On 13/04/2012 at 00:39, daisycutter said:

I get it now. He was lambasting us

hehehehe - Do you guys ever talk about footy?

  On 13/04/2012 at 00:46, Dr Who said:

hehehehe - Do you guys ever talk about footy?

when the team start playing footy, i'll be happy to

  On 13/04/2012 at 00:46, Dr Who said:

hehehehe - Do you guys ever talk about footy?

We prefer to talk about the footy players that show some cheek, do well on a flank, don't skirt or mince and those that like to play in a topside. Those that don't mind to put the shoulder bone in much like Garry Loin chop did with his rump.

  On 13/04/2012 at 00:49, daisycutter said:

when the team start playing footy, i'll be happy to

I look forward to the day - sounds like we have a whole heap of self-confessed "are we there yet" supporters.

I'm underwhelmed as well. It looks like we generally have 3 positions for full time staff in recruiting. A head recruiter whose job will be essentially left blank this year and merged under Viney's role until the Collingwood chap comes out of contract, and 2 full time recruiting officers. It seems those positions will be filled by Burleigh who seems to me to be part of the team who have recruited poorly in the last decade and now a guy who hasn't ever done the job before.

Sure he's got a good background with community and football experience but couldn't we lure a part time guy from Geelong or Hawthorn into this full time role in football?

I don't think the magnitude of this years draft can be underestimated. We've got 3 first round picks, one of which will be Viney but we need to nail the other 2 and all our other picks. It's the best opportunity for us to get talented, tough footballer players in so that with the talent we've already added we can craft a proper side. If we stuff up this year then I'm not sure we'll ever get it right.

  On 13/04/2012 at 00:55, the master said:

I'm underwhelmed as well. It looks like we generally have 3 positions for full time staff in recruiting. A head recruiter whose job will be essentially left blank this year and merged under Viney's role until the Collingwood chap comes out of contract, and 2 full time recruiting officers. It seems those positions will be filled by Burleigh who seems to me to be part of the team who have recruited poorly in the last decade and now a guy who hasn't ever done the job before.

Sure he's got a good background with community and football experience but couldn't we lure a part time guy from Geelong or Hawthorn into this full time role in football?

I don't think the magnitude of this years draft can be underestimated. We've got 3 first round picks, one of which will be Viney but we need to nail the other 2 and all our other picks. It's the best opportunity for us to get talented, tough footballer players in so that with the talent we've already added we can craft a proper side. If we stuff up this year then I'm not sure we'll ever get it right.

Sorry, I read through this carefully, but try as I might, I could not find a single pun... perhaps they are a little subtle for me? I did note there are a couple of names in Voney (who you seem to expect to be fruitful) and Burleigh (who it seems could attract no decent bites)... aaaah, I get it now. Very clever!

(sorry, I just couldn't resist)

  On 13/04/2012 at 00:55, the master said:

I'm underwhelmed as well. It looks like we generally have 3 positions for full time staff in recruiting. A head recruiter whose job will be essentially left blank this year and merged under Viney's role until the Collingwood chap comes out of contract, and 2 full time recruiting officers. It seems those positions will be filled by Burleigh who seems to me to be part of the team who have recruited poorly in the last decade and now a guy who hasn't ever done the job before.

Sure he's got a good background with community and football experience but couldn't we lure a part time guy from Geelong or Hawthorn into this full time role in football?

I don't think the magnitude of this years draft can be underestimated. We've got 3 first round picks, one of which will be Viney but we need to nail the other 2 and all our other picks. It's the best opportunity for us to get talented, tough footballer players in so that with the talent we've already added we can craft a proper side. If we stuff up this year then I'm not sure we'll ever get it right.

Do we follow the successful clubs thinking like Collingwood, Geelong, Hawthorn etc - Is it possible that there is a belief that talent identification although important is no longer the be all and end all in footy recruiting - could we be dealing in an environment where much of the "information" is well exposed. So in reality the "order" as such is agreed on by a proven and tested path. ie how you perform in junior footy, how you perform in under 18 carnivals, how you perform in TAC cup finals, your results in mental & physical testing.

However, is it possible the general footy public over emphasis the value of the early picks?

Where in modern day AFL football there "real" value can only be truly exposed by how well you develop them?

I should also add I'm not so concerned about our ability to recruit more our inability to trade. Maybe, thats where Todd & Lamb may focus on for us. Pelchen (ex-hawks) was a top quality trader.

