List Mgmt. 2024 List Mismanagement and Trading Part 2

[Vader]

There is absolutely no excuse for not drafting a young development ruck with a later/rookie pick. None.

The SANFL approach by the club should be primarily around development not SANFL Premierships...nobody will ever convince me that having a young developing ruck developing in in the SANFL is detrimental on any level even with a mature (break glass in emergency) Strachan or the like also on the list.

Young development ruckman, I have no problems with whatsoever! We are in complete agreement here.

What I'm against is grabbing another low-cost SANFL-based AFL-ready ruckman, who will never be a regular AFL ruckman. We need one of these on our list at all times, but we don't need 2. We have Strachan on our list for 2025, so there's no need to recruit a replacement until the end of next season.

Young developing rucks, on the other hand, are a definite need.

 

[jenny61_99]

Jenny is suggesting that the big footy rumors might have stemmed from her loose lips source that thinks the kids name is sam Draper.

No that’s not what I’m suggesting. I’m thinking that maybe this source, also shared this information with others who may not have realised the mistake (they meant Sid not Sam) and they’ve run with Sam rumours. Anyways… if we end up with two Drapers we can assume my source doesn’t know the difference between trading and drafting….

 

[FR0GGY]

No that’s not what I’m suggesting. I’m thinking that maybe this source, also shared this information with others who may not have realised the mistake (they meant Sid not Sam) and they’ve run with Sam rumours. Anyways… if we end up with two Drapers we can assume my source doesn’t know the difference between trading and drafting….

That’s exactly what I meant

 

[Mutineer]

No that’s not what I’m suggesting. I’m thinking that maybe this source, also shared this information with others who may not have realised the mistake (they meant Sid not Sam) and they’ve run with Sam rumours. Anyways… if we end up with two Drapers we can assume my source doesn’t know the difference between trading and drafting….

That draft guru?

 

[jackster83]

It would have to be quite decent to get him here, this will come down to whether we can blow Essendon off the park as he genuinely loves playing at Essendon

That's the price we have to pay for Hamish refusing to draft any rucks since 2018.

 

[Scorpus]

I'd rather keep ROB than get Draper

 

[Mutineer]

That's the price we have to pay for Hamish refusing to draft any rucks since 2018.

Hamish and his recruiting team probably gave it up as a lost cause after getting kiboshed by Don Pyke and list management on Tim English. Been told to look in the bargain bin only hence Strachan..

Surely you heard the chief of list management Justin Reid's interview re rucks on wednesday evening?

And by the way it's a list management decision not the recruiter who ever it may be.

 

[Danger in Texas]

I'd rather keep ROB than get Draper

I figure that ROB may have already let us know that he’s more likely to head to VIC at the end of next year

 

[Danger in Texas]

Hamish and his recruiting team probably gave it up as a lost cause after getting kiboshed by Don Pyke and list management on Tim English. Been told to look in the bargain bin only hence Strachan..

Surely you heard the chief of list management Justin Reid's interview re rucks on wednesday evening?

And by the way it's a list management decision not the recruiter who ever it may be.

I mean, if you believe the reports (and the blurred whiteboard from that draft video), we wanted Goad last year

The real bad error was Parnell over Moyle

 

[Scorpus]

I figure that ROB may have already let us know that he’s more likely to head to VIC at the end of next year

Re-sign ROB for 1 year, let Essendon give Draper a huge contract, we dodge a bullet then try again end of 2026

 

[Danger in Texas]

Re-sign ROB for 1 year, let Essendon give Draper a huge contract, we dodge a bullet then try again end of 2026

First part’s probably out of our hands, unfortunately

 

[Sizzlepack]

ROB leaving feels like some motivated reasoning plus 2+2=5 stuff, based on the fact he's studying and will enter free agency. I guess it's possible – particularly because you think his next contract won't be so generous – but I've not actually heard anything about him being interested in doing it.

Hoping our Draper interest goes the way of our interest in Petty.

 

[Crow till I die]

Re-sign ROB for 1 year, let Essendon give Draper a huge contract, we dodge a bullet then try again end of 2026

yep, 100% agree there if thats the option

 

[Vader]

Re-sign ROB for 1 year, let Essendon give Draper a huge contract, we dodge a bullet then try again end of 2026

... assumes ROB doesn't want to exercise his rights as a UFA.

Presumably the reason we're interested in Draper is that ROB has already told the club that he's leaving.

