nutbean

What you do in the privacy of your own home should not be broadcast on demonland..

Not all but your pretty well on the money with this statement !

This is one the definitions on groupthink.... Rather than critically evaluating information, the group members begin to form quick opinions that match the group consensus. Groupthink seems to occur most often when a respected or persuasive leader is present, inspiring members to agree with his or her opinion. It may be a stretch ( no pun intended) but the group members are posters on here and the "respected or persuasive leader" and "group concensus" in my opinion is the media ( the likes of Cardona and Paige and other journo's ) who quite accurately predict the top 10 of each draft each season and tell us how wonderful they are all, only to be proven incorrect in actuality . Going back to the Judd/Hodge/Ball draft there has not been a draft since where there hasn't been a bust in the top 3 draft picks. So here is the critical information that has not been evaluated. Given the data from all those drafts - there is at least a 33% chance that one of McCartin, Petracca or Brayshaw will be a bust. The amount of people lauding our wonderful performance in the draft and how we got it right based on write ups in the papers fail to factor in the one in three chance that one of our top two picks has a fair chance of being decidedly average. Absolutely we should be excited but to use expressions like "we nailed it" when the boys drafted have an AFL resume of zero astounds me. If you dont think it matches the description of groupthink then fine but I will then go with "those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it". If history does repeat itself and we are the recipients stay tuned for posters in about 2 years flaying Taylor and Viney for passing up on Lever or Laverde or some other champion that got through to pick 44 when one of Petracca and Brayshaw turn out to be meh. Edit - See post 772 - Frawley is a solid and reliable defender. Swapping Frawley for Brayshaw is a magnificent result. Is it really ? He hasn't played one game yet and could turn out to be Xavier Ellis taken at 3..... Then how magnificent is it ?

actually according to the thread.....

I would caution anyone to suggest that any draft pick is a win until there some runs on the board. I am cautiously optimistic with the current draft picks with caution being the operative word. Many first round draft picks notoriously do not live up to their footage. This is not just a syndrome that has befallen our club but all clubs - unfortunately our club has had failed draft picks more than most. Sorry Angus, but pick 3 has been particularly bad with the only true star being Judd. Dusty is very good - Griffin - great and poor.Here is my optimism - we may have the best no 3 at our club since Judd - and that is Tyson.

Bottom line is - don't stop the reports Saty....

Spot on . Thread successfully hijacked so I will leave it at that. My one zillion posts in the aforementioned thread makes my position clear.

It was a parable - ( not a very good one ). Haven't eaten one of those wretched things for years.

Apparently he did know when to mark. Took the second most marks for the year behind Frawley and clearly took the most contested marks. He did get caught out a bit but I thought he did a good job down back.

You know what you are going to get with Saty so I don't really understand the angst either. Love his work. I buy a Big Mac because I like it but I always throw away the pickle. Maybe some should try the same with Saty's reports ? It's not that hard.

RE-read the Frawley thread again and tell me if you would still like to maintain this position. edit - interesting thread - read the first five pages...then go to the middle of the thread...then go to the end of the thread. He apparently was much required at the beginning of the thread - by the middle when he still hadn't signed there was great shift and many suggested that we would be better off without him and by the end he was no loss at all. There was some support that pick 3 made him going worthwhile but I beleive that many of the negative views of him were coloured because he refused to re-sign and the expectation was that he was going.

I will suggest that Frawley ( who had some good games dotted with some games where he didn't go nearly hard enough) was absolutely maligned by supporters on this site based on his protracted contractual situation. Not to hard to replace and won't be missed. I expect to be shouted down by the "Frawley was a cancer on the club" brigade.

I did not dismiss the theme of "big bodies" midfielders being drafted. I commented that you would expect a 22 year old to be developed and not all the footballers we have taken are big bodied. My main concern has always been posters fixation with big bodies rather than recruiting players who can firstly play football that may have big bodies. Most footballers as they mature add some size - we fixate on the exceptions like Morton and Gysberts, And you need a combination of both big bodies inside and finer footballers with more speed - as Fremantle have as well. Billy Stretch was taken for his outside speed.

Most of his marks were from hit up leads high half forward / wing. Who had the 3rd most inside 50's for us ? Frawley - tells you where he was getting his kicks. I'll reserve judgement on my thoughts on Brayshaw for Frawley after I see how Brayshaw goes. I will concede that pick 3 for Frawley is above market value - but pick 3 is only a number - lets see how the player goes.

Tragics like us come onto Demonland and we get links to all manner of articles etc. Tragics like us miss out on nothing. The book may not be on the right shelf in the library but we always get to see the book as we spend way too much time in this library.

Frawley did have some games where he didn't look all that interested - but it wont get acknowledged here that he also had some good games. As poor as many considered him this season - he still took the 3rd most marks in the league and he was playing mainly forward this year so he wasnt getting the cheap chip backwards marks in defence. I don't think Grimes has deserved to be in the top 10 for last 2 years - i see some talent in him but his turnovers make me wince.

I think it is a pre-requisite. If you don't believe you can beat/curb your opponent then you are behind the eight ball before you start.

I wouldn't promote unless it leads immediately to a game in the 1sts - otherwise why bother ?

Could also be because he is 22 ? Oscar Mc and Billy Stretch are hardly what you called developed. Our problem has not been that the players drafted were stick insects. They were stick insects who couldn't get a kick. ( we drafted some big bodied footballers and they couldn't get a kick either)

I get all that but I just don't put the same emphasis on B&F's as others. To me they usually get the best couple of players on the ground correct but then there is some more left of centre voting from then on down. I suspect that the match committee cast the lower votes around who is doing exactly as required rather than who is playing the best. I am bemused by Watts finishing as high as he did and find it interesting that the smacking the Frawley got from most on here - he finished 8th in the B&F. It is just all opinions. On Grimes - I like the way he goes about it but he does need to clean up the clangers.

More involved in the back half. Lots of intercept marks and spoils. I like him back with a pinch hit forward if required.

As stated elsewhere - his disposal left a lot to be desired. Doesn't matter how much you get the pill if you cant hit a target. And yes - it is like Boyd. To me Boyd is an enormous punt. Jeremy Cameron I could understand but Boyd is a wing and prayer. I think you are right though - GWS were desperate for a signing.

As long as you don't go up to CP and quote verbatim Mr Mooses post and follow up with "care to comment" ?

I'm not gobsmacked we took Scully either. It shows me that the so called experts aren't all that expert at all and recruiters, journo's and the like are seeing these footballers in the little pond called TAC. He was a revelation at the junior level getting to so many contests and whilst his dodgy kicking was known it wasnt as obvious at TAC level where you have more time to dispose of the pill. Gobsmacked is probably not the right word - I think Scully is the best example possible of recruiters not thinking about "what will this footballer become" and being mesmerised by his one major attribute being his ball winning ability at that level. Like you I am gobsmacked that GWS paid the price they did for him. I was never a supporter of the conspiracy theory that Sheedy wanted to pay us back for not getting the head coach gig but I am struggling to figure out a reason they paid that amount of money for a kid who was so obviously deficient.

petracka-attark ?