If CAC is rated so highly, then why are we predicted to be so bad again?

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

Dappa – my question to you was rather facetious and didn’t really warrant a response. But thanks anyway.

Ah. I see. No worries.

Hannabal is a far more respected poster on this board than I ever will be and, although I disagree with him on McDonald and Warnock, his analysis is fair.

Yep. While strictly speaking I'm not sure I agree with all of it, I think it's as close as it comes to middle ground for you and I. The next few years will be intriguing for CAC and for us.

On the subject of stars, it's certainly true CAC hasn't recruited one... While that's not something I've mentioned, it's certainly a point I agree with. But I will say this. Even if we DID have a star, no-one ever rates the dees, no-one ever reads anything about them, no-one ever really talks about them. If Brock was a Pie or a Don, or even a Saint his profile would be entirely different. My only hope is that we can land a Carey. A player that isn't just considered a warrior for his club, but a champion and premiership winner. I use Carey as an example because he played for a club under significant distress financially, and still made the grade. MORE than made the grade.

Anyhoo... Glad this one's over.

[Jarka 767]

There's more to add to this debate.

Positives for CAC

Very good use of later picks. ie Bartram, Bruce etc

Good use of rookie picks (especially early in career). ie J.Mac, Davey etc

Good recent record ie McLean, Bate, Jones

Second half of his career very good

Negatives

Poor record of drafting leaders early career (recent picks have yet to prove themselves)

Poor record of drafting KPP's

Ordinary record of first round picks early in career

Ordinary record of recruiting ruckman

CAC's role wasn't just about recruiting though, he was also in charge of list management and considering the new coach decided that we had to rebuild the list around the u23's then it's fair to say that the list management hasn't been that great over the last half a decade. At the end of last year we had a whole group of 25's and over who weren't really up to first 18 standard.

[Guest fatty]

There's more to add to this debate.

Fantastic stuff, Jarka. But I’m pedantic and can’t help myself on the following:

Very good use of later picks. ie Bartram, Bruce etc

Bartram, Bruce & Whelan are exceptions. The rest of our late picks are ordinary. They get a place due to the failure of earlier picks.

Good use of rookie picks (especially early in career). ie J.Mac, Davey etc

You can have this one. McDonald & Davey are exceptional but rookies are what they are and 90% of them don’t make it.

Good recent record ie McLean, Bate, Jones

McLean & Jones are gems. Bate, Dunn & Newton are still questionable. I wouldn’t have picked them in the draft. CAC did and the jury is still out.

Second half of his career very good

About time but I would still disagree.

Negatives

Poor record of drafting leaders early career (recent picks have yet to prove themselves)

Doesn’t make any difference. McLean is the only leader that the club should bank on.

Poor record of drafting KPP's

This is where we will be exposed the most in the next 10 years. Bate, Dunn, Miller, Rivers were recruited as KPP’s. With the exception of Rivers, none of them will fill that role. I think we’re in trouble in this regard.

Ordinary record of first round picks early in career

CAC agrees. Even later in his career, he’d be worried about the same. McLean is a star and Sylvia is a dud. Dunn, Bate, Newton are still to prove their worth.

Ordinary record of recruiting ruckman

Jeff White is our only true ruckman. I believe they’ve done their best to rectify it this year.

None of the above stacks up well for Craig Cameron as a success story in the history of the MFC. Good luck at Richmond. They need far more help than we do.

[Slartibartfast 17,279]

Very good use of later picks. ie Bartram, Bruce etc

Bartram, Bruce & Whelan are exceptions. The rest of our late picks are ordinary. They get a place due to the failure of earlier picks.

You're kidding? Bruce Whelan and Bartram only getting a game due to early pick failures? Bruce and Whelan would play in any team in the league. Bartram was a first year player and played every game. He was injured all his second year and you judge him already. Name another recruiter that picks a higher percentage of late picks.

You've missed the boat badly on this one I reckon.

Good recent record ie McLean, Bate, Jones

McLean & Jones are gems. Bate, Dunn & Newton are still questionable. I wouldn’t have picked them in the draft. CAC did and the jury is still out.

