Drafting Analysis: 2007 - 2009

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

With the benefit of hindsight, I think the recruiting strategy adopted by Bailey/Prendergast was slightly naive. Recruiting very young, skinny players and putting 'game time' into them largely at the expense of some of our older, experienced players (all of whom were in our best 22 at the time) doesn't ensure they will become great players. Looking at the way the new regime has approached last year's draft and this year's pre-season, it's clear to me they recognised this immediately and then recruited some mature, hard bodied players to give us a better mix on the field. It seems a more practical, realistic approach.

Some here say the problem was not so much the players selected in the last few years, but the club's inability to develop them because of a lack of resources. Well, surely a recruiting strategy needs to take that into account. If it is true that we are not as good as developing players as some other clubs, we should have recognised this and then recruited players who are hungrier and who are determined to succeed irrespective of any deficiencies in resourcing. Moneyball provides a good example of how a 'poorer' club tailored its recruitment strategy to its more limited resources. And it seems in that instance the coach dictated to the recruiters who to select, not the other way around.

As to not interviewing Dustin Martin - if true, that's really disappointing. We were gifted picks 1 and 2 in a good draft pool. That's an unbelievably rare opportunity. And we stuffed it. Losing a number one draft pick two years after being selected is not good - and the signs were there almost immediately. Tapscott and Trengove signed up for an extension almost immediately - Scully did not. I was nervous about him right from the start - just through observing his reactions to being drafted by the MFC and his general demeanour. How some of this didn't come out in the interviews still amazes me.

I remember the Swans (and a few other clubs) expressed a very strong interest in Martin prior to that draft. I think they had pick 6 which they ultimately used on Rohan (another player the club should've looked at IMO). I remember thinking at the time, if a club like the Swans is really interested in Martin (and I'm pretty confident they were full bore on him), I really hope we check him out because they are good at identifying hard, loyal, effective types. I find it absolutely bizarre that we didn't at least chat to him. It just seems amateur in the extreme. Martin and Trengove would have been a midfield transforming masterstroke - the thing is, for a dedicated recruitment team it shouldn't have been that hard.

And it seems to me that the Swans would probably not have picked Scully had they had pick one, so it simply cannot be the case that Scully was so clearly the number one pick that the club didn't need to speak to other talented kids (eg, Martin). The following articles are quite interesting IMO. I still find it hard to come to terms with Richmond having a better midfield than us given the picks we've had in recent years - particularly given that we appeared to have a 'midfield' focus for several of those drafts.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/tiger-tough/story-e6frf9jf-1225795211997

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/fox-sports-afl-expert-wayne-schwass-compares-richmonds-dustin-martin-to-all-time-great-leigh-matthews/story-e6frf3e3-1226080357418

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/more-news/richmond-cub-dustin-martins-all-out-attack-on-elite-status/story-e6frf9jf-1226045887508

"Roos, who was still coach of the Swans at the 2009, said he was hoping Martin would slip down the pecking order so he could nab him at No.6.

"Everyone was hoping," Roos said."

[Sir Why You Little 36,604]

Well said Ron. I agree 100% with that.

The club has blown a big chance and i think they know it.

At least they have reacted in the last 6 months. But 2007-2011 must be looked at as a very bad lost opportunity.

[RalphiusMaximus 6,012]

The thing to remember regarding drafting in the Bailey era is that he came to the club with a huge reputation for developing young players. Our entire recruiting strategy was built upon this. We made a point of taking bottom aged players who were seen as having huge potential because we had a coach who was supposed to be able to mould them into great players. The failure wasn't in the recruiters but in the strategy they were instructed to adopt. Everything was built around what turned out to be a false expectation that Bailey was the man to develop these kids into elite footballers, a task at which he failed utterly. We now have Mark Neeld conducting remedial lecture sessions trying to undo the damage that Bailey's "Kid gloves and free games" strategy caused to these kids.

The issue now is whether the kids Bailey got his hands on are ruined beyond hope of salvation or whether in a professionally run club with serious training and accountability they will be able to reach the potential the recruiters saw in them.

Edited March 18, 2012 by RalphiusMaximus

[rpfc 28,046]

Does anyone here think we have been crap these last few years because of our drafting from 2007 to 2009?

We are in the predicament we are in because of our lack of solid senior players. Poor selections, lack of development, injury, whatever.

We are beginning to move on to Jones, Batram, Frawley, Garland, and Grimes from 2005 and 2006 but it is because of those drafted pre-2005 that we are in this mess.

