So for you to say our list is not very good is not really accurate. I think you mean to say the problem is our list is not very experienced. Then yeah absolutely. Spot on. Agree with you. Give it another year or three whilst these 18-22 year olds move into the 21-25 year olds. Add one or two free agents and then we will start to see something.
I refuse to accept ‘potential’ as ‘performance’. Based on current performance, our list is not very good. It is however packed with potential.
We have a huge list of kids who are very talented and who will make the grade. I'm not going to name them as all regular posters including yourself know them inside out. We also have some kids whom have shown glimpses and may or may not make it. Again we all know who they are too. Remember Joey and BJ took time before they clicked.
You don't know who will make the grade or not. None of us do. It is highly unlikely that everyone we expect to make it, will do, certainly not reach their absolute potential. Law of averages suggests at least one will fail.
There’s no point in the “best 22 under 22” lists that list every kid we have on the list and puts them in position, because about half of them aren’t going to be any good. Maybe a quarter will get released, a quarter will be C-graders and scrape to 50 games. The other half will be AFL players, and its near impossible to say if they’ll be AA-level or not.
Looking at the top 30 picks from 2007 and 2008 drafts, it seems as a rough estimate that a bit over half of players picked in that range will be of a level 7 years later that another AFL club would desire to have them on their list. So that’s roughly something a bit higher than a 40% attrition rate. And that was from the top 30 picks, not overall or including rookie draft picks or delisted talent. We will be lucky (and our staff deserve huge credit) if all of our recent high picks become AA-level stars, let alone the chances of Lonie, Minchington or Murdoch becoming decent enough to start games on merit.
The other conversation on this thread is about rucks, in particular Stanley and Longer. AFL talent assessors have basically admitted that they find it near impossible to project how a ruck will develop; all you can base on is athletic ability, indicators such as body frame, what technique they have, learning capacity etc. But they all but admit they are taking educated guesses with rucks. I reckon the chances of random fans on this forum having any better of an idea with rucks is slim.
So whilst we can all hope Longer and Hickey become AFL legends (and I really like them both), its blind optimism to just pencil them in as top-level AFL players for the next 8 years.