How satisfied are you with Essendon's drafting in the last 5 years?

[Tippaz]

given the fact that the common player only lasts 4 years in system, i think we've done quite well overall.

my problem with the recruiting is the decision to draft talls with our top picks, especially over the last 3 years. i think our list needed midfielders to give Lloyd/Lucas/Fletcher another shot at a premiership... after all, they are still our best 3 players IMO. if Gumbleton/Myers/Hurley read Selwood/Palmer/Rich we'd have a crack midfield and a realistic shot at a premiership.
instead, we've taken the long-term approach, recruiting Lloyd/Lucas/Fletcher replacements. here's the quandary... by the time Gumbleton/Myers/Hurley come good, our 3 best players will have gone we'll have to wait even longer for our list to reach it's true zenith.
more patience is required.

 

[Burzum]

Selwood would be our number 1 midfielder, he wouldn't be as dominant in this team. Palmer is great but his disposal is pretty poor at the moment. Rich we don't even know if he's going to be any good.

 

[Kong]

and if we had've drafted selwood/palmer/rich, the pessimists (including certain posters on here) would be certain that our midfield had become one-paced and one-dimensional. when the premiership didn't come by 2009, said people would be saying we should've drafted more talls to replace the ageing fletcher, michael, lucas and lloyd.

 

[Ziltoid]

and if we had've drafted selwood/palmer/rich, the pessimists (including certain posters on here) would be certain that our midfield had become one-paced and one-dimensional. when the premiership didn't come by 2009, said people would be saying we should've drafted more talls to replace the ageing fletcher, michael, lucas and lloyd.

Exactly.

 

[stay true]

given the fact that the common player only lasts 4 years in system, i think we've done quite well overall.

my problem with the recruiting is the decision to draft talls with our top picks, especially over the last 3 years. i think our list needed midfielders to give Lloyd/Lucas/Fletcher another shot at a premiership... after all, they are still our best 3 players IMO. if Gumbleton/Myers/Hurley read Selwood/Palmer/Rich we'd have a crack midfield and a realistic shot at a premiership.
instead, we've taken the long-term approach, recruiting Lloyd/Lucas/Fletcher replacements. here's the quandary... by the time Gumbleton/Myers/Hurley come good, our 3 best players will have gone we'll have to wait even longer for our list to reach it's true zenith.
more patience is required.

There's a significant catch 22 in drafting midfielders with our top picks just to give our 3 champions another crack at a premiership. When all 3 retire it leaves a massive hole in the KPP stocks. We shouldn't forget that Lloyd was pick 1 in the compensatory draft and Lucas was pick 4 in the 1994 draft.

It's going to take a kid with some serious talent to replace those 3 so it makes sense to go for the best available at our pick.

I'd much rather we build a spine that can match longevity of our previous one that started way back in 1993.

 

[Slattery_20]

Our best two players are midfielders

Fletch was ineffectual this year, Lucas - 18 goals, Lloyd (although he started & finished the year v strongly) had a shocking run during our shocking run

McVeigh and Hille are our two best players

 

[Skeeta Olly]

I voted on potential. But really, I'll be very satisfied with recruiting if the recruited players in the last 5 years can win us a Premiership. It's hard to judge, due to the fact we haven't won a Premiership with the recruited players in the last 5 years....yet.

I'll find it hard for anyone to say they were dissatisfied with our recruiting in the past 5 years if we win a Premiership with those players. Yes?

So right now, I'll amuse all those votes are on expectation. So those who have voted under average believe we haven't recruited the right players in the last 5 years to win a Premiership with them?

As for drafting midfield wise, i see us building on a champion midfield rather than a midfield of champions. No one is really standing out, but they're all working hard at it together is the way i see it panning out.

 

[BomberBuzz]

06 seems to be our greatest draft so far.
I think i am a 3.5
few with loads of potential that need to deliver

 

[Don Gibson]

gave it a 4 because of a good strike rate with players that i believe will take us to the next level.

if gumbleton fires (as i pray he will), this could rise along with the premiership it should deliver....

 

[bomba4eva]

Some good drafting that has been made less impressive by the continued injuries of a select few high picks. Time is on their side but patience is wearing thin. Dempsey and Neagle would want to show something this year as they have had a few seasons in the system without doing much.

6.5/10 for me but some quality recruits which will boost the score up once they establish themselves.

 

[bomba4eva]

It's going to take a kid with some serious talent to replace those 3 so it makes sense to go for the best available at our pick.

The problem with that tactic is that we have not gone for best available. Gumbleton and Ryder you could argue confidently they went best available but certainly with the recent Hurley pick all the messages coming out of Essendon is that they got the best available KPP at our pick but not the best player available. The spine does not need to be filled with superstars (though I enjoy the sight of our future spine on paper) and we could have got a competent KPD at Pick 23 but it seems Essendon bit the bullet and took Hurley who is well credentialled though perhaps not the best available which you should be going for with a high pick.

