I would be quite interested in Claws response to this article....serious
ive actually praised their first round selctions and i agree we have found at the worst decent players with them in the main.
why not francis jacksons entire record though.
he started with us in 05 yes while he had other commitments he was still watching kids but could only work with us on a part time basis. greg miller was part time as well in the role they are both still responsible for the decisions they made.
he was very much responsible for jon and just as responsible as miller for the rest of that draft.
05 - jon 8. big fail and it still remains the most galling pick of them all for me. a blind man could see jons weaknesses if you actually watched him play.
06 - riewoldt 13. well he was easily the best kpf left in the draft. he lasted to us despite us trading out of pick 8. there was a few busts this draft so well done.
07 - rance end of first round pp at 18. hes slowly become servicable thats about as much as im prepared to concede. still has too many flaws for the role we want him to play imo. pass mark.
07 - cotchin 2 its widely conceded by all kruezer and cotchin were easily the best two kids going in that draft. it was a no brainer that a bloke off the street would have taken. pass.
08 - vickery 8. imo this pick by no means can be claimed as a pass mark yet. it could still go either way. we drafted him as a ruckman so that part is a fail.
09 = martin 3. another no brainer. there was just 4 in contentention and we had to make a decision on just 2 imo. trengove,scully was going to melbourne we all knew it.it was martin or morabito. so its a pass hardly tough decisions to make.. i still think if injury had not hit so hard morabito would have been the pick of the lot. now he may be a total bust but no one can plan for injurys like hes had.
09 - griffiths 19. was always a risk this pick kills me. i argued strongly for lots of talls but had bastinac pencilled in here. i argued if we go tall it had to be carlisle or black and boy did i cop poo over it. fail.
10 - conca 6. a solid pick up but im in the camp of we probably could have done better. based on performance i thought him a reach i still do. but hes performed servicably to date and under difficult circumstances. so pass. just for the record my choice here was elliot kavanagh. so im behind the 8 ball.
11 - ellis. 15. a good pick up should be at least a good consistent player for us. pass
12 - vlastuin im going to give em credit here imo he was a top 5 pick and a very safe bet. thing is there was a fair few very good choices here and it would have been damn hard to stuff up. if grundy was not there he would have been my choice and he was certainly my choice of the mids that were left to us. i still think stringer will become something out the ordinary but he was gone.
13 - lennon 12. not my choice here and i have reservations about what he will offer thru the midfield. but saying that hes a highly thought of kid by a lot and a worthy pick here i think. pass. if chasing a mid acres dunstan or jones were available. shame sharenburg did not get to us or dom sheed. acres was my choice here of those that were left.
yes our top 20 picks have been decent but you should not be getting too many of these picks wrong ever.
the real complaints over jackson and our recruiting have come after the first rnd or top 20 as the article puts it.
the only player taken in these rounds 2nd 3rd that has remotely come close to making a decent contribution is shane edwards and boy he has his knockers and rightly so.
the entire list of 2nd and 3rd rounders under jackson.
gordon, mcintosh, mcbean, mcdonough, elton, arnot, batchelor, helbig, macdonald, astbury, dea, taylor 51 4th. post putt, edwards, connors 51/4th, hughes, casserley.
no wonder we are so keen to trade out of these picks. thats our lot after 9 yrs of francis jackson 2nd and 3rd round picks bloody hell thank god we have found some decent players in the first round eh.
one point id make is how do you define an a grader the top mark we can give a player.
finding good consistent players doesnt make em a graders. with such early picks you really should find your fair share though. thing is how man have proven themselves to be A graders.
i query the decent footskills comment as well. thats patently wrong.
i also ask why only mention the success stories for hartley and jackson that makes it nothing but a feel good story and totally unbalanced.
i have a question. how many state league and players from other clubs has blair hartley taken in his short time at the club???. that is if hes responsible for taking these types.
by my count there are 22 mature players who fall under hartleys umbrella. yet we only hear about the 4 or 5 to date that have made a decent contribution.
yet when someone questions just how effective hes really been or if we ask could we be doing better that person cops abuse.
i dont think anyone on here in the last 3 or so yrs has argued we have improved in most areas. ffs we could not have been worse. the argument remains should we be doing better.have we done as well as we could should we be further along than we are. dont just look at recent yrs when answering this look at the entire history under jackson and hartley.
just for the record correct me if i have any wrong but the mature players we bought into the club under hartley.
farmer, nason, webberley, derickx, miller, jakobi, a maric, lonergan, petterd, stephenson, this list is made up of poor choices .
thomas, banfiels, miles gordon, lloyd this list is wait and see.
i maric, morris, chaplain, houli, grigg, knights, a edwards. all have added in varying degrees. all bar ivan have knocks on their game.
anyway as usual im just trying to balance out the argument and get people to look past the feel good spin that that article is.
