Player Watch Brayden Cook - Contract Extension to End of 2026

[Scorpus]

Your point being ....players don't develop in the SANFL ....they have to play in the AFL to develop

And that is simply a lame POV .....even the most cynical Crows supporter (who don't watch matches thru the bottom of a beer glass), can see we've fast tracked players over the years .....Michalanney the latest ....Danger IIRC hardly played SANFL

Others take 2-3, sometimes 4-5 years .....and is as match about mentally maturing as physically

You apply a one fits all scenario to player development

And you know what ....in 2 years time, no-one remembers how long it took Nankervis, Curtin, or Cook, to become permanent members of the team

Do you remember the dialogue on this board, about how bad Hinge was .....needed to be delisted was the subject of many a post

I think you are wrong on every single point

My point is not that players don't develop in the SANFL, but that they develop much faster in the AFL than the SANFL

No one is claiming the Crows don't fast track some players. The issue is how often we fast track players, and who we choose to fast track.

Some players need time in the SANFL to work on various areas, but this is often used as an excuse to overlook them at selection. Some players get picked despite having areas to work on, others don't. Are we getting the balance right between leaving some players in the SANFL for 4-5 years, and playing others?

Saying that no one remembers how long it takes players to become best 22 is wrong. Supporters have been highly critical of how long it takes some clearly good players to get their turn, and how this is related to our lack of success. People absolutely do remember things like how long it took Worrell to debut, or Doedee, or the yo-yo-ing of Fogarty, or dropping Lever for a final. Some here even remember us not playing Walker early, or dropping Phil Davis after his Rising Star nomination.

I also don't remember much highly critical discussion of Hinge in the early days, certainly no discussion of him being delisted. I'm sure you'll be able to pull up posts of it if it happened.

 

[1990crow]

I think you are wrong on every single point

My point is not that players don't develop in the SANFL, but that they develop much faster in the AFL than the SANFL

No one is claiming the Crows don't fast track some players. The issue is how often we fast track players, and who we choose to fast track.

Some players need time in the SANFL to work on various areas, but this is often used as an excuse to overlook them at selection. Some players get picked despite having areas to work on, others don't. Are we getting the balance right between leaving some players in the SANFL for 4-5 years, and playing others?

Saying that no one remembers how long it takes players to become best 22 is wrong. Supporters have been highly critical of how long it takes some clearly good players to get their turn, and how this is related to our lack of success. People absolutely do remember things like how long it took Worrell to debut, or Doedee, or the yo-yo-ing of Fogarty, or dropping Lever for a final. Some here even remember us not playing Walker early, or dropping Phil Davis after his Rising Star nomination.

I also don't remember much highly critical discussion of Hinge in the early days, certainly no discussion of him being delisted. I'm sure you'll be able to pull up posts of it if it happened.

Cook was drafted in 2020. At pick 25. The club clearly rated him.
That we have prioritised triers like Murphy and McHenry is the problem.
Cook was talked about being one of the most talented players at the club.
We haven't treated him as such - good clubs would have prioritised him because AFL (at least being a contending team) is about having a team of high ceiling players all peaking at the same time.

It should be obvious that our triers don't have that ceiling. But for whatever reason the people in charge can't seem to grasp that.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

No one is claiming the Crows don't fast track some players. The issue is how often we fast track players, and who we choose to fast track.

Some players need time in the SANFL to work on various areas, but this is often used as an excuse to overlook them at selection. Some players get picked despite having areas to work on, others don't. Are we getting the balance right between leaving some players in the SANFL for 4-5 years, and playing others?

