Review Draft Review

[Gone Critical]

Maybe Shaz will never make the ground up but maybe he doesn't need to. Instead of wanting him to get to where he would have been without injury maybe we all just accept that we compare him to other players with same amount of development time. Maybe having 2 years out injured will mean we get an extra year at end of his career - we will never know.

Not a go at you GC or anyone else, just throwing in my 2 bobs worth.

Yep what you are saying I think is give him a bit of time to see where he can get to . Agreed

 

[Gone Critical]

Who cares?

I think we can at times, be too focused on an individual than for the sum of the parts.
I don't know the character of your kids the way you do, but you need to build character and leadership from the bottom up and I saw first hand, the love and respect Moore and De Goey drew from their team-mates. I had heard that wasn't quite the case for Laverde.

Anyway, Collingwood covered some good ground with some good characters. I'd be happy.

Any particular issue with Laverde Harks or is he just not outstanding in an area that Moore and De Goey are?

 

[ksardog]

You've got Moore and De Goey but you're pining for Langford & Laverde.

I'd have Collingwoods many times over and Maynard may become a favourite very quickly also.

Excuse me for wanting the player (langford) i wanted at pick 5. Moore is f/s, we always had him.
Fact is people wernt keen on de goey until we picked him, suprise suprise everyone thinks he is a gun now.
Same thing happened with crisp in the beams deal, oh hes shit, dont want him. Deal done, oh he has huge upside etc etc

Thing is i think langford will be a jet, my opinion. Thats why i wanted him and why essendon done well in draft.

 

[HARKER]

Any particular issue with Laverde Harks or is he just not outstanding in an area that Moore and De Goey are?

Understood not to be the most popular of individuals amongst his peers and nothing to do with talent.

Excuse me for wanting the player (langford) i wanted at pick 5. Moore is f/s, we always had him.
Fact is people wernt keen on de goey until we picked him, suprise suprise everyone thinks he is a gun now.
Same thing happened with crisp in the beams deal, oh hes shit, dont want him. Deal done, oh he has huge upside etc etc

Thing is i think langford will be a jet, my opinion. Thats why i wanted him and why essendon done well in draft.

Moore was still a selection that Collingwood had to make. Just because he was F/S you still had to shell over a pick as you would have for Laverde or Langford.

Maybe it was that you knew you already had him, that took some of the gloss from gaining a shiny new toy...............I don't know.

Moore & De Goey>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Langford & Laverde.

 

[ksardog]

Understood not to be the most popular of individuals amongst his peers and nothing to do with talent.



Moore was still a selection that Collingwood had to make. Just because he was F/S you still had to shell over a pick as you would have for Laverde or Langford.

Maybe it was that you knew you already had him, that took some of the gloss from gaining a shiny new toy...............I don't know.

Moore & De Goey>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Langford & Laverde.

Langford was always the player i wanted, laverde wasnt overly worried about. So would hav been between langford and de goey. Time will tell.

We had a free hit at pick 5 with having moore at 9 sewn up. We picked the safest bet, not the player with potentially the biggest upside.

Anyway, shouldnt u be rejoicing in your 3rd rounder draftee that u used your first pick on?
Enjoy

 

[Apex36]

Langford was always the player i wanted, laverde wasnt overly worried about. So would hav been between langford and de goey. Time will tell.

We had a free hit at pick 5 with having moore at 9 sewn up. We picked the safest bet, not the player with potentially the biggest upside.

Anyway, shouldnt u be rejoicing in your 3rd rounder draftee that u used your first pick on?
Enjoy

Not sure I agree with the upside part. Hine was very quick to point out that DeGoey had been given very limited exposure to elite development programs compared to some other top prospects.

I think DeGoey may have more upside than you think, or at least Hine thinks he does.

 

[ksardog]

Not sure I agree with the upside part. Hine was very quick to point out that DeGoey had been given very limited exposure to elite development programs compared to some other top prospects.

I think DeGoey may have more upside than you think, or at least Hine thinks he does.

Never said de goey doesnt hav upside did i??? I said langfords is potentially huge. One of the youngest and lightest players in the draft. Wait till he fills out.