 

[yaco55]

The problem with that tactic is that we have not gone for best available. Gumbleton and Ryder you could argue confidently they went best available but certainly with the recent Hurley pick all the messages coming out of Essendon is that they got the best available KPP at our pick but not the best player available. The spine does not need to be filled with superstars (though I enjoy the sight of our future spine on paper) and we could have got a competent KPD at Pick 23 but it seems Essendon bit the bullet and took Hurley who is well credentialled though perhaps not the best available which you should be going for with a high pick.

Look at first Round Draft prospects and you find that half the clubs dont select ' Best Available ' needs, but draft for needs.

 

[ant555]

The problem with that tactic is that we have not gone for best available. Gumbleton and Ryder you could argue confidently they went best available but certainly with the recent Hurley pick all the messages coming out of Essendon is that they got the best available KPP at our pick but not the best player available. The spine does not need to be filled with superstars (though I enjoy the sight of our future spine on paper) and we could have got a competent KPD at Pick 23 but it seems Essendon bit the bullet and took Hurley who is well credentialled though perhaps not the best available which you should be going for with a high pick.

Rubbish. Hurley has been rated a top 5 prospect for two seasons. How you can say he could not be considered the best available at pick 5 is crap.
The message coming out off Essendon was was Knights liked Sidebottom but Dodoro and Keane rated Hurley the best at that stage and he was picked.
Another thing that points to that fact was they where prepared to pick another tall in Trengove at pick 23 but Port snapped him up at 22. If they did not consider Hurley the best pick at number 5 they would have gone midfielder and taken a punt on a tall later.
If they did not think Hurely was the best choice then they would not have picked him. What happened is they traded for Prismall to fill a need so they could draft who they thought was the best avialable.

 

[ant555]

Look at first Round Draft prospects and you find that half the clubs dont select ' Best Available ' needs, but draft for needs.

Not always. Clubs pick who they think is the best player with the first 10 or so picks. It is generally first round picks between 12 to 16 that some clubs draft towards needs. It all depends on what they have in store later on and if they rate some other kid a second round or third round pick when others may see him as a fourth or later.
People always argue around the best available stuff but i know each club does produce a list of player rankings and they do pick by it more so than their needs. What people fail to realise or take into account is that the 16 lists are always different.

 

[bomba4eva]

Rubbish. Hurley has been rated a top 5 prospect for two seasons. How you can say he could not be considered the best available at pick 5 is crap.
The message coming out off Essendon was was Knights liked Sidebottom but Dodoro and Keane rated Hurley the best at that stage and he was picked.
Another thing that points to that fact was they where prepared to pick another tall in Trengove at pick 23 but Port snapped him up at 22. If they did not consider Hurley the best pick at number 5 they would have gone midfielder and taken a punt on a tall later.
If they did not think Hurely was the best choice then they would not have picked him. What happened is they traded for Prismall to fill a need so they could draft who they thought was the best avialable.

What positions he was rated for the past 2 years is irrelevant. The month prior to the draft is when things start to become concrete. All the reports were suggesting Dodoro favoured Yarren at Pick 5 and Knights wanted Sidebottom there. Not sure where you heard they favoured Hurley but it seems like garbage and that Yarren was the recruiters first choice.
Your logic behind the Prismall comment is flawed as I severely doubt that the recruiters had made a decision over our recruit at Pick 5 half way through October. Sure he filled a need but it isn't like our midfield problems were all solved after recruiting one ready made bloke.
My understanding is that they thought the opportunity to snare Hurley was too good to pass as the quality of talls could dip in the next couple of seasons as we won't have the chance to get one with the concessions, not expecting such a high pick etc etc.
The quality difference between a Hurley and say a Lisle/Post is stark and Essendon bit the bullet and took Hurley though regrettably to me it appears we didn't pick the best available player. I've been looking out for the typical comment from all recruiters saying they took best available especially for the 1st pick but it seems to have either slipped passed me or not been said by Dodoro which seems strange...

 

[Merv]

What positions he was rated for the past 2 years is irrelevant. The month prior to the draft is when things start to become concrete. All the reports were suggesting Dodoro favoured Yarren at Pick 5 and Knights wanted Sidebottom there. Not sure where you heard they favoured Hurley but it seems like garbage and that Yarren was the recruiters first choice.
Your logic behind the Prismall comment is flawed as I severely doubt that the recruiters had made a decision over our recruit at Pick 5 half way through October. Sure he filled a need but it isn't like our midfield problems were all solved after recruiting one ready made bloke.
My understanding is that they thought the opportunity to snare Hurley was too good to pass as the quality of talls could dip in the next couple of seasons as we won't have the chance to get one with the concessions, not expecting such a high pick etc etc.
The quality difference between a Hurley and say a Lisle/Post is stark and Essendon bit the bullet and took Hurley though regrettably to me it appears we didn't pick the best available player. I've been looking out for the typical comment from all recruiters saying they took best available especially for the 1st pick but it seems to have either slipped passed me or not been said by Dodoro which seems strange...