If we are still shite in 2016 then come on here and complain about GRimes, Morton, Watts, and co. but, at this minute, they are not our problem.

Edited March 18, 2012 by rpfc

[old dee 23,486]

Does anyone here think we have been crap these last few years because of our drafting from 2007 to 2009?

We are in the predicament we are in because of our lack of solid senior players. Poor selections, lack of development, injury, whatever.

We are beginning to move on to Jones, Batram, Frawley, Garland, and Grimes from 2005 and 2006 but it is because of those drafted pre-2005 that we are in this mess.

If we are still shite in 2016 then come on here and complain about GRimes, Morton, Watts, and co. but, at this minute, they are not our problem.

Agree with most of what you say, I have been complaining for 2 years about the quality of our senior players.

We know they are not good enough in fact IMO they may mean that the young players may never develop correctly.

We go into 2012 with a bunch of average senior players, with almost no one to show the kids the way.

It looks very bleak

[bing181 8,908]

Does anyone here think we have been crap these last few years because of our drafting from 2007 to 2009?

Unfortunately, yes they do.

Much of the argument - such as it is - re drafting is based on the fallacious assumption that if Player X taken after our pick turns out (5 or 6 years down the track) to be a better player, then we failed, people should be shot, heads should roll etc. etc.

But players' success or failure does NOT depend on where they were taken in the draft, and the draft is NOT a reflection of a player's capacity or capability. If it was, we wouldn't even need to bother with the rookie draft, as they'd all be total spuds. But there are rookies who were passed over completely in the draft who have become AA players, B&F winners, club captains, 200 gamers, etc. etc.

Even looking over recent Brownlows. Judd, sure. Ablett - hard to say where he would have gone, he went F/S and was NOT a walk-up first 22 player by any means. But Goodes (pick 43) and Swann (pick 58) - they were taken at those picks because that's about how they were rated as 18 year olds.

Which is all the draft is. It's an assessment of a bunch of kids just out of high school, a guide. Not only is not an accurate predictor of 25 year olds, it's not even accurate a year later when they're 19 or so - the Rising Star attests to that. And even then the Rising Star isn't an accurate predictor of players becoming "elite". Jared Rivers anyone? (not knocking him either ...). If you go by the Rising Star, the best pick in the 98 draft went at pick 67 - Byron Pickett.

There have been some good posts in this thread, and even some good analysis. If people think that we should be winning more games, then they're going to think we have a problem. But that problem, as alluded to above, is not our recent drafting. And if Cale Morton turns out to be an average player, so be it. It just means that his capabilities at 25 didn't match his capabilities at 18 - when he was in fact, very very good. It does not mean we "failed".

Finally, a suggestion to those still not convinced. Take an afternoon. Take 4 years' drafts, say 2003 - 2006, those players should be fulfilling their potential by now. Classify the players by round (first, second, third etc.), right down to the rookies, and put all those players names on bits of paper. For each of our picks, make a selection AT RANDOM from the players available for that round. At the end of that, rate the selections and throw away the bottom half of those (players who didn't make it), and then see where you end up. Different? I'm sure. Better than any other team around? Not so sure.

And just remember people, the same Hawthorn recruiting team who took Franklin at pick 5, took Mitch Thorp at pick 6 two years later. Speaking of Hawthorn, the player who impressed me two weekends ago was Suckling. Rookie who didn't even play in the firsts till his third season.

[Pennant St Dee 12,655]

Agree with most of what you say, I have been complaining for 2 years about the quality of our senior players.

We know they are not good enough in fact IMO they may mean that the young players may never develop correctly.

We go into 2012 with a bunch of average senior players, with almost no one to show the kids the way.

It looks very bleak

and what you & RPFC say is the difference in teams like West Coast, Fremantle & maybe Adelaide being able to turn things around fairly quickly. Having a good core of senior players is vital, we are heading there but it will come from our Chips, Jones, Trengove,Blease, Clark, Grimes an from what I've seen this year Tynan, Davis & Mconald.

To those constantly berating our list, the list above none of them are the taller KPP thinner builds who we need to give a few years to see how they are going to end up. Not all doom & gloom just another 20/30 games into these boys think 1986

Edited March 18, 2012 by Pennant St Dee

[old dee 23,486]

I wouldn't.

I would

[Ron Burgundy 8,584]

Recruiting Mitch Clark was an inspired play IMO. Neeld recognised it and made it happen.

