Chris Scott's legacy if he gags in another finals series?

[beema limapep]

Adelaide would be more pissed because Richmond were a joke when they lost

Question - If Richmond was a "joke" in 2017, what does that make Geelong, given their preliminary final loss by 51 points to Richmond?

Answer:- it makes Geelong consistent in finals.

 

[Noidnadroj]

Some nice balance there, Fat.

It's a hard one. I remember the Cats walking off with losers limp after we beat them in a final at the 'G in 2018. I thought they were old and cooked then, but here we are 3 years later and they're still top 4.

I reckon he's an excellent tactical coach, but the list management under his helm has been questionable in recent times. How much he wears for that I'm not sure.

I think he has been a very good coach. I believe the Cats were perhaps due for a lean season or two around 2016-17, and that’s when the best player in the competition in his prime walked through the door. Then there’s topping up with any number of senior bodies over the last 5-6 years: Tuohy, Cameron. smith, Higgins, Stanley, Ceglar, Dahlhaus, Henderson … the list goes on and on and on …. That has kept them at the pointy end, in addition to a superb defensive gameplan the poor to average teams cannot win against, particularly at Geelong.

Scott is happy to play an ultra defensive game style where he doesn’t risk losing, as he knows his team will win 90% of games against average opposition playing this style …. Hold possession, attack slowly, numbers behind the ball, no risky kicks etc….I think all strong teams could adopt this ‘no lose’ philosophy, but it has proven to jot hold his teams in good stead come finals time.

That’s when pressure is up, more mistakes are made, better quality opposition can slice through defensive presses with fast ball movement and can defend turnover etc….so that’s where I’d be disappointed if he doesn’t change up the game style drastically. If he keeps it the same then I guarantee Cats will finish top-6, and maybe top-4, as average to poor teams cannot beat them. I also believe barring a miracle run with injury and getting great seasons out of Hawkins, Danger and Selwood they can’t win a flag playing this defensive style.

If I was a Cat I’d much rather they play a much riskier style that can win finals but may lose them 2-3 more H&A games on the way through. With their current style everything has to go right to win finals and a flag …. and in finals the pressure is just too great and nothing ever goes perfectly.

After 2022-23 the Cats are in for some pain I think, as their only proven quality players under 26yo are Henry and Parfitt.

So Scott’s legacy? Another flag he’s a coaching great. Without a flag, given he has never taken over a struggling club or a poor list he’d be on a par with Ross Lyon.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Demonic Ascent]

I reckon most of the Cat's list management decisions have made sense over the last few years in isolation (topping up given they had ageing champions) but they just overdone it with too many veterans. This has meant they have lacked pace and been unable to compete with the best pressure teams in finals. Losing Kelly also really hurt them IMO.

Still, I don't blame them for trying this approach. As Demons, we know that going to the bottom of the ladder after being in finals can be rewarding but also can be disastrous.

I think their trading has been OK (some weird decisions but overall ok) but they're drafting has been poor. What has Stephen Wells done in the last 20 years? He has a reputation as a genuis based on the 1999 and 2001 drafts but since then who have been their home run picks? Selwood (who slid a little due to knee injury) and Taylor but other than that the strike rate is pretty poor. Scott has done well with what he has to work with but he just hasn't had the young talent coming through - he's built a gameplan based on uncontested footy and slowing the game down which will be ok to run over teams in the H&A but in the cut and thrust of finals they've been found wanting.

He needs to change things up a little but with the list they have I don't know that he can successfully do that. It's a chicken/egg scenario and they're not poor enough to just blow it up and start again so probably have to ride out the Selwood/Hawkins/Danger years and hope to get some kids coming through to build around in the interim.

 

[Sky]

Question - If Richmond was a "joke" in 2017, what does that make Geelong, given their preliminary final loss by 51 points to Richmond?

Answer:- it makes Geelong consistent in finals.

I agree we are consistently underwhelming

 

[Meteoric Rise]

I think their trading has been OK (some weird decisions but overall ok) but they're drafting has been poor. What has Stephen Wells done in the last 20 years? He has a reputation as a genuis based on the 1999 and 2001 drafts but since then who have been their home run picks? Selwood (who slid a little due to knee injury) and Taylor but other than that the strike rate is pretty poor. Scott has done well with what he has to work with but he just hasn't had the young talent coming through - he's built a gameplan based on uncontested footy and slowing the game down which will be ok to run over teams in the H&A but in the cut and thrust of finals they've been found wanting.

