You know thats one thing that has amazed me, is the way a team like Port has rebuilt so quickly. WCE has so many good young kids(not taken high in drafts), even Brisbane are assembling a good young list.After years of success and then champion player retirements, they can build a good list so quickly! What are they doing so differently to us? Surely watching these kids playing all the time in the TAC is enough to pick out the good ones? Somebody tell me what they do differently to us.

well i guess im the only one who fully realises what thoes 8 players cost us. Basically we didnt compete in 2 of the last 8 draft seasons and that is a lot of players

Na mate im with you. All these blokes have their heads in the clouds. Absolutely pathetic, do you think the Geelong message board would have a post about Daniel Bell getting best on ground for one game? It's this attitude of celebrating mediocrity that has got us to 14th on the ladder. Why did we come 14th? Because we got injuries or because we've got no superstar players? I say both.

Loved that trade table -

Simmonds for Ellis

Heffernan for pick 10

Holland for pick 20

Woewodin for pick 14 - we got one right

Jolly for Dunn - jury still out

Moloney for Thompson - Not much they could do

Armstrong delisted wins premiership, not a star but would still get a game at Melb

Bishop (premiership player) for Powell (delisted by Melbourne - played one good year)

Byron Pickett (29 games) for pick 28

P.Johnson for pick 29 - jury is still out

Bizzell for Grgic and pick 17 (in the superdraft of 2001 - James Kelly, soon to be premiership player)

Bassett for Brent Williams and Nick Pesch - not much they could do as bassett wanted to go home but brent who? and nick who?

are there more, i recall nick carter getting a run at Melbourne at one stage too.

Are there any more master strokes that we did at trade time? Both good and bad?

We need to establish where we have gone wrong in the past to go forward redraft molan. Let's hope Dean Bailey brings with him the success that Port have enjoyed via draft picks and trades.

I’m not 100% sure, but have they produced an All-Australian player?

Does it matter that much? The difference between a team with 9 AAs and one with no AAs is 5 points!

Na mate im with you. All these blokes have their heads in the clouds. Absolutely pathetic, do you think the Geelong message board would have a post about Daniel Bell getting best on ground for one game? It's this attitude of celebrating mediocrity that has got us to 14th on the ladder. Why did we come 14th? Because we got injuries or because we've got no superstar players? I say both.

Loved that trade table -

Simmonds for Ellis

Heffernan for pick 10

Holland for pick 20

Woewodin for pick 14 - we got one right

Jolly for Dunn - jury still out

Moloney for Thompson - Not much they could do

Armstrong delisted wins premiership, not a star but would still get a game at Melb

Bishop (premiership player) for Powell (delisted by Melbourne - played one good year)

Byron Pickett (29 games) for pick 28

P.Johnson for pick 29 - jury is still out

Bizzell for Grgic and pick 17 (in the superdraft of 2001 - James Kelly, soon to be premiership player)

Bassett for Brent Williams and Nick Pesch - not much they could do as bassett wanted to go home but brent who? and nick who?

are there more, i recall nick carter getting a run at Melbourne at one stage too.

Are there any more master strokes that we did at trade time? Both good and bad?

We need to establish where we have gone wrong in the past to go forward redraft molan. Let's hope Dean Bailey brings with him the success that Port have enjoyed via draft picks and trades.

Great to see youv'e done some research. You'll find Bishop wanted to go back to SA, but apart from that, nice work! Damning facts though. I'm starting to warm to you. But as i said before, the horse has bolted. All we can do is hope is that this new regime learns from previous mistakes.

You know thats one thing that has amazed me, is the way a team like Port has rebuilt so quickly. WCE has so many good young kids(not taken high in drafts), even Brisbane are assembling a good young list.After years of success and then champion player retirements, they can build a good list so quickly! What are they doing so differently to us? Surely watching these kids playing all the time in the TAC is enough to pick out the good ones? Somebody tell me what they do differently to us.

You've just conceded the argument redraft molan. Id suggest a few reasons for the difference one is funding, we just dont have the money to compete player development and recruitment. the second is we havent brought any superstar players from 1997-2002.

