Age Profile

[deejammin' 2,096]

I think this has needed to be posted for awhile in the context of both our drafting and list management.

18-21 (New recruits): Davis, Blease, Gawn, TMac,Taggert, Tapscott, Trengove, Tynan, Watts, Viney, Toumpas (!!!!), Barry, Hogan, Kent, Evans.

22-25 (Established players): Bail, Clark, Dunn, Fitzy, Frawley, Garland, Grimes, Howe, Jetta, Jones, Jordie, Sellar, Spencer, Strauss, Dawes, Pedersen, Nicholson, Gillies, M Jones, Terlich.

26-28(Senior Players): JMac, Sylvia, Byrnes,

29+(Veterans): Davey, Jamar, Rodan.

Bold: New

Looking at our list at this stage of the trade period I think Neeld's mindset becomes clear. The vast majority of our list (particularly with the exits of Rivers, Moloney, Green and Jurrah) are in the first two groups, with only 5 players pre our new ins over 26. It should also be noted that of those players over 26, only 2 have really cemented their spots in the 22 in 2012 (Jamar and Sylv and thats still debatable).

The vast majority of the quality on our list is in the age group between 22-25, with more entering over the next couple of years (Trenners, Watts and Blease for example).

But in the key 26-28 age group, where I would argue most players are hitting their peak we only have 3 players with 2 famously inconsistant and JMac, who we could debate the quality of. Clearly our list is deficient in this region and even with several good players entering this age group over the next couple of years it is clear it needs to be bolstered. Clearly we have plenty of talent in the younger region of our list and this will be bolstered with at least 4 young recruits this year.

I am sure multiple conclusions can be drawn from this, and sure the age groups are arbitrary and I haven't guessed at the delistings, but I think it has needed to be posted as I feel it would answer a lot of the concerns given in several threads.

Obviously we are actually adding more youth than anything else in this draft so those like Cam Mooney who argue we aren't continuing to add quality to the young end of our list are way off the mark. But in Byrnes, Ray and Dawes (who will be 25 next year) we have added 3 experienced players who have come from quality cultures, experienced success and are equally as good, if not better than most of our current experienced players.

Edited to include Rodan, also in this context Rodan makes far more sense as he adds to an age and experience group we have very little in.

Edited to include delistings, Pedersen and trades (Gys, Morton).

Edited to include upgraded Rookies and Gillies.

Edited to include draft

Edit: For all the talk during trade period of "not adding enough youth" we have now added 6 players under 22 to our primary list along with 4 over 25. Seems pretty balanced to me. Also the depth of this list is looking better and better, there are far fewer in the team that I can't see getting an AFL game than when we started. Also with at least 5 (Dawes, Jones, Pedersen, Clark, Frawley, Jones) high quality players moving into the "Senior player" age group over the next 2 years this list is starting to look more and more competitive, rather than developmental.

Edited November 22, 2012 by deejammin'

[Lucifers Hero 37,395]

I think this has needed to be posted for awhile in the context of both our drafting and list management.

18-21 (New recruits): Cook, Davis, Blease, Gawn, Gysberts, TMac,Taggert, Tapscott, Trengove, Tynan, Watts, Viney, Pick 4, Barry, Hogan, Evans.

22-25 (Established players): Bail, Bartram, Bate, Bennell, Clark, Dunn, Fitzy, Frawley, Garland, Grimes, Howe, Jetta, Jones, Jordie, Morton, Petterd, Sellar, Spencer, Strauss, Dawes, Pedersen, Magner, Nicholson.

26-28(Senior Players): JMac, Martin, Sylvia, Byrnes, Ray,

29+(Veterans): Davey, Jamar,

Bold: New

Red: Potential New Trades

Green: Potential Rookie Upgrades.

Looking at our list at this stage of the trade period I think Neeld's mindset becomes clear. The vast majority of our list (particularly with the exits of Rivers, Moloney, Green and Jurrah) are in the first two groups, with only 5 players pre our new ins over 26. It should also be noted that of those players over 26, only 2 have really cemented their spots in the 22 in 2012 (Jamar and Sylv and thats still debatable).

