Draft Picks 1 - 20

[Guest Demon Abroad]

I disagree with 2009. Drafting Scully was a master stroke! With him defecting to GWS and the ridiculous compensation that the AFL had in place enabled us to get rid of a player who has been a complete bust and get Hogan and Barry, a big win.

Trengove will be quite ok.

I can only agree with you on Gysberts. Having said that, there must have been something there. Not many players get two Rising Star nominations and then do not kick on. Also, we essentially swapped him for Pederson which I would have previously said was a wash but now I think we came out way in front.

Yeah I agree in the longer term we will come out in front as a result of selecting Scully, him leaving and the subsequent Hogan/Barry deal, notwithstanding this it was a bad selection at Pick 1 which we have got no return from for the last 3 years which has us where we are.

When you throw in Tapscott who I omitted at Pick 18 it is a horror draft, 4 picks inside 18, including 1 & 2 and none of them are in the top 10 players from that draft in my opinion.

And yeah, we may have got something from the Gysberts deal later on but hardly value for a Pick 11.

[Guest Demon Abroad]

And statements like this show absolutely zero understanding in relation to drafting - you can only pick the best at the time.

Again Cook, Strauss and Gysberts were NOT the best available at that time and the recruiters should definitely be held to account for those picks. Watts vs Niknat is a comparison that will be made until the end of days as they were clearly the pick of the bunch - if anything Niknat was slightly favoured however we went the home grown boy.

But for anyone to suggest that Scully and Trengove should not have been taken at the time, as you so eloquently put it, are in complete denial of reality.

Surely the main question when recruiting is who will be the better player for the club over 10 years, not who has had the better junior career or tested the best at the Draft Combine.

I would have thought the secret to being a good recruiter is predicting what the player could become not simply taking who the best is at age 18.

[Demon trucker 1,800]

Surely the main question when recruiting is who will be the better player for the club over 10 years, not who has had the better junior career or tested the best at the Draft Combine.

I would have thought the secret to being a good recruiter is predicting what the player could become not simply taking who the best is at age 18.

That's not a recruiter that's a psychic you can't know how anyone Will be like in ten years time, take morton for example, after his frist two season's,there whould not be one person on demonland who would have said he whould only play anorther 30; od4d games

.

[Guest Demon Abroad]

That's not a recruiter that's a psychic you can't know how anyone Will be like in ten years time, take morton for example, after his frist two season's,there whould not be one person on demonland who would have said he whould only play anorther 30; od4d games

.

Nonsense, It is absolutely what recruiters are paid to do, yes it is a hit and miss game but are you claiming that all they should do is rank the draftees on their exposed junior form and pick the best?

It is all about what they can bring to the club over the next 10 plus years, their junior form doesn't count for much when they walk in the door day one.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

That's not a recruiter that's a psychic you can't know how anyone Will be like in ten years time, take morton for example, after his frist two season's,there whould not be one person on demonland who would have said he whould only play anorther 30; od4d games

.

Some people could see it early on with Morton.

[P-man 13,367]

When you look at it on paper, it's unbelievable. We have not developed one truly good player out of the first round since the 06 draft.

It has to be more development related. You can't get that many wrong. You just can't.

[Dr. Gonzo 24,468]

When you look at it on paper, it's unbelievable. We have not developed one truly good player out of the first round since the 06 draft.

It has to be more development related. You can't get that many wrong. You just can't.

It's both we picked some of the wrong kids but we also had a dearth of leadership and a rotten off-field culture which created a toxic environment for these kids to develop in.

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

When you look at it on paper, it's unbelievable. We have not developed one truly good player out of the first round since the 06 draft.

It has to be more development related. You can't get that many wrong. You just can't.

For me, development comes from having good senior players and leaders around the recruits (which they haven't had). But even if they did then they still wouldn't be much better than they currently are. A lot of the players Melbourne have drafted have serious flaws and as I and the OP mentioned even other clubs haven't been able to make them into better players.

[nutbean 8,838]

Surely the main question when recruiting is who will be the better player for the club over 10 years, not who has had the better junior career or tested the best at the Draft Combine.

I would have thought the secret to being a good recruiter is predicting what the player could become not simply taking who the best is at age 18.