Im sure degoey will be very good for us for what its worth

 

[ace andy]

For me I want a kid to show what he can do now. He doesn't have to do it consistently but I don't believe in saying someone will be able to do this if they get bigger, that just takes away from the aspect of the game that is purely mental. Langford is already a good mark. So clearly he can do that. He is bad at getting contested ball. Its a big if to say that that is just down to being skinny.

 

[Apex36]

Never said de goey doesnt hav upside did i??? I said langfords is potentially huge. One of the youngest and lightest players in the draft. Wait till he fills out.

Im sure degoey will be very good for us for what its worth

I didn't say you thought he didn't have upside, I said his upside is probably bigger than you think it is. Or at least in Hine's mind it is.

Time will tell I guess

 

[ksardog]

For me I want a kid to show what he can do now. He doesn't have to do it consistently but I don't believe in saying someone will be able to do this if they get bigger, that just takes away from the aspect of the game that is purely mental. Langford is already a good mark. So clearly he can do that. He is bad at getting contested ball. Its a big if to say that that is just down to being skinny.

I guess u dont think players can develop their game, makes me wonder why we hav specialist coaches then.

 

[ace andy]

I guess u dont think players can develop their game, makes me wonder why we hav specialist coaches then.

Lol. Not exactly what I said. I said that if Im judging a young player I want to know that they can actually do something. Not just hope it materialises out of thin air. If you draft a player who is a terrible kick and tell everyone how with development it will be a great kick everyone would laugh. Maybe Langford will become the next fyfe. but so far all he has really showed is a great mark. He hasn't shown any ability to be an inside player to develop. IF you want to just assume that any skinny kid will become a good contested player when he fills out then we may as well draft the youngest skinniest kid each year because he will naturally develop into a star.

BTW I don't mind if you rate langford higher than de goey. But I just dislike how your reason is that he is skinny and young rather than what he actually does.

 

[ksardog]

Lol. Not exactly what I said. I said that if Im judging a young player I want to know that they can actually do something. Not just hope it materialises out of thin air. If you draft a player who is a terrible kick and tell everyone how with development it will be a great kick everyone would laugh. Maybe Langford will become the next fyfe. but so far all he has really showed is a great mark. He hasn't shown any ability to be an inside player to develop. IF you want to just assume that any skinny kid will become a good contested player when he fills out then we may as well draft the youngest skinniest kid each year because he will naturally develop into a star.

BTW I don't mind if you rate langford higher than de goey. But I just dislike how your reason is that he is skinny and young rather than what he actually does.

He was punching out similar numbers to those rated high in the draft ( including degoey ) without luxury of playing midfield. Played forward a few times, bagged 5 goals twice. Played mainly in the backline.

By the way, langford averaged 6.4 contested posessions in tac cup
Degoey averaged 6.9.
Spread a myth enough it becomes gospel

Anyway im over it, its the weekend now

 

[swoop42]

I'm clearly with Apex36 on this one and in truth find your opinion quite odd, but nonetheless what are you basing it on (outside of a supposed wretched injury run)?

Also can you please indicate a player in the history of the game that has been treated the same way?

Lastly what were the long term benefits to said fit AFL listed player not playing Aussie Rules football for 3 months?

Quite odd?

I would have thought it's just good common sense that the longer the body is allowed to heal and be protected from high stress loads, better the potential outcome is.

It's medically accepted that a basic hamstring injury in truth takes up to 12 months to properly heal and not the usual 3 or 4 weeks on the sidelines we generally see.

Football clubs though are unable and unwilling to wait that long so the club doctor must assess the injury and conclude at what point the player can return with an acceptable risk of re-injury.

As we've seen over the last two years with Beams and Reid that call is not always a good one.

 

[Apex36]

Quite odd?

I would have thought it's just good common sense that the longer the body is allowed to heal and be protected from high stress loads, better the potential outcome is.

It's medically accepted that a basic hamstring injury in truth takes up to 12 months to properly heal and not the usual 3 or 4 weeks on the sidelines we generally see.

Football clubs though are unable and unwilling to wait that long so the club doctor must assess the injury and conclude at what point the player can return with an acceptable risk of re-injury.

As we've seen over the last two years with Beams and Reid that call is not always a good one.

I like most of your posts swoop, both on here and Nick's, but honestly, wrapping the kid up in cotton wool like you suggest will do him more harm than good, both physically and mentally.

