2010 Draft Discussion thread [merged]

[Infamy]

There is way too much text on this page

[WilliamPowell]

Have to say some of the posts on this thread have been fantastic  Great discusssion points from both sides

Wouldn't you love another Dustin Martin, Lids or Cotchin in the team?

No doubt I think we all would.

However, the argument seems to be that the only way to get these types of players this year is if we have pick 4. The draft is supposedly deep so who says we wont get a gun with pick 6?

My biggest problem with tanking now (even more so after reading the Hardwick interview in the Age over the weekend) is what price do we pay if we try and lose games now?

Hardwick and the club is clearly trying to build something and one the core elements of this build is respect.

The playing group clearly respects Hardwick and Hardwick also comes across as man with great integrity (again something I took out of the Age article).

What message does it send to our young group if he compromises his integrity and starts playing for losses. What happens to the respect that is clearly being developed and earned at all levels?

Is it really worth jepordising all the gains we've made so far and could make as the year progresses for pick 4? 

Pro-tankers will say YEP most definitely but for me right at the moment the answer is NOPE

[Stripes]

Have to say some of the posts on this thread have been fantastic  Great discusssion points from both sides

Wouldn't you love another Dustin Martin, Lids or Cotchin in the team?

No doubt I think we all would.

However, the argument seems to be that the only way to get these types of players this year is if we have pick 4. The draft is supposedly deep so who says we wont get a gun with pick 6?

My biggest problem with tanking now (even more so after reading the Hardwick interview in the Age over the weekend) is what price do we pay if we try and lose games now?

Hardwick and the club is clearly trying to build something and one the core elements of this build is respect.

The playing group clearly respects Hardwick and Hardwick also comes across as man with great integrity (again something I took out of the Age article).

What message does it send to our young group if he compromises his integrity and starts playing for losses. What happens to the respect that is clearly being developed and earned at all levels?

Is it really worth jepordising all the gains we've made so far and could make as the year progresses for pick 4? 

Pro-tankers will say YEP most definitely but for me right at the moment the answer is NOPE

I think you can achieve both.

Firstly the players I mentioned were all top 3 draft choices in an uncompromised draft. A later pick may get us a player of similar quality but it is increasing unlikely the higher we go.

In terms of losing player respect and derailing what Harwick has achieved, I think that can be avoided while still retaining last spot. If players are rested and played in alternative positions why would this be alert the players that the club was attempting to position itself for the draft? Hardwick and the Selection Committee have been making decisions such as these all year. Hardwick would not be trying to lose but he would also not be trying to win either - he would be focusing on what is really important, like what he has said he would do, and that is developing and finding a team.

If we win games while playing all the list, including as many rookies as possible, and trialling people in various roles and positions, I'll be happy. The minute winning becomes the number one priority at the expense of development and the 'transformation' process, is the minute Hardwick begins to lose his way and take short cuts.

Holding true to these principals we can achieve development, culture while still perhaps securing a priority pick. Unlikely I know but I can dare to dream can't I?

Stripes

[WilliamPowell]

In terms of losing player respect and derailing what Harwick has achieved, I think that can be avoided while still retaining last spot. If players are rested and played in alternative positions why would this be alert the players that the club was attempting to position itself for the draft? Hardwick and the Selection Committee have been making decisions such as these all year. Hardwick would not be trying to lose but he would also not be trying to win either - he would be focusing on what is really important, like what he has said he would do, and that is developing and finding a team.

I think he has not moved from the development thing (as promised) one iota. Only thing now is things are coming together and the results are reflecting that. He has said all along that our 2nd half of the season was going to be a lot better than the first half and we are seeing that

If we win games while playing all the list, including as many rookies as possible, and trialling people in various roles and positions, I'll be happy. The minute winning becomes the number one priority at the expense of development and the 'transformation' process, is the minute Hardwick begins to lose his way and take short cuts.