Hmmm... well at least you are acknowledging that much of recruiting is fortune telling - trying to predict who will be a 10 year player

Could you also advise recruiters the "secret" of how to figure out who will be the best player in future without taking into account who is playing the good football at junior level ???? Of course you will hear expert talk about players upside. That is also fortune telling.

The thrust of your argument is basically - "guess"

[nutbean 8,838]

Some people could see it early on with Morton.

Show me after season one who thought that ?????

His first season was good.

Revisionism

( happy for you to prove me wrong by backing up your statement)

[Dr. Gonzo 24,468]

Hmmm... well at least you are acknowledging that much of recruiting is fortune telling - trying to predict who will be a 10 year player

Could you also advise recruiters the "secret" of how to figure out who will be the best player in future without taking into account who is playing the good football at junior level ???? Of course you will hear expert talk about players upside. That is also fortune telling.

The thrust of your argument is basically - "guess"

You have to look at their personal traits/work ethic/mentality etc not just their ability to rack up disposals in u18's. I think the psychological part of it is just as important as the physical.

[nutbean 8,838]

Nonsense, It is absolutely what recruiters are paid to do, yes it is a hit and miss game but are you claiming that all they should do is rank the draftees on their exposed junior form and pick the best?

It is all about what they can bring to the club over the next 10 plus years, their junior form doesn't count for much when they walk in the door day one.

Just wow.

Of course recruiters will look at how far certain players have developed in terms of TAC/ASC and other junior leagues and make some assessments on their future development ( skinny beanpole ruckman for example)

But to dismiss their junior form ? Pray tell - am I missing something - what else can you actually judge them on ?????

[nutbean 8,838]

You have to look at their personal traits/work ethic/mentality etc not just their ability to rack up disposals in u18's. I think the psychological part of it is just as important as the physical.

Of course that is part of it - yet people are bemoaning us not picking Dustin Martin ???

And we can throw the poop at Scully ( deservedly so) but as a junior his work ethic was legendary, his will to succeed immense and gulp - was considered an excellent leader at the Stingrays.

Unless they have a VERY suspect character ( Dale Gartlett) I believe the vast majority of footballers will fall into the category of being psychologically sound to play AFL ( and have the necessary attributes to succeed)

Equally important ? nope. The Hawks who are most successful club had taken a risk with both Franklin and Gartlett .

Edit - for the record - the way juniors are ranked by recruiters and experts are not only by "possessions" - it is by a raft of considerations. If not - please explain why Darling slipped so badly - ( WCE played it up but there were definite knocks on his work ethic) - Daniel Rich slipped because he was considered to have limited upside.

[nutbean 8,838]

Nonsense, It is absolutely what recruiters are paid to do, yes it is a hit and miss game but are you claiming that all they should do is rank the draftees on their exposed junior form and pick the best?

It is all about what they can bring to the club over the next 10 plus years, their junior form doesn't count for much when they walk in the door day one.

So what are your thoughts on Petracca - if he is available at number two just pass on him ? His junior form has been outstanding ?

[old dee 24,084]

So what are your thoughts on Petracca - if he is available at number two just pass on him ? His junior form has been outstanding ?

That guarantees he would be a shocker with us nutbean.

I reckon we go for someone who is coming off hip, back or knee surgery.

[Beats 190]

Edit - for the record - the way juniors are ranked by recruiters and experts are not only by "possessions" - it is by a raft of considerations. If not - please explain why Darling slipped so badly - ( WCE played it up but there were definite knocks on his work ethic) - Daniel Rich slipped because he was considered to have limited upside.

I'd say it was the off field indiscretions rather than his work ethic. There were a few incidents leading up to the draft, was suspended from school, had a run in with the law(?) and probably a few other things that didn't make the papers...

[jackaub 1,402]

That guarantees he would be a shocker with us nutbean.

I reckon we go for someone who is coming off hip, back or knee surgery.

Yes and has no preseason !

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

Show me after season one who thought that ?????

His first season was good.

Revisionism

( happy for you to prove me wrong by backing up your statement)

T.G.R. over at Demonology went early on Morton. Maybe not after one year but close.

[Guest Demon Abroad]

Hmmm... well at least you are acknowledging that much of recruiting is fortune telling - trying to predict who will be a 10 year player

Could you also advise recruiters the "secret" of how to figure out who will be the best player in future without taking into account who is playing the good football at junior level ???? Of course you will hear expert talk about players upside. That is also fortune telling.

