Draft Needs Analysis

[Whispering_Jack 30,674]

Chris Doerre (aka Knightmare) has done an interesting draft needs analysis for ESPN - 

AFL Draft: Your club's list needs

Here's his analysis for the MFC -

List needs

1. Classy inside midfielder

2. General forward

3. Relieving ruck

Draft picks: 23, 28, 54, 62, 91

Who should they draft? As a medium marking forward, Sam Sturt would be a strong addition to Melbourne's front half at 23. Bailey Williams at 28 would be ideal as a relieving ruckman who has uncontainable athleticism as a marking forward. If one of the Demons' preferred choices in the 20s is unavailable, midfielder Sydney Stack would add further class to the club's engine room. Through their NGA, Toby Bedford will provide speed and pressure through the midfield and up forward.

[WERRIDEE 5,518]

We don't need any of those really. speed on the outside and small forwards is what we need.

[Moonshadow 17,677]

1. Classy outside midfielder

2. Classy outside midfielder

3. Project ruck

[Dr.D 1,771]

i agree, i think we need another forward and another good midfielder..but the moment you get caught uo going for needs then its a big risk. 

I don't want to pick up a farren ray or a kane tenace  for outside speed just because we already have some good inside mids.

[DV8 2,271]

1 hour ago, Whispering_Jack said:

Chris Doerre (aka Knightmare) has done an interesting draft needs analysis for ESPN - 

AFL Draft: Your club's list needs

Here's his analysis for the MFC -

List needs

1. Classy inside midfielder

2. General forward

3. Relieving ruck

Draft picks: 23, 28, 54, 62, 91

Who should they draft? As a medium marking forward, Sam Sturt would be a strong addition to Melbourne's front half at 23. Bailey Williams at 28 would be ideal as a relieving ruckman who has uncontainable athleticism as a marking forward. If one of the Demons' preferred choices in the 20s is unavailable, midfielder Sydney Stack would add further class to the club's engine room. Through their NGA, Toby Bedford will provide speed and pressure through the midfield and up forward.

I agree with "knightmare". 

- Our needs are a classy inside mid with speed... to replace Tyson, with the aspects he lacked.   Another Salem or better?

- next would be similar, another running mid with balance and speed.  no one-dimension mids please... they should all be able to play thru the inside and the wing.

- a tall forward/ruck, project player.

[DV8 2,271]

40 minutes ago, WERRIDEE said:

We don't need any of those really. speed on the outside and small forwards is what we need.

We already have that type, Garlett... that's enough.

 

[Rogue 585]

1 minute ago, DV8 said:

We already have that type, Garlett... that's enough.

 

I reckon we've just about written him off, and who's the next cab off the rank?

Similar problem with lack of depth up the other end, I think - who replaces Jetta?

Edited November 3, 2018 by Rogue

[rjay 25,093]

We've been here before....

You don't draft for needs.

It's a recipe for disaster.

Best available every day of the week.

You can think of picking for needs but then make sure you extinguish that thought and pick best available.

...and that best available must be a competitive ball winner, tall, mid or small.

If they're not then they're not best available.

 

[DV8 2,271]

4 minutes ago, rjay said:

We've been here before....

You don't draft for needs.

It's a recipe for disaster.

Best available every day of the week.

You can think of picking for needs but then make sure you extinguish that thought and pick best available.

...and that best available must be a competitive ball winner, tall, mid or small.

If they're not then they're not best available.

 

No... you've been there before.  We have needs, but you do not take a player on needs alone. if they are inferior to what is about them in the draft. 

You don't ignore real talent, at anytime.

[Willmoy1947 4,140]

Maynard's got a brother who got injured.....

[mauriesy 7,357]

40 minutes ago, rjay said:

We've been here before....

You don't draft for needs.

It's a recipe for disaster.

I don't know. You could say we filled urgent needs with many recent recruits (e.g. Oliver, Brayshaw, Petracca, VDB, Viney as hard-bodied midfielders, Weideman as a KPF, Spargo as a small pressure forward, Fritsch as a HBF/wing). How good they were was a bonus.