As much as I like Tapscott, I think we erred in not going harder at getting Luke Ball (pick 18 could've done the deal). He didn't want to come to the Dees, though nor did Mitch Clark - not initially at least. Ball was the type of senior player we needed at the time. I also don't believe Neeld and co would've cut James McDonald a season prematurely for much the same reason (particularly with Cameron Bruce skipping the coop that year). Our recruiting and development strategy at the time all seemed a bit too cute to me - it's footy, and every team needs a core of really hard men to get things moving.

It seems to me that we now have a football department that means business. It inspires confidence and seems to be one that will make things happen. It has a hard edge and a practical focus to it.

As much as I wish this list was more advanced on its journey than it is, the pre-season just past (but for the Jurrah and Sylvia incidents) has been absolutely awesome for this club. Neeld and the others will turn this list into a well functioning machine IMO. The 186 loss provided the wake up call we needed at the time.

[Hells Gates 505]

Recruiting Mitch Clark was an inspired play IMO. Neeld recognised it and made it happen.

As much as I like Tapscott, I think we erred in not going harder at getting Luke Ball (pick 18 could've done the deal). He didn't want to come to the Dees, though nor did Mitch Clark - not initially at least. Ball was the type of senior player we needed at the time. I also don't believe Neeld and co would've cut James McDonald a season prematurely for much the same reason (particularly with Cameron Bruce skipping the coop that year). Our recruiting and development strategy at the time all seemed a bit too cute to me - it's footy, and every team needs a core of really hard men to get things moving.

It seems to me that we now have a football department that means business. It inspires confidence and seems to be one that will make things happen. It has a hard edge and a practical focus to it.

As much as I wish this list was more advanced on its journey than it is, the pre-season just past (but for the Jurrah and Sylvia incidents) has been absolutely awesome for this club. Neeld and the others will turn this list into a well functioning machine IMO. The 186 loss provided the wake up call we needed at the time.

It would of been an awesome pre season if we hadnt of had so many injuries - guys in rehab, but yes a big step in the right direction.

[old dee 23,486]

It would of been an awesome pre season if we hadnt of had so many injuries - guys in rehab, but yes a big step in the right direction.

HG I have seen very little to suggest the playing group has made any significant improvement since the nd of 2011.

The two players who show some improvement are Clark and Magnar

Both imports this year.

We have played Brisbane Won by less than a goal and GCS beat us.

Beat the Pies but they were playing a large number of their seconds.

Belted by the Hawks, it was over at the 15 minute mark.

Beaten easily by Port ( 2nd last in 2011 ) it was over again at the 15 minute mark.

Can you please show me how that form is a big step in the right direction.

[Hells Gates 505]

HG I have seen very little to suggest the playing group has made any significant improvement since the nd of 2011.

The two players who show some improvement are Clark and Magnar

Both imports this year.

We have played Brisbane Won by less than a goal and GCS beat us.

Beat the Pies but they were playing a large number of their seconds.

Belted by the Hawks, it was over at the 15 minute mark.

Beaten easily by Port ( 2nd last in 2011 ) it was over again at the 15 minute mark.

Can you please show me how that form is a big step in the right direction.

Sorry OD I was referring to our fitness training.

I have sent you a PM as well.

[old dee 23,486]

Sorry OD I was referring to our fitness training.

I have sent you a PM as well.

Ok Sorry I totally missed your point.

[dazzledavey36 52,728]

The above list doesn't take into account needs in terms of list make-up.

It also doesn't allow for future development and the potential for players to pass others.

And I question some of the "preferred options". It's an exercise in hindsight, and lacks foresight.

I only think it works if you'd today do a straight up trade, and even then it doesn't allow for future development.

- would you really prefer Yarran to Watts? Even NicNat and Hurley I have my doubts. None of them are the finished article.

Hurley was a FB with question marks on pace and going forward, plus his attack on the ball is great, but beyond that he is heavily overrated.

- Harry Taylor or Callan Ward over Grimes? You can't predict the injuries.

- Ballantyne, Zaharakis or Redden over Blease? We're yet to see the best of any of them, but Blease we've seen least of to date. Bottom-age and held back by injuries, remember.

- Ash Smith over Bennell?? Really?

- Butcher over Scully? Even Martin over Trengove?

- Bastinac over Gysberts?? Now you've gotta be joking.