He needs to change things up a little but with the list they have I don't know that he can successfully do that. It's a chicken/egg scenario and they're not poor enough to just blow it up and start again so probably have to ride out the Selwood/Hawkins/Danger years and hope to get some kids coming through to build around in the interim.

I differ a bit on the Cats trading v drafting. I think their trading has been mostly way down a bad track, far too many players in the second half of their careers, and several in the last 2-3 years if not less. And still they carry on with it.

Their drafting under Wells seems to me to have been very solid on the other hand, and it really makes me wonder why they didn’t keep more picks in his hands.

Here is a comparison I did on another thread between the Richmond and Geelong drafting I think from 2006 to 2016…..the Geelong drafting during that period was more than respectable given I am comparing them to a club that I think drafted over 20 Premiership players in the period in question. I have posted this before so apologies to people who have seen it. But I think this shows Geelong have drafted well during this period.

OK, next cab off the rank, let’s look at Jackson up against Geelong FC and their long time and highly regarded Recruiting Manager Stephen Wells.

This time, let’s line up the dates correctly, 2006-2016 drafts inclusive.

First let’s compare how many draft picks each club took in all drafts in that period.

Richmond: 90
Geelong: 85

Next, how many of those played 100+ games for the club or look near certain to do so*?

Richmond: 19. Riewoldt, Edwards, King, Cotchin, Rance, Vickery, Martin, Astbury, Grimes, Conca, Houli, B Ellis, Vlastuin, Mcintosh, Short, Castagna, Lambert, Rioli, Broad.

Geelong: 14. Selwood, Hawkins, Lonergan, Taylor, Motlop, Duncan, Guthrie, Murdoch, Bews, Blicavs, Kolodjashnij, Menegola, Parfitt, Stewart

* Have not included anyone under 50 games so far so Graham, Bolton, Soldo not counted, for Geelong Ratugolea, Henry, Cockatoo not included for same reason.

Richmond clearly better on this measure.

Top 60 picks available to each club..

Richmond: 2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 12, 12, 13, 15, 15, 18, 19, 26, 26, 26, 29, 30, 31, 33, 33, 35, 42, 44, 47, 50, 50, 51, 51, 51, 52, 53, 55, 58, 58, 60. 35 picks.

1113/35 = average pick 31.8


Geelong: 7, 10, 15, 15, 16, 16, 17, 17, 23, 25, 26, 28, 32, 33, 34, 34, 36, 37, 39, 40, 40, 41, 41*, 42, 43, 44, 47, 48, 49, 50, 54, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 59, 60, 60*. 40 picks.

1517/40 = average pick 37.9. Will discount this slightly for the Hawkins F/S pick to 37.2

So Richmond average pick is appreciably higher quality than Geelong’s and this would mean a significant difference in the expected outcomes at the drafts.

Top 10 picks

Richmond 5
Geelong 3*(Including Hawkins as he was rated top 10 in his year)

11-20 picks

Richmond 7(total top 20 picks 12)
Geelong 6(9)

21-30 picks

Richmond 5(total top 30 picks17)
Geelong 4(13)

31-40 picks

Richmond 4(total top 40 picks 22)
Geelong 6(19)

So given the array of picks I would probably expect the Tigers to have drafted an extra elite player, and an extra very high level non elite and an extra above average player, and maybe a little more advantage than that given more of our picks are at the lower end of the above ranges.

How did we go?

Elite: Riewoldt, Cotchin, Rance, Martin. v Selwood, Hawkins
Very high level but not genuinely elite: Edwards, Grimes, Houli, Vlastuin, Lambert v Taylor, Duncan, Stewart, Blicavs
Above average: Astbury, Ellis, Rioli v Lonergan, Motlop, Guthrie, Kolodjashnij
Average: Broad, Mcintosh, Conca, Short, Castagna, King v Menegola, Parfitt, Bews, Murdoch

We got two extra elite players. One extra very high level player. The Cats got about as many above average and average 100+ gamers.

