MFC's Poor Drafting.

[jnrmac 19,907]

You can add we traded pick 12 in 2004 for Beamer.

I reckon you could expand that to the first two rounds of the draft and MFC performance overall under Cameron/ BBBP has been abysmal. There have been odd wins (Frawley) but far too many fails.

The rebuild of 2007 was already compromised by the yawning gaps in our list created in the period 2000 to 2004

Two points:

1. you are harsh on Beamer. Not my favourite player and form has fallen away dramatically but by most measures has been a good pick up even at that pick. You need to have context in these debates which is where a lot of people fail. We had just lost Scott Thompson - we needed a tough onballer. Moloney fitted the bill but has not reached the heights of Thompson. A lot worse picks than him.

2. The rebuild of 2000 to 2004 is solely the result of the squealing curly headed rat Gutnick. Stuffed us for years with our two years of missing first round picks. Don't get the love for him here. Nearly killed us. Combine that with our GF appearance in 2000 AND the new football deal of $780m when Freo was throwing huge money at Woewodin and the Wiz and we were in a giant hole. We didn't trade well but circumstances were difficult at that time.

Context......hmmmm.

[pantaloons 2,019]

Caption the photo competition ....

* Winner gets to pick our next draftees names out of a hat on draft day. Don't worry you will do a better job than this man.

"Dean, it says here we WERE allowed to bring in our cheat sheet with the names of players we've seen this year."

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Two points:

1. you are harsh on Beamer. Not my favourite player and form has fallen away dramatically but by most measures has been a good pick up even at that pick. You need to have context in these debates which is where a lot of people fail. We had just lost Scott Thompson - we needed a tough onballer. Moloney fitted the bill but has not reached the heights of Thompson. A lot worse picks than him.

2. The rebuild of 2000 to 2004 is solely the result of the squealing curly headed rat Gutnick. Stuffed us for years with our two years of missing first round picks. Don't get the love for him here. Nearly killed us. Combine that with our GF appearance in 2000 AND the new football deal of $780m when Freo was throwing huge money at Woewodin and the Wiz and we were in a giant hole. We didn't trade well but circumstances were difficult at that time.

Context......hmmmm.

You are wrong.

1. Talking of context, I said "overall" and you want to cherry pick.

2. We lost a first round pick in 1999 and a second round pick in 2000. It does not mitigate the disaster recruiting of 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004. And I know 2003 was a poor vintage. We had no need to offer over the odds on Woey when we did.

And you raise the point about context...Hmmmm. Add facts to that also.

[H_T 3,032]

Caption the photo competition ....

* Winner gets to pick our next draftees names out of a hat on draft day. Don't worry you will do a better job than this man.

See what happens when you drink too much Powerade....

[rpfc 28,052]

This is painful isn't it?

But the reason why we are where we are is 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, and 2005 drafts rather than those that came after.

Those will bite us later...

Anyway, I am looking to this coming draft and the arrival of some hard-working midfield Demons with great desire for the contest.

We will get these picks right.

We're due?

[hardtack 10,424]

I think that if you look at MFC's drafting in isolation, then yes, it looks pretty ordinary of late, but with a few gems as well... if you look at it in terms of the bigger picture (all clubs), I think you will find that we have done no worse than most other clubs, if not all. Rather than poor drafting, the problem is more likely to have been in our development of these players and until more recent times, our facilities.

These things are changing for the better with new development staff and better facilities, so as fitness levels improve, we will hopefully start to see a few of these so called "duds" stepping up.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

On any metric you like MFC recruiting has been bottom quartile of the other Clubs.

If you do the sums and look at the first two rounds of drafts picks per Club, MFC comes out poorly.

Name a club (other GWS and GC) that has had more first round draft picks than MFC in the past decade and then look at what they have selected.

And have a look at those players who have agreeably traded/delisted from MFC and see what they have done at other clubs.

And when you look at the players we have taken off high draft picks and rookie drafts and they have won Blueys or made AA, it shows the development excuse in its truest light.

[hardtack 10,424]

And when you look at the players we have taken off high draft picks and rookie drafts and they have won Blueys or made AA, it shows the development excuse in its truest light.

I disagree... how many of our high draft picks and rookie draft picks have won the Bluey (which is irrelevant as it is internal so is not a good indicator) or reached AA status over the past decade? I would argue that those who have are more the exceptions that prove the rule.

Players in the top 10 to 15 draft picks are there for a very good reason. If we had opted for Nic Nat over Watts, there would have been just as many complaints, if we had not taken Scully and Trengove, these forums would have gone into meltdown (the biggest argument was over who should be ranked 1 and 2).

