There are many mythologies perpetuated on this site. The current trending topic (in the wake of Sylvia's departure) is us not being able to hang on to senior experience. This post is an attempt to set the record straight for the bunch of posters who are making emotive statements that are perhaps not based on actually looking at the facts.

Here is a look at our departures since 2006 (end of Daniher era). I'm only considering players that were regulars for several years (not fringers), and/or actually functioned somewhere else after they left us - not the plethora of Isaac Weetras we have gone through... also I'm not talking about anyone that came to the club from 2010 onwards b/c we are talking about senior players here (eg. minimum 6th season in 2014). Scully is not considered because a)he left under special circumstances, b ) we were very well compensated and c)he is not in the above stated age bracket

NATURALLY RETIRED
Neitz, Brown, White, Yze, Robertson, Whelan, Green, Davey, Bartram, Bizzell, Holland, Ward, Godfrey, Wheatley, Nicholson, Warnock, Jurrah(!)

MOVED ON PERHAPS A YEAR EARLY
McDonald, Bruce, Miller

TRADED/DELISTED TO OTHER CLUBS
Johnstone, Moloney, Rivers, Sylvia, McLean, Petterd, Martin, Morton, Bennell

STILL HERE
Jamar, Garland, Dunn, Frawley, Grimes, Jones, Clark, Dawes
Watts, Blease, McKenzie, Strauss, Jetta, Spencer (this group will be 23/24 years old in 2014.. I know not really 'seniors')

Now the only categories of concern to this discussion are MOVED ON PERHAPS A YEAR EARLY and TRADED/DELISTED (these are supposedly our 'lost seniors'). Now ask yourself how many of those players you would consider to be assets for the club moving forward - the answer for mine is only Moloney, Rivers, Sylvia, McLean.. all of whom will be aged 28-30 next season. Don't forget we also got pick11 for McLean and probably pick19-ish for Sylvia (the fact we misused that pick11 is irrelevant to this discussion). Compare that to the STILL HERE list, the players that have NOT left us. Of importance is Clark and Dawes, who are genuine senior assets that have actually arrived at the club in this period.

so I'm saying in eight draft/trade periods we have lost a total of FOUR senior players that might be of value to us for 2014 onwards, two of them for good draft picks. These four might have a combined total of ten years of footy left in them. Meanwhile we kept a good dozen others on the list as senior players going forward, including the addition of Dawes and Clark.

You could say it is Moloney, Rivers, Sylvia and McLean in exchange for Pick11, Pick19, Clark and Dawes.

The reality of the situation you will find is vastly less disastrous than some here would have us believe.

What has killed us more was our drafting through the early 2000's - the players that should be around the 28 mark now. There are none of them, because we farrked up every pick, setting us well behind all the other clubs and it has really been telling the last 5 years or so.

The lack of mature talent in that respect really shafted us.

What has killed us more was our drafting through the early 2000's - the players that should be around the 28 mark now. There are none of them, because we farrked up every pick, setting us well behind all the other clubs and it has really been telling the last 5 years or so.

The lack of mature talent in that respect really shafted us.

Yep, exactly right.

It's not so much the older players that were moved on but our inability to retain/develop players who should have become veterans about now.

Lost to Free Agency: Everyone who has become a free agent. 100% strike rate and that's no myth.

Until Frawley re-signs, in my mind he is gone.

Lost to Free Agency: Everyone who has become a free agent. 100% strike rate and that's no myth.

Until Frawley re-signs, in my mind he is gone.

Sad but true. We have to make signing Frawley a priority, as soon as possible.

Edit: Actually wasn't Jamar a FA last season? We re-signed him.

Whether you like it or not we are a very young list, and probably more importantly inexpeienced list. Many of our early 20s players like Bleaze, Strauss, Bail, Jetta, Evans etc have played relatively few games due to injury etc. Statistically you need to get you best 22 averaging around the high mid 20's and aroun 70 games to be a competetive outfit, we are no where near that in terms of our best 22 and losing experience is something we cant afford because it will just take us longer to get there.

If we lose a FA player each year like the past few we will never get there. Thats why its important to retain experience. To win a flag it has to be the right players but just retaining players would be a good start.

You could say it is Moloney, Rivers, Sylvia and McLean in exchange for Pick11, Pick19, Clark and Dawes.

You could say that, talking only in terms of experience, but that has nothing to do with building a successful football club, we effectively got Clark and Dawes through our compo picks for Scully, we lost Rivers, Sylvia, Moloney, McLean for Shannon Byrnes, Pick 48(Dean Kent),Pick 11 (Gysberts) and Pick 19 (Strauss). Had we been able to retain Rivers, McLean, Moloney and Sylvia, we would have Clark an Dawes in our forward line being fed by 3 experienced midfielders, and with a strong experienced player to lead our defence. Instead we have one quality experience mid (Jones) and a whole bunch of speculative picks that yielded talent that is unlikely to surpass the four players we lost for at least 3 years if at all.

