On 28/10/2014 at 03:15, Machsy said:

That's a misperception.

I'd also be a bit more selective with who I refer to as an "expert."

Sorry for having an opinion though.

I'm not saying you're not allowed to have an opinion, I already said a couple of posts above that I can understand it to a degree.

But if you can find me an expert who doesn't have McCartin in the top 3 I'll be very surprised...

Emma Quayle, Cal Twomey, Paige Cardona, Knightmare - these people get the phantom draft top 10's near enough to spot on year after year and they all have McCartin at 2 or 3, and they all say that he is an absolutely outstanding prospect.

  On 28/10/2014 at 03:28, Members said:

I'm not saying you're not allowed to have an opinion, I already said a couple of posts above that I can understand it to a degree.

But if you can find me an expert who doesn't have McCartin in the top 3 I'll be very surprised...

Emma Quayle, Cal Twomey, Paige Cardona, Knightmare - these people get the phantom draft top 10's near enough to spot on year after year and they all have McCartin at 2 or 3, and they all say that he is an absolutely outstanding prospect.

No in actual fact they only get the top 10 right when they do their final version of the draft because that's when clubs have taken into account a whole range of factors and their specific needs.

If you look at the 2012 draft for example, Brodie Grundy was rated No.2 almost all year by them.

  On 28/10/2014 at 02:36, Members said:

So what are you saying, that because recruiters inevitably don't get every pick spot on that we should steer clear of those rated in the top 3 for the sake of it?

Of course it's an inexact science but those picked higher in the draft are done so because they have the highest chance of becoming the best footballers from all available evidence.

I don't think we should stay clear but pick players on conviction rather than group think.

As a group you are 100% correct the higher draft picks have more chance of success than the lower draft picks but the top 10 can almost be like trying to pick the correct order in the Melbourne cup.

I will state categorically we made a mistake picking Toumpas over Wines however all research at the time, all experts at the time, rated Toumpas higher. Everyone had Toumpas being selected before Wines. The unanswerable questions remains - did our recruiters , like everyone else rate Toumpas higher than Wines or did we go along with group think.

Fact - history shows us that the order of selection does not equal the order of success. Most drafts follows conventional thinking of who is picked where - ( there are exceptions - Rich slipped, Grundy slipped) - therefore there is every chance that if we follow what what is assumed to be the conventional order we may be sadly disappointed.

  On 28/10/2014 at 03:25, Machsy said:

He's good. A solid prospect as a KPF.

Maybe I'd be happy with him as a pick 15-20.

But a KPF is a luxury, not a necessity, and I think there are better prospects available.

He's not as fast as I'd like, doesn't have an exceptional tank or workrate, is a horribly average kick, and I think lacks a bit of agility.

He's a brute and will take a lot of contested marks. I don't know if he'll cover enough ground to be as good as we'd like.

I don't see much difference between him and Levi Casboult.

Could have been a champion if born 25 years earlier.

I think that's why him and Hogan would complement each other really well though. Hogan as the mobile CHF and McCartin at FF.

Apparently his speed off the mark is excellent though and he's also meant to be terrific below his knees.

To say his kicking is horribly average is completely ridiculous and shows you're not viewing him objectively at all.

  On 28/10/2014 at 03:31, Deespicable said:

No in actual fact they only get the top 10 right when they do their final version of the draft because that's when clubs have taken into account a whole range of factors and their specific needs.

If you look at the 2012 draft for example, Brodie Grundy was rated No.2 almost all year by them.

Yep correct. That's what this time of year is, final version time.

  On 28/10/2014 at 03:33, nutbean said:

I don't think we should stay clear but pick players on conviction rather than group think.

As a group you are 100% correct the higher draft picks have more chance of success than the lower draft picks but the top 10 can almost be like trying to pick the correct order in the Melbourne cup.

I will state categorically we made a mistake picking Toumpas over Wines however all research at the time, all experts at the time, rated Toumpas higher. Everyone had Toumpas being selected before Wines. The unanswerable questions remains - did our recruiters , like everyone else rate Toumpas higher than Wines or did we go along with group think.

Fact - history shows us that the order of selection does not equal the order of success. Most drafts follows conventional thinking of who is picked where - ( there are exceptions - Rich slipped, Grundy slipped) - therefore there is every chance that if we follow what what is assumed to be the conventional order we may be sadly disappointed.

Agree with all that NB - surely you don't think any recruiters worth their salt would make their picks based on group think though?

It's been documented how heavily Todd Viney was into Toumpas having known him well from SA days.

McCartin is one of the best marks in a pack as well as below his knees. His pace and ability to change direction and lead out to smart areas are the main positives of his game. If our mids learn to kick low, hard and sharp to a confident McCartin, there is no way, no matter who you are as a defender. There is NO way you can spoil a mark like that if it's coming to you very low, below the knees lace out on the lead.

This would be a massive bonus for us going forward with a player like that in our inside fifty.

