Delisted Adrian Dodoro - Lodged a dispute with FairWork. Paid out. Gone. #putoutyourjackets

[Ants]

For more general points.

One father son selection but how many top 3 brownlows, mvps, all Australian captains and even all Australians in the last twenty years has dodo drafted. Not a lot for a twenty year tenure with over 100 picks and list mgmt decisions.

Can argue all you want but to me its the super elite that win finals and flags, we haven't drafted any and we don't win finals. Simple.

I'm not saying his bad but he is not an elite list manager like he is made out to be on here.

If we stretch out to twenty five years without a finals win, that's okay for a list manager?

On Bomberblitz a poster called Goaloss looked at players we'd recruited over the last 15 years (this was done in 2020 I think) who had made the AA squad and found we were ranked 5th highest. He excluded guys drafted pre-1998 which was when Dodoro joined EFC. The analysis was on drafting ability, so it was including everyone we drafted who got AA with anyone, but ignoring anyone who got traded in (e.g. Richards counted, McPhee didn't). He included F/S selections both for us and for competitors, as well as academy selections.

Dodoro has drafted quite a few AA and AA squad players: Richards, Watson, Heppell, Hooker, Ryder, Houli, Hurley, Daniher, Hibberd, Merrett, Parish and Jenkins made the AA squad. Parish wouldn't have made that analysis since he only did it this year (and Jenkins wouldn't have counted either).

So its not true we're not finding elite talent.

I don't think anyone is saying that he is an elite list manager. I do however believe he has improved a lot after the saga.

I think he's top notch.

His record over his career is terrible. Essendon has been a terrible club for so long
sh*t coaches,sh*t development, sh*t administration, sh*t medical and sh*t recruiting all
mean one thing - sh*t club. Administration looks to finally be leading. Coaches look good and latest recruiting is giving us hope. Is this Dodoro or Forster-Knight? Time will tell if we have improved in medical and development because if we are going to get better we must improve from within.

You say his record is terrible, and then list all the reasons which would impact performance that are not in his control or his purview. That seems very unfair.

I did some analysis earlier in the year. I looked at the 2008 to 2017 drafts, and calculated the average number of games played by our picks, and the percentage of those players making 50 and 100 games. I then used the five picks that followed each of ours and calculated average games played and percentage of players making 50 and 100 games. On the theory that the 5 picks following our draft picks are the best comparators of who was available and that other clubs rated similarly. So in 2016 McGrath would have been compared against Taranto, McCluggage, Ainsworth, Setterfield, SPS. Begley would be included in our stats while Atley, Drew, Watson, Brown and Williams would be in the comparator group. In 2015 as we selected Parish & Francis back to back, the next 10 picks would be included.

From my calculations I found:

• Games played: Across 2008 to 2017 EFC draftees have averaged 14% more games played than the players picked with the following 5 picks.
• 100 games played: From 2008 to 2013 (excluded later years as hard to have hit 100 games) EFC draftees have played 100 games 30% more than the opposition. i.e. for every 10 players picked with following picks that hit 100 games, EFC recruited 13.
• 50 games played: From 2008 to 2015 Essendon recruited 15% more players that hit 50 games.

So on these simple metrics, EFC is out recruiting the competition over that 10 year period. It obviously doesn't allow for quality of player, or bad luck with injuries, or anything else. It doesn't allow for whether it is easier/harder to get into the side. But there is no subjectivity. It isn't "my view/his view". Its games played. And on that metric, Essendon has been doing well.

 

[boncer34]

Ants it could also suggest we hold onto players and give them more chances than other clubs?

 

[Ants]

Ants it could also suggest we hold onto players and give them more chances than other clubs?

Possibly. But do we really believe that is happening for 100 game players?

I'm not saying this analysis is perfect. None will. And drafting/recruitment is a particularly subjective area. But in an area of grey, at least these are hard statistics that are comparable between clubs.

 

[Keystone agony]

Also think we have quite a few defenders in that AA group

If i took the best defender with my top 10 pick every year i reckon im hitting plenty of AAs

Have no doubt that Denver Grainger Barass and Gibcus are AAs at some point barring a horrific injury curse

There should be a correlation between AAs and team success as a whole

We havnt had that. Why? Thats the main question.

Have we not been a good enough 'team' and purely played as individuals?

Have our AAs had too much reliance on being defenders?

I rate Dodoro, love the way he operates but no success for 25 years then its probably time to move on. I give him another 4-5 years with this group hes built

 

[GUMBLETRON]

Possibly. But do we really believe that is happening for 100 game players?

The stat isn't solely a function of hundred-gamers. A club could turn its list over more aggressively, finding more hundred-gamers overall, but because it took proportionally more failures to get there, come out looking worse on an average pick basis.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Disappointed in the great man this year. Expect more shenanigans

 

[Ants]

The stat isn't solely a function of hundred-gamers. A club could turn its list over more aggressively, finding more hundred-gamers overall, but because it took proportionally more failures to get there, come out looking worse on an average pick basis.

