Certified Legendary Thread 2 x Premiership Coach Chris Scott contracted to 2026 (aka the Chris Scott volumes

[Partridge]

You're right - the decision to play or not is all very hypothetical. I'm just surprised anyone could try paint that performance - crook or not - as being close to the standard. 4 touches and 0 tackles. 2 goals, one of them well after Melb had put the cue in the rack.

Just remember this the next time we play a young forward who has those stats and let's see how charitable the analysis is.

 

[PhatBoy]

Sure do. Final round of 2015, and the way the crowd reacted when Dangerfield had the ball after the siren. That confirmed it for me, and have seen nothing since to change that view.

We had missed the finals. We were getting one gun player (like Geelong fans of all fans had never seen star players before). The crowd were acting like we'd won the flag.

You are a supporter who, unless I’m getting my wires badly crossed, has essentially said that we should drop off and go to the draft.

How is that attitude - one of accepting failure in order to be better in the future - ANY different to a fan base accepting that ok we failed in 2015 in missing the finals but the gaps on our list and room in our cap was allowing us to get a gun player that would hopefully immediately put us back in contention? Do you think the people were cheering because they thought ‘we love missing finals but hopefully with this guy we can miss them but be more entertained’?

 

[Partridge]

You are a supporter who, unless I’m getting my wires badly crossed, has essentially said that we should drop off and go to the draft.

How is that attitude - one of accepting failure in order to be better in the future - ANY different to a fan base accepting that ok we failed in 2015 in missing the finals but the gaps on our list and room in our cap was allowing us to get a gun player that would hopefully immediately put us back in contention? Do you think the people were cheering because they thought ‘we love missing finals but hopefully with this guy we can miss them but be more entertained’?

Bzzzzt. Thanks for playing. First part completely wrong. I've never said we should drop off, nor see any need why we have to. I absolutely want us to go to the draft. Every year. Except - as I've said before - when amazing deals come along - i.e. Ottens, Dangerfield. But absolutely never for broken hacks and players with far much injury or other baggage (see McIntosh, Clark, Scott Selwood, Gary Rohan, Jack Steven). I'll take an untried 18 year old at pick 35 over them every day of the week. I'm not apologising for that either.

This is the part where posters like to inform me that there are no guarantees in drafting (no kidding) , and that free agency has changed the landscape.

I thought the reaction just stank a little too much about worshipping one player instead of the club. As has been the endless articles about how Dangerfield "deserves" a premiership (he doesn't, and neither does anyone else). He plays for the team. I get the distinct impression some fans think it's the other way around.

 

[PhatBoy]

Bzzzzt. Thanks for playing. First part completely wrong. I've never said we should drop off, nor see any need why we have to. I absolutely want us to go to the draft. Every year. Except - as I've said before - when amazing deals come along - i.e. Ottens, Dangerfield. But absolutely never for broken hacks and players with far much injury or other baggage (see McIntosh, Clark, Scott Selwood, Gary Rohan, Jack Steven). I'll take an untried 18 year old at pick 35 over them every day of the week. I'm not apologising for that either.

This is the part where posters like to inform me that there are no guarantees in drafting (no kidding) , and that free agency has changed the landscape.

I thought the reaction just stank a little too much about worshipping one player instead of the club. As has been the endless articles about how Dangerfield "deserves" a premiership (he doesn't, and neither does anyone else). He plays for the team. I get the distinct impression some fans think it's the other way around.

Mate it’s people clapping.

****en hell

 

[Badtemperedbadger]

not disputing that he didn’t fire in finals but can you a) show me anyone who really did last year and b) tell me in what way he even had a chance to against Melbourne?

Agree totally and not sure why some people have concluded Cameron a bust after one season.
Same people who use Ottens as an example clearly don’t remember his first season.
”Leave him alone………. All of you”

Sorry for being pedantic but can we wait for a couple more seasons before declaring Cameron a bust

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Gary Rohan

23

Gary Rohan

Age

33

Ht

189cm

Wt

92kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

9.6

2star

K

6.6

3star

HB

3.0

3star

M

3.3

3star

T

2.5

4star

G

1.0

4star

D

8.8

2star

K

6.0

2star

HB

2.8

2star

M

3.4

3star

T

2.3

3star

G

1.0

4star

D

9.8

3star

K

6.8

3star

HB

3.0

3star

M

2.2

3star

T

4.2

5star

G

1.2

4star

. Traded for pick 61.
85 goals in 3 seasons = successful trade.