It's got to be incredibly frustrating for him as it is right now, knowing that he has so many months of rehab ahead of him. Telling him he can't play footy for even longer 'just in case', would just about do his head in.
Add to that, the physical conditioning that games and full training provide, and you're setting back the kids career far more than necessary.

As for your examples with Reid and Beams, whilst I have no details on Reid, I was told by his sister that his quad reinjuries were due to him ignoring doctors orders and pushing himself too hard too early.

And honestly, how often do players reinjure their ACL after a construction? I know guys like Menzel (and closer to home, Walker), are examples of this happening, but they are certainly in the minority of cases, and their injuries seem to be a case of structural weakness in their bodies rather than poor management.

I agree the club should be conservative with him, but not to the extremes you're suggesting.

 

[Laurie Holden]

I like most of your posts swoop, both on here and Nick's, but honestly, wrapping the kid up in cotton wool like you suggest will do him more harm than good, both physically and mentally.

It's got to be incredibly frustrating for him as it is right now, knowing that he has so many months of rehab ahead of him. Telling him he can't play footy for even longer 'just in case', would just about do his head in.
Add to that, the physical conditioning that games and full training provide, and you're setting back the kids career far more than necessary.

As for your examples with Reid and Beams, whilst I have no details on Reid, I was told by his sister that his quad reinjuries were due to him ignoring doctors orders and pushing himself too hard too early.

And honestly, how often do players reinjure their ACL after a construction? I know guys like Menzel (and closer to home, Walker), are examples of this happening, but they are certainly in the minority of cases, and their injuries seem to be a case of structural weakness in their bodies rather than poor management.

I agree the club should be conservative with him, but not to the extremes you're suggesting.

I agree too. But the kid wants to play and as soon as he gets the nod from dr's he needs to play......anywhere. Vfl, central highlands, Wimmera League

 

[jmac70]

I like most of your posts swoop, both on here and Nick's, but honestly, wrapping the kid up in cotton wool like you suggest will do him more harm than good, both physically and mentally.

It's got to be incredibly frustrating for him as it is right now, knowing that he has so many months of rehab ahead of him. Telling him he can't play footy for even longer 'just in case', would just about do his head in.
Add to that, the physical conditioning that games and full training provide, and you're setting back the kids career far more than necessary.

As for your examples with Reid and Beams, whilst I have no details on Reid, I was told by his sister that his quad reinjuries were due to him ignoring doctors orders and pushing himself too hard too early.

And honestly, how often do players reinjure their ACL after a construction? I know guys like Menzel (and closer to home, Walker), are examples of this happening, but they are certainly in the minority of cases, and their injuries seem to be a case of structural weakness in their bodies rather than poor management.

I agree the club should be conservative with him, but not to the extremes you're suggesting.

We could put him one of these.

 

[Gone Critical]

Quite odd?

I would have thought it's just good common sense that the longer the body is allowed to heal and be protected from high stress loads, better the potential outcome is.

It's medically accepted that a basic hamstring injury in truth takes up to 12 months to properly heal and not the usual 3 or 4 weeks on the sidelines we generally see.

Football clubs though are unable and unwilling to wait that long so the club doctor must assess the injury and conclude at what point the player can return with an acceptable risk of re-injury.

As we've seen over the last two years with Beams and Reid that call is not always a good one.

Interesting claim. Can you back it up with any detail. There is a limit on how long the body takes to repair different injuries and that is best assessed by the medical and fitness staff. I don't know of any great evidence to suggest that waiting a significant further period beyond these times will lead to an improvement in re injury rates. When Shaz gets the all clear, and I believe that will be done by taking a conservative timeframe in his case, there won't be any benefit in delaying further.

 

[mike123]

Never said de goey doesnt hav upside did i??? I said langfords is potentially huge. One of the youngest and lightest players in the draft. Wait till he fills out.

Im sure degoey will be very good for us for what its worth

Just like how WHE has filled out

 

[swoop42]

Interesting claim. Can you back it up with any detail. There is a limit on how long the body takes to repair different injuries and that is best assessed by the medical and fitness staff. I don't know of any great evidence to suggest that waiting a significant further period beyond these times will lead to an improvement in re injury rates. When Shaz gets the all clear, and I believe that will be done by taking a conservative timeframe in his case, there won't be any benefit in delaying further.