I would say in absolute terms this is a definite win to Richmond. But relative to the quality of the picks available, it is a lot closer. I still have us just shading it even relative to the picks. What do others think?

Oh, and let’s see how both clubs got on for top 30 pick conversions.

Richmond 17 picks(average top 30 pick is pick 15.7)
8 strong outcomes from the 18 top 30 picks. 2 Cotchin, 3, Martin, 9 Vlastuin, 13 Riewoldt, 15 Ellis, 15 Rioli, 18 Rance, 26 Edwards
1 unresolved, looks good: 29 Bolton
6 Outright fails: 19 Ben Griffiths, 12 Ben Lennon, 12 Corey Ellis 24, 26 Todd Elton, 26 Jayden Post, 30 Jake Batchelor,
2 Not good outcomes: 8 Vickery, 6 Conca though both played over a hundred games and Vickery compensation got us the Bolton pick.

Looking like 9 good outcomes and 8 poor outcomes from 17 picks.

Geelong 13 top 30 picks(average top 30 pick is 17.1.)
Strong outcomes: 7 Selwood, 41*(going to rate him pick 8) Hawkins, 17 Taylor, 28 Duncan, 23 Guthrie
Unresolved: 10 Cockatoo 26 Parfitt
Outright fails: 25 Djerkurra, 15 Brown, 15 Smedts, 16 Thurlow, 16 Lang,
Not good outcomes: 17 Menzel

You could only say Geelong have done well here with a later average pick than ours. They probably have picked 8 strong players, albeit two cruelled by injuries and 5 weaker players. So they might have outperformed us in terms of conversion rate, but we have got more in the top echelon from our picks.

I am giving Jackson a narrow win over Wells relative to the available picks, but it is close this one.

 

[kozi]

Surely he’s in the process of making changes to the gag plan.

 

[WillHayward]

Surely he’s in the process of making changes to the gag plan.

He will double down on the old game plan. Yet again.

Will get ugly and Chris will have a meltdown and blame everyone and everything when it all hits the skids.

Get the popcorn ready ...

 

[Fat Tony!]

I think their trading has been OK (some weird decisions but overall ok) but they're drafting has been poor. What has Stephen Wells done in the last 20 years? He has a reputation as a genuis based on the 1999 and 2001 drafts but since then who have been their home run picks? Selwood (who slid a little due to knee injury) and Taylor but other than that the strike rate is pretty poor. Scott has done well with what he has to work with but he just hasn't had the young talent coming through - he's built a gameplan based on uncontested footy and slowing the game down which will be ok to run over teams in the H&A but in the cut and thrust of finals they've been found wanting.

He needs to change things up a little but with the list they have I don't know that he can successfully do that. It's a chicken/egg scenario and they're not poor enough to just blow it up and start again so probably have to ride out the Selwood/Hawkins/Danger years and hope to get some kids coming through to build around in the interim.

Stewart, Kelly, Duncan and Guthrie are A graders picked late in the draft. Blicavs and O’Conner were inspired picks as category B players. Parfitt, Menegola and Henry were solid picks who will each play 150+ games. The Cats drafting has been excellent with a poor draft hand.

 

[master bate]

Stewart, Kelly, Duncan and Guthrie are A graders picked late in the draft. Blicavs and O’Conner were inspired picks as category B players. Parfitt, Menegola and Henry were solid picks who will each play 150+ games. The Cats drafting has been excellent with a poor draft hand.

Even if they were mostly later first round picks they had an awful run of first round picks.

Thurlow, Smedts, Lang, Cockatoo and then Fogarty in the early 20's (can play, didn't get a lot of chances to show it).

Stewart and Kelly have probably covered over a pretty lean run since 2010.

They've been structural issues as well in the Cats footy department. They cut too fine, gave Wells too much on his plate that took away from what he does best - talent spotter - and suffered for it.

I wouldn't be surprised if he has a few excellent drafts now he's been moved back to a lesser role doing what he does best.

 

[E Shed]

The main reason it has become an "issue" amongst Geelong fans now is that your club is trying is best extend its home ground advantage from the H&A season into the finals series. It's a cowardly b1tch move by the Cats. You've played MCG finals for close to 120 years and there was never a murmur about any "disadvantage" from playing there. Why would there be any disadvantage from playing at the MCG for 6/7/8 games every year with plenty of room for all your fans? The MCG is Geelong's home away from home. There's nothing unique or quirky about the place. Not compared to Kardinia Park.