None of those four players are superstars, but they would all walk into our best 22 any day of the week. We should look on the bright side as it has happened and there is nothing we can do about it, but FA has hurt us more than most.

What has killed us more was our drafting through the early 2000's - the players that should be around the 28 mark now. There are none of them, because we farrked up every pick, setting us well behind all the other clubs and it has really been telling the last 5 years or so.

The lack of mature talent in that respect really shafted us.

Spot on 'Django' and losing draft picks in that time is part of the reason, it's a big penalty and you can't afford to get the ones you have wrong.

You could say that, talking only in terms of experience, but that has nothing to do with building a successful football club, we effectively got Clark and Dawes through our compo picks for Scully, we lost Rivers, Sylvia, Moloney, McLean for Shannon Byrnes, Pick 48(Dean Kent),Pick 11 (Gysberts) and Pick 19 (Strauss). Had we been able to retain Rivers, McLean, Moloney and Sylvia, we would have Clark an Dawes in our forward line being fed by 3 experienced midfielders, and with a strong experienced player to lead our defence. Instead we have one quality experience mid (Jones) and a whole bunch of speculative picks that yielded talent that is unlikely to surpass the four players we lost for at least 3 years if at all.

None of those four players are superstars, but they would all walk into our best 22 any day of the week. We should look on the bright side as it has happened and there is nothing we can do about it, but FA has hurt us more than most.

you are talking about the specificity of certain trades and the impact of the FA in isolation - I am talking about the bigger picture arrivals/departures from the club over a certain period of time. The facts are, for whatever reason, we have Clark and Dawes come in with four going out, I don't know what sense it makes to exclude them based on the method by which they got here. My point is that Moloney, Rivers, Sylvia and McLean in exchange for Pick11, Pick19, Clark and Dawes is the net result of it all, so I don't understand the attitude of many around here at the moment. Again, our net loss is two 28-30 year olds that won't be out there next year.

however you are correct in pointing out that we have lost it in the midfield and got some back with key forwards, which is an important point, and part of why our midfield is battling.

You could also look at it by saying most senior players who have had any currency at all recently have moved on, and many of those who stayed in the Daniher era seemingly wanted to hang around on the gravy train until they could collect a Seniors public transport ticket.

Notable exceptions, of course, but plenty that fit the theory.

What has killed us more was our drafting through the early 2000's - the players that should be around the 28 mark now. There are none of them, because we farrked up every pick, setting us well behind all the other clubs and it has really been telling the last 5 years or so.

The lack of mature talent in that respect really shafted us.

I agree that we lack mature players, e.g. 26-28 y/old with 100+ games. Our inability to stop opposition getting a run of 5-6 goals is a product of this.

I'm not convinced we drafted the wrong players but rathet think we failed to develop them due to our poor culture. One mistake may be that we have focussed too much on drafting talent and potential in the past without the culture to make these players consistent. I expect we will bring in some 100+ game club man types.

Frawley is a priority but the first true test of this new administration is signing Hogan to a long-term deal.

If they can't get that done, then they're no better than the despots that preceded them.

Problem is that the "myth" isn't a myth at all: losing experience is okay if you have the experience and/or potential to back it up. Melbourne dumped experienced players from a successful era without anyone to take the reigns. St. Kilda is doing the same thing now and they risk really bottoming out just as Melbourne did.

So losing the experience in Melbourne's case was a bad thing. But that said had we not lost them, we may not have players like Hogan, Barry, Viney.

Experience is over rated. Ability makes up for a lack of experience. Our ability to control a game and keep control of the ball is the problem.

Experience counts to nothing if they keep turning the ball over. I started a thread a few months back, outling the MFC side of 1987 had less experience than the current list of players. When both sides are compared, that 1987 team had a lot more talented players. Made easlier when playing with confidence.

Experience helps no doubt, but if there are 10 players that have 150+ games under their belts, and arent as talented as 10 players that played less than 100 games. I think I know where I would have my money. Experience and stats go hand in hand, stats don't tell the full story of a game, its a guide to where the team can improve. Its what they do with it that counts, experience doesnt mean they will get better, though you would hope so.

NATURALLY RETIRED

Neitz, Brown, White, Yze, Robertson, Whelan, Green, Davey, Bartram, Bizzell, Holland, Ward, Godfrey, Wheatley, Nicholson, Warnock, Jurrah(!)

Fwiw, plenty of those would have been happy to play on if they were wanted.