Give Misson and the rest a good go at the list and lets see how things are looking following another full pre-season (they were NEVER going to get the list into shape in a single pre-season). Also, bring in some recruits such as Cloke who are from clubs with a stronger culture, so that they can add their influence... we saw it happening with Clark almost from the day he arrived at the club; we need more of that.

[Guest KingDingAling]

On any metric you like MFC recruiting has been bottom quartile of the other Clubs.

If you do the sums and look at the first two rounds of drafts picks per Club, MFC comes out poorly.

Name a club (other GWS and GC) that has had more first round draft picks than MFC in the past decade and then look at what they have selected.

And have a look at those players who have agreeably traded/delisted from MFC and see what they have done at other clubs.

And when you look at the players we have taken off high draft picks and rookie drafts and they have won Blueys or made AA, it shows the development excuse in its truest light.

Combination of drafting and development.

We can't develop players - yet also draft players slight on, often athletic players who need the most development.

[rpfc 28,052]

And when you look at the players we have taken off high draft picks and rookie drafts and they have won Blueys or made AA, it shows the development excuse in its truest light.

Yeah, because development is simply about making rookies useful players...

[Its Time for Another 4,088]

It's very easy to slam the picks but to do the exercise properly you have to look at the other players available after the picks. If you look through the drafts you would be surprised to see how few there are that would have been better. There are plenty of smokeys that were picked much later but obviously weren't picked by any team in the rounds where we picked our players. Hindsight is a great thing but pretty useless.

I had a look through Sydney's draft picks over a similiar period. They are renowned for recycling players they get for nothing. Very interesting how many duds they've picked in the draft. They have done worse than us. I bet if you went through the exercise for most teams it would be the same. It shouldn't be called the draft it should be called the lottery. You still don't know what you're going to get, even nowadays with the feeder comp;s etc.

Cook over Darling looks like a howler now. Darling was probably a West Coast set up. The word on him at the time was he was a real head case. Suspended from school then night club fights before the draft. Now he seems fine but he could have been a disaster. Also who's to say there wouldn't be a major go home factor for him. (Trying to see the good side to this story )

People are very quick to diss Gysberts who's been totally hampered by injuries. You don't have a first game like him against Geelong at Geelong in a losing team and play that well if you are a dud. The Cats are still in to him big time and were then and there recruiting track record is as good as any. Give the kid a bit of time. We didn't need another key back like Talia, we needed a gun midfielder. Give him an injury free pre season and I'm betting he'll come through next year.

Watts v Natanui. This debate will still be going in 10yrs. Watts is going to be a fantastic footballer wherever he ends up. Natanui will never be the same calibre of pure footballer. He can't read a game and his numbers outside of the occasional spectacular Ruck contest are way less than you'd think.

[Demons 32 235]

I have always watched a lot of the under 18’s comp… and I am convinced I could have drafted better than MFC have…

First off I would have picked Watts before NicNat and Scully/Trengove before Martin.

I still hold hope for all of those guys, but in a very boring one paced side perhaps the footy would be a little more fun with the X factor of NicNat/Martin.

I also would have picked Blease, Tapscott, Jetta.

I didn’t know of Howe or Bennel so am not going to claim I was all over them.

I am not going to go through every draft in hindsight and explain where we went wrong and at each pick, however I will tell you 4 names that pre-draft over the years I was desperate for the Dees to pick up and 2 players I was praying we wouldn’t pick up.

The 2 players I was praying we wouldn’t pick were James Strauss and Lucas Cook…

1. James Strauss: Had an amazing kick and solid decision making skills, but that was all. He wasn’t fast, wasn’t tough, wasn’t a great man defender and wasn’t a confident player.

2. Lucas Cook: Was a poor version of Jack Watts, he had good skills for a big man, but never had strong pack marking ability, never displayed an X Factor and just seemed like a skinny kid who would never really become a big kid.

The 4 players I was desperate to see us draft would make us a remarkably better side right now…

1. Jack Darling: West Coast clearly tricked everyone into thinking he was this bad egg… he had arrogance, he had a personality, he wasn’t a bland private school kid from Victoria. His talent was obvious to see and the fact he slipped that far in the draft was ridiculous, the fact we picked Lucas Cook over him was the worst.

2. Luke Parker: Tough as nails leader who never took a backwards step and worked his ass off, would have helped bring a tough/brave culture to any team (happened to go to Sydney which was perfect for him).

3. Dayne Beams: Convinced teams didn’t pick him because he was a bit different like Jack Darling… But he was an incredible talent, killed it up in QLD with his great running ability and he kicked goals… This one upsets me more than anything, cause Beams was “my boy” and it all went wrong when he went to Collingwood.