Do the stories of Gilbert McAdam & John Georgiades ring a bell .....probably not, however each players development must be mapped with their psychological profile

Some players, like Harley Reid, physically & mentally, are ready to play ......others, like Worrell (his admission) have to learn how to be an AFL professional .....whilst others haven't the capacity to concentrate for the time required of AFL footy

It's the one area none of us can make comment on .....we can only comment on the footy a kid plays .....and even then, most comment on what a player does with the ball .....not without the ball ...and that's equally important

Regarding, are we getting the balance right .....who have we held back, that has gone on to be successful elsewhere .....Gotta admit I must have overlooked who's picking up Newchurch in the MSD ? .....he is playing league football this year, surely

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

The club has proven categorically that its approach doesn't work

I admire their staying power and conviction but maybe it's time to turn over a new leaf

 

[Coopers]

Cook was drafted in 2020. At pick 25. The club clearly rated him.
That we have prioritised triers like Murphy and McHenry is the problem.
Cook was talked about being one of the most talented players at the club.
We haven't treated him as such - good clubs would have prioritised him because AFL (at least being a contending team) is about having a team of high ceiling players all peaking at the same time.

It should be obvious that our triers don't have that ceiling. But for whatever reason the people in charge can't seem to grasp that.

It's odd, after 4 preseaons they still talk about how he's coming from a long way back.

Should be enough to be AFL ready, body-wise.

 

[Scorpus]

Do the stories of Gilbert McAdam & John Georgiades ring a bell .....probably not, however each players development must be mapped with their psychological profile

Some players, like Harley Reid, physically & mentally, are ready to play ......others, like Worrell (his admission) have to learn how to be an AFL professional .....whilst others haven't the capacity to concentrate for the time required of AFL footy

It's the one area none of us can make comment on .....we can only comment on the footy a kid plays .....and even then, most comment on what a player does with the ball .....not without the ball ...and that's equally important

Regarding, are we getting the balance right .....who have we held back, that has gone on to be successful elsewhere .....Gotta admit I must have overlooked who's picking up Newchurch in the MSD ? .....he is playing league football this year, surely

You can look at examples to see whether going back to the SANFL actually improves a player's game

For example, when we yo-yoed Fogarty in and out of the team, did that prepare him to play better football when we finally decided to back him in? Not really. It was only once we backed him in at AFL level did his form and performances start to rise

Is Brayden Cook now a better player at AFL level than he was in 2021 after all those 40+ SANFL games? Not really. In the last three rounds of 2021 he had 17, 6 and 19 disposal games. Played some decent football. If anything it's taken longer to adjust to AFL level four years later.

I mean the results speak for themselves. You're saying we can't comment on development because we don't know what's best, yet we're sitting here with a poor record in both win-loss and in terms of draft success. As Drugs said above, is that really indicative of the process we use working?

 

[1990crow]

It's odd, after 4 preseaons they still talk about how he's coming from a long way back.

Should be enough to be AFL ready, body-wise.

We haven't been anywhere near close to challenging in 2021, 2022, 2023 and this year.
Why waste games on players that should be clear to everyone won't be high ceiling players, and not play those that you do think will be?

Even if you're losing production 10 percent because the other player is a trier, surely the game time spent investment for when you're contending needs to be considered?

And maximising finishing low when you're shit to get top tier draft picks.

These are things as a club we fundamentally don't understand.

 

[FR0GGY]

I wonder what has changed in selection philosophy from him being dropped for a good 16 possession game on the G against a good side to getting 4 touches in a game this year?

 

[Scorpus]

Cook was drafted in 2020. At pick 25. The club clearly rated him.
That we have prioritised triers like Murphy and McHenry is the problem.
Cook was talked about being one of the most talented players at the club.
We haven't treated him as such - good clubs would have prioritised him because AFL (at least being a contending team) is about having a team of high ceiling players all peaking at the same time.

It should be obvious that our triers don't have that ceiling. But for whatever reason the people in charge can't seem to grasp that.

It's fair to say some players have things to work on. Cook definitely has things to work on and areas to improve

But how could anyone with a straight face say that Cook's issues need 47 games in the SANFL, but Murphy's issues need 6 games in the SANFL.

Trying to get high ceiling players to their ceiling is a fair strategy and the right strategy. But is what we're doing the right strategy? Is backing in Murphy over Cook (as an example) actually leading to Cook being the better long term player? Or is not backing Cook in at AFL level preventing him from finding form and consistency at AFL level, instead handing those chances to a player with a much lower ceiling for little in return?

