2011 draft

[nutbean 8,837]

I have listened to posters with the luxury of hindsight tell us how we recruited badly and who we should have picked.

Lets step up to the plate right now.

Name one player after Taggart and Tynan picks who we missed out on (without the benefit of seeing them play).

At least that way you can have cred by saying - I told you so at the time.

[old dee 22,854]

I have listened to posters with the luxury of hindsight tell us how we recruited badly and who we should have picked.

Lets step up to the plate right now.

Name one player after Taggart and Tynan picks who we missed out on (without the benefit of seeing them play).

At least that way you can have cred by saying - I told you so at the time.

Do we all look that silly nutbean!

[old55 21,326]

Dustin Martian

[nutbean 8,837]

Do we all look that silly nutbean!

I had to give it a shot!

[dee-luded 2,958]

I have listened to posters with the luxury of hindsight tell us how we recruited badly and who we should have picked.

Lets step up to the plate right now.

Name one player after Taggart and Tynan picks who we missed out on (without the benefit of seeing them play).

At least that way you can have cred by saying - I told you so at the time.

I for one cannot comment on last years draft 'nutbean', as I didn't follow the TAC Cup sine we drafted Scull & Trenners.

So, other than my disappointment at missing The Tassie boy who went to GCSuns, I can't say anything.

[Viney12 196]

I have listened to posters with the luxury of hindsight tell us how we recruited badly and who we should have picked.

Lets step up to the plate right now.

Name one player after Taggart and Tynan picks who we missed out on (without the benefit of seeing them play).

At least that way you can have cred by saying - I told you so at the time.

Looking at the draft - nothing stands out

We picked 2 in and under players, which we needed plus a mature age KPP (Sellar)

The only one really standing out to me at the moment is potentially Aaron Hall - he looked pretty good for GC in the NAB

[nutbean 8,837]

Dustin Martian

Alien Christensen ?

[old55 21,326]

Alien Christensen ?

You might be thinking of his brother "Haysoos Jnr"

[Hannibal 5,814]

I have listened to posters with the luxury of hindsight tell us how we recruited badly and who we should have picked.

Lets step up to the plate right now.

Name one player after Taggart and Tynan picks who we missed out on (without the benefit of seeing them play).

At least that way you can have cred by saying - I told you so at the time.

It's not the supporters that sit at the draft table. We don't own the decisions. We're not paid for our opinion. If the club recruits poorly supporters have every right to vent their spleen. They don't need to be told they're using Harry Hindsight, because it's plainly obvious everyone does. The club does, the industry does, recruiters do. Why do you think some recruiters get the flick ? We're all experts after the fact, but they get paid very well to get it right. It doesn't matter that nobody else was predicting player 'x' to go at a certain point. It doesn't matter that "everybody overlooked player 'x', even his own club once before taking him in the second round". What matters is getting the best players you can into the club. What matters is getting James Kelly at pick 17 when others overlooked him.

We all know that recruiting isn't an exact science. We all know that there's a high failure rate in certain rounds of the draft. We all know that some players like Rockliff, Barlow, and a plethora of ruckman including Cox, Jolly, and Jamar came off rookie lists. Past captains to come off rookie lists include Junior McDonald, Matty Boyd and Brett Kirk. Why weren't they drafted in the ND ? Why did Carlton get rid of a slow Greg Williams ? Clubs and recruiters make mistakes. Some players just aren't ready at the time of their ND.

Ultimately though recruiters live and die by their choices. The problem for them is that some players may excel at one club, but not be properly developed at another. This gives a recruiter a mini escape clause. But it's not one they'd want to rely on too often. There are a myriad of reasons why players don't make it. I'll cut a recruiter some slack if they get the odd one wrong, but they also need to deliver the goods. I won't laud them if they get a good late pick, because occasionally they should. They're paid well to get a good late pick. Other clubs get good late picks too. I won't laud them for a good Rookie pick. They should get the good occasional Rookie. It's what they do. Some drafts run very deep, which is why good players have to wait for the Rookie draft. These days Rookies are very important and are expected to make the grade. They're no longer chosen as a long shot that may surprise. They're chosen with an expectation they have what it takes to get elevated.