4. Ahmed Saad: This was just last year, he was impressive watching him in the VFL 3 times and knowing that he was still fairly new to the game. Had pace and eye for goal, but more importantly, absolutely loved applying defensive pressure, we are still crying out for a small forward of quality.

Just makes me soooo mad that the Melbourne recruiting team failed so dramatically.

I am what forum posters would call an “armchair” expert…. But if this armchair expert was recruiting for the MFC we would have all 4 of the players above right now.

[Ouch! 2,205]

Caption the photo competition ....

* Winner gets to pick our next draftees names out of a hat on draft day. Don't worry you will do a better job than this man.

Commentator "Player 1433 Calder Cannons "

Barry: "Hey Dean! We won! Bingo! B.I.N.G.O!"

Edited August 14, 2012 by Oucher

[Guest KingDingAling]

I have always watched a lot of the under 18’s comp… and I am convinced I could have drafted better than MFC have…

First off I would have picked Watts before NicNat and Scully/Trengove before Martin.

I still hold hope for all of those guys, but in a very boring one paced side perhaps the footy would be a little more fun with the X factor of NicNat/Martin.

I also would have picked Blease, Tapscott, Jetta.

I didn’t know of Howe or Bennel so am not going to claim I was all over them.

I am not going to go through every draft in hindsight and explain where we went wrong and at each pick, however I will tell you 4 names that pre-draft over the years I was desperate for the Dees to pick up and 2 players I was praying we wouldn’t pick up.

The 2 players I was praying we wouldn’t pick were James Strauss and Lucas Cook…

1. James Strauss: Had an amazing kick and solid decision making skills, but that was all. He wasn’t fast, wasn’t tough, wasn’t a great man defender and wasn’t a confident player.

2. Lucas Cook: Was a poor version of Jack Watts, he had good skills for a big man, but never had strong pack marking ability, never displayed an X Factor and just seemed like a skinny kid who would never really become a big kid.

The 4 players I was desperate to see us draft would make us a remarkably better side right now…

1. Jack Darling: West Coast clearly tricked everyone into thinking he was this bad egg… he had arrogance, he had a personality, he wasn’t a bland private school kid from Victoria. His talent was obvious to see and the fact he slipped that far in the draft was ridiculous, the fact we picked Lucas Cook over him was the worst.

2. Luke Parker: Tough as nails leader who never took a backwards step and worked his ass off, would have helped bring a tough/brave culture to any team (happened to go to Sydney which was perfect for him).

3. Dayne Beams: Convinced teams didn’t pick him because he was a bit different like Jack Darling… But he was an incredible talent, killed it up in QLD with his great running ability and he kicked goals… This one upsets me more than anything, cause Beams was “my boy” and it all went wrong when he went to Collingwood.

4. Ahmed Saad: This was just last year, he was impressive watching him in the VFL 3 times and knowing that he was still fairly new to the game. Had pace and eye for goal, but more importantly, absolutely loved applying defensive pressure, we are still crying out for a small forward of quality.

Just makes me soooo mad that the Melbourne recruiting team failed so dramatically.

I am what forum posters would call an “armchair” expert…. But if this armchair expert was recruiting for the MFC we would have all 4 of the players above right now.

I just shake my head when I think of Lewis Jetta and Barry P.

Words just don't can't describe what you really want to say about it all.

[stinga81 210]

We've had major issues with player development over the years.

It's all good and well to have a pot at our recruitment over the years, but if you can't develop those players you have selected than your always going to behind the 8 ball.

If we selected Nic Nat before Watts, Shuey before Blease, Cook before Darling, Strauss before Beams, we'd be having the opposite arguments.

This is the first season we're players such as Jones, Howe, Blease, Watts etc have shown significant improvement in their development

[Hannibal 5,814]

MFC 2000 Pick 16 Scott Thompson (went home to S.A)

MFC 2001 Pick 9 Luke Molan

MFC 2002 Pick 14 & 15 Daniel Bell and Nicholas Smith

MFC 2003 Pick 3 Sylvia Pick 5 B McLean

MFC 2004 Pick 13 Matthew Bate Pick 15 Lynden Dunn (Pick 15 was from Crows for Thompson)

MFC 2005 Pick 12 Nathan Jones

MFC 2006 Pick 12 James Frawley

MFC 2007 Pick 4 Cale Morton Pick 14 Jack Grimes

MFC 2008 Pick 1 Jack Watts 17 Blease 19 Strauss

MFC 2009 Pick 1 Scully Pick 2 Trengove Pick 11 Gysberts Pick 18 Tapscott

MFC 2010 Pick 12 Lucas Cook

MFC 2011 Pick 11 Traded for Mitch Clarke

The pick we used on Dunn we got from Sydney for Jolly.