I don't think winning is the number one priority and it was never going to be this year. However, as I said things are coming together now as the players get used to the game plan, structures and team rules and the reuslts are refelcting that. As I said if we win, we win and if don't as long as we are competitive.

But I think you are wrong in saying the moment winning becomes the priority then we are taking short cuts - they (wins) aren't shortcuts they are the justified results of a lot of hardwork by alot of people especially a bunch of kids who just want to be successful and they should be encouraged not discouraged

But it seems to me that for some people the idea that if we continue to win is not in the best of the RFC long term. Getting this group to play together as a team is what is important to this club and if that means we win some along the way then so be it

[Stripes]

I don't think winning is the number one priority and it was never going to be this year. However, as I said things are coming together now as the players get used to the game plan, structures and team rules and the reuslts are refelcting that. As I said if we win, we win and if don't as long as we are competitive.

But I think you are wrong in saying the moment winning becomes the priority then we are taking short cuts - they (wins) aren't shortcuts they are the justified results of a lot of hardwork by alot of people especially a bunch of kids who just want to be successful and they should be encouraged not discouraged

But it seems to me that for some people the idea that if we continue to win is not in the best of the RFC long term. Getting this group to play together as a team is what is important to this club and if that means we win some along the way then so be it

But who is to say this group will be good enough in the long run WP?! That is the whole point. 'Pro-Tankers' are not trying to cripple the club by proclaiming loses are better than wins or that encouraging success as a team is a terrible thing but rather that we need more quality players to compliment our list. That is it.

The argument is fairly simple as I see it. You think winning as a team will be better in the long run for our future while I say getting the best possible collection of draft choices so we can get the best young players is the most important thing. In an ideal world you cn have both but in reality, winning now means that we lose on draft day. It's pretty simple. The more we win short term, the more we lose long term with the chances of finding quality players diminished.

I don't know if we have all the players we need. I don't think anyone here can safely speculate that we do. I don't want to take any chances. We need to add depth, we need to add talent and we need to do it this draft. If we make the same mistake this year as we have done in the past and won a few meaningless game only to hurt us long term - it will be a mistake in my eyes.

Stripes

[Wildride]

The problem is, when do we flick that switch and start competing for a flag? When does winning change from a short term view to a long term one? I agree that every team always needs more depth, but at some stage you have to switch mentalities from rebuilding to contention. This is more general than where we are currently, I mean - we're not ready to contend for a flag right now I know!

[WilliamPowell]

The argument is fairly simple as I see it. You think winning as a team will be better in the long run for our future while I say getting the best possible collection of draft choices so we can get the best young players is the most important thing. In an ideal world you cn have both but in reality, winning now means that we lose on draft day. It's pretty simple. The more we win short term, the more we lose long term with the chances of finding quality players diminished.

It seems to me (and correct me if I am wrong) you seem willing to put faith in our ability to develop players that we draft but question whether we can develop what we've got.

Further to that I see the we must lose argument as being flawed in that there is quality deep in this draft you just have to know where to find it - so many seem unwilling to acknowledge that.

Whether we have pick 4 or pick 6 we are going to get a quality kid in this draft - it is a deep draft. Whether we have pick 27, 29 or 30 again we are going a pretty good pick up if our recruiters are smart just like any other year

I understand the argument about needing another good draft to bring in more kids but at the same time I don't think we should be "short circuiting" the development of the kids coming through just so we can sow up pick 4. We need to get the balance right

I will repeat let them play and let's see what happens, if we win; then we win if we don't then I will sit back and enjoy the ride. Reality is we are going to finish somewhere between 16th and 14th no higher so let's just see what happens and enjoy it 

[Fluffy Tiger]

I dont think that Tanking is something we could or should do. In reality it does not make much difference in the draft unless you are prepared to finish with four or less wins for 2 seasons in a row. I cant see that happening at the same time as developing this group, learning the game plan, and changing the culture. These things just dont mix for that long, I wouldnt wont this group to go though two years of that. Two years of that would put thoughts of changing clubs, lack of confidence in team mates, coaches and game plan. These negatives should be taken out of the if possible.
 