We've latched on to triers and we refuse to rotate through the bottom few spots in the team.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

You can look at examples to see whether going back to the SANFL actually improves a player's game

For example, when we yo-yoed Fogarty in and out of the team, did that prepare him to play better football when we finally decided to back him in? Not really. It was only once we backed him in at AFL level did his form and performances start to rise

Of course Fogarty was better .....again the commentary at the time was, he's a failed pick ....where else can we play him, DEF ? MID ?
He's certainly one player you could point the finger at and say, the lad has needed time to "get it"

Is Brayden Cook now a better player at AFL level than he was in 2021 after all those 40+ SANFL games? Not really. In the last three rounds of 2021 he had 17, 6 and 19 disposal games. Played some decent football. If anything it's taken longer to adjust to AFL level four years later.

I mean the results speak for themselves. You're saying we can't comment on development because we don't know what's best, yet we're sitting here with a poor record in both win-loss and in terms of draft success. As Drugs said above, is that really indicative of the process we use working?

I dispute this ....it's simply an isolated supporter's POV in the bubble of Crowland .....all Clubs have had equal, if not greater drafting misses

But you don't factor in the industry averages ....you see the success's of other Clubs, not their failures

Our recovery from the Tippett fiasco & draft sanctions, and the Camp fiasco, is way better than other Clubs .....ESS still hasn't any success after 20 years ....CARL the same .....SAINT's , NORTH, and GC, have had more draft handouts that should have guaranteed success ....it hasn't

The Saints picks 7 & 8 .....Coffield and Hunter-Clark, both bigger failures than Ned

 

[Coopers]

We haven't been anywhere near close to challenging in 2021, 2022, 2023 and this year.
Why waste games on players that should be clear to everyone won't be high ceiling players, and not play those that you do think will be?

Even if you're losing production 10 percent because the other player is a trier, surely the game time spent investment for when you're contending needs to be considered?

And maximising finishing low when you're shit to get top tier draft picks.

These are things as a club we fundamentally don't understand.

That's definitely something we do.

However, I also think we aren't happy with being very low on the table for... any real amount of time.

I think Nicks has definitely been coaching for his job in that period, as have probably all of the coaching staff. So you can see why they wouldn't make any decisions that drop production by 10%. They'd be out of a job, because it wouldn't be accepted, and... that's why it happens.

 

[1990crow]

That's definitely something we do.

However, I also think we aren't happy with being very low on the table for... any real amount of time.

I think Nicks has definitely been coaching for his job in that period, as have probably all of the coaching staff. So you can see why they wouldn't make any decisions that drop production by 10%. They'd be out of a job, because it wouldn't be accepted, and... that's why it happens.

And herein lies the answer to why we can't be a top side.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I wonder what has changed in selection philosophy from him being dropped for a good 16 possession game on the G against a good side to getting 4 touches in a game this year?

Consistently terrible results have forced a rethink, thankfully

7 years out of finals in a competition where nearly half the teams make them every year, plus bottom half finishers get an easier draw, better draft picks and less salary cap pressure is quite the feat.

 

[skam85]

Do you remember the dialogue on this board, about how bad Hinge was .....needed to be delisted was the subject of many a post

Show the posts then.

 

[skam85]

Cook was drafted in 2020. At pick 25. The club clearly rated him.
That we have prioritised triers like Murphy and McHenry is the problem.
Cook was talked about being one of the most talented players at the club.
We haven't treated him as such - good clubs would have prioritised him because AFL (at least being a contending team) is about having a team of high ceiling players all peaking at the same time.

It should be obvious that our triers don't have that ceiling. But for whatever reason the people in charge can't seem to grasp that.

I'd rather 9 disposals from Cook than 20 from McHenry

 

[dogs105]

Show the posts then.

Hinge needs to be delisted. That is the subject of my post.