[Little Richard 6,216]

Furthermore, I'd put forward that without Cox, Naitinui wouldn't be half the player he is now.

This is even more true with Darling, playing as the third or fourth tall would have aided his development massively. If we had taken him his development would probably be much slower as he would have been thrown straight in as our primary or secondary forward. As well as that, every single team passed on Darling before West Coast picked him up the second round so there is no use bemoaning that.

[Range Rover 1,935]

every single team passed on Darling before West Coast picked him up the second round so there is no use bemoaning that.

Sigh

[dpositive 1,652]

D32 given your insight in past have you got the same insight into this draft. Especially do you still follow U18 closely?

I cant recall your comments on the Viney question mahbe you can add your thought on that as well.

Nothing wrong with an "armchair expert" opinion and it may be rejected due to circumstances outside the chair

but I do think the comments you made re other picks show a good bit of footy knowledge. Im happy to read more.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

I disagree... how many of our high draft picks and rookie draft picks have won the Bluey (which is irrelevant as it is internal so is not a good indicator) or reached AA status over the past decade? I would argue that those who have are more the exceptions that prove the rule.

A player who is recruited as a low ranked or fringe player and goes onto to win a Bluey is a perfect indicator of development. The player has gone from fringe or speculative recruit to being judged the B&F at the Club. What better measure. Your exceptions are hard facts 10 players over the past 8 years that have been developed. So its not appropriate to take a blanket approach to the no development aspect at MFC. It could clearly have been better but its only your exceptions are that because they dont suit your argument.

Players in the top 10 to 15 draft picks are there for a very good reason. If we had opted for Nic Nat over Watts, there would have been just as many complaints, if we had not taken Scully and Trengove, these forums would have gone into meltdown (the biggest argument was over who should be ranked 1 and 2).

Yes players are in the top 10-15 are there because Club recruiters select them. They get some right and they get some wrong. Some players are stars. Some players are mystifiying selections. There is an element of rishIts what recruiters get judged on and get paid the big bucks. I fully understand and at the time supported Scully and Trengove. It was a reasonable and safe bet. However, recruiters are there to find talent and the really good ones are able to look through the consensus and make those brave or clever calls. FWIW, if we had gone Nik Nat over Watts we would be in front at this.

Give Misson and the rest a good go at the list and lets see how things are looking following another full pre-season (they were NEVER going to get the list into shape in a single pre-season). Also, bring in some recruits such as Cloke who are from clubs with a stronger culture, so that they can add their influence... we saw it happening with Clark almost from the day he arrived at the club; we need more of that.

.

Fitness of the list, adaption to game plan and recruitment of experienced players does necessarly augur well for the supposed talent on the list atm. It will have to be a cracking pre season for some players.

Yeah, because development is simply about making rookies useful players...

I used that as an obvious example of improvement of fringe players. I thought you would benefit from that. I was wrong.

[rpfc 28,052]

I used that as an obvious example of improvement of fringe players. I thought you would benefit from that. I was wrong.

Perhaps I misread what you wrote.

Our development of players is non-existent. Clubs like Sydney have been doing it for a decade and we are 6 months in.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Perhaps I misread what you wrote.

Our development of players is non-existent. Clubs like Sydney have been doing it for a decade and we are 6 months in.

Our development of players is not good.

But it is not the sole excuse as to why many of our draft picks are no good that many other posters are saying.

I know you realise that.

Its been a combination of poor recruiting and poor development. But I still think the drafting over the past 12 years has been overall bad and you cant develop a silk slipper from old gumboots (its the cleanest analogy I could think of)

[old dee 23,505]

Our development of players is not good.

But it is not the sole excuse as to why many of our draft picks are no good that many other posters are saying.

I know you realise that.

Its been a combination of poor recruiting and poor development. But I still think the drafting over the past 12 years has been overall bad and you cant develop a silk slipper from old gumboots (its the cleanest analogy I could think of)

RR on this one we are in 100% agreement.

How does this one grab you? " you cannot pull up your socks if you don't have any on"

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Good another clean one. No smut. thanks.

[Guest José Mourinho]

Our development of players is not good.

But it is not the sole excuse as to why many of our draft picks are no good that many other posters are saying.

I know you realise that.

Its been a combination of poor recruiting and poor development. But I still think the drafting over the past 12 years has been overall bad and you cant develop a silk slipper from old gumboots (its the cleanest analogy I could think of)

Who exactly said that..?