i just looked up Emmas 2012 phantom draft

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/the-2012-afl-national-draft-20121121-29qfq.html

She did have the MFC taking Toumpas at 4, and Port taking Wines at 7

and yeah. at east we weren't the only team to pass on Wines i guess

Emma is reactive, she cares only about her reputation.

It is unfortunate, because back in the day I rated Emma right up there.

By going mainstream, Emma now cares more about getting the order right come draft day - than about evaluating with a focus on the long term.

Anyone can get the order right at night out, but not anyone can go out on a limb and declare Wines of the best few in the draft - knowing Port will take him at 7.

As much as Big Footy has gone down on the drain of recent, it is still the bench mark for drafting - outside of the AFL scouts, who have more time to put into scouting.

I remember pre draft Emma Quayle saying that if Melbourne take Wines, he and Viney will be causing explosions at the centre square for the next 12 years

Ahh, i remember reading this well. It wasn't Emma Quayle who said this (it might have been in her article). It was in fact a recruiter who didn't want his identity to be revealed who said explosions would happen.

Don't know if that makes it better or worse.

I also remember reading a poster say that he spoke to Neeld, some-time pre-draft, and that the MFC (coach and recruiting team i guess) didn't rate Wines in the top 4. WHOOPS.

Shocking decision.

I agree and I was shocked that he was dropped. Unless there were some thing's going on which I haven't seen (and that is very likely I admit) I thought there would be half a dozen who should be demoted before Jimmy.

Quote name="hogans heroes" post="902452" timestamp="1396528462"]

I remember pre draft Emma Quayle saying that if Melbourne take Wines, he and Viney will be causing explosions at the centre square for the next 12 years

What a massive stuff up this was by the recruiting staff

A broken clock is still right twice a day. You're disregarding all the experts who thought we got an absolute steal when Toumpas fell to 4.

Wingard and Jackson Macrae had poor first years but were persisted with and Wingard is an AA, and Macrae playing incredible football. He's 19 and has flaws, but whether the midfield explosion from Wines and Viney would be better than Viney releasing a streaming Toumpas hitting up i50s to Hogan is an answer noone knows...

Not even Emma, HH.

Nope. Showed enough

got that one wrong !

I remember pre draft Emma Quayle saying that if Melbourne take Wines, he and Viney will be causing explosions at the centre square for the next 12 years

What a massive stuff up this was by the recruiting staff

She also predicted we'd take Jack Darling. Bloody hell. If only Emma was right

Gentleman - the internet remembers everything and google is a wonderful thing.

Emma Quayle had us taking Toumpas in the 2012 draft.

She had us taking Dyson Heppell in 2010 draft with Lucas Cook going at 23 and Jack Darling was not in her top 25.

Experts aren't alwys right are they

It's usually the posters that arent right.

As to experts arent always right - interesting concept. Do you suggest that recruiters do not talk to other experts watching junior football about prospects ? Take Scully for example - every recruiter interviewed and all expert watchers of junior football had him as the best junior talent in the land. Are your suggesting that this should all be disregarded ? In Scully's case you are right - history now shows that he is not the best player to come out of the draft (at this point in time) but do you completely dismiss these opinions at the time ? The club didnt disregard all good research and expert opinion and went with the top talent in Scully - how did that work out. In Lucas Cook - they did the opposite - took a player well before his popular rating.

Edited April 3, 201411 yr by nutbean

Shocking decision.

No it wasn't - it was a well considered decision that at this stage hasn't work out.

I hope Jack Viney has a belter this week, then we can get the only comparison that actually works going, Wines vs Viney

You guys must hate roundabouts - you'd never get off the thing!

No it wasn't - it was a well considered decision that at this stage hasn't work out.

Pretty sure he was referring to Toumpas being dropped.

It's usually the posters that arent right.

As to experts arent always right - interesting concept. Do you suggest that recruiters do not talk to other experts watching junior football about prospects ? Take Scully for example - every recruiter interviewed and all expert watchers of junior football had him as the best junior talent in the land. Are your suggesting that this should all be disregarded ? In Scully's case you are right - history now shows that he is not the best player to come out of the draft (at this point in time) but do you completely dismiss these opinions at the time ? The club didnt disregard all good research and expert opinion and went with the top talent in Scully - how did that work out. In Lucas Cook - they did the opposite - took a player well before his popular rating.

I would suggest they don't put as much weight in the view of other experts as they should with their own eyes.

If anyone remembers the famous Scully/Doggies game where he got 38 odd disposals and Malthouse was rating him the next Judd. If you really watched that game and didn't get caught up in the hype of stats and experts his last quarter where he got most of the ball was really impressive for his running and coverage of the ground but most possessions went nowhere and were turned over.

How do you rate that sort of game? depends if you're listening or watching.

Pretty sure he was referring to Toumpas being dropped.

Ahh ! I didn't think he should have been dropped as I though there were worse than him. But I am not privvy as to whether or not he is following his coaches instructions or doing his role as asked.

Ahh ! I didn't think he should have been dropped as I though there were worse than him. But I am not privvy as to whether or not he is following his coaches instructions or doing his role as asked.

I thought he was very average.

I would suggest they don't put as much weight in the view of other experts as they should with their own eyes.

If anyone remembers the famous Scully/Doggies game where he got 38 odd disposals and Malthouse was rating him the next Judd. If you really watched that game and didn't get caught up in the hype of stats and experts his last quarter where he got most of the ball was really impressive for his running and coverage of the ground but most possessions went nowhere and were turned over.

