Jason Taylor

[mauriesy 6,787]

Lumumba for Clark wasn't an error. It was just a trade swap of players (not controlled by Taylor), both of whom did nothing at their respective new clubs. We didn't win or lose.

Any player from a rookie draft is speculative, and hardly a major fail when they don't make it given the price you pay for them.

[DeeSpencer 23,122]

9 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

Lumumba for Clark wasn't an error. It was just a trade swap of players (not controlled by Taylor), both of whom did nothing at their respective new clubs. We didn't win or lose.

Any player from a rookie draft is speculative, and hardly a major fail when they don't make it given the price you pay for them.

Certainly more a list management error than on Taylor but any senior player bought in who gives nothing is a mistake.

That said, we’ve mostly tried either expensive trade ins who have delivered to some extent or cheap bargain buys.

Lumumba cost little at the trade table but likely got a contract too large to write off as just a swing and miss unlike a Mitchie or Balic or similar. The same probably goes for KK.

[mauriesy 6,787]

It's easy analysing draft selections through the retrospectoscope a few years down the track.

I bet most people here thought Lumumba was a good pick-up when first recruited. 

[WERRIDEE 5,211]

18 hours ago, Farmer said:

Still think it was a mistake to get Jackson? If u do then every Demon supporter  would  disagree with you. I reckon he may we’ll win a Brownlow . And I reckon he, Kosi, and Rivers  will play 200 games. Anyone disagree?

No believe it or not I can be wrong sometimes.

[Watts the matter 1,235]

1 hour ago, mauriesy said:

Lumumba for Clark wasn't an error. It was just a trade swap of players (not controlled by Taylor), both of whom did nothing at their respective new clubs. We didn't win or lose.

Any player from a rookie draft is speculative, and hardly a major fail when they don't make it given the price you pay for them.

It was a three-way and Varcoe left Geelong. There was a clear winner in this three-way trade. Not related to Taylor.

[Watts the matter 1,235]

7 minutes ago, mauriesy said:

It's easy analysing draft selections through the retrospectoscope a few years down the track.

I bet most people here thought Lumumba was a good pick-up when first recruited. 

Don't know about that. Think there would have been a mixed reaction similar to Tomlinson.

[dazzledavey36 48,714]

17 hours ago, olisik said:

That’s because I got more to say after a loss. What’s your point?  You watch strangers habits on the internet. Nice.

 @dazzledavey36

Not surprised.

You've always been pretty gutless and miserable like that. Dees could win 4 flags in a row and you'd still ways to [censored] and complain.

 

[titan_uranus 22,293]

1 hour ago, mauriesy said:

This is just a nonsense.

Firstly, Taylor isn't respoonsible for trades. Secondly, just classifying picks on a "success-neutral-error" basis is totally subjective and far too black and white. As is the assumption that we would have picked the same player another team did with a traded pick. Remember that 19 other recruiters overlooked Fyfe at pick 20, for instance.

The only way to assess Taylor is

1. against his peers (i.e. how other recruiters at other clubs have performed with a similar range of picks) and
2. how his actual picks have gone against the average number of games for picks in the same range. For instance, getting a 90-game player like Salem for pick 9 in 2013 is hardly an individual "error". How many games on average would you expect to get out of a first-, second-, third- or fourth-round recruit?

To reduce the overall score for Taylor by saying:

1. Sparrow and Jordon are "neutral" when they are still second-year developing players taken later than pick 26,  and Nietschke is an "error" when he's out for the season.
2. Jackson, Pickett and Rivers are "neutral" when it's their first season.

is either jumping the gun, or a poor assessment of players who have played a handful of games.

I think they are all showing tremendous promise.

The criticism of drafting is nothing new on Demonland, it's just (thankfully) been less common the last few years.

Criticising draft picks is usually done with hindsight: e.g. we stuffed up taking Scully because he left after two years, or we stuffed up taking Pickett because Georgiadis kicked some goals the other week.

It's almost never done with foresight, or based on rational evidence available at the time of the decision. To the extent that posters subsequently criticise the pick, it's often because they had a subjective personal view of some other player they wanted us to pick, then see that player play well, and immediately say "I was right, we should have picked that other guy I wanted".