- Reid or Christensen over Gawn is way too early when we've not seen enough of Gawn and we needed a ruck. He was a great prospect. Reid's kicking is still iffy and Christensen was bloody lucky to land in a great program.

i dont agree with any of what u have just written dude... i would take nicknat or hurley over watts i dont need to explain why.

harry taylor is a star and jack grimes is on his way too.

err haven't seen the best of them? redden is going to be a star! reminds me of lenny hayes. zaharakis has already won an essendon best and fairest yet you still question why you would rather blease instead.. right.. ballantyne is the next steve milne.

bennell over smith? heeelll noo!!

Butcher over scully?? where do i sign?

martin over trengove? martin is a going to be a genune superstar! not knocking jack but if i had my choice again it would be martin! i do like jack though he is a gun.

gys needs to lift work rate and put on muscle, could be anything if he gets his weakness right, bastinac is a gun though!

Gawn over Reid!!??? are u [censored] outter ya mind!! reid by a length way to the moon and back. kid is going to be a superstar for many years! gawn err is tall.. with dodgy knees.. yeah no!

Edited March 18, 2012 by dazzledavey36

[Arsene Wenger 72]

i dont agree with any of what u have just written dude... i would take nicknat or hurley over watts i dont need to explain why.

harry taylor is a star and jack grimes is on his way too.

err haven't seen the best of them? redden is going to be a star! reminds me of lenny hayes. zaharakis has already won an essendon best and fairest yet you still question why you would rather blease instead.. right.. ballantyne is the next steve milne.

bennell over smith? heeelll noo!!

Butcher over scully?? where do i sign?

martin over trengove? martin is a going to be a genune superstar! not knocking jack but if i had my choice again it would be martin! i do like jack though he is a gun.

gys needs to lift work rate and put on muscle, could be anything if he gets his weakness right, bastinac is a gun though!

Gawn over Reid!!??? are u [censored] outter ya mind!! reid by a length way to the moon and back. kid is going to be a superstar for many years! gawn err is tall.. with dodgy knees.. yeah no!

- Great, you don't need to explain why... thanks for the reply then.

Watts was bottom-age, unlike the others, and they all still have a lot of development to do.

I'd prefer the output of the others right now, but I'm not silly enough to believe Watts can't eclipse them in the near future.

- Harry Taylor had the fortune of landing in a premiership side, where he could slot in the newly vacant CHB position.

If Grimes was at Geelong, he'd be spoken of in the same terms as Selwood.

- Yes, we haven't seen the best of them. Or do you think they have all plateaued?

And you may be conveniently ignoring that Blease was bottom age and missed significant amounts of development time because of injury, something none of those other 3 players were or have done.

- It's subjective, but I'd keep Trengove over Martin.

We don't know what we'll get for the Scully compo picks, so we don't know if we'd prefer Butcher.

As for Scully himself, you're using a crystal ball that we didn't have back in 2009 when every single other club would have chosen Scully as a "can't-miss" prospect over Butcher. Don't try to re-write history.

- Yes, Bastinac is a "gun". With time and development, I think Gysberts will eventually have much greater influence over a football match.

Either way, it is not clear cut.

- Gawn -- we needed a ruckman. More than we needed another KPF. It's that simple.

And it's like bringing up Fyfe as an example of a missed opportunity - no other team knew he was going to develop so well, so quickly.

Sydney took a punt and it paid off.

[Harrisonrules 273]

This is my rough assessment taking into consideration the pick they were taken with and what they have gone on to achieve so far.

2007

Cale Morton - Bad

Jack Grimes - Very good

Addam Maric - Bad

Kyle Cheney - OK

Tom McNamara - OK

Stefan Martin - Very Good

Trent Zomer ® - OK

Austin Wonaeamirri ® - Good (personal issues)

Jake Spencer ® - OK (injuries)

Shane Valenti ® - Good

2008

Jack Watts - OK

Sam Blease - OK (injuries)

James Strauss - OK (injuries)

Jamie Bennell - OK

Neville Jetta - OK

Rohan Bail - Very Good

Liam Jurrah - Very Good

Jordie McKenzie ® - Very Good

Rhys Healey ® - OK

Daniel Hughes ® - OK

2009

Tom Scully - Very Bad

Jack Trengove - Good

Jordan Gysberts - Good

Luke Tapscott - OK (injuries)

Max Gawn - Good (injuries)

Jack Fitzpatrick - Bad

Joel Macdonald - Good

Stick to your day job

[jayceebee31 697]

Yeah but imagine:

- Rioli/Dangerfield over Morton

- Shuey over Blease

- Martin over scully

- Nicnat over Watts

- Fyfe over Gysberts/tapscott,

Of the team that played against port on the weekend only one of the above melbourne players played.