 

[And_ROOS]

Gary Rohan. Traded for pick 61.
85 goals in 3 seasons = successful trade.

Absolutely. He isn't the only player to disappoint in finals, but he still bobs up with goals (kicked a few against GWS).

But at the end of the day, you need to make finals, and Rohan kicked a lot of very important goals for us over the last 3 years. You take the good with the bad with players.

 

[Ricky Vaughn]

Gary Rohan. Traded for pick 61.
85 goals in 3 seasons = successful trade.

Genuine bait. I respect it.

 

[PhatBoy]

Rohan is a hard one to assess because he is SOOO bad in finals. He more than earns his keep the rest of the year. Maybe you treat him like a second spinner in a cricket side. Just bring him out when it makes sense and shelve him at other times

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Genuine bait. I respect it.

Hardly. Been consistent on that for quite a while.

Pick 61 would be lucky to play 20 games. To get 85 goals as the 3rd forward is a successful trade IMO

 

[goyoucatters]

Hardly. Been consistent on that for quite a while.

Pick 61 would be lucky to play 20 games. To get 85 goals as the 3rd forward is a successful trade IMO

Rohan's played 59 games for us in a team that's gone PF, GF, PF. On average, a player taken at Pick 51 through 70 averages just under 43 games in their career. And generating a 50-game player from this draft position takes an average of 3.8 picks, across the history of the draft.

Rohan's finals have generally been incredibly lamentable, no doubt. But the idea that the trade itself was a bad one is demonstrably a hot take, based on many years of draft data from in and around that pick.

Draftguru - AFL Draft Pick Value Comparison - All Time

 

[Partridge]

Rohan's played 59 games for us in a team that's gone PF, GF, PF. On average, a player taken at Pick 51 through 70 averages just under 43 games in their career. And generating a 50-game player from this draft position takes an average of 3.8 picks, across the history of the draft.

Rohan's finals have generally been incredibly lamentable, no doubt. But the idea that the trade itself was a bad one is demonstrably a hot take, based on many years of draft data from in and around that pick.

Draftguru - AFL Draft Pick Value Comparison - All Time

Except that already didn't apply to Rohan - he'd already played 106 games before he came to Geelong.

 

[Vdubs]

We disagree.

about some issues, yes.

 

[Vdubs]

You're right - the decision to play or not is all very hypothetical. I'm just surprised anyone could try paint that performance - crook or not - as being close to the standard. 4 touches and 0 tackles. 2 goals, one of them well after Melb had put the cue in the rack.

nowhere near the standard, and when I saw Guthrie spewing on the ground, more than once, it rang alarm bells that something was off. That performance by the whole team was so flat and out of character, I was glad to hear there were some causative issues. It does not absolve the performance, but in context, explains a lot.

 

[Down at K Park]

nowhere near the standard, and when I saw Guthrie spewing on the ground, more than once, it rang alarm bells that something was off. That performance by the whole team was so flat and out of character, I was glad to hear there were some causative u=issues. It does not absolve the performance, but in context, explains a lot.

Looked like a typical geelong finals team to me. Complete with deers in the headlights.

Looked the same against port, without the convenient illness excuse.

 

[standupand]

Agree totally and not sure why some people have concluded Cameron a bust after one season.
Same people who use Ottens as an example clearly don’t remember his first season.
”Leave him alone………. All of you”

Sorry for being pedantic but can we wait for a couple more seasons before declaring Cameron a bust

Just on Ottens - he was already very good at Richmond, but you know the one area I think he improved out of sight after his first couple of seasons at Geelong: tackling. That to me speaks to the standard-setting of the whole team/club. When it comes to doing the hard things, it doesn't matter who you are.

 

[Ricky Vaughn]

Hardly. Been consistent on that for quite a while.

Pick 61 would be lucky to play 20 games. To get 85 goals as the 3rd forward is a successful trade IMO

It still feels like bait. I’m gonna leave it. Except to say, I disagree.