 

[Mutineer]

I mean, if you believe the reports (and the blurred whiteboard from that draft video), we wanted Goad last year

The real bad error was Parnell over Moyle

Yeah and we were supposed to have interest in Harry Barnett too but the bid for Max Michalanney came earlier than expected.

Probably why you don't use reasonably early picks on rucks over later/rookie picks as development projects.

 

[Scorpus]

First part’s probably out of our hands, unfortunately

I agree but I'd rather pay ROB $1.5 million for 1 year than give Draper $4 million over 5 years

 

[Mr_Moogle]

Essendon supporter I work with doesn't rate Draper. Says he lacks footy IQ and his kicking is unreliable.

 

[jackster83]

I mean, if you believe the reports (and the blurred whiteboard from that draft video), we wanted Goad last year

The real bad error was Parnell over Moyle

Jimmy Rowe over Henry Smith was a shocker too.

 

[crow2crow]

Do we even have any free spots to do that?

create one. its not that hard. give me c burgess phone number and I am happy to make the call.

 

[Scorpus]

Jimmy Rowe over Henry Smith was a shocker too.

In 2018 we took Kieran Strachan over local lad Jordon Sweet in the rookie draft

In 2016 we took Ben Davis with pick 75, one pick before Mitch Lewis. Rowan Marshall and Oscar McInerney went in the rookie draft, as did Draper

 

[crow2crow]

Essendon supporter I work with doesn't rate Draper. Says he lacks footy IQ and his kicking is unreliable.

unreliable. its diabolical. it's actually worse than ROBs even though that statement breaks three fundamental laws of physics

 

[Vader]

In 2018 we took Kieran Strachan over local lad Jordon Sweet in the rookie draft

In 2016 we took Ben Davis with pick 75, one pick before Mitch Lewis. Rowan Marshall and Oscar McInerney went in the rookie draft, as did Draper

This argument comes up time & time again. It pisses me off, because it is so ****ing dumb!

Every single club can point to a selection most years, and say player X was taken 1-2 picks after we selected player Y... Player X turned out to be a gun, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, 4 years after the fact, while player Y never made it. There is nothing to be gained by this - some players make it, others don't. That's the nature of AFL football - it always has been, and it always will be.

The argument has some relevance when discussing failed picks at the top end of the draft (e.g. McAsey), but it makes no sense at all when discussing speculative picks waaay down the order - like Davis (pick 75), or anyone taken in the RD or PSSP.

Picks taken at 70+ (including the RD & PSSP) have less than a 10% chance of making it to 100 games. Every one of these players has fundamental flaws in their game, which is why they are taken so late in the draft. Some will be able to overcome those flaws, but most won't. It's a total craps shoot, with luck being the main determinant on draft day.

 

[Scorpus]

This argument comes up time & time again. It pisses me off, because it is so ****ing dumb!

Every single club can point to a selection most years, and say player X was taken 1-2 picks after we selected player Y... Player X turned out to be a gun, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, 4 years after the fact, while player Y never made it. There is nothing to be gained by this - some players make it, others don't. That's the nature of AFL football - it always has been, and it always will be.

The argument has some relevance when discussing failed picks at the top end of the draft (e.g. McAsey), but it makes no sense at all when discussing speculative picks waaay down the order - like Davis (pick 75), or anyone taken in the RD or PSSP.

Picks taken at 70+ (including the RD & PSSP) have less than a 10% chance of making it to 100 games. Every one of these players has fundamental flaws in their game, which is why they are taken so late in the draft. Some will be able to overcome those flaws, but most won't. It's a total craps shoot, with luck being the main determinant on draft day.

Sure it's a gamble on who you get, but it's more the decision making in 2016 to not take a ruckman in the later parts of the draft.

Let's say it's a gamble on who you get. Well the following ruckmen were taken after pick 75:

Sam Draper, Lachlan Filipovic, Peter Ladhams, Rowan Marshall, Luke Strnadica, Oscar McInerney and Max Lynch

Of those players there was about a 50% strike rate of getting someone AFL quality. If we had chosen to target a ruck the strike rate was well above 10% from the batch recruiters deemed draftable at that stage of the draft. We chose not to take a ruck and paid the price, ultimately picking from a pool of players with a very low chance of making it. The clubs that correctly identified that draft as a strong ruck draft won out.

In addition to that there were three AFL standard ruckman drafted earlier than pick 75 (English, Cameron and Darcy) out of four picks (the other being Ryan Abbott). So it was one of the strongest drafts for ruckman in history and we didn't identify that correctly.