I just thought of two other trades which may lessen my point but anyway

T.Longmuir went to Freo for pick 18 (brad green)

Jeff White for pick 2 (brad ottens)

Will anyone remember who Geelong beat in the grand final in 20 years time, let alone the preliminary final, they will remember though that Geelong won.

Cannot believe more people do not realise how poorly our club was managed from 1997-2001 (5 years), and it's still to early to judge from 02 looks ok if rivers gets fit and bell continues good form, but 03 is still to early to judge.

One other thing moorcroft probably played more games for melbourne than hunter, smith, molan, rogers and clarke combined. he was one of the good ones of that batch.

Bishop was recruited from Box Hill, so he must have made a detour via Port Adelaide to get from Junction Oval to home.

But it is difficult to argue with the facts as you may well see. I dont expect Cameron to get every draft pick right, no one has in the past, but his record is not what everybody goes on about on this forum.

Bishop was recruited from Box Hill, so he must have made a detour via Port Adelaide to get from Junction Oval to home.

But it is difficult to argue with the facts as you may well see. I dont expect Cameron to get every draft pick right, no one has in the past, but his record is not what everybody goes on about on this forum.

Oh didn't you know, there is a Box Hill on the outskirts of Adelaide I don't concede anything!

I'm not sure if you're familiar with my postings, but you and I are kindred brothers.

CAC is now no doubt a better recruiter than 5 years ago. You can't buy experience. I've much respect for him and he's highly regarded within the industry. He too would acknowledge there's been mistakes along the way, however, he's batting at about 50%, which ranks pretty much at the top end of recruiters. He doesn't have the 'star' that some of us have craved for so long, and he needs one on his CV. But he knows that. And anyone that thinks a team doesn't need a star doesn't understand footy. I know that teams can get up and pinch a flag without one, but stars usually ensure a flag, as well as sustained success. We haven't had a star since 1987. Why do clubs cherish early draft picks ? Why are clubs loathe to trade them ? I'll tell you why. They're hoping to get a Judd, Pavlich, Riewoldt, Franklin. They want a star. And yes, an early pick doesn't guarantee one.

Why do so many supporters trot out the platitude "a good team is more important than stars" ? It goes without saying you can't rely on just a star. Just because I crave a star doesn't mean I want him surrounded by hacks. The level of comprehension on forums is sometimes staggering.

I'd love someone to make me want to go to the footy. I love my team and club, but I'd really like a flag and I'd really like to have a Buddy Franklin drag me through the gate. I could name 20 stars of the last 20 years and none have worn red and blue. How do you think Hawks supporters feel driving to a game ? How do you think they feel about next year ? They're already excited about Franklin for 2008. It's been so long we forget what it feels like to have a star to watch each week.

I've also been moaning on forums for 4 years that the MFC doesn't adequately develop it's players. Who actually gets better ? Who goes to the next level ? Thankfully, the club has finally recognised this and it's one of the reasons for the change of coach. And it's particularly pointed that we've hired a developing, or teaching coach.

We also haven't turned our list over nearly enough in the last 5 years. Too many players stay for 1, 2, or even 3 years too long. Read, Lamb, Smith, Godfrey, Ward, Jamar, Nicholson, Warnock, I could go on. CAC has been hamstrung by not having enough picks in too many drafts. Even in last year's 'super draft' we should have had more picks.

Football clubs only exist to win premierships. They should make all football decisions with this in mind.

I've much faith in the new coaching team and am sure CAC will be well supported in his astute choices. He already looks good, but I'm sure he'd like a coaching structure that makes him look even better.

Amen to that hannibal. I agree you can't buy experience and hopefully Cameron has learnt from his mistakes. It's to early to judge the players from the second 5 year period at this stage, but the ones from the 1997-2001 were not up to scratch.

All your points are brilliantly made.

Can i just say, an AA selection is not the be all and end all, ive said that before. But it is the best we have in external judgement. A melb B&F is not recognised by anyone outside the club, a best clubman also etc. Ablett, Carey, Dunstall didnt win brownlows, are they not star players absolutely not, did they make AA, absolutely and more than once. Successful clubs need superstars, I believe the 1991 Hawthorn premiership team had none but I'm not 100% sure (that ones for you redraft molan).