Just a thought.

Edited April 13, 201213 yr by Dr Who

  On 13/04/2012 at 00:55, Dr Who said:

I look forward to the day - sounds like we have a whole heap of self-confessed "are we there yet" supporters.

It's called apathy doc.

You on the other hand have a problem with empathy. Ever been checked for Asperger's Syndrome?

  On 13/04/2012 at 01:10, Dr Who said:

Where in modern day AFL football there (sic) "real" value can only be truly exposed by how well you develop them?

Hey Hoo, so it's the chicken and the egg and not just the egg ?

Just a thought.

  On 12/04/2012 at 23:50, billy2803 said:

Q. What's the difference between the Melbourne Herald Sun and the New Zealand Herald?

A. The Melbourne Herald Sun runs an article with the heading "Lamb travels across the Tasman to chack out talented New Zealanders"...

DC - I get nothing for this? Damn, thought that was some of my best work, especially compared to the earlier stuff I posted!

Bugger - just noticed the spelling mistake - should've been "check" not "chack", maybe that's where the confusion was! B)

  On 13/04/2012 at 01:29, Ben-Hur said:

Hey Hoo, so it's the chicken and the egg and not just the egg ?

Just a thought.

Well - was it more previously when the "information" was not so well exposed, yes you where forced to put more resources to talent identification - the good old "smokey" hidden in the bush. However, today its hard to hide. Much to the disappointment of the general public - we loved the "smokies".

I would suggest all the eggs are pretty much well know - now its all about - what you feed them, how you recover ie fitness & injury, how & what you teach them.

That will get you a prize "chicken" in your words.

Edited April 13, 201213 yr by Dr Who

  On 13/04/2012 at 01:35, Dr Who said:

Well - was it more previously when the "information" was not so well exposed, yes you where forced to put more resources to talent identification - the good old "smokey" hidden in the bush. However, today its hard to hide. Much to the disappointment of the general public - we loved the "smokies".

Craig Smoker?

You'd like to think Lamb will be an expert at finding Followers.

  On 13/04/2012 at 01:32, billy2803 said:

DC - I get nothing for this? Damn, thought that was some of my best work, especially compared to the earlier stuff I posted!

Bugger - just noticed the spelling mistake - should've been "check" not "chack", maybe that's where the confusion was! B)

You're probably suffering from a bit of 'beamer consistency'. It's contagious apparently

Just spoke to Lamb about this thread he said to tell youse all to flock off.

  On 13/04/2012 at 01:35, Dr Who said:

Well - was it more previously when the "information" was not so well exposed, yes you where forced to put more resources to talent identification - the good old "smokey" hidden in the bush. However, today its hard to hide. Much to the disappointment of the general public - we loved the "smokies".

I would suggest all the eggs are pretty much well know - now its all about - what you feed them, how you recover ie fitness & injury, how & what you teach them.

That will get you a prize "chicken" in your words.

You can have all the "information" in the world, but you also need to attribute the correct weight to each different piece of info.

If you overvalue or undervalue the wrong KPIs, you could well find yourself making an inferior selection.

Webjet.

Webjet.

Edited April 13, 201213 yr by José Mourinho

  On 13/04/2012 at 02:05, 1 red eye 1 blue eye said:

Just spoke to Lamb about this thread he said to tell youse all to flock off.

Flock or livestock ?

  On 13/04/2012 at 01:10, Dr Who said:

Do we follow the successful clubs thinking like Collingwood, Geelong, Hawthorn etc - Is it possible that there is a belief that talent identification although important is no longer the be all and end all in footy recruiting - could we be dealing in an environment where much of the "information" is well exposed. So in reality the "order" as such is agreed on by a proven and tested path. ie how you perform in junior footy, how you perform in under 18 carnivals, how you perform in TAC cup finals, your results in mental & physical testing.

However, is it possible the general footy public over emphasis the value of the early picks?

Where in modern day AFL football there "real" value can only be truly exposed by how well you develop them?

I should also add I'm not so concerned about our ability to recruit more our inability to trade. Maybe, thats where Todd & Lamb may focus on for us. Pelchen (ex-hawks) was a top quality trader.

Just a thought.

I imagine Lamb will be good at trading our stock...

Hopefully the wool does not get pulled over his eyes

  On 13/04/2012 at 02:08, José Mourinho said:

You can have all the "information" in the world, but you also need to attribute the correct weight to each different piece of info.