The vast majority of the quality on our list is in the age group between 22-25, with more entering over the next couple of years (Trenners, Watts and Blease for example).

But in the key 26-28 age group, where I would argue most players are hitting their peak we only have 3 players with 2 famously inconsistant and JMac, who we could debate the quality of. Clearly our list is deficient in this region and even with several good players entering this age group over the next couple of years it is clear it needs to be bolstered. Clearly we have plenty of talent in the younger region of our list and this will be bolstered with at least 4 young recruits this year.

I am sure multiple conclusions can be drawn from this, and sure the age groups are arbitrary and I haven't guessed at the delistings, but I think it has needed to be posted as I feel it would answer a lot of the concerns given in several threads.

Obviously we are actually adding more youth than anything else in this draft so those like Cam Mooney who argue we aren't continuing to add quality to the young end of our list are way off the mark. But in Byrnes, Ray and Dawes (who will be 25 next year) we have added 3 experienced players who have come from quality cultures, experienced success and are equally as good, if not better than most of our current experienced players.

Great Post! Hope Greg Denham reads this and gets off the 'MFC should be drafting kids' trip he is on!

[deejammin' 2,096]

Thanks LH, I hope not, I prefer to think that Denham can't read!

Anyway I also wanted to add that Sydney had 9 players in their GF team over 29, thats just the 22, not the entire list! Also Hawthorn had at least 6 over 28. So that shows just how deficient we are in experienced players!

[Moonshadow 16,468]

All the colors are doing my eyes in! Reminds me of the summer of '68. Peace man.

Good info DJ. Puts the recent trades into perspective. Would have liked Riv to stay. He'll be the one we miss.

[Sir Why You Little 35,148]

Trade month next year will be very similar...The Job is not done yet.

Hopefully next year will be easier to attract more interest as our list and results improve.

Good post...KB's Producer should read it at least.

[Hannibal 5,814]

Great stuff !

[Curry & Beer 5,444]

as a club we have had 'Peter Pan' syndrome for a long time - time goes by but we never age. When Bailey came in at the end of 07 he immediately began replacing the old with the young.. every season our kids get a year older but we have continued to cull experience systematically, and therefore the small amount of average games we take on the field every week has remained fairly constant over time... and it is no surprise that we consistently see a side getting belted by a more mature opponent.The result has been 5 pretty awful seasons of football to endure. It looks like there will be at least a couple more to come also. I think the slash -and-burn regeneration was the only choice we had at the time - but I am sure very few expected that at the time we welcomed Bailey, Morton and Grimes to the club, it would be 5 years later and we are essentially at the same rung on the ladder. We desperately need this 22-25 group to become solid, experienced, consistent UNIT, we can't have many of them pizzing off or fading out on their potential. We've lost Scully, Jurrah and I guess Morton, who were supposed to be flagship players - but on the other hand we have somewhat unexpectedly gained Clark, Howe and Tom McDonald. The time for playing kids has to be behind us now, we need to start fielding sides that match the experience of our opponents or we will remain uncompetitive.

[deejammin' 2,096]

as a club we have had 'Peter Pan' syndrome for a long time - time goes by but we never age. When Bailey came in at the end of 07 he immediately began replacing the old with the young.. every season our kids get a year older but we have continued to cull experience systematically, and therefore the small amount of average games we take on the field every week has remained fairly constant over time... and it is no surprise that we consistently see a side getting belted by a more mature opponent.The result has been 5 pretty awful seasons of football to endure. It looks like there will be at least a couple more to come also. I think the slash -and-burn regeneration was the only choice we had at the time - but I am sure very few expected that at the time we welcomed Bailey, Morton and Grimes to the club, it would be 5 years later and we are essentially at the same rung on the ladder. We desperately need this 22-25 group to become solid, experienced, consistent UNIT, we can't have many of them pizzing off or fading out on their potential. We've lost Scully, Jurrah and I guess Morton, who were supposed to be flagship players - but on the other hand we have somewhat unexpectedly gained Clark, Howe and Tom McDonald. The time for playing kids has to be behind us now, we need to start fielding sides that match the experience of our opponents or we will remain uncompetitive.