True, and that would be a way to work it if you're ability to pick talent is worse. But a worse percentage per pick would still imply that team with high churn isn't as good at picking talent.

 

[boncer34]

Possibly. But do we really believe that is happening for 100 game players?

I'm not saying this analysis is perfect. None will. And drafting/recruitment is a particularly subjective area. But in an area of grey, at least these are hard statistics that are comparable between clubs.

I swear I read some people on here bemoaning that we carry people to that point.

You're right though, it's a good analysis.

 

[Keystone agony]

Disappointed in the great man this year. Expect more shenanigans

The 5 min wait to pass

And taking a Voss

Not enough

 

[GUMBLETRON]

True, and that would be a way to work it if you're ability to pick talent is worse. But a worse percentage per pick would still imply that team with high churn isn't as good at picking talent.

Identifying talent continues once they're in the door and knowing when to cut is an important part of that. It's also a function of where picks are - a churn strategy may be more appropriate with later picks. I'm not making an argument about Dodoro here, just what the data can really tell us.

 

[Ants]

Also think we have quite a few defenders in that AA group

If i took the best defender with my top 10 pick every year i reckon im hitting plenty of AAs

Have no doubt that Denver Grainger Barass and Gibcus are AAs at some point barring a horrific injury curse

I suspect AA are generally correlated with higher picks regardless of position.

There should be a correlation between AAs and team success as a whole

We havnt had that. Why? Thats the main question.

Have we not been a good enough 'team' and purely played as individuals?

Have our AAs had too much reliance on being defenders?

My personal opinion, is I think there are a number of factors (not necessarily in order):

• The saga in my mind absolutely wrecked the team for a number of years. We lost picks, some players for unders, the development time to produce replacements, and the opportunity to recruit in. I think there was also a mental weight throughout that period.
• Injuries: I think our performance here was terrible in the 2005ish to 2013ish period. Some was bad luck and unavoidable (e.g. Gumby). But I've no doubt that players like Winders, D. Daniher, Dempsey, Myers were impacted by the number and severity of the injuries. Between June 2011 and Feb 2013 we had 4 changes in our High Performance Manager, which also was the period we had our "spate" of soft-tissue injuries. Injuries almost certainly derailed our 2012 campaign.
• Coaches: Since Sheedy left at the end of 2007 we've gone Knights, Hird, Thompson, Hird, Worsfold and now Truck. Six changes of coach in 14 years. You just can't build stability with that in game plan or development. On average a coaching change less than every 3 years. Yes, Hird/Thompson/Hird was coach/assistant/coach, but the fallout at the 2014 Crichton shows the situation was still messy. And I thought Worsfold was a particularly bad coach; at least Knights developed the youngsters well. Even if all of those coaches and the recruitment team were totally on the same page, no doubt there were changes when the coach changed. Drafting is for 3-4 years down the road, how do you do that when the coach that will be there may want something different from the coach who is there now?
• EFC goals: I think EFC has chased premierships when we shouldn't. In the late 00's we did so with lots of top-ups under Sheedy, and we did it again after the Saga. My memory was in the nineties and 00's we had a club goal of making finals every single year. I think in an era of drafts, that is a bad strategy as mediocrity makes it much harder for the recruiters and harder to entice trade targets.
• EFC goals (2): I also think too often EFC has focussed on financial outcomes. We gutted our recruitment and facility spending in the late 90s/early 00s, so that Dodoro was the full time recruiter with gameday responsibilities. We also let Sheedy fiddle back then with drafting. And Beverley Knights with Richard Cole. We took too long to provide the support in recruiting that teams like Collingwood and Eagles were doing.

So I think a lack of continuity, a lack of good injury management, and the upper management having short term goals and the wrong priorities caused us the major issues. With the SAGA the evil cherry on top.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I suspect AA are generally correlated with higher picks regardless of position.

My personal opinion, is I think there are a number of factors (not necessarily in order):

• The saga in my mind absolutely wrecked the team for a number of years. We lost picks, some players for unders, the development time to produce replacements, and the opportunity to recruit in. I think there was also a mental weight throughout that period.
• Injuries: I think our performance here was terrible in the 2005ish to 2013ish period. Some was bad luck and unavoidable (e.g. Gumby). But I've no doubt that players like Winders, D. Daniher, Dempsey, Myers were impacted by the number and severity of the injuries. Between June 2011 and Feb 2013 we had 4 changes in our High Performance Manager, which also was the period we had our "spate" of soft-tissue injuries. Injuries almost certainly derailed our 2012 campaign.
• Coaches: Since Sheedy left at the end of 2007 we've gone Knights, Hird, Thompson, Hird, Worsfold and now Truck. Six changes of coach in 14 years. You just can't build stability with that in game plan or development. On average a coaching change less than every 3 years. Yes, Hird/Thompson/Hird was coach/assistant/coach, but the fallout at the 2014 Crichton shows the situation was still messy. And I thought Worsfold was a particularly bad coach; at least Knights developed the youngsters well. Even if all of those coaches and the recruitment team were totally on the same page, no doubt there were changes when the coach changed. Drafting is for 3-4 years down the road, how do you do that when the coach that will be there may want something different from the coach who is there now?
• EFC goals: I think EFC has chased premierships when we shouldn't. In the late 00's we did so with lots of top-ups under Sheedy, and we did it again after the Saga. My memory was in the nineties and 00's we had a club goal of making finals every single year. I think in an era of drafts, that is a bad strategy as mediocrity makes it much harder for the recruiters and harder to entice trade targets.
• EFC goals (2): I also think too often EFC has focussed on financial outcomes. We gutted our recruitment and facility spending in the late 90s/early 00s, so that Dodoro was the full time recruiter with gameday responsibilities. We also let Sheedy fiddle back then with drafting. And Beverley Knights with Richard Cole. We took too long to provide the support in recruiting that teams like Collingwood and Eagles were doing.