Provided that the players we take are, with a body of evidence behind them, reasonably capable of being taken with the pick we use, and they fill some sort of need on our list, most of Taylor's job is too difficult to assess. He only gets them in the door. Goodwin, Mahony, Gawn, our players and our culture take over from there, and if we don't mentor, develop, train, lead and support those players as best we can, how can we then blame Taylor for bringing them in?

[TRIGON 4,715]

On 8/1/2020 at 12:45 PM, Elegt said:

2015

Trades

Melksham for 25-success

Howe and Toumpas for Kennedy 29 + 50-error

Fitzpatrick for 94-success

Bugg and 7 for 10 + 43 +64- success

Draft

Oliver 4-success

Weideman 9- error

King 42-error

Hulett 46-error

Rookie

Wagner 6-error

Smith 41- neutral

Trades:

• Jake Melksham for pick 25 has been good; albeit his form this year isn't as strong as I'd like.
• Howe and Toumpas for Kennedy, 29 and 50 didn't work out for us. 
• Fitzpatrick for 94 was just a goodwill trade.
• Bugg, - as a footballer he made a good instagram model.  However Bugg and Pick 7 was a win because it allowed us to grab the 2 top talents that we'd targeted.

Draft:

• Clayton Oliver, and inspired choice.
• Sam Weideman is now coming of age.
• King and Hulett turned out to be poor choices

Rookies:

• Josh Wagner, still on the list.
• Viv Michie...was there a story behind this? Did he offer to go on the rookie list so that we could get another player and so we promised to retain him?.
• Joel Smith, still on the list. Athletic enough but an enigma, struggling to find what his best position is.

Five players who are still on our list, 3 of which are leading players. So, strong and brave work at the pointy end of the draft that year. Disappointing later on, especially as Tom Papley was right under our noses at Casey...the one that got away.

Edited August 11, 2020 by TRIGON

[Elegt 872]

4 hours ago, mauriesy said:

This is just a nonsense.

Firstly, Taylor isn't respoonsible for trades. Secondly, just classifying picks on a "success-neutral-error" basis is totally subjective and far too black and white. As is the assumption that we would have picked the same player another team did with a traded pick. Remember that 19 other recruiters overlooked Fyfe at pick 20, for instance.

The only way to assess Taylor is

1. against his peers (i.e. how other recruiters at other clubs have performed with a similar range of picks) and
2. how his actual picks have gone against the average number of games for picks in the same range. For instance, getting a 90-game player like Salem for pick 9 in 2013 is hardly an individual "error". How many games on average would you expect to get out of a first-, second-, third- or fourth-round recruit?

To reduce the overall score for Taylor by saying:

1. Sparrow and Jordon are "neutral" when they are still second-year developing players taken later than pick 26,  and Nietschke is an "error" when he's out for the season.
2. Jackson, Pickett and Rivers are "neutral" when it's their first season.

is either jumping the gun, or a poor assessment of players who have played a handful of games.

I think they are all showing tremendous promise.

If you read carefully I actually labelled the salem selection as a success. What is wrong with labelling sparrow and jordan as neutrals? We haven't seen enough to judge

[Elegt 872]

4 hours ago, TRIGON said:

Trades:

• Jeff Garlett was great value for those picks
• The Mitch Clark situation was forced upon us but taking Lumumba was real clanger. Was this Taylor's fault or was it Paul Roos (or more to the point Tammy) being taken in by Lumumba's tales of transcendental hopping?
• Sam Frost, 40 and 53 for pick 23. How can you criticise this when Frosty is STILL doing him damnedest to get us an early 2nd round selection in the next draft? 

Draft:

• Pick 2 Christian Petracca (thank you Sainters)
• Pick 3 Angus Brayshaw
• Pick 40 Alex Neal Bullen 
• Pick 42 Billy Stretch, neat footballer but the footy gods seemed to be against him.
• Pick 63 Oscar MacDonald

Rookie Draft:

• AVB
• Mitch White (played senior football)

Overall 5 players still on our list and 3 who gave us good service (Garlett, Stretch and Frost)

While I love Frost he is not worth pick 23, hence why he is not at the dees anymore

[Elegt 872]

2 hours ago, Watts the matter said:

It was a three-way and Varcoe left Geelong. There was a clear winner in this three-way trade. Not related to Taylor.