If you overvalue or undervalue the wrong KPIs, you could well find yourself making an inferior selection.

Webjet.

Webjet.

You touch on a good point, a very good point. Its how you work with imperfections assessed in you process. Again the big $$$$$ clubs have a massive advantage.

You can have two identical candidates - if you feed one properly, train them to peek fitness & if the incur an injury deal with perfectly, teach them the "correct" way they will not end up identical.

"If you overvalue or undervalue the wrong KPIs" - yes very much so but again the "path" is well worn. Where you get the biggest gap is where you can "ignore" many KPI's yet develop their weakness to an extent they can still perform to a high level inside your structures.

  On 13/04/2012 at 02:18, s-t-i-n-g-a said:

I imagine Lamb will be good at trading our stock...

Depends on how you define "good" - I doubt many around here would have the ability to recognise a good decision from an ordinary decision. They display no ability to assess the WHOLE process.

But will they "scream like pigs" - you bet they will. They have bought their "membership" they have inflated their Demonland post count - that must give them credibility

Edited April 13, 201213 yr by Dr Who

  On 13/04/2012 at 02:35, Dr Who said:

You touch on a good point, a very good point. Its how you work with imperfections assessed in you process. Again the big $$$$$ clubs have a massive advantage.

You can have two identical candidates - if you feed one properly, train them to peek fitness & if the incur an injury deal with perfectly, teach them the "correct" way they will not end up identical.

"If you overvalue or undervalue the wrong KPIs" - yes very much so but again the "path" is well worn. Where you get the biggest gap is where you can "ignore" many KPI's yet develop their weakness to an extent they can still perform to a high level inside your structures.

I'm not talking purely development though.

I mean in making the selection of one candidate over another.

Recruiter A may highly value having a large tank at U/18 level whereas Recruiter B may give it less value because it can be improved on once they are on the list.

Recruiter A may value a player winning their own footy much higher than decision-making, as they can be developed with certain drills.

Recruiter A may value desire whereas Recruiter B does not consider it, or not to the same extent.

Recruiter A may even go to a greater depth in breaking down desire into different facets - desire to improve, desire to constantly improve, desire for team success, desire for personal success, confidence in ability to achieve that success, etc.

I'm not a recruiter, I don't know.

I don't know what is more easily fixed once in a professional football environment.

But I see how recruiters may value certain KPIs differently and opinions can differ.

Webjet.

Edited April 13, 201213 yr by José Mourinho

  On 13/04/2012 at 02:52, José Mourinho said:

I'm not talking purely development though.

I mean in making the selection of one candidate over another.

Recruiter A may highly value having a large tank at U/18 level whereas Recruiter B may give it less value because it can be improved on once they are on the list.

Recruiter A may value a player winning their own footy much higher than decision-making, as they can be developed with certain drills.

Recruiter A may value desire whereas Recruiter B does not consider it, or not to the same extent.

Recruiter A may even go to a greater depth in breaking down desire into different facets - desire to improve, desire to constantly improve, desire for team success, desire for personal success, confidence in ability to achieve that success, etc.

I'm not a recruiter, I don't know.

I don't know what is more easily fixed once in a professional football environment.

But I see how recruiters may value certain KPIs differently and opinions can differ.

Webjet.

Yes, I understood you. I agree but I think the KPI's are well known - our ability to predict how a player will is "likely" to perform to those KPI's has been well researched. (But I should add ALL recruiters will get it wrong - but many times the reason they were wrong is out of their hands ie injury, team structures, advancements in playing styles etc)

I'm not sure that there is that much difference between recruiter A & B on "talent identification" - I hold the belief the big difference comes in when you introduce your development team into the recruiting process. So essentially the recruiters these days are looking for "flaws" & "imperfections" and how that can be dealt with.

IMHO a recruiter cannot be judged with what he does with early picks - but more what he does with the late low probability picks.

Edited April 13, 201213 yr by Dr Who

Agree with most of that, although maybe it comes down to the coach telling the recruiter what he is looking for, more than the recruiter's ability to identify it.

Especially agree with the last line.

Hence, I feel it is not such an issue we won't have Jason Taylor in place until next year (according to rumour).

Webjet.

He'll have to ram home the need for players who don't hogget (ewe know, those who shear the ball around) regardless of wether they've been earmarked for the draft yet

Edited April 13, 201213 yr by Retrospective