So even though I understand the arguements on both sides its a NO to tanking for me.

[wayne]

I'd love to finish ahead of the Demons.

I had a cousin giving me the 'don't worry the Tiges will get there one day' speech after the Dee's beat Brisbane and we lost our 5th game.

They're so incredibly insecure about their drafting. Dustin Martin is the best from the 2009 draft is answered with Sculley had 19 touches in a quarter against the Dogs (no mention of the 50% efficiency). Don't even dare try to suggest that Riewoldt is better than Frawley, apparently Riewoldt is inconsistent, while Frawley is the best full back in the land, despite his team losing about 90% of games he's played in.

I'd love to see the handful of Demon supporters try and fathom how the Tigers finished above their so called superstar list. 

[Stripes]

The argument is fairly simple as I see it. You think winning as a team will be better in the long run for our future while I say getting the best possible collection of draft choices so we can get the best young players is the most important thing. In an ideal world you cn have both but in reality, winning now means that we lose on draft day. It's pretty simple. The more we win short term, the more we lose long term with the chances of finding quality players diminished.

It seems to me (and correct me if I am wrong) you seem willing to put faith in our ability to develop players that we draft but question whether we can develop what we've got.

Further to that I see the we must lose argument as being flawed in that there is quality deep in this draft you just have to know where to find it - so many seem unwilling to acknowledge that.

Whether we have pick 4 or pick 6 we are going to get a quality kid in this draft - it is a deep draft. Whether we have pick 27, 29 or 30 again we are going a pretty good pick up if our recruiters are smart just like any other year

I understand the argument about needing another good draft to bring in more kids but at the same time I don't think we should be "short circuiting" the development of the kids coming through just so we can sow up pick 4. We need to get the balance right

I will repeat let them play and let's see what happens, if we win; then we win if we don't then I will sit back and enjoy the ride. Reality is we are going to finish somewhere between 16th and 14th no higher so let's just see what happens and enjoy it 

My argument is not that we can not develop existing players because the proof that we can is in our teams and individuals growth this year. Players such as Edwards, Gus, Riewoldt and White are all proof of that plus the ability of most our first year players to step up immediately. What I am suggesting though is that probability is not on our side if we believe every single one of our young draftees will develop sufficently to become premiership players.

Players have various levels of potential which sometimes is hard to guage while other times simple. Will Nason ever be the player Martin is? What about Polo while he every be as valuable to us with years of development invested into him as Deledio? The answer is - it is extremely unlikely. While they can all be valuable contibutors to our future, the upside of players is not even and depends on their base talent. This is why first round, and even moreso - top 5 draft picks, are so valuable because the potential upside of the players usually selected is far higher than later picks. Put a list together of first draft selections and compare them to a list of pick 10, 20 or 30. Every now and then a player bursts on to the scene and performs unexpectantly well but these are exceptions not the rule.

I am not saying that we can not uncover good or even very good players later in the draft but the further we drift in the draft the more difficult and unprobable uncovering quality players will become. We can develop average players into good and good into very good but we need as great players which we can develop into stars as we can. That is the difference between pick 4 and pick 8 in my book - the ability to pick who we want rather than who is left. You can't make strawberry jam out of horse manure 

In addition I don't think we should field a team to lose. The players should be playing together to win all year. What I am saying is that the administration should select players and recommend positional changes in the effort to continue the teams development...so we lose. You are saying the players aren't silly and that they would see through such a ruse but we have been making similar decisions all year so changes such as these would not seem amiss. If we win then well we did so finding out more about the list and players but if we lose then it would be better for our future list development.

Stripes

[HKTiger]

The funny thing is that the most recent draft that can be evaluated with some form of relevance is 2006.  I.e. The drafts post 2006 toofew player have played enough yet.