The MCG is the most neutral AFL venue in terms of surface, shape, dimensions, conditions, crowd support and familiarity to all players. It's not like the disadvantage faced by visiting teams to Geelong who've played 1 game there tops (some not at all) and have the entire crowd barracking against them. Your club doesn't like the 50:50 odds of MCG finals. It wants to get a leg up on their opponents and gain a 60:40 advantage by playing at their home ground.

"We play the game as it should be played"

Pfft... Yeah, right... with systemic intimidation of the umpires and constant whinging for free kicks... by ducking your heads or diving forwards when tackled... with all your defenders blocking & holding opponents out of every contest... and with your president, CEO and coach lobbying the AFL for a clearcut home ground advantage in finals...

Not sure how much of advantage it is.
They currently have a 100% loss rate for home finals.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[db26]

I don't see him as coach who can rebuild the side or bring kids through that's my question mark on him has no choice now through.

 

[Partridge]

I differ a bit on the Cats trading v drafting. I think their trading has been mostly way down a bad track, far too many players in the second half of their careers, and several in the last 2-3 years if not less. And still they carry on with it.

Their drafting under Wells seems to me to have been very solid on the other hand, and it really makes me wonder why they didn’t keep more picks in his hands.

It's become an article of faith now, particularly with some Geelong fans. We must do it, because drafting isn't guaranteed, and also, because we don't have any good picks. Ignoring completely the picks we gave away for many many older retreads.

 

[The 747]

Even if they were mostly later first round picks they had an awful run of first round picks.

Thurlow, Smedts, Lang, Cockatoo and then Fogarty in the early 20's (can play, didn't get a lot of chances to show it).

Stewart and Kelly have probably covered over a pretty lean run since 2010.

They've been structural issues as well in the Cats footy department. They cut too fine, gave Wells too much on his plate that took away from what he does best - talent spotter - and suffered for it.

I wouldn't be surprised if he has a few excellent drafts now he's been moved back to a lesser role doing what he does best.

Thurlow and Cockatoo can't be pinned on Wells, they got badly injured and never developed. Thurlow was an excellent prospect playing good senior footy before he did his knee. The rest are gash and because we always have late first rounders Wells tends to go for riskier prospects (would have been top 10 but for junior injury, extra 10cms etc).

The main issue is too many picks have been traded away or downgraded. The strategy of picking up older players is fine by me IF they are free agents. For example Smith was a good pickup as a FA, adding Higgins who we gave up a decent pick for was dumb. And those players keep younger players out, so it becomes a vicious cycle if there are too many.

 

[master bate]

Thurlow and Cockatoo can't be pinned on Wells, they got badly injured and never developed. Thurlow was an excellent prospect playing good senior footy before he did his knee. The rest are gash and because we always have late first rounders Wells tends to go for riskier prospects (would have been top 10 but for junior injury, extra 10cms etc).

The main issue is too many picks have been traded away or downgraded. The strategy of picking up older players is fine by me IF they are free agents. For example Smith was a good pickup as a FA, adding Higgins who we gave up a decent pick for was dumb. And those players keep younger players out, so it becomes a vicious cycle if there are too many.

Doing an ACL and never coming back the same these days is probably still a reflection on the player than put down to injury ruining a career. If Thurlow was going to make it he should've been able to recover from that injury.

Cockatoo I'm more inclined to agree with but he'd played 1 exceptional game as a junior and missed a heap of time through injuries. Good recruiters roll the dice on talent and are prepared to fail every now and then, but it didn't help that came during a run of outs.

 

[The 747]

Doing an ACL and never coming back the same these days is probably still a reflection on the player than put down to injury ruining a career. If Thurlow was going to make it he should've been able to recover from that injury.

Cockatoo I'm more inclined to agree with but he'd played 1 exceptional game as a junior and missed a heap of time through injuries. Good recruiters roll the dice on talent and are prepared to fail every now and then, but it didn't help that came during a run of outs.

Yeah I don't really know what went on with Thurlow, he was just never the same after the knee injury.