Mitch Clark was killing it for Melbourne 

[Elegt 872]

47 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

Trades:

• Jake Melksham for pick 25 has been good; albeit his form this year isn't as strong as I'd like.
• Howe and Toumpas for Kennedy, 29 and 50 didn't work out for us. 
• Fitzpatrick for 94 was just a goodwill trade.
• Bugg, - as a footballer he made a good instagram model.  However Bugg and Pick 7 was a win because it allowed us to grab the 2 top talents that we'd targeted.

Draft:

• Clayton Oliver, and inspired choice.
• Sam Weideman is now coming of age.
• King and Hulett turned out to be poor choices

Rookies:

• Josh Wagner, still on the list.
• Viv Michie...was there a story behind this? Did he offer to go on the rookie list so that we could get another player and so we promised to retain him?.
• Joel Smith, still on the list. Athletic enough but an enigma, struggling to find what his best position is.

Five players who are still on our list, 3 of which are leading players. So, strong and brave work at the pointy end of the draft that year. Disappointing later on, especially as Tom Papley was right under our noses at Casey...the one that got away.

sorry to offend those on here but Josh Wagner is the definition of a list clogger. Great bloke but jordie McKenzie like in his ability 

[Engorged Onion 9,257]

22 minutes ago, Elegt said:

If you read carefully I actually labelled the salem selection as a success. What is wrong with labelling sparrow and jordan as neutrals? We haven't seen enough to judge

It's probably because when you post it's typically quite negative about players, coaches etc.

So, understandably the inference is that if it's 'neutral' Elegt must mean not good enough. I know I took it that way as well.

For clarity - perhaps it would have been better to write

Sparrow and Jordan: We haven't seen enough to judge. 

Edited August 11, 2020 by Engorged Onion

[Elegt 872]

2 minutes ago, Engorged Onion said:

It's probably because when you post it's typically quite negative about players, coaches etc.

So, understandably the inference is that if it's 'neutral' Elegt must mean not good enough. I know I took it that way as well.

For clarity - perhaps it would have been better to write

Sparrow and Jordan: We haven't seen enough to judge. 

same thing as neutral

[Dr. Gonzo 22,412]

2 hours ago, WERRIDEE said:

No believe it or not I can be wrong sometimes.

Maybe it's worth remembering that before being so forceful with your opinions next time?

[Dr. Gonzo 22,412]

2 hours ago, dazzledavey36 said:

Not surprised.

You've always been pretty gutless and miserable like that. Dees could win 4 flags in a row and you'd still ways to [censored] and complain.

 

Nah we just wouldn't hear from him for 4 years. The 5th year "what happened? Can't win the 5th to break the record huh?"

[WERRIDEE 5,211]

1 minute ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Maybe it's worth remembering that before being so forceful with your opinions next time?

yeah nah

[Go the Biff 3,129]

36 minutes ago, Elegt said:

Mitch Clark was killing it for Melbourne 

Was a shot duck when that trade took place though. It's in that light that the trade should be evaluated.

Jeez he was good for us in the brief time he was up & going though

[Elegt 872]

11 minutes ago, Go the Biff said:

Was a shot duck when that trade took place though. It's in that light that the trade should be evaluated.

Jeez he was good for us in the brief time he was up & going though

yes but at least we should've got some value for him given how well he was going

[Pates 9,536]

We were lucky to be getting anything for Clark, he was finished at our club for many reasons. I always wonder how his time at the club would’ve gone if he hadn’t have got that awful injury, he was killing it for us in his early games. 

The Pies cleaned up on that one big time, I think the cats were backing themselves to rebuild a player. H had some decent games for us, but never seemed close to hitting his Collingwood highs. 

[TRIGON 4,715]

On 8/1/2020 at 12:45 PM, Elegt said:

2016 

Trades

 29 + 68 for Hibberd and 59 -success

Dunn and 51 for 47-error

Draft

Hannan 46-neutral

Johnstone 64-error

Rookie

Filipovic 8-error

Smith 25-error

Kielty 41-error

Trades:

• The Michael Hibberd & pick 68, giving up pick 28 (Josh Begley) has worked well for us.
• Pick 47, giving up Lynden Dunn & picks 51 was pragmatic.
• Jordan Lewis & 57 & 68 for picks 48 & 68, sound thinking to bring an experienced premiership player into the fold.

