http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/chal...565.html?page=2

People should take a look at this article from todays paper- lots of people on this board have unrealistically high expectations on CAC and continuisly question his ability bc he has had 2 first round misses in Luke Molan and Nick Smith.

From the 'super draft', misses in the first round include Sampi (6), Molan (9), Cole (11), Watson (14), Brooks (15), Harvey (18)...

Other first round misses include Bradley (6), Trotter (9), Dunn (10), Watts (14), Morrison (17), Spaaderman (18)

As CAC says in the article, talls are a much bigger risk, because if they dont become part of the starting team spine, then they dont really have any other positions to fill, unlike midfielders who can reinvent themselves as wingman, run-with-players or defenders.

I think CAC has a well above average strike rate, has picked up some ripper players with low picks (Bruce, Pettard, Bartram...), and some great players from low first rounders- Dunn, Jones, Bate...

People should try to get over Luke Molan and Nick Smith. in both cases injuries contributed to their demise. not all KPP can turn out to be successes, and we've had to use first round picks trying to find one for years.

The unfair factor in all of this is that most players will not make it because there is not enough room on their club lists. A player who fails to break into the senior side and stay there, is usually delisted within a few seasons. It is an impossible task for every boy drafted to be successful. It is a numbers game like racehorses. Recruiters need to be cut some slack and not have every unsuccessful pick thrown in their faces.

My only gripe with CAC is with his KPP's (including rucks) selections. He states that the success rate with 1st rounders is around 70%, right now going by his rules he's running at 0% with KPP's with only Frawley likely to be a true KPP who will play 50 games. So that's 20% at best.

Everyone else he does is great though, so I guess you can't be perfect.

  sylvinator said:

People should try to get over Luke Molan and Nick Smith. in both cases injuries contributed to their demise not all KPP can turn out to be successes, and we've had to use first round picks trying to find one for years.

Rubbish excuse, injury played no part in both of them being delisted, they were simply just not good enough.

  Jarka said:

My only gripe with CAC is with his KPP's (including rucks) selections. He states that the success rate with 1st rounders is around 70%, right now going by his rules he's running at 0% with KPP's with only Frawley likely to be a true KPP who will play 50 games. So that's 20% at best.

Umm, no. He said 70% overall, not just on KPP. CAC would have at least a 70% success rate with 1st rounders. Don't alter the stats to suit your agenda.

  Brocky said:

Umm, no. He said 70% overall, not just on KPP. CAC would have at least a 70% success rate with 1st rounders. Don't alter the stats to suit your agenda.

I'm not altering the stats to suit my agenda, but what you're suggesting is ridiculous. He said that the success rate for 1st round picks is 70%, so if you isolate any particular type of player then you'd expect that rate to be the same. Please explain to me how I'm altering the stats.

Even if what you're saying is true it doesn't change the results, our drafting of KPP's in the 1st round over the last ten years has been poor (at best). Only one person is responsible for that.

  Jarka said:

I'm not altering the stats to suit my agenda, but what you're suggesting is ridiculous. He said that the success rate for 1st round picks is 70%, so if you isolate any particular type of player then you'd expect that rate to be the same. Please explain to me how I'm altering the stats.

You only have to read page 2 of the article to get your explanation:

The disappearance or shuffling of so many unfulfilled ruckmen and key position players has another explanation, according to Sydney's manager of player acquisition, Kinnear Beatson.

"A number of them are taller players who have had long-running battles with serious injury — Brooks with a bad knee, Walsh with a knee, Watts with a broken leg and ankle, for example," Beatson said.

"But I've got a theory on tall players, too, that I think counts for something here. In my opinion, they're either really good and they become the spine of your team or they're not quite good enough and they don't have anywhere else to go and forge a career.

"A midfielder, on the other hand, can end up being a run-with tagger or a defender or change his game and reinvent himself. A tall generally has nowhere else to go and therefore he becomes more expendable."

  old55 said:

You only have to read page 2 of the article to get your explanation:

The disappearance or shuffling of so many unfulfilled ruckmen and key position players has another explanation, according to Sydney's manager of player acquisition, Kinnear Beatson.

"A number of them are taller players who have had long-running battles with serious injury — Brooks with a bad knee, Walsh with a knee, Watts with a broken leg and ankle, for example," Beatson said.

"But I've got a theory on tall players, too, that I think counts for something here. In my opinion, they're either really good and they become the spine of your team or they're not quite good enough and they don't have anywhere else to go and forge a career.

"A midfielder, on the other hand, can end up being a run-with tagger or a defender or change his game and reinvent himself. A tall generally has nowhere else to go and therefore he becomes more expendable."

There is a general view in the footy world about our 1st round KPP picks, and that is that the players we take are taken too early. Molan, Smith, Dunn and Frawley all fit into this category (Lamb was widely respected as a good chance iirc), so when they fail to meet the expectations of performing at the level expected of a first round pick it's of no surprise to the footballing world.

