suns-dominate-22under22-squad-two-clubs-completely-snubbed

Adelaide and Melbourne are the two clubs without a rep in the 40 player squad.  Sad.

The 'Under 22' covers the players recruited in 2016 to 2018 as 18 and 19 yo.  The years Goodwin has overseen list building.

In those 3 years we didn't have a 1st round pick having used them in 2015 (Oliver/Weideman) or for Lever (2017/2018) and May (2019). 

With no one in the < 22 squad, it suggests we have not done well with our 2nd and 3rd round picks in those years.  I can't think of a player of any age drafted in those years, be they new draftees or ex VFL players who are getting regular games or are 'best 22' after several years at the club. 

In those years, the club recruited 'experienced' players from other clubs /VFL in the belief we were close to 'being in contention' for a flag,  The old 'money ball' approach (or a low key version of what Clarkson has done at Hawthorn). 

However, does taking the 'experienced' path also say the coaches and the club weren't prepared to invest the time and resources to teach and develop 'kids' we did recruit? 

Anyway, it is very sad to see 3 - 4 years (2015 - 2019) of recruiting 2nd and 3rd round draftees not amount to much.

Kozzie, TJ and Rivers haven't played enough games to be selected this year so we can look fwd to them (hopefully) being in the squad next year.

Future not looking good. Shocking list management 

If supporting the Dees has taught me anything, it's that promising young players do not translate to success. Following on from that logic, the key to success must be having no promising young players.

Seriously though, it's not really an under 22 side - it's a side of 20 and 21 year-olds (18-19 year-olds mostly don't have enough runs on the board to get selected). We obviously traded out of those drafts, so hardly surprising that we don't have any players listed. Not even remotely a cause for concern.

57 minutes ago, Accepting Mediocrity said:

If supporting the Dees has taught me anything, it's that promising young players do not translate to success. Following on from that logic, the key to success must be having no promising young players.

Seriously though, it's not really an under 22 side - it's a side of 20 and 21 year-olds (18-19 year-olds mostly don't have enough runs on the board to get selected). We obviously traded out of those drafts, so hardly surprising that we don't have any players listed. Not even remotely a cause for concern.

Maybe I expressed it badly.  We used our 1st round pics well in draft or trade.

My point was that the players selected in 2nd and 3rd rounds in 2015 to 2018 haven't developed into regular 22 selections.  Hence our list falls away after the first 10-12 selected each week. 

Edited September 8, 20204 yr by Lucifer's Hero

Guys we had a ton of players in the under 22 team for 4-5 years.

Means absolutely nothing.

Supporters often still say "we're a young side". We're not. We're ranked 9th for age.

IMO Rivers is the only 22 and under player who has shown he'll definitely be a long term player. Jackson we haven't seen enough yet, Pickett is a worry to be honest. Petty showed a bit, but jury is still out and with injury now he might even get cut if lists shrink. There's no others under 22 worth noting.

Teams like Brisbane, Richmond and Port Adelaide are all younger. Brisbane are muuuch younger, yet are still producing better football than we have for 15 years.

Our core of Oliver, Petracca, Viney, Gawn, Lever, May are mostly mid 20s, some later. Our core is a good age profile. However, we traded away our chances at young talent to get some of them in, so if we don't capitalise in the short term then we're in for a world of pain in a few years as there is a gap of young talent coming through. We loaded up for a flag tilt and it's not happening.

We as a club lack leadership throughout. The coaches are obviously clueless. The players are clueless and lack onfield leadership. The board etc don't know how to turn the place around. The only time the club improved this decade was when we had Roos as coach and PJ as CEO. When they left the leadership and direction evaporated.

We need to get some strong leadership in at all levels.

34 minutes ago, Action Jackson said:

Guys we had a ton of players in the under 22 team for 4-5 years.

Means absolutely nothing.

We didn't.  We had the same players year after year:  Oliver, Petracca, Brayshaw and not sure if there was anyone else. 

As I said we used our 1st round picks well.  It is the 2nd and 3rd round picks that haven't born fruit which is why our list drops away after the top 10-12 players.

20 minutes ago, Lord Travis said:

Supporters often still say "we're a young side". We're not. We're ranked 9th for age.

IMO Rivers is the only 22 and under player who has shown he'll definitely be a long term player. Jackson we haven't seen enough yet, Pickett is a worry to be honest. Petty showed a bit, but jury is still out and with injury now he might even get cut if lists shrink. There's no others under 22 worth noting.

Teams like Brisbane, Richmond and Port Adelaide are all younger. Brisbane are muuuch younger, yet are still producing better football than we have for 15 years.

