed a lot of promise I agree. Still Mooney is gone, Pod is old and Hawkins still unproven after a number of years despite a good finals series. Hawkins is a good example of a tall who other than FS would have been taken top 10 who has taken ages to progress.

The discussion here seems to be "take Darling as he's good and he's "now". I believe Cook was probably taken for the type of footballer he will be (most likely different to Darling) and the fact BP believed he would be better than Darling in the longer run. If this is in fact right I support it. Our premiership window will be from 2015 onward and we need to be as good as we can be then. If we suffer a bit now then that's ok by me as long as we are maximizing our chances to win a flag with this list.

The 'premiership window' timing is interesting to me, Fan. People here used to talk about it commencing in 2013. Now it's 2015. It seems there's some time creep going on at the moment.

We have 'suffered' from about 2007. And we have been patient. Not only that, 'this list' will not include the best of the list from recent years, supplemented by the younger talented recruits (Morton, Watts, Trengove, Gysberts etc), as was said to be the stated methodology a few years ago. It will be an entirely different list in 2015 and beyond.

To me, that suggests that we're not really relying on any of our better players over the last 5 years or so, eg, Jamar, Green, Sylvia, Moloney, Rivers, Davey etc. And, given that we don't yet really know how good our younger, talented players will be just yet, it's possible the rebuild's not tracking as well as we have been told/would have hoped.

Accordingly, I am hoping the 'premiership window' opens before that - and we witness some drastic improvement, commencing round 1, 2012, following a year of chronic underperformance and disappointment last season. I want to see finals this year, as I think does Mark Neeld.

If I'm being overly optimistic or idealistic in saying this, it has to mean our rebuild since 2007/2008 has not been all that successful or particularly well balanced. It also begs the question as to why we didn't go full bore at recruiting some more effective senior players over the last few years.

[Axis of Bob 11,945]

Why would our premiership window involve our veterans? If they were good enough to win a flag then we wouldn't have needed such a massive rebuild.

Look at the timeframes of the top clubs with their rebuilds. Specifically, look at Geelong. They started their rebuild in 1998.

[Hannibal 5,814]

  On 29/01/2012 at 02:47, Fan said:

Mitch Brown has so many injuries he's probably in the "Cook" catagory - unknown. Vardy showed a lot of promise I agree. Still Mooney is gone, Pod is old and Hawkins still unproven after a number of years despite a good finals series. Hawkins is a good example of a tall who other than FS would have been taken top 10 who has taken ages to progress.

The point I'm making is that when assessing Geelong's recruiting decisions of November 2010 you can't overlook two young promising tall forwards, especially when one was a first rounder. Obviously it's difficult to transplant oneself into 15-16 months ago, but when Stephen Wells was assessing the best prospects come draft day he and the coach would have also looked at their current players. The fact that they overlooked Darling could have been as much to do with their internal views on Brown and Vardy.

Certainly when one is discussing Geelong's need for tall forwards it's a glaring omission to not even mention a first round pick in Brown, or the potential of the promising Vardy. Especially when you're trying to use hindsight and in part you're talking up the merits of another first round pick in Cook.

[Slartibartfast 18,125]

  On 29/01/2012 at 04:46, Ben-Hur said:

The point I'm making is that when assessing Geelong's recruiting decisions of November 2010 you can't overlook two young promising tall forwards, especially when one was a first rounder. Obviously it's difficult to transplant oneself into 15-16 months ago, but when Stephen Wells was assessing the best prospects come draft day he and the coach would have also looked at their current players. The fact that they overlooked Darling could have been as much to do with their internal views on Brown and Vardy.

Certainly when one is discussing Geelong's need for tall forwards it's a glaring omission to not even mention a first round pick in Brown, or the potential of the promising Vardy. Especially when you're trying to use hindsight and in part you're talking up the merits in another first round pick in Cook.

Yes, I agree, Brown and Vardy certainly come into the picture. Geelong know their list much better than us although sometimes you can get too close to it as Daniher did in 2007 and Richmond in 2001.

[old55 23,871]

  On 29/01/2012 at 04:46, Ben-Hur said:

The point I'm making is that when assessing Geelong's recruiting decisions of November 2010 you can't overlook two young promising tall forwards, especially when one was a first rounder. Obviously it's difficult to transplant oneself into 15-16 months ago, but when Stephen Wells was assessing the best prospects come draft day he and the coach would have also looked at their current players. The fact that they overlooked Darling could have been as much to do with their internal views on Brown and Vardy.

Certainly when one is discussing Geelong's need for tall forwards it's a glaring omission to not even mention a first round pick in Brown, or the potential of the promising Vardy. Especially when you're trying to use hindsight and in part you're talking up the merits in another first round pick in Cook.

You make agood point about Brown and I did overlook him because he has hardly played. The argument from the pro-Darling camp is that he's so good overlooking him is a sackable offence. With Brown and Hawkins doubtful and Mooney and Pods old how could Wells overlook the sure thing?

[Hannibal 5,814]

  On 29/01/2012 at 05:21, old55 said:

With Brown and Hawkins doubtful and Mooney and Pods old how could Wells overlook the sure thing?