  On 28/10/2014 at 03:28, Members said:

But if you can find me an expert who doesn't have McCartin in the top 3 I'll be very surprised...

Show me an expert who didn't rate Toumpas top 4 and I'll be surprised. This draft like every other draft will have a selection inside the top 5 who will disappoint. We got 2 picks inside the top 5 - we want the disappointed to be some other club.

  On 28/10/2014 at 03:43, Members said:

Agree with all that NB - surely you don't think any recruiters worth their salt would make their picks based on group think though?

It's been documented how heavily Todd Viney was into Toumpas having known him well from SA days.

I hope that recruiters use their own IP to determine who they pick - I really hope so

Can you post where Viney was into Toumpas because there is a myth (?) floating around on here that Viney wanted Wines but was overruled by Neeld (and Jack Watts).

Following your line of thinking, you too would have taken Toumpas before Wines ?

  On 28/10/2014 at 03:45, nutbean said:

Show me an expert who didn't rate Toumpas top 4 and I'll be surprised. This draft like every other draft will have a selection inside the top 5 who will disappoint. We got 2 picks inside the top 5 - we want the disappointed to be some other club.

Of course mate that's inevitable!

There's a lot of follow-the-leader involved in talent projection.

Emma Quayle & Twomey are both very good at knowing who will be taken where, but I put that down to maintaining good relations with recruiters to get an inside word. Neither have shown any ability to accurately predict who will/won't be able to succeed at the next level.

Paige is a supercoach guru, little more at this stage as far as I'm concerned.

Knightmare has had his share of misses, and whilst it's admirable he forms his own opinions, I've seen nothing to suggest he's a great indentifier of future AFL talent.

Not that I'm any better, but I think it's folly to put such trust in these sources.

  On 28/10/2014 at 03:33, nutbean said:

I don't think we should stay clear but pick players on conviction rather than group think.

As a group you are 100% correct the higher draft picks have more chance of success than the lower draft picks but the top 10 can almost be like trying to pick the correct order in the Melbourne cup.

I will state categorically we made a mistake picking Toumpas over Wines however all research at the time, all experts at the time, rated Toumpas higher. Everyone had Toumpas being selected before Wines. The unanswerable questions remains - did our recruiters , like everyone else rate Toumpas higher than Wines or did we go along with group think.

Fact - history shows us that the order of selection does not equal the order of success. Most drafts follows conventional thinking of who is picked where - ( there are exceptions - Rich slipped, Grundy slipped) - therefore there is every chance that if we follow what what is assumed to be the conventional order we may be sadly disappointed.

Damned if you do and damned if you don't - we can also go against conventional wisdom and be sadly disappointed.

The truth is we're stuck with a flawed system and whilst we've got this flawed system, not much will change.

By the way, the "experts" aren't really experts. They are just slightly better qualified speculators. The more knowledge one can have about all the potential draftees, the more confusing the whole thing can become.

Most people like to have a dash at the next big thing or make an overly negative prediction. Me, I can't be bothered trying to make sense of a largely nonsensical system.

We'll pick who we pick and hopefully they'll all turn into good players (we might even fluke a star or 2) If not, there will be no recriminations from my part.

We can point the finger at the club for a number of unforced errors in the past but when it comes to "top end" draft picks, I blame the system when those top end draft picks don't turn up trumps.

The Americans have numerous "busts" with all the drafts across their 4 major sports and often, the draftees are 21-23 years old. We evaluate a lot of our potential draftees when they're only 17 years old - it's any wonder the strike rate is as low as it is.

Spot on Macca.

I also put a lot onto the club for their failure to have any form of development but they seem to be recognising this with the appointment of McCartney.

One day I will be bothered to do an analysis.

My hypothesis would be that strong bodies midfielders, with work ethic, good skills and of good character rate a much higher chance of success. But then all of those qualites are objective and can be difficult to measure.

  On 28/10/2014 at 03:40, Members said:

I think that's why him and Hogan would complement each other really well though. Hogan as the mobile CHF and McCartin at FF.

Apparently his speed off the mark is excellent though and he's also meant to be terrific below his knees.

To say his kicking is horribly average is completely ridiculous and shows you're not viewing him objectively at all.

Stay at home FFs don't survive in the game today.

You need to have the agility and to cover ground to be a success.

He might be "meant to be" a lot of things, but I've not witnessed any of it.

He's aggressive and a good contested mark, but the rest needs too much work for me to justify taking him ahead of others.

And his kidding is bloody ordinary.

I'd want him to have a laser-like boot for the hype that is being bandied around.

That has nothing to do with my objectivity... but keep making those assertions.

  On 28/10/2014 at 04:18, Machsy said:

Stay at home FFs don't survive in the game today.

You need to have the agility and to cover ground to be a success.

He might be "meant to be" a lot of things, but I've not witnessed any of it.

He's aggressive and a good contested mark, but the rest needs too much work for me to justify taking him ahead of others.

And his kidding is bloody ordinary.

I'd want him to have a laser-like boot for the hype that is being bandied around.