Premierships is what we want, no player, draft pick, coach or recruitment officer has brought us that, yet! But we will not challenge for a flag until we discover at least 4-5 superstars, and have the Bruce's, Johnstones, Greens as the 12th, 13th, 14th players picked, rather than how it is currently, too much is expected of players that just arent up to it.

Good to have you on board redraft molan. Nothing wrong with healthy debate.

Amen to that hannibal. I agree you can't buy experience and hopefully Cameron has learnt from his mistakes. It's to early to judge the players from the second 5 year period at this stage, but the ones from the 1997-2001 were not up to scratch.

All your points are brilliantly made.

Can i just say, an AA selection is not the be all and end all, ive said that before. But it is the best we have in external judgement. A melb B&F is not recognised by anyone outside the club, a best clubman also etc. Ablett, Carey, Dunstall didnt win brownlows, are they not star players absolutely not, did they make AA, absolutely and more than once. Successful clubs need superstars, I believe the 1991 Hawthorn premiership team had none but I'm not 100% sure (that ones for you redraft molan).

Premierships is what we want, no player, draft pick, coach or recruitment officer has brought us that, yet! But we will not challenge for a flag until we discover at least 4-5 superstars, and have the Bruce's, Johnstones, Greens as the 12th, 13th, 14th players picked, rather than how it is currently, too much is expected of players that just arent up to it.

Good to have you on board redraft molan. Nothing wrong with healthy debate.

Concede nothing and admit to nothing!

I'm not sure if you're familiar with my postings, but you and I are kindred brothers.

CAC is now no doubt a better recruiter than 5 years ago. You can't buy experience. I've much respect for him and he's highly regarded within the industry. He too would acknowledge there's been mistakes along the way, however, he's batting at about 50%, which ranks pretty much at the top end of recruiters. He doesn't have the 'star' that some of us have craved for so long, and he needs one on his CV. But he knows that. And anyone that thinks a team doesn't need a star doesn't understand footy. I know that teams can get up and pinch a flag without one, but stars usually ensure a flag, as well as sustained success. We haven't had a star since 1987. Why do clubs cherish early draft picks ? Why are clubs loathe to trade them ? I'll tell you why. They're hoping to get a Judd, Pavlich, Riewoldt, Franklin. They want a star. And yes, an early pick doesn't guarantee one.

Why do so many supporters trot out the platitude "a good team is more important than stars" ? It goes without saying you can't rely on just a star. Just because I crave a star doesn't mean I want him surrounded by hacks. The level of comprehension on forums is sometimes staggering.

I'd love someone to make me want to go to the footy. I love my team and club, but I'd really like a flag and I'd really like to have a Buddy Franklin drag me through the gate. I could name 20 stars of the last 20 years and none have worn red and blue. How do you think Hawks supporters feel driving to a game ? How do you think they feel about next year ? They're already excited about Franklin for 2008. It's been so long we forget what it feels like to have a star to watch each week.

I've also been moaning on forums for 4 years that the MFC doesn't adequately develop it's players. Who actually gets better ? Who goes to the next level ? Thankfully, the club has finally recognised this and it's one of the reasons for the change of coach. And it's particularly pointed that we've hired a developing, or teaching coach.

We also haven't turned our list over nearly enough in the last 5 years. Too many players stay for 1, 2, or even 3 years too long. Read, Lamb, Smith, Godfrey, Ward, Jamar, Nicholson, Warnock, I could go on. CAC has been hamstrung by not having enough picks in too many drafts. Even in last year's 'super draft' we should have had more picks.

Football clubs only exist to win premierships. They should make all football decisions with this in mind.

I've much faith in the new coaching team and am sure CAC will be well supported in his astute choices. He already looks good, but I'm sure he'd like a coaching structure that makes him look even better.

I hate replying to a post without adding something, but in this circumstance there is nothing to add. This is one of the best posts I have ever read.

I wholeheartedly agree, the best post I've read. Maybe because I agree.

"CAC is now no doubt a better recruiter than 5 years ago. You can't buy experience."

That really helps us now doesent it. The fact of the matter is that there are multiple players who have not lived to expectation or we have traded and lost valuable draft picks.

