Draft History

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

This argument again, can we confine these threads to draft week.

Man. I just had a blue with someone over 3 pages on this topic a few weeks ago...

please note the question mark.

Only opened this for a debate on something other than who's head's next on the chopping block from the first 22

Basically Eastie, the point you hint at isn't justified. Or more specifically, it's ALWAYS justified when yo're talking about a team on the bottom of the ladder with 30-something percent in the percentage column. If we had Bartram, Rivers, Dunn etc etc playing, and all our good players going well then we would rate them higher, and consequently our draft history would look better than it does....

Mark our recruiting over the last 5, or maybe 10 years where the players playing now were recruited. Our history in that time isn't as bad as people think.... finals series, finals won, grand final... And all with a number of chronic infrastructure weaknesses.

Put simply. Our recruiting is ok. Not top-notch, but then how could it be? We've been in the top 8 a fair bit, unlike Richmond, Carlton, Dogs, Hawks etc etc...

[Jarka 767]

Ohh, saved by the old '?'.

Pizz off.

Don't be a [censored] H

[Hannabal 4]

Don't be a [censored] H

Why ? Some mungbean starts a thread intimating that our recent draft history is inferior to all clubs bar Richmond and when challenged to produce some facts states "I was only asking the question".

Get real.

[drdrake 3,065]

Since 1997 have we drafted any KPP that are above average AFl Player, the only two I can think of are Robbo and Rivers. In 1998 we had Lyon, Neitz, The Ox, Shaun Smith as our key forwards with Farmer as well. Robbo also played a bit. Down back we had Ingerson and Shanahan, Since then we have not had the KPP spine and we still haven't addressed this. No FB, a CHB that has missed but can play, no CHF and a aging Neitz. OUr early drafting picks have been very poor.

[Jarka 767]

Man. I just had a blue with someone over 3 pages on this topic a few weeks ago...

It's a topic that will continue to be argued and debated over the next half a decade as we have to completely rebuild the list

Basically Eastie, the point you hint at isn't justified. Or more specifically, it's ALWAYS justified when yo're talking about a team on the bottom of the ladder with 30-something percent in the percentage column.

That's not the whole story though, over the last 6 or 7 years the best that we've done is just above middle of the road - not good enough

If we had Bartram, Rivers, Dunn etc etc playing, and all our good players going well then we would rate them higher, and consequently our draft history would look better than it does....

IF....yeah and if my aunt had balls then she'd be my uncle. The fact is that both Bartram and Dunn have showed promise but havn't proved themselves yet, Dunn moreso. Us demon fans have a habit of overrating our players.

Mark our recruiting over the last 5, or maybe 10 years where the players playing now were recruited.

Yep, I've done that and posted my results on this forum, it's not as great as we think it is, particularly in the early rounds.

Our history in that time isn't as bad as people think.... finals series, finals won, grand final... And all with a number of chronic infrastructure weaknesses.

*cough* [censored] *cough*

Sure we made a grand final, and got absolutely belted, record loss - yeah something to be proud of <_<

In this competition half of the competition gets to play finals, half! That means that average, middle of the road teams get a shot, and that description fits our club snugly over the last decade.

How many finals do you think we've won since 2000? We have won just 2 finals since 2000, and oen of them was against a limping, injury decimated Saints in 06. Prior to that you have to go back to 2002 against the kangaroos. 2 wins and 4 losses, how could anyone be satisfied with that record? Oh yeah, Melbourne supporters

The Kangaroos built a championship team training on a paddock with portable rooms as their club rooms. It's an excuse for failure, nothing more.

Put simply. Our recruiting is ok. Not top-notch, but then how could it be? We've been in the top 8 a fair bit, unlike Richmond, Carlton, Dogs, Hawks etc etc...

Our recruiting is not ok, it's just average, at best. We've had a couple of decent late picks but go back and look at our record in drafting KPP's and rucks.

Average, just like the rest of the club, or more accurately, soft as butter.

[Jarka 767]

Why ? Some mungbean starts a thread intimating that our recent draft history is inferior to all clubs bar Richmond and when challenged to produce some facts states "I was only asking the question".

Get real.

No H, you get real. Personally I think the topic deserves more debate but what the [censored] is the point if the OP asks a question and provides all the answers as well?

[Keepin up with the Joneses 48]

I don't think we have the worst draft history, but rather the worst club culture. I have no doubt all of those players probably would have been better players had they been at other clubs.