What I won't tolerate is stuffing up top 30 picks. It's crucial that recruiters get the best talent into the club possible. If they stuff up pick 63 I'll live with it. But if they stuff up top 20/30 picks on a few occasions then look for a new profession. I can even live with stuffing up top a 20 pick, or two in one draft, but you're cactus if you do it twice. You're paid to get it right. And you're also lucky that most players get 3/4 years to show their wares, so the recruiter naturally gets that time too, and in the mean time they make draft a star that cuts them some slack. But they need to keep performing. Or, rightly, they'll endure heavy scrutiny.

I don't apologise for having high expectations of our recruiters.

[nutbean 8,837]

well that makes sense - you have outlined a host of reasons of why it is so inexact and host of players that show it is inexact but you wont tolerate that the MFC wont get the inexact, exact.

Edited March 21, 2012 by nutbean

[Hannibal 5,814]

well that makes sense - you have outlined a host of reasons of why it is so inexact and host of players that show it is inexact but you wont tolerate that the MFC wont get the inexact, exact.

Why be so disingenuous ? There are degrees of everything.in life. There are great recruiters, good recruiters, average recruiters, and poor recruiters. Do you think they're all the same ? Really ? Because that's the only conclusion I can come to from your trite views.

I said, "I'll cut a recruiter some slack if they get the odd one wrong", etc, yet you say "you wont tolerate that the MFC wont get the inexact, exact". As I said, why be so disingenuous ? I want what's best for the club and I recognise that like any industry on the planet some do it better than others. Yet you want to absolve them of mistakes and even worse, seemingly make them immune from scrutiny.

Lift your standards.

[nutbean 8,837]

Immune from scrutiny?

Please see my post where I state clearly that there can be argument made that clearly that Darling was on everyones radar and passed.

I have said that we had to make a choice between Niknat and Watts and our recruiters should be and will be judged on that.

Strauss is a speccy and BP should be accountable.

Not immune at all from scrutiny.

But I cannot abide by Scully - we should have known better and picked Martin. It is hindsight about a kid leaving for money.

[bing181 8,166]

What I won't tolerate is stuffing up top 30 picks.

I need one of those "not sure if serious" images.

Your basic premise is invalid. Top picks won't live up to expectations (for a variety of reasons), and rookies will exceed expectations. A top 30 pick is no guarantee of anything, except that at 18 you do OK with a footy. At 25? Your guess is as good as mine.

Every past present and future recruiter will at some time select top 30 picks (18 year old kids) that don't turn out to be decent players. Was forever thus. Nothing to do with recruiters themselves, or their capability.

There are some decent posts in the "drafting 2007 etc" thread hereabouts.

[nutbean 8,837]

Why be so disingenuous ? There are degrees of everything.in life. There are great recruiters, good recruiters, average recruiters, and poor recruiters. Do you think they're all the same ? Really ? Because that's the only conclusion I can come to from your trite views.

I said, "I'll cut a recruiter some slack if they get the odd one wrong", etc, yet you say "you wont tolerate that the MFC wont get the inexact, exact". As I said, why be so disingenuous ? I want what's best for the club and I recognise that like any industry on the planet some do it better than others. Yet you want to absolve them of mistakes and even worse, seemingly make them immune from scrutiny.

Lift your standards.

I suggest the recruiters be judged on each case. Probably not so much on who they missed but where they have selected speculatively and got it wrong against who they specced on and got it right. and as you point out - more weight should be given to picks 1-30 when judging.

You need the judge to be in the know ( not demonlanders).

From what we have read pre draft for example. Cook went maybe 4 or 5 places early ( whats 4 or 5 places ?). Howe was about right.

Scully, Trengove were right. Gysberts a little early,Strauss definately early but Tapscott slid through to us.

So to me i would be judging on the perceived picks that we took earlier than expected.

For the record and I have repeated it many times- I beleive our problem is not recruitment - it is developing our recruits.

For the record and I have repeated it many times - we have some early bloomers some late bloomers - i dont pot players under 23 as this is when players should be maturing.

[DeeZee 6,732]

Aaron Hall

[Arsene Wenger 72]

I'd be interested to know who these recruiters are that haven't fluffed more than a couple of top 30 picks.

Even the universally highly regarded Stephen Wells at Geelong has on his record

- 1998: Peter Street (17), David Clarke (20).