Newton was hardly an early pick? Rot. He was in the 40's. You're hard on Bate but I won't debate that and Dunn is still to establish himself. It's too early to call either way so you can't have it. He may be excellent or he maybe a miss. Either way CAC took him early and if he gets it right is a big plus.

Poor record of drafting leaders early career (recent picks have yet to prove themselves)

Doesn’t make any difference. McLean is the only leader that the club should bank on.

Jones has excellent leadership potential. So do Morton and Grimes. Unless McLean pulls his head in he won't captain Melbourne as Jones will go past him. I also believe Green has excellent leadership qualities but I know I'm in the minority on this one.

Ordinary record of recruiting ruckman

Add Simmonds and Jolly. Both traded for first round picks and solid first rucks with one touted as AA. Name 3 others with better strike rates and relegate CAC to 4th.

You're very good at the absolutes Fatty, have a go at the comparative and see if you can find someone better. I reckon that's too much work. At least if you're going to shoot CAC get some facts right. There are too many holes in your analysis above.

[Guest fatty]

You're very good at the absolutes Fatty, have a go at the comparative and see if you can find someone better. I reckon that's too much work. At least if you're going to shoot CAC get some facts right. There are too many holes in your analysis above.

You’re misunderstanding my point about Bruce, Whelan, Bartram. I was referring to Walsh, Ward, Godfrey, Broadbridge, Williams getting opportunities due to the failure of earlier picks to make the grade. I apologise for not making it clear.

Matthew Whelan is one of the most important players in our side. Apart from David Neitz, he’s the most successful player we have had in the last 10 years.

Cameron Bruce, Clint Bartram, Matthew Whelan are exceptions to the rule that the best players go early. Unfortunately, Bartram apparently has a career ending injury and Bruce’s currency is waning in today’s game. Whelan is categorically injury prone.

Brock McLean can do all he likes in Germany, Greece or a Lionel Ritchie concert. He’s without doubt the next captain of the club. I have no idea about the leadership potential of Morton & Grimes. You probably know more.

“Ordinary record of recruiting ruckman”

This is Jarka’s comment. Simmonds and Jolly are both creditable ruckmen. But they don’t play for us anymore. The only decent ruckman we have right now is Jeff White. Looking at the decisions made by the MFC in the last 2 months, they’re making an attempt to rectify this.

Why should I have a go at the comparatives? Paul Gardner and Steve Harris would ask themselves why we haven’t won a premiership and then go about setting the right processes in place to fix it. Isn’t that what you would do?

[Jarka 767]

Fan, the rucking comment was mine and I'm happy to explore the statement further, but firstly Simmonds wasn't traded for a first round pick. He was involved in a 3 way trade which left Melbourne with Ellis, so going by your reasoning that Jolly was a good pick because we received a first round pick then Simmonds was a poor one because we ended up with a dud in return.

Jolly is interesting, and I agree that he is the best ruck that CAC has drafted however we were lucky to get a first round pick because he is clearly not a first choice ruck, as Sydney has discovered by continually trying to add senior ruckman to their list. I've had numerous debates on this forum about Jolly being a loss, but guys like RR put up a very good case to argue the opposite.

Fatty is right, we have only one decent ruckman on our list (Meesen has yet to prove himself), and it's a problem that CAC has had 11 years to try to get right.

My personal opinion is that CAC is a decent recruiter, but I wouldn't have him in the top 4. I believe that because he occasionally posts on this forum (and demonology) then his reputation has expanded far beyond his capabilities because of the 'celebrity syndrome'. Don't get me wrong, I loved reading his posts on the explanations of why he drafted some players, we were very lucky to have that resource of information, but alot of poeple here belived that what CAC said was gospel, which is [censored] because in recruiting it's just opinions.

I specifically enjoyed his thoughts after the draft when Hawthor took Roughhead and Franklin instead of Tambling, he gave a level headed explanation on what appeared to be a mssive blunder by the hawks, and he turned out to be right. He was great to have around and will be missed but life goes on.

[Slartibartfast 17,279]

Fatty I did misunderstand your point re Bruce, Whelan and Bartram, thanks for pointing that out. But when evaluating CAC's late picks wouldn't you also add McDonald, Robertson, Rigoni, Woewodin, Bassett, Davey and even perhaps Carroll to that list? All are late picks or rookies that have forged solid AFL careers, including Brownlows, AA and Club B&F's. It's about one a year in his tenure and we haven't really had a chance to see how Garland (who I hold high hopes for), Weetra, McNamara or Cheney turn out. And then of course there's Newton at 43, but you consider him an early pick!

