Without the benefit of hindsight

[corowa 216]

Attacking the club for inept performance at the draft has become a regular habit of many posters over the past few years. 'Naitanui should have been chosen instead of Watts'. 'Scully should not have been selected'.

These attacks invariably come well into the first season (or the second season) after the draftees fail to live up to their potential.

I would like to see posters compile a list of the top 20 draft prospects in order. It would be interesting to see how we fare by comparing the list with the performance of the draftees down the track.

Such a list would also give us some idea of who might be available for our picks 3, 4 & 13.

A popular choice of no.1 is Whitfield, but I'll leave the compilation of the list to those of you with knowledge of the lads involved.

[RalphiusMaximus 5,993]

lol. I don't even know most of the names in the top 10. I hear O'Rourke or something mentioned quite often as being a chance for our pick 4. Wines of course. Stringer. Vlastuin. Apparently the top three will be Whitfield, Grundy and Toumpas. Some people have stringer outside the top 10 and he is said to be similar to Pavlich and able to dominate games, so I'd be thrilled to get him for pick 13/14 if possible, and people have mentioned Garlett, Kennedy and possibly Menzel at that sort of range as well. As for listing in order, I have absolutely no idea.

[MadAsHell 4,089]

I did my own phantom draft mid year and at that point I had my top 20 as.

1. Lachlan Whitfield

2. Brodie Grundy

3. Jimmy Toumpas

4. Oliver Wines

5. Jake Stringer

6. Mason Shaw

7. Sam Mayes

8. Matthew Haynes

9. Lachlan Plowman

10. Joe Daniher (FS)

11. Nick Vlastuin

12. Tanner Smith

13. Ben Kennedy

14. Josh Simpson

15. Troy Menzel

16. Jonathan O'Rourke

17. Dayle Garlett

18. Nathan Wright

19. Sam Colquhoun

20. Liam McBean

As mentioned, this was done mid year. I'd probably rank Haynes as my slider and O'Rourke as my bolter from inside the list. Laine Wilkins and Kristian Jaksch as my bolters from outide.

[Little Goffy 12,813]

Well, I'm not going to claim great expertise, but the guys I particularly like from the mix of write-ups include -

Whitefield, Grundy andToumpas (the 'well duh' group)

Wines

Vlastuin

Stringer

Menzel

Kennedy

Broomhead

Membrey

Wright

Oh, and Viney and Daniher of course. It'll be interesting to see which turns out to be the bigger steal of those two.

This is not an order of merit, just a bunch of names I reckon 'sound right'. I guess they are roughly in order of confidence.

Edited October 8, 2012 by Little Goffy

[corowa 216]

lol. I don't even know most of the names in the top 10. I hear O'Rourke or something mentioned quite often as being a chance for our pick 4. Wines of course. Stringer. Vlastuin. Apparently the top three will be Whitfield, Grundy and Toumpas. Some people have stringer outside the top 10 and he is said to be similar to Pavlich and able to dominate games, so I'd be thrilled to get him for pick 13/14 if possible, and people have mentioned Garlett, Kennedy and possibly Menzel at that sort of range as well. As for listing in order, I have absolutely no idea.

Thanks for your input RM. This is a good start.However, there are posters here who know all sorts of details about the kids and I'm hopeful they will contribute tp this post. I'm amazed at what I read.If Whitfield, Grundy & Toumpas are the 'top'3 then we would have to get one of them and the 4th best - possibly Oliver Wines - if we still have picks 3 & 4.If we trade picks 3 &/or 4 for 'established' players then we know we have to do better than the kids.

[RalphiusMaximus 5,993]

Thanks for your input RM. This is a good start.However, there are posters here who know all sorts of details about the kids and I'm hopeful they will contribute tp this post. I'm amazed at what I read.If Whitfield, Grundy & Toumpas are the 'top'3 then we would have to get one of them and the 4th best - possibly Oliver Wines - if we still have picks 3 & 4.If we trade picks 3 &/or 4 for 'established' players then we know we have to do better than the kids.