1996

11. Brent Grgic

22. Alistair Nicholson

30. Hayden Lamaro

45. Clayton Gardiner

75. Mark Winterton

82. Duncan O'Toole

83. Ashley Gehling

1997

39. Matthew Blake

50. Luke Ottens

1998

13. Chris Lamb

60. Luke Speers

72. Luke Taylor

Scott Chrisholm to melbourne

Nick Carter to melbourne

Rookies - Matthew Bishop

Pre season - Jamie Shannahan

Ok so these players go back a long number of years yet Robbo was the only real standout and Ward too. It honestly scares me to see and research all these players that we have lost. A team with these players potentual would make us a compedititve team yet i think we are very very ordinary. I know CAC does his best and he is a good recruiter however they are damning statistics arnt they?

"CAC is now no doubt a better recruiter than 5 years ago. You can't buy experience."

That really helps us now doesent it.

1996

11. Brent Grgic

22. Alistair Nicholson

30. Hayden Lamaro

45. Clayton Gardiner

75. Mark Winterton

82. Duncan O'Toole

83. Ashley Gehling

1997

39. Matthew Blake

50. Luke Ottens

1998

13. Chris Lamb

60. Luke Speers

72. Luke Taylor

Scott Chrisholm to melbourne

Nick Carter to melbourne

Rookies - Matthew Bishop

Pre season - Jamie Shannahan

Ok so these players go back a long number of years yet Robbo was the only real standout and Ward too. It honestly scares me to see and research all these players that we have lost. A team with these players potentual would make us a compedititve team yet i think we are very very ordinary. I know CAC does his best and he is a good recruiter however they are damning statistics arnt they?

"That really helps us now doesent it."

Well yes, it does. Obviously.

CAC's first year of recruiting was 1997, so nice of you to blame him for 1996.

Anyway pal, it's been done to death. Search cyber space for dozens of other threads and posts regurgitating the same discussion.

As I said, he's batting at about 50%. And I can tell you from the previous dozens of discussions it's at the better end of the scale.

But by all means keep going. Knock yourself out.

As Pagan once said "you dont look in the rear vision mirror as your driving forward".

Ah what driving school did u go to.

When i drive i always look in the rear vision mirror when going forward it is a basic part of driving.

I hope pagen does not crash.

A player is awarded AA, woop dee doo. I'm pretty sure they would much rather a Norm Smith Medal or a premiership medallion.

Fair enough, but we don't have any of those either. I'd also suggest that making a grand final - having a chance at Norm Smith or Premiership - means you need to be in a strong team, whereas AA honours are more indicative of individual talent.

Anyhow, interesting to be remembered of our lack of draft picks in 2000 due to salary cap penalties. Guys drafted in 2000 would be at their peak right about now, so it's disappointing. 2001 was quite terrible for us too, which is a double whammy. I seem to recall that ND wanted us to go for talls, but that may be incorrect.

Regarding CAC, it was interesting to see '96 (the year before he was here) - what a shocker!

I'm not going to delve too deeply into this because I can't go close to topping Hannibal's effort. However, I think Craig Cameron is probably better judged on Rising Star results than AA selection or anything else.

It is his job to find kids with the potential to be stars. The Rising Star competition recognises that potential. Where they go for the rest of their career has much more to do with the development and coaching staff than the initial recruitment.

DD's table of Rising Stars, particularly in the last 3-4 years, shows that kids with a lot of potential have been drafted. Therefore CAC seems to have done a very good job. It's now up to the coaching staff to develop that potential, hopefully better than has occurred over the last 5-7 years.

This is an old post of craig camerons from over a year ago, im sure we all appreciate any inside info CAC provides us, i have been critical but this gives us a fair fact based piece to judge his performance. In this CAC readily acknowledges that we have not recruited any stars, and reveals the flaws in the statistics, ill shut up now, an interesting read, it'd be good if he'd come back with an update of these figures.

As a self assessment tool the club produces a draft analysis, club by club, each year based on statistical success rates. A success is considered a player drafted who plays 50 AFL games. Injuries are not taken into account.