110% Correct, but we also have to accept that CAC could not recruit KPP

[Hannabal 4]

No H, you get real. Personally I think the topic deserves more debate but what the [censored] is the point if the OP asks a question and provides all the answers as well?

The topic has been done to death. I don't mind questioning our recruiting, in fact CAC and I have had some healthy debate over the years, but if I was to start a thread intimating that our recent history was only better than Richmonds I would produce some statistical analysis. And if challenged to further produce facts I would. I'm sick of lazy posters who make broad, or off the cuff statements or 'questions' and wait for others to do the work. I've always loved feisty debate, so, by all means make your assertions, but be prepared to back them up. Don't hide behind a rhetorical question mark.

There are so many crap opinions on here I feel like I'm embedded in the 50,000 tonnes of cow pat currently attracting flies in Lake Eildon.

[warren dean 193]

Jarka, you make some very valid points, and as you know, I agree with much of what you have to say. CAC did have 10 years to assemble a list that has us in pretty much the same position as when he arrived at the club. I do believe though, as I stated earlier in the thread that the uneven playing field re recruiting/drafting rules and regs over the past 10 years makes it difficult to rank clubs in order of success. Like you, I believe we have been just average.

[Jarka 767]

I've always loved feisty debate, so, by all means make your assertions, but be prepared to back them up. Don't hide behind a rhetorical question mark.

And yet you specifically choose that post to respond to and not my other one where I debated the topic.

Don't hide behind your superiorty complex, it's obvious you enjoy belittling other posters far more than debating opinions.

[Slartibartfast 16,131]

There are so many crap opinions on here I feel like I'm embedded in the 50,000 tonnes of cow pat currently attracting flies in Lake Eildon.

Then you should see if you can find an alternative.....

[Hannabal 4]

Then you should see if you can find an alternative.....

Here he is Didn't know you were still around ?

Good to see you Bob up.

[Jaded No More 60,151]

List management is more of an issue than drafting IMO.

Every club has hits and misses. It is impossible to get every selection right, and it was even more so 10 years ago. Technology and bigger recruiting teams are making the science of drafting more exact, but still, how can you predict with 100% accuracy what a 17 year old player is going to be like at 27?

However, once on the list, it generally doesn't take too many seasons to identify the weaknesses of your recruits (nobody is perfect, no matter if your name is Godfrey or Judd). What we haven't done well under Daniher and CAC is identify the disposable players, and dispose of them quickly and efficiently. We waited too long in the hope every player will come good, and most of them didn't.

I am more hopeful that Bailey won't wait around forever to get rid of under-performing players.

[Hannabal 4]

And yet you specifically choose that post to respond to and not my other one where I debated the topic.

Don't hide behind your superiorty complex, it's obvious you enjoy belittling other posters far more than debating opinions.

BaggyBob is right Heart. Frankly, I've posted so much over the years that I really can't be bothered repeating what I've written on countless other threads, and I've never been good at keeping documents on Word, so I can't even cut and paste which would save much time.

There are the same old topics from year to year, month to month, and even week to week. It's Groundhog Day. I just pipe in from time to time when I feel inclined, but am not adding much to the debate. But trust me I've debated more than I've had hot dinners. I can no longer be bothered.

I might take that sanctimonious pricks advice.

[Redleg 38,617]

On an examination of the draft on a pick by pick basis there will always be room for the genius of hindsight.

My annoyance is that I can't recall us drafting one champion in the last 10 years. Every other club seems to have been able to get one or more truly great players. We haven't. In my opinion Rivers is the closest to it we have come.

[beelzebub 22,740]

I think a serious error many make is to think its really about getting every selection right. if ythat was the case then youd want to be able to review and say we got X% right. The reality is ideally you want to get SOME cream!! You want some players to be the goods ( or Goodes even ..lol ) .

No one is going to have a great strike rate...yes some are better historically than others but its about getting some right as opposed to all wrong.. thats my view !!

[Jarka 767]

Well I'm convinced, after watching today's game we clearly have the most talented list in the AFL, in fact I'm amazed how anyone could possibly even consider that any other club has a better drafting record.

[Eastie Boyz 0]

At least there's no shortage of ruckman . . .

White, Johnson, Jamar, Meesen, Martin, Zomer, Spencer

Wonder how they ended up with all them and I spose Jolly back in the day, yet haven't landed themselves a decent replacement for Neitz at FF or a CHF

*edit*

Actually, looking at other clubs lists that's about the norm for ruckman. 3 more muture ones with a couple of rookie listers