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/...equency-re-injury-and-length-of-recovery.html

"In sports medicine, the medical staff is often faced with the difficult decision of when a player can safely and quickly return to a game. If the medical staff waited for full recovery following a muscle strain, most players would not return until the following season".

 

[DopeMaster]

As previously stated I am stoked with the overall moves made in the draft.
FWIW on Scharanberg the knee injury is unfortunately likely to hamper him from being the superstar we all hoped for. History suggests losing a year of development robs players of too much time to reach the uber elite. The only guy amongst that group currently who suffered an injury which stole 12 months from him was Grey... The likes of Pendles, Ablett, Judd, Dangerfield, Fyfe and Buddy have had injuries along the way, but never anything to keep them out of the game for 12 months. I obviously hope to be proven wrong, but he would clearly be bucking the trend to reach that level. Oh and he's a defender for mine ace andy nailed the reasons why.

Not sure if that logic is particularly strong. How many player do you consider 'uber-elite', maybe 10 in the comp? For arguments sake let's say 10. So 1 out of 10 'uber-elite', players has gone through a reco. Now compare that to what proportion of all players have gone through a reco, I would bet that it's a higher ratio, even if slightly lower the difference would be statistically insignificant. Point being, the ratio of players who become 'elite' after reconstructions likely is not dissimilar to the ratio of players who have reconstructions in general, so no real conclusion can be drawn as you are suggesting IMO.

 

[ksardog]

Just like how WHE has filled out

Keep on the armstrong bandwagon mate, only 2 of u on there.

 

[Scodog10]

Quite odd?

I would have thought it's just good common sense that the longer the body is allowed to heal and be protected from high stress loads, better the potential outcome is.

It's medically accepted that a basic hamstring injury in truth takes up to 12 months to properly heal and not the usual 3 or 4 weeks on the sidelines we generally see.

Football clubs though are unable and unwilling to wait that long so the club doctor must assess the injury and conclude at what point the player can return with an acceptable risk of re-injury.

As we've seen over the last two years with Beams and Reid that call is not always a good one.

I thought it was obvious what I meant by odd, but to explain further it indicates that your opinion is outside the norm. No club has ever done that in the history of the sport (from memory) hence it would be an odd thing to do!

I wrote a thesis on why losing development time is not good for Scharanberg! Therefore no I'm not particularly buying that it's common sense until I've seen examples of players given further rest once cleared fit to play and the benefits associated with that further rest.

Like the elite players with LTI's I'm not basing this on statistical parameters I'm basing it on what I have seen from the game of Aussie Rules football. In the case of extra rest I can't remember that taking place and the with top level elite players give me names of guys that go against the grain and I'll buy into your POV not statistical probabilities.

It's because the unknown plays to great a role in the exercise for numbers to be relevant. I'm dealing with known quantities like lack of development time on field, the mental toll it takes to deal with rehab and the physical toll with the weight he's lost.

 

[Gone Critical]

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/...equency-re-injury-and-length-of-recovery.html

"In sports medicine, the medical staff is often faced with the difficult decision of when a player can safely and quickly return to a game. If the medical staff waited for full recovery following a muscle strain, most players would not return until the following season".

Thanks for that. Interesting article.

 

[Bonuspoints]

Understood not to be the most popular of individuals amongst his peers and nothing to do with talent.

I wonder how much that played into the decision making at the draft table. These days clubs really look deeply into draftees mental strength and discipline to ensure they can cope with the demands and pressures of an elite level program. I wonder if Collingwood are taking it a step further and looking at how likely the kids will be able to match up the culture Buckley wants.

Obviously Buckley has been breaking down the cult of MM that dominated the club and has worked to instill a different culture to MM. Bringing in players that reinforce the mentality he wants to instil will speed through transition period. I've seen this a bit at work over the last 3-4 years. Having certain personalty types in the working group around a certain leader helps shift the working culture towards where the leader wants it. I'd say a number of the guys that resisted the change are either gone or have come around now so hopefully we'll see the benefits in 2015 and beyond. I'm curious about whether recruiters are factoring this in when weighing up one kid over others.