I think that CAC is a good recruiter, however I'm a believer that we shouldn't blindly worship someone just because they post here. Just like what happens with my own job every year every position in our club should be evaluated and investigated to see if we can do it better. The facts remain that after 10 years of one person having the job we've got a list that hasn't been able to make a serious tilt at the flag in the last 6 years and mostly recently finished 3rd last. Add to that record a new coach has come in and made the statement that we're basically rebuilding the squad around that u23's. Now it could be that it's not the recruiting which has been the problem, it could be that we've been poor at devloping them once they get onto our list, I don't have the answers but having a new coach is exactly what we need, fresh ideas.

  Jarka said:

There is a general view in the footy world about our 1st round KPP picks, and that is that the players we take are taken too early. Molan, Smith, Dunn and Frawley all fit into this category (Lamb was widely respected as a good chance iirc), so when they fail to meet the expectations of performing at the level expected of a first round pick it's of no surprise to the footballing world.

I think that CAC is a good recruiter, however I'm a believer that we shouldn't blindly worship someone just because they post here. Just like what happens with my own job every year every position in our club should be evaluated and investigated to see if we can do it better. The facts remain that after 10 years of one person having the job we've got a list that hasn't been able to make a serious tilt at the flag in the last 6 years and mostly recently finished 3rd last. Add to that record a new coach has come in and made the statement that we're basically rebuilding the squad around that u23's. Now it could be that it's not the recruiting which has been the problem, it could be that we've been poor at devloping them once they get onto our list, I don't have the answers but having a new coach is exactly what we need, fresh ideas.

Who are these people in the 'footy world' that you refer too? More likely, just your opinion.

  mo64 said:

Who are these people in the 'footy world' that you refer too? More likely, just your opinion.

Sorry but you're wrong. The people who I'm referring to are the guys that watch the kids playing ie local junior coaches etc.

  Jarka said:

There is a general view in the footy world about our 1st round KPP picks, and that is that the players we take are taken too early. Molan, Smith, Dunn and Frawley all fit into this category

Interesting. I reckon that Dunn and Frawley will be players although I'm not sure Dunn will be a KPP.

If they are then it shows that CAC is infact very good at selecting talls as he is seeing something that others aren't.

These are the "talls" taken 1st round (I've used top 16) since 2000. There are a fair few that would be considered "disappointing or failures" given the expectations placed on a first round pick.

2000: Reiwoldt, Koschitzke, Livingstone, McDougall, Angwin,

2001: Polak, Hale, Molan, Brooks

2002: J Brennan, Walsh, McIntosh, Laycock, Schulz, Smith, Gilham

2003: Bradley, Murphy, Watts, Chaplin

2004: Roughead, Franklin, Williams, Meesen, Dunn, Pattison

2005: Kennedy, Dowler, Ryder, Clark

2006: Gumbleton, Hansen, Leuenberger, Thorp, Reid, Brown, Everitt, Frawley, Riewoldt, Sellar, Hampson

It's probably too early to tell with 2005 and 2006 but there are a fair few failures in there. It supports the theory that you pick mids early and only go for talls if they are a sure thing. It's why I don't want a tall with pick 4.

  Jarka said:

There is a general view in the footy world about our 1st round KPP picks, and that is that the players we take are taken too early. Molan, Smith, Dunn and Frawley all fit into this category

Agreed

Can we stop turning every thread on drafting into a referendum of CAC's performance, its been done to death.

  rpfc said:

Can we stop turning every thread on drafting into a referendum of CAC's performance, its been done to death.

Actually, the opening post was all about CAC's record, so I have no idea where you got the idea that this thread 'turned' into anything...

Jarka, did we take Frawley early because we took him at 12 instead of 17?

Did Carlton take Gibbs early because they took him at 1 instead of 2?

How would you know?

  Bring-Back-Powell said:

Agreed

interesting regarding frawley being taken earlier than expected...i thought WC were very keen on him and given that we were keen we were pretty happy to snap him up when we got him...

we did pick dunn and bate early, but we drafted them as bottom age players, with the expectation that both would have gone top 10 if they had've been allowed to stay in the under 18s another season...

Did we pick up Bate and Dunn early? I thought that Bate was expected to go to Colling at 10.

The point is that none of us know whether they were picked earlier than we rated them. Only CAC knows that. Bigfooty consensus means jack.

  Axis of Bob said:

Did we pick up Bate and Dunn early? I thought that Bate was expected to go to Colling at 10.

The point is that none of us know whether they were picked earlier than we rated them. Only CAC knows that. Bigfooty consensus means jack.

well they were both bottom age picks, so even though we've had em for 3 years, they are the age of your standard second year player.

i think newton might have been bottom age also...

but im pretty sure if they were left in that draft they would have been snapped up early the following year.

i think one of them was so young that they were actually before the cut off, but an exception was made for another player so they put in a late submission and it was accepted very late...

so dunn is 20 (wont be 21 til mid next year) and has now played 24 games. some say it should have been more...

bate is the same age, and has played about 35 games...they were picked up at 15 and 13 respectively in 2004.

newton is the same age as those two (a month older) but was drafted in the same year (2004) also as a 17 year old.

we drafted 3 talls that year and it looks like all could become long term players, unfortunately only newton looks to be a traditional KPP...