 

[1990crow]

Torney: very stiff, nearlly saved us the elimination final
Bode: shattered but delisted thru injury
Pfeiffer & Hinge: Shithouse recruiting
Perri: Kinda happy

 

[Scorpus]

Of course Fogarty was better .....again the commentary at the time was, he's a failed pick ....where else can we play him, DEF ? MID ?
He's certainly one player you could point the finger at and say, the lad has needed time to "get it"

I dispute this ....it's simply an isolated supporter's POV in the bubble of Crowland .....all Clubs have had equal, if not greater drafting misses

But you don't factor in the industry averages ....you see the success's of other Clubs, not their failures

Our recovery from the Tippett fiasco & draft sanctions, and the Camp fiasco, is way better than other Clubs .....ESS still hasn't any success after 20 years ....CARL the same .....SAINT's , NORTH, and GC, have had more draft handouts that should have guaranteed success ....it hasn't

The Saints picks 7 & 8 .....Coffield and Hunter-Clark, both bigger failures than Ned

You can't be serious suggesting that our poor record is only in the bubble of Crowland. This will be our 7th year without finals and 25+ without a flag

On drafting, there are actual industry numbers to go on. https://www.draftguru.com.au/analysis/pick-value-comparison

Pick 6 to 10 - 125 median games. McAsey Jones
Pick 11 to 20 - 86 median games. Milera Doedee Fogarty Gallucci McHenry Pedlar
21 to 30 - 61 median games. Hamill Worrell Schoenberg Cook Berry
31 to 50 - 36 median games. Poholke McPherson O'Connor Rowe Gollant
51 to 70 - 14 median games. Himmelberg Signorello Sholl
About 1 in 3 rookie picks (below 50) play 10+ games. Hunter Beech Wilson Murphy Strachan Butts Keays Crocker Edwards Jarman

Average career Brownlow votes

Pick 6 to 10 - 21 McAsey Jones (Jones is on 0 and will never get to 21)
Pick 11 to 20 - 17 Milera Doedee Fogarty Gallucci McHenry Pedlar

Average number of picks needed to get an All Australian between pick 6 and 20 is about 5 or 6 picks. We've taken 8 picks so one of them should be an All Australian at some point on average.

You cannot say our drafting has been industry average between 2015 and 2020

 

[NSolis]

You can look at examples to see whether going back to the SANFL actually improves a player's game

For example, when we yo-yoed Fogarty in and out of the team, did that prepare him to play better football when we finally decided to back him in? Not really. It was only once we backed him in at AFL level did his form and performances start to rise

Is Brayden Cook now a better player at AFL level than he was in 2021 after all those 40+ SANFL games? Not really. In the last three rounds of 2021 he had 17, 6 and 19 disposal games. Played some decent football. If anything it's taken longer to adjust to AFL level four years later.

I mean the results speak for themselves. You're saying we can't comment on development because we don't know what's best, yet we're sitting here with a poor record in both win-loss and in terms of draft success. As Drugs said above, is that really indicative of the process we use working?

I dunno, I do think Cook is better than he was in 2021. But you'd also expect that because he's maturing and training and so on. Not saying SANFL did it, but I'm not sure you can say that playing SANFL did nothing for him either, it's fairly hard to determine.

I do agree with you that players mostly develop faster in the AFL. The only exceptions might be there a player just can't get their hands on the ball at the higher level in which case more reserves footy might help them, but that would be temporary anyway.

But there are costs and tradeoffs to including players in the seniors including confidence and impacts on the team's performance, so it's always a balancing act. As Wayne said, Worrell is a good example of someone who was pretty far off the pace when he first came to the club. In 2022 he was killing it in the SANFL and should have been in the AFL side earlier than he was, but it doesn't follow that because he's good now he should have been picked every week and should be a 70-80 game player now. I think it's somewhere in the middle and he probably did need to work on his standards and his game, but also should have played most of 2022 in the seniors.

 

[George Kramer]

Show the posts then.

Hey get in line, we need his answer on Shape first....