The best two players from that draft went 7 and 13.  I'd take pick 13 from 2006 again in a heartbeat.

[Stripes]

The funny thing is that the most recent draft that can be evaluated with some form of relevance is 2006.  I.e. The drafts post 2006 toofew player have played enough yet.

The best two players from that draft went 7 and 13.  I'd take pick 13 from 2006 again in a heartbeat.

Do you mean from out list or in general?

[the_boy_jake]

If you go through the drafts from the last 6-8 years, I don't think there is much at all between picks 4-7. In fact I think it could be argued that the best players from those picks have been those who went to clubs who draft cleverly and develop players well, e.g. Pendlebury.

I agree it is better to have an early pick than a later one, but after pick 2 or 3 it seems to depend more on having the right system and development culture in place than the natural talent of the player.

I read an interesting book several years ago by Sven-Goran Erikssons team sports shrink at Lazio who said the rarest and most important quality in an athlete is the will to win in all situations. If you have players like this then tanking wont be viable anyway.

[Stripes]

If you go through the drafts from the last 6-8 years, I don't think there is much at all between picks 4-7. In fact I think it could be argued that the best players from those picks have been those who went to clubs who draft cleverly and develop players well, e.g. Pendlebury.

I agree it is better to have an early pick than a later one, but after pick 2 or 3 it seems to depend more on having the right system and development culture in place than the natural talent of the player.

I read an interesting book several years ago by Sven-Goran Erikssons team sports shrink at Lazio who said the rarest and most important quality in an athlete is the will to win in all situations. If you have players like this then tanking wont be viable anyway.

There is no doubt that how your teach and educate players is the most important element of list development but drafting comes a close second. Teams like Collingwood have been successful for so long because of the money they invest into recruiting and development. They find quality players from the draft who they develop to their utmost potential. But their lies a problem of sorts also and is why they seem to over preform during the season but underperform during finals when you would expect players to step up. The continuous difficulty for that club is that their players are developed and coached to perform at their peek week in week out but their peek is not as high as other players from opposition teams who make the extra jump in standard during finals.

Here lies my point. Development and education can only lift a player to a certain level, there utmost potential. Players chosen early in the draft are usually those that already have a very exciting, strong base to grow from. There potential improvement is greater than those who have more to learn or improve which are the player chosen later in the draft. The more stronger, talented players we can choose early the better scope we have to improve them as individuals and therefore the team as a whole.

It's like anything - the better raw materials you have to work with the better the end product. Sure a truly wonderful artist can create a beautiful painting using average paint but if they had superior paint, brushes and canvas to start with - what a truly magnificant masterpiece they could create.  Hardwick appears to be a great coach at the moment, with a strong team beneath him. They are beginning to develop the makings of a masterpiece but they are currently using a mixture of poor, average and superior players. If they could get rid of the poor and as much of the average as they can and bring in as much of the superior as possible, imagine what they could create. Anyone following me here...

Anyway - I realize the importance of developing culture, game plan and winning ethos but I also see the incredible importance that ensuring we get as many quality picks as possible to give us the best chance to bring the best players we can to our club. This is our last chance to have a good cleanout and add as many quality young players to the list. After this year, regardless, our masterpiece with begin to be painted 

Stripes

[mightytiges]

You can't make strawberry jam out of horse manure 

Thank you Caro's dad 

In addition I don't think we should field a team to lose. The players should be playing together to win all year. What I am saying is that the administration should select players and recommend positional changes in the effort to continue the teams development...so we lose. You are saying the players aren't silly and that they would see through such a ruse but we have been making similar decisions all year so changes such as these would not seem amiss. If we win then well we did so finding out more about the list and players but if we lose then it would be better for our future list development.

For example promoting and playing Gourdis at FB on Barry Hall and Pavlich in the next two games now that McGuane is out injured. If he struggles we lose; if Goo holds his own and we win then we've found another key defender. Win-win long-term!