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 10,882]

45 minutes ago, rjay said:

We've been here before....

You don't draft for needs.

It's a recipe for disaster.

Best available every day of the week.

You can think of picking for needs but then make sure you extinguish that thought and pick best available.

...and that best available must be a competitive ball winner, tall, mid or small.

If they're not then they're not best available.

 

With the club's first few picks, yes, I think you would pick 95% based purely on best available.  By the time you are getting into later picks, the perceived difference in talent, cultural fit etc probably plateaus out and that's when you'd try to pick based on needs.  Of course if you the best available at an early pick also aligns with needs, then that's the ideal scenario.

I wouldn't be against us drafting more quality inside mids, somewhat for the purpose of evening out our age profile a bit for future years.  No doubt Jones will play that role less and less and if we have another young guy that can work himself into an inside mid role over the next 2 or 3 years, then who knows, maybe we can free up Oliver or Brayshaw to spend more time forward (particularly against lesser sides) and prolong their career a bit.

Bradtke is probably ok as a project ruck at the moment, but I recon if there was someone we rated, we could probably use another on either the main or Rookie list.

[spirit of norm smith 16,589]

Best available at 23 and 28 and then balanced for needs at 54,62,91,rookie. 

[WERRIDEE 5,518]

1 hour ago, DV8 said:

We already have that type, Garlett... that's enough.

 

Garlett is no where near enough. We need 2 small forwards Bedford and Rubock. 2 half backs Duursma and Ayton-Delaney. A half forward in Sturt. 2 wingers maybe Partington and C.Wagner and a back pocket maybe Lockhart.

[DV8 2,271]

45 minutes ago, WERRIDEE said:

Garlett is no where near enough. We need 2 small forwards Bedford and Rubock. 2 half backs Duursma and Ayton-Delaney. A half forward in Sturt. 2 wingers maybe Partington and C.Wagner and a back pocket maybe Lockhart.

Garlett is too-much, IMO.

I think we are after the same sort of player, apart from you seemingly wanting a specialist outside quick... and I want a Richmond style small, or winger,  with our own polish on the player.  

Meaning one who will willingly 'go', when called for.   One with attitude. Like Spargo has.

Agree re the half back.  We need to start to think about finding someone, to replace Hibberd in a few years time. So we need to draft now or 2019, for that.  Allowing 3 Yrs of development +/-...

 

[rjay 25,093]

1 hour ago, mauriesy said:

I don't know. You could say we filled urgent needs with many recent recruits (e.g. Oliver, Brayshaw, Petracca, VDB, Viney as hard-bodied midfielders, Weideman as a KPF, Spargo as a small pressure forward, Fritsch as a HBF/wing). How good they were was a bonus.

All those picks were best available.

The classic recent needs picks were the Saints with McCartin over Trac

...and us taking Toumpas.

1 hour ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

By the time you are getting into later picks

When you get to the later picks it's pure hope...hope we can land one. 

You trade in needs.

2 hours ago, DV8 said:

No... you've been there before.  We have needs, but you do not take a player on needs alone. if they are inferior to what is about them in the draft. 

You don't ignore real talent, at anytime.

Have a look at our recruiting under Prenders and you will see that WE Have been there before.

Only a fool drafts needs.

[Redleg 41,477]

3 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

1. Classy outside midfielder

2. Classy outside midfielder

3. Project ruck

We have a project ruck in Bradtke. We need another experienced ruck in case Max and  Preuss go down.

[Moonshadow 17,677]

2 hours ago, mauriesy said:

I don't know. You could say we filled urgent needs with many recent recruits (e.g. Oliver, Brayshaw, Petracca, VDB, Viney as hard-bodied midfielders, Weideman as a KPF, Spargo as a small pressure forward, Fritsch as a HBF/wing). How good they were was a bonus.