Our core of Oliver, Petracca, Viney, Gawn, Lever, May are mostly mid 20s, some later. Our core is a good age profile. However, we traded away our chances at young talent to get some of them in, so if we don't capitalise in the short term then we're in for a world of pain in a few years as there is a gap of young talent coming through. We loaded up for a flag tilt and it's not happening.

We as a club lack leadership throughout. The coaches are obviously clueless. The players are clueless and lack onfield leadership. The board etc don't know how to turn the place around. The only time the club improved this decade was when we had Roos as coach and PJ as CEO. When they left the leadership and direction evaporated.

We need to get some strong leadership in at all levels.

Depends how you calculate it.

Presumably you are looking at the overall list.

But we're not playing many of our older players.

The side we fielded last night, for example, had an average age of 24 years 11 months. Was younger than Fremantle's (25 years, 1 month).

Brisbane's most recent 22 had an average age of 25 years 1 month (their opponent, Collingwood, was 25 years 10 months).

Richmond's most recent 22 was 25 years 6 months, West Coast's was 26 years 1 month, Port Adelaide's 26 years 2 months.

Age isn't everything, but we're not playing TMac, Jones, Brown or Jetta, who are all at the top end of our age bracket. We might have 1 or 2 of them on the list next year.

Experience (i.e. games played) is another metric. Last night our average games played was 78.9 (Fremantle's was 92.8). Those other clubs' most recent 22: Brisbane 102.8, Richmond 95, West Coast 105.9, Port 113.8.

Now, for comparison, our 22 vs Sydney had an average age of 25 years 6 months and average games of 96.6. So that would make us older than Brisbane (but only by 5 months) but younger than the rest, and more experienced than Richmond but not the rest.

All of this is to say we're not exactly old/experienced, and we definitely fielded a young and inexperienced side last night.

However, I agree that we lack leadership, and IMO our problem is that we rely on our core players to lead us when they are all around the 100-game mark and, Gawn aside, are all 23-26. Not the right age/experience profile for the core leaders. We're too young and too inexperienced.

I mean, we hold Petracca to the standard of Dustin Martin. Martin's 4.5 years older and has played 138 games more than Petracca.

11 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

My point was that the players selected in 2nd and 3rd rounds in 2015 to 2019 haven't developed into regular 22 selections.  Hence our list falls away after the first 10-12 selected each week. 

I get what you're saying, but our top 50 picks in that time are as follows:

2015: Oliver (4) and the Weid (9).

2016: Hannan (46)

2017: Spargo (29); Fritsch (31); Petty (37); Baker (48)

2018: Sparrow (27); Jordon (33)

2019: Jackson (3); Pickett (12); Rivers (32)

 

On balance, I don't think it looks too bad. Some hits, some misses and some too early to tell - but it's not as though we've been passing up Naughton or Rowell with our available selections.

For mine, our biggest issue is that our senior mid-tier players (ANB, Hunt, Melksham, Melksham, Tomlinson, AVB, Salem et al) aren't producing the consistent footy we need from them (for various reasons).

 

 

5 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

We didn't.  We had the same players year after year:  Oliver, Petracca, Brayshaw and not sure if there was anyone else. 

As I said we used our 1st round picks well.  It is the 2nd and 3rd round picks that haven't born fruit which is why our list drops away after the top 10-12 players.

I wonder how many of the 22 under 22 squad were picked in the 1st round vs 2nd round vs 3rd round etc.

Many of the names I've seen are 1st rounders (most of the GC players, most of the Carlton players).

I'm sure there are plenty of non-1st rounders in there but I'd like to know the breakdown before we start criticising our drafting of 2nd/3rd rounders.

5 minutes ago, Accepting Mediocrity said:

I get what you're saying, but our top 50 picks in that time are as follows:

2015: Oliver (4) and the Weid (9).

2016: Hannan (46)

2017: Spargo (29); Fritsch (31); Petty (37); Baker (48)

2018: Sparrow (27); Jordon (33)

2019: Jackson (3); Pickett (12); Rivers (32)

On balance, I don't think it looks too bad. Some hits, some misses and some too early to tell - but it's not as though we've been passing up Naughton or Rowell with our available selections.

For mine, our biggest issue is that our senior mid-tier players (ANB, Hunt, Melksham, Melksham, Tomlinson, AVB, Salem et al) aren't producing the consistent footy we need from them (for various reasons).

I was commenting on 2nd and 3rd round picks who haven't been able to solidify a regular 22 spot. 

The reason for highlighting that is those selections are supposed to be the mid-tier and journeyman in our regular 22.  They aren't and imv view it is one reason why our list lacks depth.

Another indictment on the Club (although Jackson and Rivers not far off):

 

16 minutes ago, dice said:

Another indictment on the Club (although Jackson and Rivers not far off):

 

yep; traded lever for 2 first rounders. Thanks Josh Mahoney