Imagine last nights team with Rioli as our small forward, Nicnat in the ruck and Shuey, Martin and Fyfe added in the midfield.

We have missfired with our early picks too often and it has cost us a chance at a 'dynasty'.

The players selected by other teams after ours were within a couple of picks of ours, they weren't 'missed by everyone'.

At least we got Trengove.

Hindsight is a great tool along with time.I feel in time,several players we have recruited will become elite footballers.We as a club just need a little luck with injuries.

[Grimes Times 1,278]

and what you & RPFC say is the difference in teams like West Coast, Fremantle & maybe Adelaide being able to turn things around fairly quickly. Having a good core of senior players is vital, we are heading there but it will come from our Chips, Jones, Trengove,Blease, Clark, Grimes an from what I've seen this year Tynan, Davis & Mconald. To those constantly berating our list, the list above none of them are the taller KPP thinner builds who we need to give a few years to see how they are going to end up. Not all doom & gloom just another 20/30 games into these boys think 1986

Agree it makes a huge difference as a young player if you step into a established side with a great senior core. Swap Geelong's young guns Duncan, Christensen, Menzel and put them into Melb team and see how they go. In the reverse put any one of Morton, Blease, Strause, Grimes, Gysberts, Tappy MacKenzie etc in the Geelong team and suddenly they are surrounded by experienced senior players like, Corey, Enright, Chapman, Selwood, Scarlet etc. It makes a huge difference.

People claim that Geelong have have a great developed system as their players step straight into senior football and perform, I say its because they are stepping into a great team already. Its a lot easier to get a kick when you are winning instead of when you are spending all day chasing tail and watching the ball go over your head thru the bug sticks.

You cant tell me Morton on a wing for Geelong wouldn't dominate. He could run forward of the ball all day and end up on the end of it kicking it to the leading forwards. People would be saying how good is he he's always on his own finding space. Its easy to find space out of defence when you know your teammates are going to win the ball 9 times out of 10.

Edited March 21, 2012 by Grimes Times

[The Chazz 4,077]

Put this in a different thread, but most relevant here...

Not sure where to put this, covers a lot of players in "The Locker Room", but is there any frigging chance we can get to see all these top draft picks that we've been working hard to get actually play in the same game? I'm talking basically;

Jones

Frawley

Grimes

Morton

Watts

Blease

Strauss*

Trengove

Gysberts

Tapscott*

Cook

(* Very early 2nd round picks)

We will struggle to win bulk games until all these blokes are on the field together. Relying on Pick 50's+, mature-age rookie selections, etc to take us to finals is not the answer.

Further, I will hold my judgement on our drafting in tis timeframe until I see the above players starting in a game.

[nutbean 8,838]

Yeah but imagine:

- Rioli/Dangerfield over Morton

- Shuey over Blease

- Martin over scully

- Nicnat over Watts

- Fyfe over Gysberts/tapscott,

Of the team that played against port on the weekend only one of the above melbourne players played.

Imagine last nights team with Rioli as our small forward, Nicnat in the ruck and Shuey, Martin and Fyfe added in the midfield.

We have missfired with our early picks too often and it has cost us a chance at a 'dynasty'.

The players selected by other teams after ours were within a couple of picks of ours, they weren't 'missed by everyone'.

At least we got Trengove.

Since we are all being Captain Hindsight we got Trengove wrong - we should have picked Martin or Sam Reid or Nat Fyfe - all have had a bigger impact than Trengove.

[Disco Demons 92]

Dean Bailey was the biggest mistake.

All he did was tank to finish last...got rid of the older guys, didn't play them, give them or give them a chance...he wasn't able to educate the younger players.

His legacy was the flogging we received down in geelong...and exactly why he lost his job.

[old dee 23,486]

Dean Bailey was the biggest mistake.

All he did was tank to finish last...got rid of the older guys, didn't play them, give them or give them a chance...he wasn't able to educate the younger players.

His legacy was the flogging we received down in geelong...and exactly why he lost his job.

DD can you please get rid of that bloody Avatar.

I take one look at it and imediately think negative about your comments before I read one word.

Edited March 21, 2012 by old dee

[Disco Demons 92]

DD can you please get rid of that bloody Avatar.

I take one look at it and imediately think negative about your comments before I read one word.

since you said please..I have done it.

[old dee 23,486]

since you said please..I have done it.

Excellent DD

That is a quantum leap into the positive