All the reports were suggesting Dodoro favoured Yarren at Pick 5 and Knights wanted Sidebottom there.

What reports?

You mean speculation by Emma Q or an article in WA paper with Precott talking about yarran and saying he wouldn't be there at our second pick.

All the reports were suggesting Dodoro favoured Yarren at Pick 5 and Knights wanted Sidebottom there. Not sure where you heard they favoured Hurley but it seems like garbage and that Yarren was the recruiters first choice.

You are wrong.

Knights wanted Sidebottom and Dodoro and Keane wanted Hurley, they made the final decision and went with Hurley but i'm sure you will find they rated about 4 or 5 players very closely. That is not rumours or speculation, it is fact. Dodoro has been keen on Hurley for a very long time.

Your logic behind the Prismall comment is flawed as I severely doubt that the recruiters had made a decision over our recruit at Pick 5 half way through October. Sure he filled a need but it isn't like our midfield problems were all solved after recruiting one ready made bloke.

Not sure what you are getting at here but by recruiting Prismall we have added another midfielder and our coaching panel and our recruiters don't think we have as many holes in our midfield as BF recruiters do. In fact Essendon are so concerned about our midfield that we were about to call out Trengoves name at 23 but Port pipped us. Once again, fact

The quality difference between a Hurley and say a Lisle/Post is stark and Essendon bit the bullet and took Hurley though regrettably to me it appears we didn't pick the best available player.

Why does it appear to you that we didn't?

The difference between those 2 others appears considerable to me from a youtube distance.

 

[slugger]

It seems that BF consensus is the way it works for the last month before the draft. What the clubs think is irrelevant....but if 20 guys put Yarran at 5 in their mock drafts, most of which are copied off each other anyway, that has zero to do with how the club thinks. Although just about every mock draft I read had us taking Hurley.

From everything I've heard from inside the club, we were never going to pick Yarran. Rich might have made us think, but we'd decided on Hurley early.

I reckon Sidebottom will be a very good player, but I'm not at all surprised he went at 11. With the first 9 falling the way they did, I'd say 10 was the highest he'd go.

 

[bomba4eva]

What reports?

You mean speculation by Emma Q or an article in WA paper with Precott talking about yarran and saying he wouldn't be there at our second pick.
Yes, all the various articles, reports and rumours suggested Yarren was the recruiters choice. It was only very late that Hurley's name came back into the fray so people desperately went to youtube to convince themselves that he was the right choice. They settled on him as they are clearly looking to fill the spine and aren't expecting an abundance of quality talls for us to pick from in the next few seasons.


You are wrong.

Knights wanted Sidebottom and Dodoro and Keane wanted Hurley, they made the final decision and went with Hurley but i'm sure you will find they rated about 4 or 5 players very closely. That is not rumours or speculation, it is fact. Dodoro has been keen on Hurley for a very long time.
No doubt they had a handful of players they were looking at but they would have had an order talent wise that gave them the best available. Did not hear reports suggesting Dodoro and Keane wanted Hurley. Just reading some of their post draft discussion has convinced me that Hurley was not best available. Seemed like they were trying to justify picking Hurley at 5 like they knew he was best KPP available but not best player.



Not sure what you are getting at here but by recruiting Prismall we have added another midfielder and our coaching panel and our recruiters don't think we have as many holes in our midfield as BF recruiters do. In fact Essendon are so concerned about our midfield that we were about to call out Trengoves name at 23 but Port pipped us. Once again, fact
ant was suggesting that we took a KPD at 5 as we'd recuited Prismall at 39. I believe we did the trade simply as Prismall fitted a need, was in the right age group and had the necessary quality where we were getting a good player at a bargain price. I don't think our midfield was seen to have been completed by the recruitment of Prismall and certainly don't believe that we'd made a decision on Pick 5 half way through October.

What makes you think we'd take Trengove? I have not heard anywhere that we were intending on taking him at 23 and the quickness of us reading Zaharakis' name suggests we were planning on taking him at 23


Why does it appear to you that we didn't?
Reading in between the lines of what the recruiters have said
The difference between those 2 others appears considerable to me from a youtube distance.
No need for the sly dig

 

[bomba4eva]

It seems that BF consensus is the way it works for the last month before the draft. What the clubs think is irrelevant....but if 20 guys put Yarran at 5 in their mock drafts, most of which are copied off each other anyway, that has zero to do with how the club thinks. Although just about every mock draft I read had us taking Hurley.