Jolly and Simmonds must be included in an analysis of recruiting. The fact they are now playing for other clubs is a list management question.

Jarka I'm interested in your comments on the Simmonds trade. Certainly the AFL Guide supports you but I could have sworn there were picks attached to the trade. But your point is valid. If there were no picks he wasn't a first rounder. Nonetheless he has turned out to be a good footballer, one that pushed for AA selection and he was recruited by CAC. Again the fact he is not on our list or what we traded him for is not relevant to the discussion.

I'm as guilty as anyone for not doing the comparative research but the main criticism of CAC is his lack of stars and his early round failures. So I went through the draft records and looked at the first 20 picks in each draft of CAC's tenure and put in my "failures". It's totally subjective but it gives a flavour:

Sydney: Willoughby, Fitzgerald

Richmond: Schulz, Meyer.

WC: Crabb, Chambers, Hill, McDougall, T Gasper, Haynes.

Geelong: McKay, Bray, Tenace

St.Kilda: Walton, Beetham, Watts, McQualter

Hawthorn: Obst, Collica, Elstone

Carlton: Vance, Livingstone, Sporn

Melbourne: Lamb, Molan, Smith

Freo: Schell, Dunn

Brisbane: Cupido, Spannderman

Collingwood: Roach, Jason Cloke, Cole, Morrison

PA: Koulouriotis, Brookes, Willits

NM: Smith, Watson, Shore, Trotter

Adelaide: Angwin, Watts, Meeson, Pfeiffer

Essendon: Davies, Harvey, Bradley

Footscray: Walsh, Faulkner.

I've not looked at the number of picks each club has had which if you were to do it seriously should be done. I've not set a strict criteria but gone on "gut feel". We've missed on three talls who have a much higher "miss" rate than smalls. But what I reckon it shows is that CAC was not a bad recruiter of players early, but he had his missed along with everyone else.

It would be interesting to go through players picked (say) 50 and above and see how many played (say) 50 games. Any takers?

[Axis of Bob 11,812]

The Simmonds trade was:

Simmonds to Freo

Bandy to Footscray

Pick 26 and Ellis to Melbourne.

This was also the Judd draft, so Simmonds for 26 was not unreasonable in itself. Ellis was more sugar coating IMO but it is often said by people on this site that it was Simmonds for Ellis, which completely untrue. It's the same as when people say we traded Grgic for Bizzell. It's simplistic and untrue.

[Guest fatty]

But when evaluating CAC's late picks wouldn't you also add McDonald, Robertson, Rigoni, Woewodin, Bassett, Davey and even perhaps Carroll to that list? All are late picks or rookies that have forged solid AFL careers, including Brownlows, AA and Club B&F's. It's about one a year in his tenure and we haven't really had a chance to see how Garland (who I hold high hopes for), Weetra, McNamara or Cheney turn out. And then of course there's Newton at 43, but you consider him an early pick!

With the exception of McDonald & Davey, the players you list are all still very ordinary. Robertson is arguable but his short-comings are well documented on this site. Davey is yet to prove himself as a class player.

I’m wrong about Newton and I stand corrected. Pick 43 is not a first-rounder. I tend to lump the three together as they were all speculative bottom age picks in the same year. I shouldn’t do that. I’ll still reserve judgement on all three of them.

You’re also right about Jolly & Simmonds. They’re both good recruits and unfortunate losses to the club - Simmonds more so than Jolly. Cameron is not to blame for our dearth of ruckmen.

But you know that you can’t win this argument as I’ll just start pointing at premierships (which Nasher seems to think are nebulous). I’m not trying to be a smart-arse but my contention is that Craig Cameron has not put us in any better position to have a tilt at the flag. I can argue that is why he was employed in the first place, and he’s failed. A number of factors are beyond his control but responsibility must be attributed somewhere, otherwise we gain nothing from the experience. The recruiting staff, football department and administration are responsible. As I’ve said before, CAC himself is willing to admit it.