  Axis of Bob said:

How would you know?

By talking to blokes who see them play alot, and the fact that you're assuming it's from bigfooty tells me that your arguments are based purely on assumptions and not on fact.

I'm not referring to Bate, he's not a KPP (I've already posted this, it gets very boring having to repeat myself over and over again because people don't read. I'm talking about our first round KPP's. Do you really believe that Molan was expected to go in the first round of his draft?

  deanox said:

interesting regarding frawley being taken earlier than expected...i thought WC were very keen on him and given that we were keen we were pretty happy to snap him up when we got him...

we did pick dunn and bate early, but we drafted them as bottom age players, with the expectation that both would have gone top 10 if they had've been allowed to stay in the under 18s another season...

Have you ever heard a recruiter say that they were unhappy with their picks? I'm pretty sure Bate was a little bit of a slider, alot had him in the top 10, Dunn was definitely early.

  Jarka said:

Have you ever heard a recruiter say that they were unhappy with their picks? I'm pretty sure Bate was a little bit of a slider, alot had him in the top 10, Dunn was definitely early.

haha good point. but i think there is a difference between yes we rate this kid, and wow we thought he would go earlier...i thought we had said the later about frawley, regardless of what the rest of the scouting world said. maybe i am wrong. maybe mfc had a different opinion on him than other clubs, but who after frawley could we have taken...reiwoldt or sellar perhaps? all three are KPP. frawley is the lightest of them all but i think he will fill out...other than that tho i dont know much about that draft...

i actually heard at the time that we were targeting petterd with pick 14 last season, but took frawley when he was available still, and then were stoked when petterd was still there...again, not sure if its true but could turn out to be a good draft for us...

  deanox said:

haha good point. but i think there is a difference between yes we rate this kid, and wow we thought he would go earlier...i thought we had said the later about frawley, regardless of what the rest of the scouting world said. maybe i am wrong. maybe mfc had a different opinion on him than other clubs, but who after frawley could we have taken...reiwoldt or sellar perhaps? all three are KPP. frawley is the lightest of them all but i think he will fill out...other than that tho i dont know much about that draft...

i actually heard at the time that we were targeting petterd with pick 14 last season, but took frawley when he was available still, and then were stoked when petterd was still there...again, not sure if its true but could turn out to be a good draft for us...

re: petterd, I heard that as well.

so out of interest jarka, your suggesting we may have taken frawley too early but that obviously backs up that we thought frawley would go much higher...

do you think we were wrong or right at this stage? and after 1 year, do you think there was anyone else we should have taken instead? perhaps petterd because he showed more this year, however would frawley have been around at 30? most likely not...

i have no doubt molan and smith were stuff ups, but apart from those two examples (and lamb) we havnt really had a plethora of high selection KPP's have we?

  deanox said:

so out of interest jarka, your suggesting we may have taken frawley too early but that obviously backs up that we thought frawley would go much higher...

do you think we were wrong or right at this stage? and after 1 year, do you think there was anyone else we should have taken instead? perhaps petterd because he showed more this year, however would frawley have been around at 30? most likely not...

i have no doubt molan and smith were stuff ups, but apart from those two examples (and lamb) we havnt really had a plethora of high selection KPP's have we?

Far too early to make a judgement on Frawley, however I've previously counted his pick as a (potential) success for CAC, his only KPP success in the first round, 1 one from 5 in years - Lamb, Molan, Smith, Dunn and Frawley. Even though Dunn will play over 50 games (CAC's criteria for success) he is not a KPP. If you look at all his KPP picks he's had one true success - Rivers. Newton and Frawley are possibles but both have a long way to go.

My personal opinion is that CAC is now a great recruiter, it's just a pity we've had to endure about 7 years of 'learning the ropes'

  Jarka said:

Actually, the opening post was all about CAC's record, so I have no idea where you got the idea that this thread 'turned' into anything...

It was 'turned' in the opening post. From citing an article on the difficulty of drafting, even in the 1st round, we go off and have the same argument, convincing no-one and infuriating everyone.

I love a good argument as much as the next bloke but CAC's performance is always at the door step of those that want to [censored] about the club.

As I have stated before; CAC is the last of our problems. We've got a new coach, FOM, two assistants, two development guys and we have no idea how they'll go. We are back in the red, have a plethora of training bases all over town, a shrinking supporter base, a CEO that drives employees away at the rate of 80%, and the concerned looks of the AFL.

And what are we stuck on here: CAC. The bloke who chose Molan, Lamb, and Smith.

You're right to criticise but when it is constant you overstate its importance.