I disagree with every example you mention and especially with the bolded part. That is flat out wrong.

I've heard many club recruiters interviewed in the last year who state almost to a man that it's "best available" every time. A club drafting for need is doomed to fail at selection.

For example, we knew exactly how much potential and talent Viney had, regardless of our list, and he was a steal at the pick we got him.

[WERRIDEE 5,518]

1 hour ago, Redleg said:

We have a project ruck in Bradtke. We need another experienced ruck in case Max and  Preuss go down.

No we don't we have Weideman and McDonald. Don't need another project ruckman like King and Filipovic, Bradtke is enough.

Edited November 3, 2018 by WERRIDEE

[DV8 2,271]

2 hours ago, rjay said:

All those picks were best available.

The classic recent needs picks were the Saints with McCartin over Trac

...and us taking Toumpas.

When you get to the later picks it's pure hope...hope we can land one. 

You trade in needs.

Have a look at our recruiting under Prenders and you will see that WE Have been there before.

Only a fool drafts needs.

The recruit is only half the equation FJ... probably closer to 40% of the equation to making players.   The other is club culture and development coaches/footy dept' spend..

 Our past issues weren't about the recruiting methods, or the type recruits... but mostly about the club itself at the time.  Our weak soft culture, and being way to matey and cliquey, & leaders who were somewhere between Amateur & Pro's, on the mental side of the game.

We were a sort of part time club, where most thought they were better, than they really were.  Talented yes, but woefully unprofessional, compared to the big clubs of the day.

 

Well, cal me a fool then rj, if thats the way you think... because we have now entered the time for needs.  Hence we spent on May, and Jazza, 'nee' Kade.

And Preust. So I guess these selection decisions were based on best alone, then ?  and not on needs.

Edited November 3, 2018 by DV8

[Ethan Tremblay 30,970]

27 minutes ago, DV8 said:

Well, cal me a fool then rj, if thats the way you think... because we have now entered the time for needs.  Hence we spent on May, and Jazza, 'nee' Kade.

And Preust. So I guess these selection decisions were based on best alone, then ?  and not on needs.

You’ve missed the point. You’re referring to players we’ve traded for. This discussion is about the draft.

Edited November 3, 2018 by Ethan Tremblay

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 10,882]

53 minutes ago, Ethan Tremblay said:

You’ve missed the point. You’re referring to players we’ve traded for. This discussion is about the draft.

Agreed Roos and most good recruiters mantra is more or less pick best available at the draft and trade to fill in the gaps based on needs.

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 10,882]

3 hours ago, rjay said:

All those picks were best available.

The classic recent needs picks were the Saints with McCartin over Trac

...and us taking Toumpas.

When you get to the later picks it's pure hope...hope we can land one. 

You trade in needs.

Have a look at our recruiting under Prenders and you will see that WE Have been there before.

Only a fool drafts needs.

I think it's a bit more than hope.  We have picked up some pretty good players with late picks and I think they would have been pretty purposefully selected.  Their is a certain amount of hit and miss at all stages of the draft.

[The Great Pretender 476]

The article isn’t advocating that you necessarily have to draft for needs but rather, it sets out what each club needs.

At any given time when making a decision on who to pick, the recruiters are usually presented with more than one choice of roughly equal quality and, at that point, your needs are a factor in the decision-making.

In many cases it’s a subjective view of which one is the best player available anyway. That’s why those phantom drafts are never all exactly the same.

[Redleg 41,477]

8 hours ago, WERRIDEE said:

No we don't we have Weideman and McDonald. Don't need another project ruckman like King and Filipovic, Bradtke is enough.

Read what I said. I said we need another EXPERIENCED ruck, as we have a project ruck in Bradtke and without Hogan, they shouldn’t risk injuries to Tom and Sam in the ruck, ad we are short of key forwards.

Someone like Tom Campbell as a rookie for a couple of years, is needed until Bradtke can develop. We have lost Pedo and if Max and Preuss go down we are in trouble.