I’m tougher on the club than I should be. But I’m a paid up member and believe I have a right to be. I suspect you’re a little more lenient. You’re right not to argue with Rono over on Demonology because he’s a [censored]. However, his “cheerleader” comments about you are not without merit (this is not an attempt to insult).

I am interested in your thoughts about Garland. I have no idea about him. The same goes for Weetra, McNamara, Cheney.

If we win a premiership in the next 10 years, I’ll apologise to everyone here that I’ve offended, including Craig Cameron and admit that he got it right..

[Jarka 767]

The Simmonds trade was:

Simmonds to Freo

Bandy to Footscray

Pick 26 and Ellis to Melbourne.

This was also the Judd draft, so Simmonds for 26 was not unreasonable in itself. Ellis was more sugar coating IMO but it is often said by people on this site that it was Simmonds for Ellis, which completely untrue. It's the same as when people say we traded Grgic for Bizzell. It's simplistic and untrue.

As I said, a 3 way trade, and who did we get with pick 26?

[george_on_the_outer 7,591]

My contention is, to date, we are yet to get it right.

Why is this so difficult to explain?

It is actually very easy to explain.....when was the last time that CAC got a draft pick in the top 3 or 4. Yes Mclean and Sylvia...are they stars yet? Who knows....

But you have to go back to Travis Johnstone to find the previous of these picks, and that area is where you find the Stars you speak of.

To put it simply, we haven't had the picks with which to select stars.

[Slartibartfast 17,279]

With the exception of McDonald & Davey, the players you list are all still very ordinary. Robertson is arguable but his short-comings are well documented on this site. Davey is yet to prove himself as a class player.

You're pulling my leg about Robbo. How many FP have kicked 70 goals in a season? In his 11 games last year Robbo averaged over 3 goals a game. He's a very effective goal kicker. He's also a genuine pack marking forward. How many of them exist? Robbo is not exceptional but he is miles better than "very ordinary". Take away his "weaknesses" and you have an exceptional footballer. Not many 29 yo "very ordinary" footballers are chased by other clubs and offered 3 year contracts. And the Bullies were prepared to pay a pretty good price to us.

Bassett was a fantastic footballer and AA I think. Much better than very ordinary. Woewodin won a Brownlow. He was better than "very ordinary" although I didn't rate him. What you seem to be doing is rating these players against absolutes whereas when judging CAC as a recruiter we should judge them against their position in the draft. On that basis they are all exceptional picks.

But you know that you can’t win this argument as I’ll just start pointing at premierships (which Nasher seems to think are nebulous).

CAC along with all the FD are responsible for our on field performance. But the best recruiters don't necessarily win flags. They do not fight on a level playing field. Apart from the resources they have available they have different picks in a draft so have differing opportunities. Also years differ. If we'd have had pick 3 in 2001 instead of 2003 we'd have had Judd not Sylvia and a Brownlow Medalist instead of an OP riddled player. Take away Geelongs father/sons and they may not have won a flag (Ablett, Ablett, Hawkins, Scarlett and Blake). In that lot alone they have 3 additional early first rounders and perhaps one or two others.

So flags is no basis for rating recruiting officers and to suggest they are the silver bullet in your favour is just missing the point.

I’m tougher on the club than I should be. But I’m a paid up member and believe I have a right to be. I suspect you’re a little more lenient. You’re right not to argue with Rono over on Demonology because he’s a [censored]. However, his “cheerleader” comments about you are not without merit (this is not an attempt to insult).

Fatty you've no idea how "hard" I am on the club. These forums are full of people willing to criticise the club and that's fair enough where it's warranted. But in many cases it isn't. What I try and do on these forums is add balance. The "cheerleaders" are the ones who want to join the pack on these sites and vent their spleen and beat their hairy chest. I won't do that. I'll argue my points and present positives as there are enough prepared to say the "hard" things.

And I'll state my negatives, but I'll not do it in public. I suspect I'm just as hard as you, I just don't let emotion effect my judgements. Have a beer with me one day and find out.

You have very "Hannabal" type views, characteristics and style. I'm not suggesting you're Hannabal but you could almost be related!!