We have just finished the 1997 to 2003 analysis. It is reasonabe to make some assumptions on players taken in the 2003 National draft at this time. Not so for 2004 and 2005. I'm happy to produce them in this forum as it is public domain information anyway.

The list below shows the AFL average as a comparison to MFC performance.

AFL ave MFC

Top 10 71.4% 75%

1st Round(outside top 10) 52.7% 50%

2nd Round 40.2% 66.7%

3rd Round 34% 37.5%

60+ 26.2% 40%

Overall National Draft 49.7% 59.4%

Pre Season 18.2% 30%

What do the figures tell us?

In an analytical sense they say that the MFC drafting record is good. As raised by a number on this thread our fisrt round percentage needs to improve. We sit at 50% for first round selections outside the top 10. The AFL average is 52.4%. We obviously would like to be above the average.

They also tell us that the talent pool is too small. There is a dramatic drop off outside the top 10.

What the figures don't tell us is how good the players end up being. Aaron Fiora under this analysis is considered a success. However, his opportunity cost is high. Pavlich, Murphy, Corey were selected after him.

Trav's tenet that we need to find a star holds true. The closeness of all club's figures, outside a couple of glaring exceptions that I won't post, shows that it is stars that differentiate teams not just raw draft numbers.

What isn't a truism though is that the MFC is poor in selecting first rounders. The figures don't bear this out. Only 1 in 2 of all players selected in the first round after pick 10 go on to play 50 AFL games.

When assessing draft performance opportunity cost is the best measurement. It is impossible to compare players across drafts. Not all No. 3 selections will be as good as Chris Judd. Not all No. 1's will be Nick Riewoldt. Not all No. 26's will be Jared Rivers.

This is an old post of craig camerons from over a year ago, im sure we all appreciate any inside info CAC provides us, i have been critical but this gives us a fair fact based piece to judge his performance. In this CAC readily acknowledges that we have not recruited any stars, and reveals the flaws in the statistics, ill shut up now, an interesting read, it'd be good if he'd come back with an update of these figures.

As a self assessment tool the club produces a draft analysis, club by club, each year based on statistical success rates. A success is considered a player drafted who plays 50 AFL games. Injuries are not taken into account.

We have just finished the 1997 to 2003 analysis. It is reasonabe to make some assumptions on players taken in the 2003 National draft at this time. Not so for 2004 and 2005. I'm happy to produce them in this forum as it is public domain information anyway.

The list below shows the AFL average as a comparison to MFC performance.

AFL ave MFC

Top 10 71.4% 75%

1st Round(outside top 10) 52.7% 50%

2nd Round 40.2% 66.7%

3rd Round 34% 37.5%

60+ 26.2% 40%

Overall National Draft 49.7% 59.4%

Pre Season 18.2% 30%

What do the figures tell us?

In an analytical sense they say that the MFC drafting record is good. As raised by a number on this thread our fisrt round percentage needs to improve. We sit at 50% for first round selections outside the top 10. The AFL average is 52.4%. We obviously would like to be above the average.

They also tell us that the talent pool is too small. There is a dramatic drop off outside the top 10.

What the figures don't tell us is how good the players end up being. Aaron Fiora under this analysis is considered a success. However, his opportunity cost is high. Pavlich, Murphy, Corey were selected after him.

Trav's tenet that we need to find a star holds true. The closeness of all club's figures, outside a couple of glaring exceptions that I won't post, shows that it is stars that differentiate teams not just raw draft numbers.

What isn't a truism though is that the MFC is poor in selecting first rounders. The figures don't bear this out. Only 1 in 2 of all players selected in the first round after pick 10 go on to play 50 AFL games.

When assessing draft performance opportunity cost is the best measurement. It is impossible to compare players across drafts. Not all No. 3 selections will be as good as Chris Judd. Not all No. 1's will be Nick Riewoldt. Not all No. 26's will be Jared Rivers.

Wow! Now i'm confused. Are you a CAC fan or not? Great stats though! You must have a lot of free time.

Wow! Now i'm confused. Are you a CAC fan or not? Great stats though! You must have a lot of free time.

No, he just knows how to use the search function and reposted a post CAC made (rather confusingly, as there were no quote tags used).