 

[George Kramer]

So your logic is ...because Cook is playing well now (albeit a 99 pt win) ......he would have been a good player 47 games ago ....WOW !

That's some misunderstanding of how footy development works .....every Club has players following the same development path ....they also have players that have had games put into them & then been overtaken by the developing player

Forget about 47 games ago, how about go 14 games ago when playing against a top 4 side at the G he played well with 16 touches and if I recall correctly a very high disposal efficiency. Dropped not to be seen again until our season turned to shit this year.

How about Nank playing well in the seniors last year only to be dropped and not even feature again this year until our season turned to shit. Then we sub him after a good game in a high pressure showdown.

It just amazes that you can look at all these instances, plus the rogue gameplan, poor selections, wrong midfield mix and actually acknowledge a number of these errors and still think these blokes just make good calls and you try and build a defence for them.

You are one odd cat.

 

[George Kramer]

I dunno, I do think Cook is better than he was in 2021. But you'd also expect that because he's maturing and training and so on. Not saying SANFL did it, but I'm not sure you can say that playing SANFL did nothing for him either, it's fairly hard to determine.

I do agree with you that players mostly develop faster in the AFL. The only exceptions might be there a player just can't get their hands on the ball at the higher level in which case more reserves footy might help them, but that would be temporary anyway.

But there are costs and tradeoffs to including players in the seniors including confidence and impacts on the team's performance, so it's always a balancing act. As Wayne said, Worrell is a good example of someone who was pretty far off the pace when he first came to the club. In 2022 he was killing it in the SANFL and should have been in the AFL side earlier than he was, but it doesn't follow that because he's good now he should have been picked every week and should be a 70-80 game player now. I think it's somewhere in the middle and he probably did need to work on his standards and his game, but also should have played most of 2022 in the seniors.

Why did he get dropped after Melbourne last year?

 

[NSolis]

I wonder what has changed in selection philosophy from him being dropped for a good 16 possession game on the G against a good side to getting 4 touches in a game this year?

Why did he get dropped after Melbourne last year?

It's a question of who else we have I think. Against Melbourne last year he came in as part of a whole set of changes because of injury, illness and suspension plus Sholl being dropped. That was the comeback game for Crouch and Schoenberg and we debuted Nank too. The players 'in' the next week were Soligo, Keane, Michalanney and Laird, three of whom were returning and Keane was going for a taller defence against Port. Of the new players we chose to retain those other three and Cook was squeezed out.

That was with a mostly fit list and on the cusp of finals. This year I think Cook has been picked as a possible forward option to replace McAdam or a wing option to compete with Jones/Nank/Sholl from the start, so they were more focussed on giving him time and games. Plus we've had far more injuries.

Having said that I genuinely thought he would be dropped after the Essendon game, and again after the Power game.

 

[beartoo]

I'll join the circular argument against my better judgement....
A large part of the problem lies with the standard of our top ups. Great blokes and honest triers, but they are country and suburban footballers. The skill level of our top ups ******s the development of our SANFL players. This is the reason players develop faster when elevated to the dizzy heights.
Maybe this will change if we join the VFL.

On SM-A115F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[George Kramer]

It's a question of who else we have I think. Against Melbourne last year he came in as part of a whole set of changes because of injury, illness and suspension plus Sholl being dropped. That was the comeback game for Crouch and Schoenberg and we debuted Nank too. The players 'in' the next week were Soligo, Keane, Michalanney and Laird, three of whom were returning and Keane was going for a taller defence against Port. Of the new players we chose to retain those other three and Cook was squeezed out.

That was with a mostly fit list and on the cusp of finals. This year I think Cook has been picked as a possible forward option to replace McAdam or a wing option to compete with Jones/Nank/Sholl from the start, so they were more focussed on giving him time and games. Plus we've had far more injuries.

Having said that I genuinely thought he would be dropped after the Essendon game, and again after the Power game.

You brought up Cook being better now than he was in 2021 but rd 19 in 2023 he was good, therefore he wasn’t just ready now.