[mo64 5,874]

A quick summation of some key players from Brisbane's 3 premiership teams:

Voss, Akermanis - QLD zone, exclusive to the Lions

Brown - Father/son

C. Johnson - Part of merge(takeover) with Fitzroy

M. Michael - Exchange with J. Molloy (Fitzroy)

In addition to salary cap concessions, a pretty handy gift to any recruiting manager.

[Hannabal 4]

You have very "Hannabal" type views, characteristics and style. I'm not suggesting you're Hannabal but you could almost be related!!

Yet I disagree with much of his content. Whilst some of the thrust has merit, his views are too simplistic.

And I don't think he plays chess.

[Guest fatty]

You're pulling my leg about Robbo. How many FP have kicked 70 goals in a season? In his 11 games last year Robbo averaged over 3 goals a game. He's a very effective goal kicker. He's also a genuine pack marking forward.

Ask your mate Neale Daniher what he thinks of Robbo. Your other mate, Rhino Richards, presented a valid argument that his goals against Carlton in 2007 don’t count.

Robbo has failed as a forward to apply defensive pressure. Neitz is guilty of the same. Its nice for him that the Bulldogs are interested in him but it is irrelevant.

For the sake of consensus, I’ll agree that Craig Cameron has done a good job at the MFC.

But to answer Robbo24’s original question, my reply is, Craig Cameron is not.

I don’t play chess. Its fundamentally boring.

[Jarka 767]

Yet I disagree with much of his content. Whilst some of the thrust has merit, his views are too simplistic.

And I don't think he plays chess.

I imagined that you were more of a 'checkers' type.

[Slartibartfast 17,279]

I don’t play chess. Its fundamentally boring.

Chess requires a sharp brain and a desire to analyze. I'm not surprised you don't like it.

[Brocky 4]

who did we get with pick 26?

Jared Rivers?

[Guest fatty]

Chess requires a sharp brain and a desire to analyze. I'm not surprised you don't like it.

I have a blunt brain and absolutely no desire to analyse.

[Hannabal 4]

I imagined that you were more of a 'checkers' type.

Well, there you go.

I spend 90% of my webtime playing chess on gameknot.com and about 10% elsewhere.

[Damo 3,356]

I have a blunt brain and absolutely no desire to analyse.

This has been a terrific discussion. Im sorry I didnt contribute.

Fatty you are a gem.

[Jarka 767]

Well, there you go.

I spend 90% of my webtime playing chess on gameknot.com and about 10% elsewhere.

Mate, I was joking, I just forgot to put in a smilie.

Have you ever seen Darren Brown playing chess?

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Your other mate, Rhino Richards, presented a valid argument that his goals against Carlton in 2007 don’t count.

My issue with Robbo is that in the past two years he has failed to put defensive pressure when he does not win the ball on the first contest. I think the game has changed in the past 3 years and demands from all players that they pressure the ball carrier.

However over the course of his career, Robbo has been a great clubman who has maximised his strengths and work on and overcome some of his weakness. We drafted him so late in the draft and he has played 200+ games, Club b+f and was in contention for AA a few years back. That is a pretty good return for CAC on that pick.

[timD 994]

FAtty, I hope you are kidding about that idea that Neita doesn't apply defensive pressure? Are you kidding? After being triple teamed week after week, where he gets sat on by two blokes in a marking contest while the third runs away, you criticise him for not applying defensive pressure?

[Guest fatty]

FAtty, I hope you are kidding about that idea that Neita doesn't apply defensive pressure? Are you kidding? After being triple teamed week after week, where he gets sat on by two blokes in a marking contest while the third runs away, you criticise him for not applying defensive pressure?

TimD,

I believe David Neitz is one of the most unfairly treated forwards in the competition. The number of times he is screened out of a contest and not given any reward is terribly frustrating. He’s also the victim of ND’s attacking game plan. The strict interpretation of the hands-in-the-back rule is not helping him either. However, a weakness in his game has been his lack of defensive pressure in the forward line. Someone will ask me to provide proof. I can’t.

I’m not posting on this thread anymore as I’ve antagonised far too many people. DeeFan is probably right that I look at absolutes and not comparatives. But I can no longer have a conversation when I’m asked to take away the weaknesses of a player and then form an opinion.

The general conclusion that has been reached in this thread is that I’m dumb. Fair enough. I probably am.