- 1999: Joel Corey (8) David Spriggs (15), Ezra Bray (17), Daniel Foster (23) in the year he is lauded for selecting Chapman, Ling and Corey.

- 2000: no top 30 picks, traded in Kent Kingsley, Justin Murphy, Mitchell White.

- 2001: Charlie Gardener (23) a pick before Steve Johnson, in the same year they took Ablett, Bartel, Kelly, and Henry Playfair at 41.

- 2002: Tim Callan at 36, after selecting Mackie (8) and Lonergan (23) who took 8 years to show something.

- 2003: Kane Tenace (7), Cameron Thurley (22)

- 2004: Geelong traded out of the top 30 to get Ottens for picks 12 (Danny Meyer) and 16 (Adam Pattison). Ouch.

- 2005: Travis Varcoe (15), Trent West (31)

- 2006: Joel Selwood (7), Nathan Djerrkura (25)

The rest are probably too recent to assess, like Dawson Simpson, Dan McKenna, etc.

What does this all boil down to?

Quite a few misses making it look like unrealistic expectations by some posters.

[Jordie_tackles 354]

I'd be interested to know who these recruiters are that haven't fluffed more than a couple of top 30 picks.

Even the universally highly regarded Stephen Wells at Geelong has on his record

- 1998: Peter Street (17), David Clarke (20).

- 1999: Joel Corey (8) David Spriggs (15), Ezra Bray (17), Daniel Foster (23) in the year he is lauded for selecting Chapman, Ling and Corey.

- 2000: no top 30 picks, traded in Kent Kingsley, Justin Murphy, Mitchell White.

- 2001: Charlie Gardener (23) a pick before Steve Johnson, in the same year they took Ablett, Bartel, Kelly, and Henry Playfair at 41.

- 2002: Tim Callan at 36, after selecting Mackie (8) and Lonergan (23) who took 8 years to show something.

- 2003: Kane Tenace (7), Cameron Thurley (22)

- 2004: Geelong traded out of the top 30 to get Ottens for picks 12 (Danny Meyer) and 16 (Adam Pattison). Ouch.

- 2005: Travis Varcoe (15), Trent West (31)

- 2006: Joel Selwood (7), Nathan Djerrkura (25)

The rest are probably too recent to assess, like Dawson Simpson, Dan McKenna, etc.

What does this all boil down to?

Quite a few misses making it look like unrealistic expectations by some posters.

Pretty sure West will be a great player AW, but anyway

Out of the rest i can say the only two players i would be interested after our picks are....... Jackson Paine Collingwood and Lachie Neale Fremantle

But i am happy to back the recruiters in and have been pretty impressed with Tynan and Taggert tbh

[Arsene Wenger 72]

Trent West? He's not that bloody good.

And I know ruckmen develop more slowly, but I'd want a better return 7 years in.

[nutbean 8,837]

I'd be interested to know who these recruiters are that haven't fluffed more than a couple of top 30 picks.

Even the universally highly regarded Stephen Wells at Geelong has on his record

- 1998: Peter Street (17), David Clarke (20).

- 1999: Joel Corey (8) David Spriggs (15), Ezra Bray (17), Daniel Foster (23) in the year he is lauded for selecting Chapman, Ling and Corey.

- 2000: no top 30 picks, traded in Kent Kingsley, Justin Murphy, Mitchell White.

- 2001: Charlie Gardener (23) a pick before Steve Johnson, in the same year they took Ablett, Bartel, Kelly, and Henry Playfair at 41.

- 2002: Tim Callan at 36, after selecting Mackie (8) and Lonergan (23) who took 8 years to show something.

- 2003: Kane Tenace (7), Cameron Thurley (22)

- 2004: Geelong traded out of the top 30 to get Ottens for picks 12 (Danny Meyer) and 16 (Adam Pattison). Ouch.

- 2005: Travis Varcoe (15), Trent West (31)

- 2006: Joel Selwood (7), Nathan Djerrkura (25)

The rest are probably too recent to assess, like Dawson Simpson, Dan McKenna, etc.

What does this all boil down to?

Quite a few misses making it look like unrealistic expectations by some posters.

Certainly puts a bright spotlight on the uncertainty. well done

[Hells Gates 505]

Im very happy with Tynan & Sellar. A bit of the unknown with Taggert - I dont know much about him, seemed to slip through the system so hopefully he pulls through.