I also have often thought of things I'd like to get opinions on from the guys who go out and watch the u18 matches and actually have a good idea about these guys. I just never get around to making a thread about it. I think it could be really interesting to see a couple of phantom first rounds by them to get more of a feel for what is out there and where they are likely to feature.

[corowa 216]

I did my own phantom draft mid year and at that point I had my top 20 as.

1. Lachlan Whitfield

2. Brodie Grundy

3. Jimmy Toumpas

4. Oliver Wines

5. Jake Stringer

6. Mason Shaw

7. Sam Mayes

8. Matthew Haynes

9. Lachlan Plowman

10. Joe Daniher (FS)

11. Nick Vlastuin

12. Tanner Smith

13. Ben Kennedy

14. Josh Simpson

15. Troy Menzel

16. Jonathan O'Rourke

17. Dayle Garlett

18. Nathan Wright

19. Sam Colquhoun

20. Liam McBean

As mentioned, this was done mid year. I'd probably rank Haynes as my slider and O'Rourke as my bolter from inside the list. Laine Wilkins and Kristian Jaksch as my bolters from outide.

I take my hat off to you, Tall Defence. This is great.I've not heard of most of these lads, let alone know anything about them.Where did you get the data for your list? Do you watch TAC & junior football?MFC could do worse that have blokes like you on their recruiting team.

[Jerry Lundergard 394]

I don't know all the players, but the one who caught my eye during the carnival was Kennedy from SA. So I will put my non-existstent rep on the line and single him out as a player I think will become a star.

[Watts Jurrah Dunn? 735]

These threads give me the brace and bits. "You're all geniuses in hindsight, the club are doing their best".

Posters on forums have to use hindsight because none of us are full time recruiters.

The clubs recruiting under Bailey was terrible. We must demand better from full time experts, and if they get it wrong as much as prendergast did, I'll use hindsight in calling him a dud as much as I like.

[Moonshadow 16,439]

Attacking the club for inept performance at the draft has become a regular habit of many posters over the past few years. 'Naitanui should have been chosen instead of Watts'. 'Scully should not have been selected'.

These attacks invariably come well into the first season (or the second season) after the draftees fail to live up to their potential.

I would like to see posters compile a list of the top 20 draft prospects in order. It would be interesting to see how we fare by comparing the list with the performance of the draftees down the track.

Such a list would also give us some idea of who might be available for our picks 3, 4 & 13.

A popular choice of no.1 is Whitfield, but I'll leave the compilation of the list to those of you with knowledge of the lads involved.

I think posters criticisms of our drafting over the last 5 years are completely valid. After all, we are not full time, handsomely paid, recruiting specialists who are selecting the future of our club. As members (some of us) and, therefore, stakeholders in MFC, we are perfectly within our right to expect the best draft selections possible from the professional recruitment team. If they get it wrong, we want to hold them to account and know why they made that selection.

Why would I make a list of this year's top 20 draft picks? I'd have as much chance of picking this weeks tatts numbers as getting the 2013 draft order right. That's why I put my $ and trust into the club to get it right.

[Nasher 33,178]

I have a lot of sympathy for both views actually. The selections of players like Watts, Scully and even Morton were more or less universally agreed on by every expert and qualified amateur in the industry, so it's rich for supporters to jump on here and slam the picks. At the same time, our list in the last few years has looked and played like complete dung and we've missed a lot of opportunities to draft gun players that our opposition have lapped up, and we've fallen a long way behind as a result. Both the "it's an inexact science!" and the "these guys are paid the big bucks to get it right!" crowds have equally valid points.

There's no benefit in hindcasting anyway. We've got a whole new regime this year that is heavier resourced than the last few mobs, so the slate is clean. Let's just forget past effups and just get it bloody right this time. After the turn of events in the last week I believe we're already half way there, and for no real reason at all I'm feeling confident we'll nail our off season list changes this year.