In 2018 we decided we were going to take a ruck. There were just two taken in the rookie draft, and Ned Reeves was taken as an SSP along with the experienced Tom Campbell. We decided to take an inexperienced ruck and didn't choose the good one.

 

[Vader]

Sure it's a gamble on who you get, but it's more the decision making in 2016 to not take a ruckman in the later parts of the draft.

Let's say it's a gamble on who you get. Well the following ruckmen were taken after pick 75:

Sam Draper, Lachlan Filipovic, Peter Ladhams, Rowan Marshall, Luke Strnadica, Oscar McInerney and Max Lynch

Of those players there was about a 50% strike rate of getting someone AFL quality. If we had chosen to target a ruck the strike rate was well above 10% from the batch recruiters deemed draftable at that stage of the draft. We chose not to take a ruck and paid the price, ultimately picking from a pool of players with a very low chance of making it. The clubs that correctly identified that draft as a strong ruck draft won out.

In addition to that there were three AFL standard ruckman drafted earlier than pick 75 (English, Cameron and Darcy) out of four picks (the other being Ryan Abbott). So it was one of the strongest drafts for ruckman in history and we didn't identify that correctly.

In 2018 we decided we were going to take a ruck. There were just two taken in the rookie draft, and Ned Reeves was taken as an SSP along with the experienced Tom Campbell. We decided to take an inexperienced ruck and didn't choose the good one.

A ruckman just wasn't a need back in 2016. Back then ROB was just 22 years old, and the heir-designate to Jacobs, who still had 3 more years to run.

Suggesting that we missed out on another ruckman 8 years ago is revisionism of the very worst kind. You're completely missing, probably deliberately so, the entire context of our list management decisions at that time.

Similarly, it just wasn't a need in 2018. We had ROB waiting impatiently for Jacobs to move on, and we grabbed Strachan to fill the SANFL-based low cost backup role.

... as for English - he's the player Ogilvie allegedly wanted to draft, before being overruled by Pyke (in favour of Gallucci). We certainly can't hang this one on the drafting or list management team.

Saying "we didn't take the good one" is, once again, pure revisionist bullshit. As I said before - players taken this late in the drafting process are largely speculative. Yes, we can say, with the benefit of 6 years of 20/20 hindsight, that another option would have been better - but they obviously didn't have that knowledge back then. Revisionist hindsight arguments like this are just plain dumb. There is no excuse for them - they are utterly stupid beyond merit.

 

[Scorpus]

A ruckman just wasn't a need back in 2016. Back then ROB was just 22 years old, and the heir-designate to Jacobs, who still had 3 more years to run.

Suggesting that we missed out on another ruckman 8 years ago is revisionism of the very worst kind. You're completely missing, probably deliberately so, the entire context of our list management decisions at that time.

Similarly, it just wasn't a need in 2018. We had ROB waiting impatiently for Jacobs to move on, and we grabbed Strachan to fill the SANFL-based low cost backup role.

... as for English - he's the player Ogilvie allegedly wanted to draft, before being overruled by Pyke (in favour of Gallucci). We certainly can't hang this one on the drafting or list management team.

Saying "we didn't take the good one" is, once again, pure revisionist bullshit. As I said before - players taken this late in the drafting process are largely speculative. Yes, we can say, with the benefit of 6 years of 20/20 hindsight, that another option would have been better - but they obviously didn't have that knowledge back then. Revisionist hindsight arguments like this are just plain dumb. There is no excuse for them - they are utterly stupid beyond merit.

I don't know how you can say we didn't need a ruckman in 2016, when we drafted one in 2018 who was 23 years old.

Taking a 21/22 year old like Marshall or McInerney in 2016, and taking the 23 year old Strachan in 2018, is virtually the same thing. It's just figuring out you need one earlier, and developing that player over a couple of years, compared to drafting a ruckman who is more mature later.

Even if we "didn't need" one in 2018 and only needed a backup... well if we had taken a better ruckman in 2016 and developed them for a couple of years, guess what? We would have had a better backup.

When nine clubs took ruckman in 2016, two of which took more than one, do you reckon they were just speculating on some late picks or had identified the draft as particularly strong for that type of player and acted accordingly? The clubs that correctly identified where it was better to speculate won, and that's the art of drafting in the later rounds.

I agree that in general late picks are speculative but it's hard to ignore that clubs were especially successful in 2016 when taking ruckman late and I don't believe that's just random luck