i like the process we went thru in getting derickx and morris.
over looking state league players while hanging onto long tem underachievers has been a bug bear with me. we do need to target blokes like derickx who have done really well at their clubs and in their competition and have enough of the required attributes. ie athleticism skills nouse etc to play afl. target blokes who have high b&f finishes at their clubs and in the league.
you wont always find a player who works out but you give yourself a good chance.
i wanted us to draft very late or rookie a bloke called tom lee last yr just 21 this yr. he ticks most boxes very athletic good kick and a damn good size at 196cm. this bloke would have been handy at chb or chf for us this yr.
i would prefer we did this than use a rookie pick on a kid who has done nothing is usually so skinny hes 3 yrs away from playing and has obvious deficiencies that will take time to fix and at the end of the day is more likely to go by the way side than make it.
yep weather derickx makes it or not hes basically a rookie pick the process is right.
the only time i have real issues with us taking mature players is if we use 1st 2nd or even in some cases 3rd round picks to get them. use these picks on quality kids take enough kids each yr as well and you can then value add with senior players until your hearts content.
finally while it doesnt look great atm big tom may well still manage to make the grade.
You make some good points claw. One thing I heard on the radio the other day, Was about how clubs draft. Some like Sydney recycle many players and do really well at it, some like Geelong build their own and rarely recycle, the conclusion whatever path you go, do it well. I think sydney are unique in the way they go about it, because they have to. Recycled players are more likely to stick in Sydney too. I think we should go more the Geelong route and develop our own, something we have not been good at since the 80s. But with our increased football spend we are developing some good players under hardwick like Rance.
i basically agree with ya . but there is a distinction between recycled and state league. i also think where we take recycled/state league players is important. the distinction between 1st rnd picks and late nd rookie picks has to be made.
keep your 1st 2nd maybe 3rd round picks and find the quality kids in the draft with them. target the recycled and state leaguers with late nd psd or orookie picks, to me thats getting the best of both worlds and you arent trading away your quality long term future.
geelong having utilised the draft to the max and built most of their team thru the draft did have a few recycled and state league players albeit they didnt come cheap apart from podsiadly.
ottens mooney spring straight to mind who were recycled afl players. pods and taylor were state league players. so geelong havent totally ignored recycled/state league players.
with two more teams in the comp the talent pool just shrank significantly again. imo the state leagues are still over looked to a large degree by all clubs not just us.
i look at kyle horsley from subi. r/u in the sandover medal performed well in the league for yrs on end. subi b&f and has all the attributes to play afl, good kick good size for a mid can find the footy basically just needed an opportunity to either make it or fail. and yes theres a good chance he would fail but has to be a lesser chance of that happening than a 18 yr old rookie who failed to get picked up in the draft and hasnt proven a thing. thats why the process with derickx is the right one. we should do more of it weather tom makes it or not.
surely kyle horsley or players in his situation are a better option than us loading up with 6 skinny rookies all of them overlooked by all clubs because they have chronic weaknesses in key areas. it takes us 3 yrs to get em up to speed if they ever get up to speed. lets not forget most rookies never ever make it. why dont we take a 24 yr old who can improve your list straight away they can actually play a game if need be and have proven themselves at the next level down something most rookies have not done.
im not advocating we dont use rookie picks or late nd picks on kids most of these type of picks should still go to kids, but i am advocating we use a few more of these picks on slightly older blokes who meet the criteria.
i know this post is getting long winded and i apologise. but to me this coming draft why not use our first 4 picks on kids.
thats going to be 4 picks in the top 50 or close to it. theres the long term quality and future sewn up. depending on what pick we actually end up with i would definately go after josh caddy with our first rounder. imo hes exactly the type of mid we need and hes still very much a kid and we cater to the quality long term player with this pick.
depending on how many we cut we may use the next pick somewhere in the 60s on a kid or target a retread from another club. we then psd a mature player recycled/state, that means we cut 6 from the list proper but go no deeper in the draft than pick 60 something to replace them.
we then work out what rookies we are to cut if we cut say 5 why not target 2 mature players from state league and take 3 kids.
at the end of it all we end up with a scenario of 7 new kids and 4 state/recycled players or something very similar.