So I think a lack of continuity, a lack of good injury management, and the upper management having short term goals and the wrong priorities caused us the major issues. With the SAGA the evil cherry on top.

It’s pretty much just coaching. We’ve lurched from one shitshow to another since about 2005. This time feels better, but we’re only 12 months in - have felt like this before.

 

[fairbump_playon]

I always come to this thread thinking we must be getting closer to definitively knowing if Dodoro is a master or a dud.

But it's now clear there are too many variables, excuses, reasons, counter arguments. The saga, Knights, lack of development vs flankers, being fancy and not taking the obvious need.

I now realise the only way to know is to fail for another ten years.

 

[Howard Moon]

I always come to this thread thinking we must be getting closer to definitively knowing if Dodoro is a master or a dud.

But it's now clear there are too many variables, excuses, reasons, counter arguments. The saga, Knights, lack of development vs flankers, being fancy and not taking the obvious need.

I now realise the only way to know is to fail for another ten years.

There is no spoon

 

[Keystone agony]

I always come to this thread thinking we must be getting closer to definitively knowing if Dodoro is a master or a dud.

But it's now clear there are too many variables, excuses, reasons, counter arguments. The saga, Knights, lack of development vs flankers, being fancy and not taking the obvious need.

I now realise the only way to know is to fail for another ten years.

Fail another 5 years and hes a fail

Definition of fail will be not winning 2 finals in the same year

 

[ghostdog]

Next years third rounder. Fair point. Collingwood effectively paid 2 third rounders for Draper. Would we have? Did Dodoro try or sat back? Who knows. Looked bad though.

When someone had a valid point against my argument, I took it on board and conceded a little. Is that not ok?

I guess I just didn't understand, because you conceded and then continued to ask the same rhetorical question again. But whatevs. Okay.

 

[Yoda_]

Ants

Would be curious to know how many of those are multiple AA’s.

Parish could fall into that one season wonder category, need him to back it up (even squad member) before declaring him a success.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ants]

Ants

Would be curious to know how many of those are multiple AA’s.

Parish could fall into that one season wonder category, need him to back it up (even squad member) before declaring him a success.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don’t think we’ve done as well there, but I’d point out:

• The saga and 2016 would have hurt Hurley, Heppell, Hooker, Ryder and Hibberd’s chances of more
• IMO there is a correlation between team success and number of AAs awarded. Easier to get them in a successful team in the media eye. This would also have hurt us
• If we’re focusing on talent identification, then getting a AA shows the talent.
  
  

 

[Foxx]

I guess I just didn't understand, because you conceded and then continued to ask the same rhetorical question again. But whatevs. Okay.

I took the point on board about us potentially having to pay too much to move up the board. But still feel Dodoro has possibly missed a trick. Or at least was out played.

Not sure what's not to understand. Im not allowed to see both sides of it?

 

[ghostdog]

I took the point on board about us potentially having to pay too much to move up the board. But still feel Dodoro has possibly missed a trick. Or at least was out played.

Not sure what's not to understand. Im not allowed to see both sides of it?

Yeah okay, or he possibly hasn't.

 

[HirdyLannister]

There is no spoon

 

[Foxx]

Yeah okay, or he possibly hasn't.

Its a plausible opinion. But while you're dissecting it, did i spell everything correctly?

 

[ghostdog]

Its a plausible opinion. But while you're dissecting it, did i spell everything correctly?

Well, 'I' as a pronoun should be capitalised, but whatevs, okay.

 

[IHurley]

I agree on our lack of out and out superstars over the past twenty years but it really shouldn't matter. If you have consistent quality on each line as opposed to a handful of elites mixed in with role players then your coach needs to develop a game that works for your players.

We might not have had enough quality to win multiple flags the past twenty years but it's pretty ridiculous that we've been outside the top four for so long. Our coaches have just never found a winning formula.

 

[Burzum]

To be fair to Dodoro a lot of people outside the club really rated the list we were building before Dank did his thing. The failure of that list build to win a flag isn’t really Dodoro’s fault.

Lots of people outside Carlton and St. Kilda rated them before this season too.