 

[Partridge]

Just on Ottens - he was already very good at Richmond, but you know the one area I think he improved out of sight after his first couple of seasons at Geelong: tackling. That to me speaks to the standard-setting of the whole team/club. When it comes to doing the hard things, it doesn't matter who you are.

From memory, his first goal for Geelong came from a tackle in our forward line against Richmond.

 

[PhatBoy]

Except that already didn't apply to Rohan - he'd already played 106 games before he came to Geelong.

That’s why it’s called a comparison. It’s comparing the player WE got, who had experience under his belt, and the output WE got from him, against the mathematical likelihood of what we would have drafted.

Selecting him to play any match that doesn’t have the word ‘round’ in front of it may have been a bust but his output in all his other games has been a win.

 

[Vdubs]

Looked like a typical geelong finals team to me. Complete with deers in the headlights.

Looked the same against port, without the convenient illness excuse.

The Port loss was more disappointing, yet still predictable. We were basically cooked by the 3rd quarter of our H&A last game v Demons, and not finishing top, having to travel to SA, and no bye- really, how many actually selected us to win? I was on Port to win the flag, that's how I rated them last year, but their form v Doggies was deplorable, with no excuse really.

 

[Vdubs]

Just on Ottens - he was already very good at Richmond, but you know the one area I think he improved out of sight after his first couple of seasons at Geelong: tackling. That to me speaks to the standard-setting of the whole team/club. When it comes to doing the hard things, it doesn't matter who you are.

I recall one tackle of Ottens in 07 GF, but really, no others , and I do not recall it as a feature, but I'm glad you did because it is a great point.

 

[standupand]

The Port loss was more disappointing, yet still predictable. We were basically cooked by the 3rd quarter of our H&A last game v Demons, and not finishing top, having to travel to SA, and no bye- really, how many actually selected us to win? I was on Port to win the flag, that's how I rated them last year, but their form v Doggies was deplorable, with no excuse really.

I recall you rated the dees pretty highly too during the season when most were still sceptical. Something like - they're like us in 07. A top call.

 

[Vdubs]

I recall you rated the dees pretty highly too during the season when most were still sceptical. Something like - they're like us in 07. A top call.

I did, and they were at that stage, and moreso in the end. Something about them looked powerful. A Port Demons GF should have been a beauty. Doggies were well performed, and then Lions came home well.
My preseason pick for GF is Demons-Tigers.

 

[standupand]

I recall one tackle of Ottens in 07 GF, but really, no others , and I do not recall it as a feature, but I'm glad you did because it is a great point.

That one was poetry - exceptional because of the chase down of the speedy defender and the stakes in the game. But there were lots of others both as a forward and in the ruck that set the tone for the team from 07 onward. I think the team back then really demanded that everyone have a defensive side to their game starting from FF all the way through. He wasn't going to just go down as a highly-rated skilful gentle giant.
I feel like that kind of thing counts more for a big name recruit, because the club by recruiting them has basically said to everyone on the list: "this is who we need to become a better team, the kind of player we value, who plays the game with the standards we would expect of everyone, even if it means some others will miss out".

 

[Spearman]

"Action is taken, confidence is restored, stock goes up." Nicholas Van Orton (The Game)
"Let's talk about the draft. I need you to make a splash, Sonny, and if you can't do it then I have to do it." Harvey Molina (Draft Day)

Some recruiting moves you simply must do, PD and JC. Others have a reason behind it, McIntosh and Clark. It worked when they were fit. Unfortunately stuff happens, be it to a vet or rook.
The point being there is always a reason. A hole to hopefully fill, speculation on potential. I remember we got a guy from NM for a year. I think they still paid some of his salary, not a star, we parked him the VFL, though I think he may have played ok in the ones a couple games. At the time I wondered why we did took him off their hands. I think it was to use some salary cap temporarily for just year, and not having to commit to a contract for longer to get above the minimum. Anyway, I felt there were more than just on field considerations at play.
So all this bother about club decision-making is kind of silly, when you realize it isn't black and white, zero sum. Not every player decision is based on 'he's going to be a gun for us'.
Unless you like an argument for an argument sake.