Fwiw, plenty of those would have been happy to play on if they were wanted.

yeah but none got a gig elsewhere

Experience is over rated. Ability makes up for a lack of experience. Our ability to control a game and keep control of the ball is the problem.

Experience counts to nothing if they keep turning the ball over. I started a thread a few months back, outling the MFC side of 1987 had less experience than the current list of players. When both sides are compared, that 1987 team had a lot more talented players. Made easlier when playing with confidence.

Experience helps no doubt, but if there are 10 players that have 150+ games under their belts, and arent as talented as 10 players that played less than 100 games. I think I know where I would have my money. Experience and stats go hand in hand, stats don't tell the full story of a game, its a guide to where the team can improve. Its what they do with it that counts, experience doesnt mean they will get better, though you would hope so.

agreed.. it is particularly true for us when we have a history of blokes like Miller and Jamar playing hundreds of games for nought impact

yeah but none got a gig elsewhere

Except Warnock to GC.

Experience is over rated. Ability makes up for a lack of experience. Our ability to control a game and keep control of the ball is the problem.

Experience counts to nothing if they keep turning the ball over. I started a thread a few months back, outling the MFC side of 1987 had less experience than the current list of players. When both sides are compared, that 1987 team had a lot more talented players. Made easlier when playing with confidence.

Experience helps no doubt, but if there are 10 players that have 150+ games under their belts, and arent as talented as 10 players that played less than 100 games. I think I know where I would have my money. Experience and stats go hand in hand, stats don't tell the full story of a game, its a guide to where the team can improve. Its what they do with it that counts, experience doesnt mean they will get better, though you would hope so.

That's a different thought process and I enjoyed the read here DeeVoted as it makes you wonder what a team could do with skill and confidence.

Even though it's possible it's still very rare for a team to have a '1987' year I think in comparison to a good experienced team who should be continually around the top half.

Clearly our issue, and that of GWS is controlling the ball which I think also comes with experience noting how much the game has changed over this time with presses and zoning off. As our players develop getting fitter and stronger I think we will see less turn overs.

I still think our biggest issue has been continually letting experienced players go. I have a 2005 Melbourne team picture on my wall which other than Dunn and Jamar I don't think anyone else still plays and I'd argue these two didn't deserve a run last year.

Our drafting throughout the 00's was, yes, dust but if we kept all our half decent players with a decent coach we would have still been a decent team.

Imagine how different things could have been if our midfield could have had players like McLean, Moloney, Thompson, Jones running through the centre and now chucking in Viney. Sylvia could go back to being a true HFF then.

Yes there is some ordinary personalities there but a good coach will still get the best out of his team all the time whether they like each other or not.

It wouldn't be a world beating team but I'd rather watch them crash and bash running painfully slow dishing it out to some finishers then watch the crap we have had to put up with over the last 7 years.

There seems to a misconception amongst a few that the Club let Scott Thompson go. Or didn't try to keep him.

MFC certainly tried to keep him, but he was adamant that he was going home. As if he wasn't going to be a star!! But had he stayed at MFC he wouldn't have had the same development opportunities.

Sad but true. We have to make signing Frawley a priority, as soon as possible.

Edit: Actually wasn't Jamar a FA last season? We re-signed him.

Yes another [censored] up.3 more years but on the bright side only 2 to go !

While it's true that 'only' an average of one senior player was traded or delisted too early per year... oh, wait... hmm... actually that's a lot.

Anyway, here's the thing - even if the number of mature players lost 'unnaturally' had been fairly small we still experienced a massive collapse of experience from 2007 until the present.

Every year since 2007 we have lost more than a season's worth of experience (484 games) through delistings and retirements, in some of those years in was more than double that benchmark.

I think the addition of Clark may have balanced us to slightly under that line at the end of the 2011 season, and obviously the sleighload of mature recruits at the end of 2012 pushed our experience up for the first time in a long time. Of course, most of those evaporated quickly, and with the loss of Davey, Macdonald and Sylvia as well, once again in 2013 we have lost well over a season's experience.

The Demons somehow are still getting younger every year. At the rate we're going, we'll be younger and less experienced than the Giants by this time next year!

And yes, it's a problem.

Sound argument on the loss/lack of experience however puzzling that Carlton and Essendon seem to by the only two Clubs having a serious discussion with Chapman who would of been perfect injection of experience for a few years whilst Viney, Trengove, Toumpas get more games under their belt.

Shouldn't Darren Jolly should get a guernsey somewhere in this discussion?

Shouldn't Darren Jolly should get a guernsey somewhere in this discussion?

no because he left 9 years ago.. how far do you want to go back

Shouldn't Darren Jolly should get a guernsey somewhere in this discussion?

Also Jolly had only played 50 games before he had asked for a trade.