I think I agree with most of what you have said. Certainly our 'Peter Pan' approach hasn't worked how we thought it would. It also hasn't worked for Carlton or Richmond in the way they thought it would when they started their complete rebuilds years before us. In fact I think you can argue strongly now that youth without strong senior players to guide them has been a largely failed strategy. I don't think the complete slash and burn approach Bailey took was the only option, I think we should have tried a more balanced approach.

What I get out of the age comparison above is that MN is trying to build a more balanced list, not ignoring youth as some are suggesting, but trying to fill deficiencies in experience, player types and roles within the team on and off the field. I think it has been a promising approach and I think it makes a lot of sense, obviously there is never any way to be certain that you will be successful, there are 18 teams going for the same thing. However I am excited by our recent trades and the two ones I have mooted above and I think that we should expect to be a far more competitive team than last year if Clark, Dawes, Byrnes and Ray can get on the park for the majority of games.

[Guest José Mourinho]

None of this should be news to any MFC supporter, but it unfortunately is to some, and it is great to see it put together in a well-thought-out OP.

Thanks.

[deejammin' 2,096]

Updated OP

[jnrmac 19,394]

The quality of players over 25 is a real problem.

[deejammin' 2,096]

The quality of players over 25 is a real problem.

Yahuh, which is why I believe Ray and Pedersen would be good additions to that group along with Dawes, Byrnes and Rodan. It looks a lot barer without them!

[Arrow 1,257]

I think people are also undervaluing the PSD pick 3. We will essentially get the pick of de-listed or undrafted mature aged talent- free to pick whatever we want. We may target that older age with 2/3 rookie and PS picks.

To OP poster, excellent post. Certainly a good topic to discuss and shows to me that Neeld's recruiting this year is very structured and well thought-out.

[deejammin' 2,096]

I think people are also undervaluing the PSD pick 3. We will essentially get the pick of de-listed or undrafted mature aged talent- free to pick whatever we want. We may target that older age with 2/3 rookie and PS picks.

To OP poster, excellent post. Certainly a good topic to discuss and shows to me that Neeld's recruiting this year is very structured and well thought-out.

Thanks DL7, I had also forgotten PSD3, I think it is interesting that Neeld said 50/50 new players and experienced players. That makes me think:

Young players/new: Hogan, Barry, Viney, Pick 4, Evans?, Nicho?

Experienced: Dawes, Byrnes, Rodan, Ray?, Pedersen?, PSD3?

If all of those eventuate (or everything without Pedersen, who I'm neither here nor there about) it would be a great, balanced result for the footy club.

Edited October 25, 2012 by deejammin'

[Guest Hulkamania]

Cam Mooney has really been letting himself down with some of his comments about Melbourne of late.

[Miles from Nowhere 199]

Cam Mooney could not possibly let himself down. It is what it is.

[deejammin' 2,096]

Edited the OP to reflect our current list. It looks a bit more balanced in terms of age, also I think it is more balanced in terms of the experienced players being in the best 22. Interesting to see who we add via the draft and rookie draft.

Edited October 27, 2012 by deejammin'

[deejammin' 2,096]

Edited OP to include upgraded Rookies and Gillies.

[nutbean 8,837]

Peter Pan drafting works when you have some wiser older heads to guide them and be role models/mentors as to what it takes to be a top class professional footballer - sadly.....

[jackaub 1,402]

The quality of players over 25 is a real problem.

The same players were a problem when over 22

We just have to replace them as quickly as we can by trading delisting etc

I hope someone is having a long hard look at them

[deejammin' 2,096]

Peter Pan drafting works when you have some wiser older heads to guide them and be role models/mentors as to what it takes to be a top class professional footballer - sadly.....