How do you rate that sort of game? depends if you're listening or watching.

I hear your suggestion but thats not the way it works - they do use their own eyes but also take feedback from experts. The problem with TAC and Junior graduates is the recruiters are guessing on how they will progress. The knock on Scully's kicking was always there but everyone was so impressed with his single minded ( bordering on obsessive) approach to his football and becoming the best that these traits overshadowed his kicking deficiencies.

I do wonder if Hawks would have picked him. The Hawks have made no secret the number one skill that they require from any recruit is the ability to kick.

You guys must hate roundabouts - you'd never get off the thing!

That has got to be one of the funniest quotes I have read on here! Just what the doctor ordered pre another tough weekend of being a dees supporter.

I thought he was very average.

He had plenty of friends in that category

He had plenty of friends in that category

He sure did.

That has got to be one of the funniest quotes I have read on here! Just what the doctor ordered pre another tough weekend of being a dees supporter.

Here is another.

Was listening to a couple of blokes discussing Essendon. When one said to the other how he could reach the conclusions he did he said.

" if one person tells you that you are a horse you can dismiss it. If a second person tells you that you are horse then you may want to consider it. If a third person tells you that you are a horse you better saddle up baby and start eating hay."

Emma is reactive, she cares only about her reputation.

It is unfortunate, because back in the day I rated Emma right up there.

By going mainstream, Emma now cares more about getting the order right come draft day - than about evaluating with a focus on the long term.

Anyone can get the order right at night out, but not anyone can go out on a limb and declare Wines of the best few in the draft - knowing Port will take him at 7.

Lol, so you expect her to know not only the exact order of the draft - which 'anyone' can nail - but also which players will be champs and who will turn out to be chumps?

If she could do this, she would be the best recruiter in the country extremely rich from winning Tattslotto.

I have no idea what you mean when you say she is ''reactive" and has gone ''mainstream'', suggesting she used to be proactive and on the fringe?? Que?

Edited April 4, 201411 yr by Grapeviney

I would suggest they don't put as much weight in the view of other experts as they should with their own eyes.

If anyone remembers the famous Scully/Doggies game where he got 38 odd disposals and Malthouse was rating him the next Judd. If you really watched that game and didn't get caught up in the hype of stats and experts his last quarter where he got most of the ball was really impressive for his running and coverage of the ground but most possessions went nowhere and were turned over.

How do you rate that sort of game? depends if you're listening or watching.

Great point. I remember that game thinking the the same. I knew he got heaps of the ball that last quarter (19 I think) but he rarely used them to great advantage. If mick malt house told me that Robbie warnock is a reliable shot for goal, I'd believe him as it's mick malthouse. Buuuuut we've seen Robbie warnock kick for goal and we know that's not true.

Emma is reactive, she cares only about her reputation.

It is unfortunate, because back in the day I rated Emma right up there.

By going mainstream, Emma now cares more about getting the order right come draft day - than about evaluating with a focus on the long term.

Anyone can get the order right at night out, but not anyone can go out on a limb and declare Wines of the best few in the draft - knowing Port will take him at 7.

As much as Big Footy has gone down on the drain of recent, it is still the bench mark for drafting - outside of the AFL scouts, who have more time to put into scouting.

So you prefer going non mainstream and against conventional wisdom and pump for the likes of Cook, Gysberts and Strauss ?

There was a reason that mainstream (everyone) had Toumpas in the top 3 above Wines. At TAC level he was considered the better player.

The draft order is not rocket Science - with few exceptions the top 15 players usually go in an order that is equivalent with how they were rated in the TAC.

Simply, Toumpas was considered the better footballer than Wines at draft time.

Unfortunately, at this stage one has developed quicker and is playing much better football than the other ( and playing in a better team with better players around him).

For the likes of Cook Gysberts and Strauss I readily accept that recruiters showed poor judgement and got it horribly wrong. For the like of Toumpas ( besides it being early days and too soon to make judgement) - if Wines continues his meteoric rise and Toumpas never amounts to anything I will say the recruiters made a well considered choice that went horribly wrong.

Simply, Toumpas was considered the better footballer than Wines at draft time.

Unfortunately, at this stage one has developed quicker and is playing much better football than the other ( and playing in a better team with better players around him).

I think it fair to say that is the generally accepted "skills are wonderful" world of weighting players that not enough is given to possibly the "body ready" factor ...or "guy had a bit of moxy factor'

yes these seem like airy fairy ambiguities but in all reality so are many of the made up meaures as used by the draft camp. Good old figjam realised that it gave no credence to some very basic skills....like kicking a ball with any effect. But hey he can run around cones and jump and hit a thing at V height and run up and down an court ....= kid 's brilliant . Yet we know there are as many factors in between all of these that really sort a potential AFL player form the next kid

Emma got it wrong.. most got it wrong. In "theory" Jimmy suited our plan going forward but nothing was proven about him ( no more than may others ) and some classic ingredients that other displayed were downplayed.

Now its up to Roos to address this conundrum and make the best of Jimmy..Hope he does.

No it wasn't - it was a well considered decision that at this stage hasn't work out.

I'm talking about dropping him.

Now its up to Roos to address this conundrum and make the best of Jimmy..Hope he does.

Unless players are headcases good coaches tend to get the best out of them. Jimmy seems to have a good head on his shoulders. He will learn because he will be given good advice. It may take time, but he has that on his side. If Roos can make Dunny look like a player then I reckon he will do just fine with the rest of the talent that isn't realised.