Its a bit early to judge this draft but I will watch with interest these picks after ours, not saying that we recruited the wrong guys last year, just curious and love watching young footballers grow.

After Taggert I will be watching:

37. Jack Newnes - Former club:Northern Knights/Ivanhoe Junior

• DOB:24/02/1993
  
• Height:184cm
  
• Weight:74kg
  
• Position:Midfielder
  

Player assessment

Represented Vic Metro at the NAB AFL U18 Championships, averaging 14 possessions. He reads the ball well and is versatile enough to play back, midfield or forward. He has a penetrating kick, is a good user inside and is a solid tackler.

39. Michael Talia - Former club:Calder Cannons/Greenvale

• DOB:11/02/1993
  
• Height:192cm
  
• Weight:88kg
  
• Position:Defender
  

Player assessment

Represented Vic Metro at the NAB AFL U18 Championships, providing good run and drive from the defensive end, averaging 16.2 disposals and 5.5 marks. He is extremely good one-on-one and a very good overhead mark. He capped off the championships with All Australian honours. He tested impressively at the NAB AFL Draft Combine

40. Tom Curran - Former club:Oakleigh Chargers/Ashburton Junior

• DOB:18/09/1993
  
• Height:193cm
  
• Weight:90kg
  
• Position:Forward
  

Player assessment

Represented Vic Metro in three games at the NAB AFL U18 Championships. He is a hard working key position player, son of former Hawk Peter Curran. Is very well built, a good kick, loves the hard contests and is very good overhead.

After Tynan:

53. Alex Woodward - Former club:Sandringham Dragons/Noble Park Junior

• DOB:11/06/1993
  
• Height:175cm
  
• Weight:80kg
  
• Position:Midfielder
  

Player assessment

Represented Vic Metro at the NAB AFL U18 championships. An inside midfielder who reads the play well around stoppages and uses the ball well by foot. He has a great work ethic and is excellent in one-on-one marking contests for his size. He wins the contested ball, is very creative with his hands and is very team oriented.

After Sellar:

I think we got Sellar right as not much after him. But I will watch with interest.

55. Matthew Arnot - Former club:Oakleigh Chargers/Vermont

• DOB:21/10/1993
  
• Height:180cm
  
• Weight:87kg
  
• Position:Midfielder
  

Player assessment

Left-footed, powerfully built midfielder with penetrating kick. Can play across half-back.

[savoydee 6]

Jackson Paine whom Collingwood picked up.

[savoydee 6]

I'd be interested to know who these recruiters are that haven't fluffed more than a couple of top 30 picks.

Even the universally highly regarded Stephen Wells at Geelong has on his record

- 1998: Peter Street (17), David Clarke (20).

- 1999: Joel Corey (8) David Spriggs (15), Ezra Bray (17), Daniel Foster (23) in the year he is lauded for selecting Chapman, Ling and Corey.

- 2000: no top 30 picks, traded in Kent Kingsley, Justin Murphy, Mitchell White.

- 2001: Charlie Gardener (23) a pick before Steve Johnson, in the same year they took Ablett, Bartel, Kelly, and Henry Playfair at 41.

- 2002: Tim Callan at 36, after selecting Mackie (8) and Lonergan (23) who took 8 years to show something.

- 2003: Kane Tenace (7), Cameron Thurley (22)

- 2004: Geelong traded out of the top 30 to get Ottens for picks 12 (Danny Meyer) and 16 (Adam Pattison). Ouch.

- 2005: Travis Varcoe (15), Trent West (31)

- 2006: Joel Selwood (7), Nathan Djerrkura (25)

The rest are probably too recent to assess, like Dawson Simpson, Dan McKenna, etc.

What does this all boil down to?

Quite a few misses making it look like unrealistic expectations by some posters.

Great post and thanks for taking the time to do it.Says to me that not all make it- and we all need a lot of luck.Also noted that Trent West has been at Geelong since 2005 , making this year his 7th.Still a chance that Pencil(Spencer could make it.)And that it may take several years for our major picks to mature..And we may have to bolster our list by gaining from the free trade players. Edited March 21, 2012 by savoydee

[bing181 8,166]

i dont pot players under 23 as this is when players should be maturing.

But you just did, no?