Draft

• Mitch Hannan at pick 47 has been good value for us.
• Dion Johnstone at pick 64 was a misfire, that being said the only 'diamond in the rough' that stands out afterwards was Mitchell Lewis.

Rookies:

• Filipovic didn't come on. Credit goes to the St. Kilda recruiter for plucking ROoan Marshall from North Ballarat.
• Tim Smith played senior footy, was unlucky with injuries.
• Declan Keilty...GOT TO PLAY MULTIPLE GAMES FOR MELBOURNE AND NEVER KNEW DEFEAT @Drunkn167

Overall in 2016 Taylor was not given much of a hand to deal with; very hard to be overly critical or praiseworthy. 

[TRIGON 4,715]

On 8/1/2020 at 12:45 PM, Elegt said:

2017

Trades

10 + 2018 (1rd) + 2018 (4rd) for Lever + 35 + 2018 (3rd rd)- error

Watts for 31 -success

66 for Balic-error

Draft

Spargo 29- error

Fritsch 31-success

Petty 37-error

Baker 48-error

 

 

Trades:

• Jake Lever & Pick 35 (Harrison Petty) & 2018 3rd Rounder (Marty Hore) given up for R1 2017 (Lochie O'Brien, Carlton, eventually) R1 2018 (Liam Stocker-Carlton, eventually) and R4 2018 (Robbie Young). Initially I thought we'd overpaid, looking at what we would have got otherwise it now looks like a good trade.
• Pick 31 for Jack Watts, not impressed by the 'fire-sale' approach taken (that's not Taylor's fault).
• Balic for Pick 66 (Tom North, Fremantle). Meh. There was not much further talent in the Draft at that point.

Draft:

• Pick 29, Charlie Spargo. Picked for his competitiveness and footy IQ, which he will need in spades of he's going to carve out a long career. Too soon to say. 
• Pick 31, Bailey Fritsch. Very talented mark, whether that be on the lead or floating across the pack. Needs to become more reliable with his shots. Overall a good selection by Taylor.
• Pick 37, Harrison Petty. If he can get past his groin injury then I think he has a very promising future. Touted as a forward but I think he's a future CHB, time will tell.
• Pick 48, Oscar Baker. We needed outside run. He has shown he can provide this, still very raw though. Time will tell.

We didn't participate in the rookie draft. Taylor brought in a mixture of experience, competitiveness, height (not so much Charlie) and took a punt on a raw outside runner. 

[Elegt 872]

4 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

Trades:

• Jake Lever & Pick 35 (Harrison Petty) & 2018 3rd Rounder (Marty Hore) given up for R1 2017 (Lochie O'Brien, Carlton, eventually) R1 2018 (Liam Stocker-Carlton, eventually) and R4 2018 (Robbie Young). Initially I thought we'd overpaid, looking at what we would have got otherwise it now looks like a good trade.
• Pick 31 for Jack Watts, not impressed by the 'fire-sale' approach taken (that's not Taylor's fault).
• Balic for Pick 66 (Tom North, Fremantle). Meh. There was not much further talent in the Draft at that point.

Draft:

• Pick 29, Charlie Spargo. Picked for his competitiveness and footy IQ, which he will need in spades of he's going to carve out a long career. Too soon to say. 
• Pick 31, Bailey Fritsch. Very talented mark, whether that be on the lead or floating across the pack. Needs to become more reliable with his shots. Overall a good selection by Taylor.
• Pick 37, Harrison Petty. If he can get past his groin injury then I think he has a very promising future. Touted as a forward but I think he's a future CHB, time will tell.
• Pick 48, Oscar Baker. We needed outside run. He has shown he can provide this, still very raw though. Time will tell.

We didn't participate in the rookie draft. Taylor brought in a mixture of experience, competitiveness, height (not so much Charlie) and took a punt on a raw outside runner. 

Not sure where Baker has gone though? Looked alright in his first couple of games then has dissapeared

[TRIGON 4,715]

3 minutes ago, Elegt said:

Not sure where Baker has gone though? Looked alright in his first couple of games then has dissapeared

Yes, the way this season has had to be structured makes it very hard to gauge how the younger players are developing, and how they're being developed for that matter. Must be frustrating for the likes of Jordon, Baker, Bedford, Chandler etc.