The thrust of your argument is basically - "guess"

Just wow.

Of course recruiters will look at how far certain players have developed in terms of TAC/ASC and other junior leagues and make some assessments on their future development ( skinny beanpole ruckman for example)

But to dismiss their junior form ? Pray tell - am I missing something - what else can you actually judge them on ?????

You are just making things up nutbean....When did I ever suggest that junior form is not taken into account or is dismissed....that's right NEVER

All I said is that there is more to be looked at than that, being a gun junior does not guarantee a successful AFL career, nor does being an average one make it impossible.

Clearly the amount of work clubs do with psych testing, meeting families, even teachers confirms this. We just have to get better at it.

Now stop making things up.

[olisik 4,060]

http://m.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/paul-roos-to-cull-top-picks-in-bid-to-regenerate-melbournes-list/story-fni5f91a-1227037950219?from=herald+sun_rss

[DeeSpencer 26,694]

I'd say it was the off field indiscretions rather than his work ethic. There were a few incidents leading up to the draft, was suspended from school, had a run in with the law(?) and probably a few other things that didn't make the papers...

Got his head punched in and quite a serious injury with it so that didn't help. But I think one of the main things was he's only what 192cm ish? A very good player. But take Josh Kennedy and the decent ruck/fwds he plays with out and see what becomes of him. He's undeniably not as valuable as a legit tall forward. Of course that doesn't mean he wasn't still a much better pick than Cook.

[nutbean 8,838]

You are just making things up nutbean....When did I ever suggest that junior form is not taken into account or is dismissed....that's right NEVER

All I said is that there is more to be looked at than that, being a gun junior does not guarantee a successful AFL career, nor does being an average one make it impossible.

Clearly the amount of work clubs do with psych testing, meeting families, even teachers confirms this. We just have to get better at it.

Now stop making things up.

"Surely the main question when recruiting is who will be the better player for the club over 10 years, not who has had the better junior career or tested the best at the Draft Combine.

I would have thought the secret to being a good recruiter is predicting what the player could become not simply taking who the best is at age 18."

Your words - I'll stop making things up when you come up with a way to figure out how you can ascertain who will be the best player over ten years without leaning very heavily on their junior form ?????

Look at your second line - by your own words - take who will be best not who is currently the best.

I am all ears - exactly how do you do that ??????

There is a reason that recruiters lean almost exclusively on form shown through junior careers - it might because that is the only indicator they have ?

There is a reason that year in year out the top 10 order is pre-ordained and comes out as anticipated. It is because of their body of work in the junior competitions.

[nutbean 8,838]

All I said is that there is more to be looked at than that, being a gun junior does not guarantee a successful AFL career, nor does being an average one make it impossible.

We are in violent agreement on this.

Posters look for black and white in recruiting when all there is is various shades of grey.

Other factors are looked at by recruiters but will either depreciate or inflate their under 18 form

.

You suggest we should get better at it . Couldn't agree more except you haven't outlined how to get better at it.

I keep harking back to Scully. Besides a knock on his kicking he ticked every single box. Outstanding junior career, leadership skills, determination to succeed at all costs. How can you test how a footballer will react when offered a $1m per year ???

I actually think it was all about money for him but there is plenty of word around ( on this site for one) that he left because of the professionalism of the club ( China end of year trip especially).

I have mentioned elsewhere that culture, stability and leadership within a club plays an enormous role in the development of the junior players - this has been sadly missing and i am hoping this a the one great legacy that Roos this club - the building of those three pillars.

[nutbean 8,838]

T.G.R. over at Demonology went early on Morton. Maybe not after one year but close.

As an early member of demonology -I recall TGR and Morton ( I also recall TGR on Wallace and Simmonds - you get some right - you get some wrong).

I would suggest closer to year 3.

Mortons first year was impressive - second year blues. Rumblings at the end of year 3.

Still waiting for some people saw it early....

[nutbean 8,838]

Quoted from pitmaster at the pie night last night

In summary Roos does not value draft picks the way some of us do: 'at Sydney we traded many draft picks because it's a lottery, the draft".

And posters want us to get better at it. How do you get better at a lottery ?