Edit: hmm, not really the thread for this tbh. Sorry to hijack your thread, OP. However it took me about seven valuable minutes of my life to write it, so I'm not removing it. ;p

Edited October 8, 2012 by Nasher

[corowa 216]

These threads give me the brace and bits. "You're all geniuses in hindsight, the club are doing their best".

Posters on forums have to use hindsight because none of us are full time recruiters.

The clubs recruiting under Bailey was terrible. We must demand better from full time experts, and if they get it wrong as much as prendergast did, I'll use hindsight in calling him a dud as much as I like.

Thanks for your comments on my thread, W J D.I was simply after information on likely recruits and how people rate them. Perhaps some clues as to who we might pick up. I was also trying to show how difficult it is to pick 'good players' from a bunch of 'kids with potential'. A bit like backing favourites in a horse race - there's no guarantees. But easy to heap scorn after the race has finished.Several people have done this and I appreciate their input.If such posts have such an adverse effect on your bowels, could I suggest you just ignore them. manner. Leave the responses to those who would like to make a positive, non-vitriolic contribution.

[mauriesy 6,867]

I'd like to see posters put their foresight where their mouth is and state precisely after the draft is complete how each player will be turn out. Then we'll have a reference in a few years time that will be incontrovertible, that no one can back out of.

[MadAsHell 4,089]

I take my hat off to you, Tall Defence. This is great.I've not heard of most of these lads, let alone know anything about them.Where did you get the data for your list? Do you watch TAC & junior football?MFC could do worse that have blokes like you on their recruiting team.

Get along to as many Dandenong Stingrays games as possible and keep a keen eye.

Otherwise it's just the usual making enquiries with a few people I know who work in the industry and played/ are still involved with some of the TAC teams. Only other resource is watching TAC Future stars.

Having said that, I'm no expert and could be well off the mark.

[dpositive 1,596]

I have a lot of sympathy for both views actually. The selections of players like Watts, Scully and even Morton were more or less universally agreed on by every expert and qualified amateur in the industry, so it's rich for supporters to jump on here and slam the picks. At the same time, our list in the last few years has looked and played like complete dung and we've missed a lot of opportunities to draft gun players that our opposition have lapped up, and we've fallen a long way behind as a result. Both the "it's an inexact science!" and the "these guys are paid the big bucks to get it right!" crowds have equally valid points.

There's no benefit in hindcasting anyway. We've got a whole new regime this year that is heavier resourced than the last few mobs, so the slate is clean. Let's just forget past effups and just get it bloody right this time. After the turn of events in the last week I believe we're already half way there, and for no real reason at all I'm feeling confident we'll nail our off season list changes this year.

Edit: hmm, not really the thread for this tbh. Sorry to hijack your thread, OP. However it took me about seven valuable minutes of my life to write it, so I'm not removing it. ;p

Think I totally agree with you Nasher

would add that I did like the view of Lundgren as a response to the question and may add a personal insight to "highly paid staff"(!) to assist them in their deliberations

There are already a number of expressions that show some people do put a lot of time into the ratings. But how accurate they are is also as you stated.

[dpositive 1,596]

I think Maurie might have the best idea for future appraisal while Tall defence is contributing from a much more viable position than anything I could say.

[nutbean 8,837]

I could not agree with the OP anymore and to say that it is "recruiters job" to get comparisons on human flesh always right is a nonsense. All clubs make good calls and bad calls on recruiting and then you have to factor in development (or in our past years, lack thereof)

I dont expect posters to name the top 20 but how about they pick who we should have taken with the picks we have.

I,for one, am heartily sick of posters being rear vision mirror experts - "we could have had him or we shouldn't have picked him". I coulda shoulda picked 8 winners at the races last Saturday but I didnt.

It is the easiest thing in the world to sit in a big fat chair 2 years down the track and name who we should have or shouldnt have picked.

Cojones on the line now ! Pick who you would and wouldnt have taken straight after the draft is completed and then you can have bragging rights to come back to this thread and say "see, I told you so"