IMHO, it's just way way too early to be making comments on players like Gysberts and Strauss, especially given their run with injuries.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

I'd be interested to know who these recruiters are that haven't fluffed more than a couple of top 30 picks.

Even the universally highly regarded Stephen Wells at Geelong has on his record

- 1998: Peter Street (17), David Clarke (20).

- 1999: Joel Corey (8) David Spriggs (15), Ezra Bray (17), Daniel Foster (23) in the year he is lauded for selecting Chapman, Ling and Corey.

- 2000: no top 30 picks, traded in Kent Kingsley, Justin Murphy, Mitchell White.

- 2001: Charlie Gardener (23) a pick before Steve Johnson, in the same year they took Ablett, Bartel, Kelly, and Henry Playfair at 41.

- 2002: Tim Callan at 36, after selecting Mackie (8) and Lonergan (23) who took 8 years to show something.

- 2003: Kane Tenace (7), Cameron Thurley (22)

- 2004: Geelong traded out of the top 30 to get Ottens for picks 12 (Danny Meyer) and 16 (Adam Pattison). Ouch.

- 2005: Travis Varcoe (15), Trent West (31)

- 2006: Joel Selwood (7), Nathan Djerrkura (25)

The rest are probably too recent to assess, like Dawson Simpson, Dan McKenna, etc.

What does this all boil down to?

Quite a few misses making it look like unrealistic expectations by some posters.

Now highlight the non-highlighted names and look how well he did....

It doesn't matter that there were some unsuccessful picks within that eight year period.

The point is he got some unbelievable players and the rest is history.

I don't think anyone is doubting that recruiters will pick guys who don't always make it.

Edited March 21, 2012 by stevethemanjordan

[Hannibal 5,814]

I'd be interested to know who these recruiters are that haven't fluffed more than a couple of top 30 picks.

Even the universally highly regarded Stephen Wells at Geelong has on his record

- 1998: Peter Street (17), David Clarke (20).

- 1999: Joel Corey (8) David Spriggs (15), Ezra Bray (17), Daniel Foster (23) in the year he is lauded for selecting Chapman, Ling and Corey.

- 2000: no top 30 picks, traded in Kent Kingsley, Justin Murphy, Mitchell White.

- 2001: Charlie Gardener (23) a pick before Steve Johnson, in the same year they took Ablett, Bartel, Kelly, and Henry Playfair at 41.

- 2002: Tim Callan at 36, after selecting Mackie (8) and Lonergan (23) who took 8 years to show something.

- 2003: Kane Tenace (7), Cameron Thurley (22)

- 2004: Geelong traded out of the top 30 to get Ottens for picks 12 (Danny Meyer) and 16 (Adam Pattison). Ouch.

- 2005: Travis Varcoe (15), Trent West (31)

- 2006: Joel Selwood (7), Nathan Djerrkura (25)

The rest are probably too recent to assess, like Dawson Simpson, Dan McKenna, etc.

What does this all boil down to?

Quite a few misses making it look like unrealistic expectations by some posters.

When you've had the length of tenure that Stephen Wells has you're going to have some misses. We all know that. I note you say "more than a couple of top 30 picks". I said, "if they stuff up top 20/30 picks on a few occasions". I'm not sure about your dictionary, but mine shows a difference between a couple and a few. In reality, you're nitpicking. Stuffing up one pick in 5 top 30 picks cuts you some slack. You may even have a speculative pick when you have that many. My point, which I'm sure you understand, is that good recruiters invariably get the early ones right, especially in a good draft.

Your table and indeed my generalisations, don't factor in the poor drafts. You highlight 2003, but we all know that 2003 was a terrible draft. I'd also point out that Wells improved his drafting as he became more experienced and that happens in every profession. All your table does is highlight how good Wells has been. It may get the OP excited, but if you want we can dissect how many good players he recruited in those years and reflect on the quality of each draft. After all, you can only pick from what's on offer.

You highlight Charlie Gardner. He was one of 6 picks in 2001. The others were Stevie J, Bartel, Kelly, Playfair and of course the F/S. And even then Gardner was traded to Sydney, so a second AFL club thought him worthy of recruiting after his stint at Geelong, but you're claiming you've made a decisive point ? Wow.

Edited March 21, 2012 by Ben-Hur