My understanding of Peter Pan drafting was that you gut the majority of the list and replace with extremely young players for a number of years, so that your average age stays extremely young, like Melbourne, Carlton, RIchmond all did recently, and in all of those cases I don't think it has worked nearly as well as approaches like Sydney, West Coast and Hawthorn's where you try to maintain a balance in the age and experience of your list. But I could have that wrong.

[Rogue 585]

My understanding of Peter Pan drafting was that you gut the majority of the list and replace with extremely young players for a number of years, so that your average age stays extremely young, like Melbourne, Carlton, RIchmond all did recently, and in all of those cases I don't think it has worked nearly as well as approaches like Sydney, West Coast and Hawthorn's where you try to maintain a balance in the age and experience of your list. But I could have that wrong.

This suggests that Melbourne, Carlton and Richmond could do the same as Sydney, West Coast and Hawthorn. However, I'm going to suggest that the second group you mentioned had far better older players than the Dees, Carlton and Richmond did.

[deejammin' 2,096]

This suggests that Melbourne, Carlton and Richmond could do the same as Sydney, West Coast and Hawthorn. However, I'm going to suggest that the second group you mentioned had far better older players than the Dees, Carlton and Richmond did.

I don't think we could have had the same amount of success as those teams for the reason you mention, our older players weren't as good as the members of those teams. However, Hawthorn for example hung onto Richie Vandenberg even when it was clear he wouldn't take them to a premiership, as he was a great leader and a hard trainer, had we hung onto guys like Junior rather than moving them on it may have helped our younger players with good examples and I think we would be further ahead of where we are now. That was my only point, not that we would be winning premierships.

[Little Goffy 12,833]

I think a fundamental difference is that many of our mature players on the last few years have merely been struggling on or fluctuating in form, rather than solidly contributing year after year after year.

And I don't just mean in comparison to Matthew Pavlich or Adam Goodes, I mean the stalwarts who keep producing solid, 'best 22' games year in year out and are consistently in the mix for B&F placings.

I'm hoping that guys like Nathan Jones, Mitch Clark, James Frawley and of course the captains can be the beginning of that kind of core group of professional, consistent, high-performing players who keep a club competitive through the twists of AFL seasons. Personally I think it takes at least half the players in the best 22 to be of that standard before you can seriously expect to contend at the very top levels.

[deejammin' 2,096]

Well, the primary list is complete, still very light on for Senior and Veteran players but with a lot of quality players to move into the Senior category next year, as well as having added some quality experience and leadership to these groups we've done all we can do to balance this area of our list this year. Our young potential is massive, guys like Toumpas, Viney, Hogan, Barry, Kent and Evans all have the potential to be a great group in the future. Also the meat mof our list looks far more balanced and competitive than the last 3-4 years, it will be tough to figure out what our best 22 is until we start playing some games. I think overall this has been a great off-season for the club and am more confident than the last 2 years that this could be a genuinely good season with some solid competitive performances against good sides and many more wins.

I saw EQ do a similar evaluation to this in her reports and I thought it could be useful to have a full primary list split this way, also I know that players like Tapscott, Howe, Blease will spend time through the midfield but I would expect them to rotate through forward flanks hence why I list them there. Also while I know Gillies and Watts and big boys I think they are more likely to play running roles than key position defence which is why I am classing them as flankers:

Key Position Forwards: Clark (Back up ruck), Dawes, Pedersen (Back up Ruck), Fitzpatrick (Back up Ruck), Hogan (2014)

Medium Flankers/Small Forwards: Byrnes, Davey, Blease, Tapscott, Howe,

Midfielders: Trengove, Grimes, N Jones, Sylvia, Mckensie, Rodan, Viney, Toumpas, Barry, M Jones, Kent, Taggert, Evans, Bail, Jetta, Couch, Magner

Rucks: Jamar, Gawn, Spencer,

Medium Flankers/Small Backs: Watts, Dunn, Strauss, Nicholson, Gillies, Terlich, JMac, Tynan

Key Position Defenders: Frawley, Garland, TMac, Sellar, Davis

*Bold = Rookie

Edited November 23, 2012 by deejammin'