Do you mean then, or now ? Hawkins has gone a long way in showing that he'll be a player and I suspect his confidence will now be through the roof; and I'm far from convinced that Brown is doubtful.

Also, recruiters often overlook players that they know should be very very good. You do realise that you can't pick them all ? Judgment calls are predicated on numerous things.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

  On 29/01/2012 at 05:38, Ben-Hur said:

Do you mean then, or now ? Hawkins has gone a long way in showing that he'll be a player and I suspect his confidence will now be through the roof; and I'm far from convinced that Brown is doubtful.

Also, recruiters often overlook players that they know should be very very good. You do realise that you can't pick them all ? Judgment calls are predicated on numerous things.

Correct, Geelong may not have had greater need for a player like Smedts, perhaps they didn't want another forward.

I think that some on here are confusing the issue; it's not that Darling is such a star it's more so that some perceive him to be better than Cook.

[old55 23,871]

  On 29/01/2012 at 05:38, Ben-Hur said:

Do you mean then, or now ? Hawkins has gone a long way in showing that he'll be a player and I suspect his confidence will now be through the roof; and I'm far from convinced that Brown is doubtful.

Also, recruiters often overlook players that they know should be very very good. You do realise that you can't pick them all ? Judgment calls are predicated on numerous things.

I mean then of course - various posters on here have questioned how BP could have chosen Cook when Darling was available, one even suggested that BP was sacked because of this. I simply pointed out that Scott Clayton, Wayne Hughes and Stephen Wells - all highly rated, experienced recruiters with good reasons at the time to pick a player like Darling also decided not to take him. I think your 2nd paragraph sums it up.

[old55 23,871]

  On 29/01/2012 at 06:01, RobbieF said:

Correct, Geelong may not have had greater need for a player like Smedts, perhaps they didn't want another forward.

Mooney retiring, Pods turning 30, Hawkins questionable and Brown always injured, even if they didn't want another forward how could they overlook Darling?

My natural tendency is to support those who give their all for the club and those who've been around long enough will remember that I was strong supporter of Neale Daniher, gave Dean Bailey the benefit of any doubts, same for Tom Scully, got behind Craig Cameron and now support Barry Prendergast. It's a path with pot-holes as the Scully experience shows. I don't think we'll know what Barry Prendergast's legacy was until late in this decade - to suggest that he screwed up taking Cook over Darling is premature.

[Nasher 33,686]

  On 29/01/2012 at 06:09, old55 said:

Mooney retiring, Pods turning 30, Hawkins questionable and Brown always injured, even if they didn't want another forward how could they overlook Darling?.

This is going to end up with the usual "I don't care what other clubs do" response for sure.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

  On 29/01/2012 at 06:09, old55 said:

Mooney retiring, Pods turning 30, Hawkins questionable and Brown always injured, even if they didn't want another forward how could they overlook Darling?.

Perhaps Geelong has as much faith in Hawkins and Brown as you do in Cook; that answer your question and does it satisfy your needs Nasher?

How many clubs passed on Cook and how many others would have, given the chance, or do you think he would have been snapped up with the next pick?

[old55 23,871]

  On 29/01/2012 at 06:12, Nasher said:

This is going to end up with the usual "I don't care what other clubs do" response for sure.

I've posted the same thing 10 times (too many) in the thread already - more fool me, I'm a slow learner.

[Nasher 33,686]

  On 29/01/2012 at 06:16, RobbieF said:

Perhaps Geelong has as much faith in Hawkins and Brown as you do in Cook; that answer your question and does it satisfy your needs Nasher?

It's an attempt at being rational, and for that I'm grateful Robbie. Thanks.

[Dee Fan 3,247]

I will say one more thing about this.

I have doubts about Cook and I think Darling has shown himself to be a good player already. What concerns me most about Cook is his attack on the ball and this is something that you can't say about Darling. Would we have picked Darling over Cook if Neeld was there; I reckon we would have.

Now all we can do is wait and see.

[BAMF 4,488]

If we picked Darling, there is no way we would have picked Howe who is roughly the same size.

Imagine trying to fit Howe, Jurrah, Pettard, Clarke, Watts into the forward line as well as Darling!

For everyone who thinks Darling had such an amazing year, please click on the below link.

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_player_compare?tid1=19&pid1=3471&tid2=12&pid2=3478&type=A&fid1=S&fid2=S

Now. Think how well Darling would have played in our forward line while we were getting limited supply into the forward line.

Think about how much better Howe would be if he played in West Coast's forward line all year.

We have a massive win. There is no way we would have taken both.

[Axis of Bob 11,945]

Exactly, UTAH. There is no way you would pick Howe, who plays pretty much the same role as Darling, and Darling in the same draft.

As an interesting exercise (that may or may not be of any importance) would everyone rather have Cook + Howe, or Darling + another player between pick 34 and 50?

[Hannibal 5,814]

  On 29/01/2012 at 06:37, UTAH said:

If we picked Darling, there is no way we would have picked Howe who is roughly the same size.

No disrespect, but I think anyone with half a brain knows this.