That has nothing to do with my objectivity... but keep making those assertions.

just needs a better writer maybe !!

  On 28/10/2014 at 03:25, Machsy said:

He's good. A solid prospect as a KPF.

Maybe I'd be happy with him as a pick 15-20.

But a KPF is a luxury, not a necessity, and I think there are better prospects available.

He's not as fast as I'd like, doesn't have an exceptional tank or workrate, is a horribly average kick, and I think lacks a bit of agility.

He's a brute and will take a lot of contested marks. I don't know if he'll cover enough ground to be as good as we'd like.

I don't see much difference between him and Levi Casboult.

Could have been a champion if born 25 years earlier.

Thanks 'Machsy', interested in your thoughts.

  On 28/10/2014 at 04:18, Machsy said:

Stay at home FFs don't survive in the game today.

You need to have the agility and to cover ground to be a success.

Agree with this.

You need to either be absolutely exceptional as a stay at home full forward or you need to have other strings to your bow. I think there is a question mark over how exceptional he is.

Hogan, Boyd and Paton would all have been ahead of him at the same stage.

  On 28/10/2014 at 04:10, nutbean said:

Spot on Macca.

I also put a lot onto the club for their failure to have any form of development but they seem to be recognising this with the appointment of McCartney.

Brendan is the type of development coach that we've been needing for quite some time and I like how swiftly we acted in securing him. Pity he can't start right now but that might have had something to do with his previous contract (or the settlement of that contract) I'm sure leading up to February there will be a fair bit of "consulting" with him, all the same.

Development is key and most here would agree that it hasn't exactly been a strong point at the club.

Having read this, if Petracca goes with pick 1, it appears to me that there is no stand out/obvious pick 3 for us.

I would've liked to see us trade pick 3 for a decent young midfielder and say pick 6 or 7, and drafted Brayshaw with pick 2.

It seems likely that picks 6 or 7 would still have landed us the type of player we'de have been happy with pick 3 - and we could also have landed a decent younger midfielder with two years in the system. Say Hvorat.

  On 28/10/2014 at 04:18, Machsy said:

Stay at home FFs don't survive in the game today.

You need to have the agility and to cover ground to be a success.

He might be "meant to be" a lot of things, but I've not witnessed any of it.

He's aggressive and a good contested mark, but the rest needs too much work for me to justify taking him ahead of others.

And his kidding is bloody ordinary.

I'd want him to have a laser-like boot for the hype that is being bandied around.

That has nothing to do with my objectivity... but keep making those assertions.

Hawkins is probably the best KPF in the game and he doesn't go anywhere.

Riewoldt, Kennedy, Walker, Gunston, Schulz etc don't stray too far from the forward 50 either...

  On 28/10/2014 at 03:49, nutbean said:

I hope that recruiters use their own IP to determine who they pick - I really hope so

Can you post where Viney was into Toumpas because there is a myth (?) floating around on here that Viney wanted Wines but was overruled by Neeld (and Jack Watts).

Following your line of thinking, you too would have taken Toumpas before Wines ?

Had a look for it and can't find it.

Certainly remember at the time though both TV and JV talking about how rapt they were to get Toumpas, and a JV interview mid season where he said he thought Toumpas was the classiest player in the draft and the one he most wanted to play alongside at the Dees.

And yep, I wanted Toumpas over Wines. Still not completely jumping off the Toumpas bandwagon but Wines certainly shown a hell of a lot more to date.

  On 28/10/2014 at 04:35, Members said:

Hawkins is probably the best KPF in the game and he doesn't go anywhere.

Riewoldt, Kennedy, Walker, Gunston, Schulz etc don't stray too far from the forward 50 either...

I think this is the point, this bloke is not likely to be as good as Hawkins, at the same age Hawkins was absolutely dominating.

McCartin doesn't really bear any similarities to the others, and Riewoldt is completely different.

  On 28/10/2014 at 04:35, Members said:

Hawkins is probably the best KPF in the game and he doesn't go anywhere.

Riewoldt, Kennedy, Walker, Gunston, Schulz etc don't stray too far from the forward 50 either...

  On 28/10/2014 at 04:33, Ron Burgundy said:

Having read this, if Petracca goes with pick 1, it appears to me that there is no stand out/obvious pick 3 for us.

I would've liked to see us trade pick 3 for a decent young midfielder and say pick 6 or 7, and drafted Brayshaw with pick 2.

It seems likely that picks 6 or 7 would still have landed us the type of player we'de have been happy with pick 3 - and we could also have landed a decent younger midfielder with two years in the system. Say Hvorat.

Always was my preference...indeed...probably the clubs...just no bites ( that floated ..sts )

bugger

I'll probably come a cropper , if they go all mainstream on me, but still have a funny feeling the club has something 'different' in mind for 3

Even Mahoneys ramblings about 4 being in the picture dont necessarily go with the names he mentioned as I kept hearing/ "there abouts"...

maybe reading far too much into things....sometimes its the simplest answer