From everything I've heard from inside the club, we were never going to pick Yarran. Rich might have made us think, but we'd decided on Hurley early.

I reckon Sidebottom will be a very good player, but I'm not at all surprised he went at 11. With the first 9 falling the way they did, I'd say 10 was the highest he'd go.

I truly hope that we thought Hurley was best available at Pick 5 and that the recruiters weren't forced to yield to the coaches wish. And I was not judging the draft results from mock drafts by people on BF. I'm aware that you are a respected poster on BB and hope that your infornation is correct.

Either way I am backing Hurley 100%.

 

[Skeeta Olly]

What reports?

You mean speculation by Emma Q or an article in WA paper with Precott talking about yarran and saying he wouldn't be there at our second pick.
Yes, all the various articles, reports and rumours suggested Yarren was the recruiters choice. It was only very late that Hurley's name came back into the fray so people desperately went to youtube to convince themselves that he was the right choice. They settled on him as they are clearly looking to fill the spine and aren't expecting an abundance of quality talls for us to pick from in the next few seasons.

To be technical. Merv: "Reports?". As i recall, the only report possibly concerning Yarran, was the statement made by Matthew Knights in regard to the draft, report that they had narrowed their choice to 3 players.

The rest were articles, books and unofficial statements in which Yarran was connected to the club in some way, shape or form. Many, possible all articles contained no quotes from the clubs that lead to suggest we were taking Yarran. I'll happily be proved wrong.

Reading Bigfooty in the weeks leading up to the Draft, i saw it had the power to sway peoples opinions from one player to another, due to the rumors.

 

[Merv]

What reports?

You mean speculation by Emma Q or an article in WA paper with Precott talking about yarran and saying he wouldn't be there at our second pick.
Yes, all the various articles, reports and rumours suggested Yarren was the recruiters choice. It was only very late that Hurley's name came back into the fray so people desperately went to youtube to convince themselves that he was the right choice. They settled on him as they are clearly looking to fill the spine and aren't expecting an abundance of quality talls for us to pick from in the next few seasons.


You are wrong.

Knights wanted Sidebottom and Dodoro and Keane wanted Hurley, they made the final decision and went with Hurley but i'm sure you will find they rated about 4 or 5 players very closely. That is not rumours or speculation, it is fact. Dodoro has been keen on Hurley for a very long time.
No doubt they had a handful of players they were looking at but they would have had an order talent wise that gave them the best available. Did not hear reports suggesting Dodoro and Keane wanted Hurley. Just reading some of their post draft discussion has convinced me that Hurley was not best available. Seemed like they were trying to justify picking Hurley at 5 like they knew he was best KPP available but not best player.



Not sure what you are getting at here but by recruiting Prismall we have added another midfielder and our coaching panel and our recruiters don't think we have as many holes in our midfield as BF recruiters do. In fact Essendon are so concerned about our midfield that we were about to call out Trengoves name at 23 but Port pipped us. Once again, fact
ant was suggesting that we took a KPD at 5 as we'd recuited Prismall at 39. I believe we did the trade simply as Prismall fitted a need, was in the right age group and had the necessary quality where we were getting a good player at a bargain price. I don't think our midfield was seen to have been completed by the recruitment of Prismall and certainly don't believe that we'd made a decision on Pick 5 half way through October.

What makes you think we'd take Trengove? I have not heard anywhere that we were intending on taking him at 23 and the quickness of us reading Zaharakis' name suggests we were planning on taking him at 23


Why does it appear to you that we didn't?
Reading in between the lines of what the recruiters have said
The difference between those 2 others appears considerable to me from a youtube distance.
No need for the sly dig

Yes, all the various articles, reports and rumours suggested Yarren was the recruiters choice. It was only very late that Hurley's name came back into the fray so people desperately went to youtube to convince themselves that he was the right choice. They settled on him as they are clearly looking to fill the spine and aren't expecting an abundance of quality talls for us to pick from in the next few seasons.

None of them are fact and are merely speculation and what that person sees as a need for that club.
What outsiders and our club see as needs are sometimes vastly different.

Hurleys name was always at the top in our recruiting departments eyes and they are the only ones that count and they overrode Knights.

No doubt they had a handful of players they were looking at but they would have had an order talent wise that gave them the best available. Did not hear reports suggesting Dodoro and Keane wanted Hurley. Just reading some of their post draft discussion has convinced me that Hurley was not best available. Seemed like they were trying to justify picking Hurley at 5 like they knew he was best KPP available but not best player.

Where did you expect hear reports that Dodoro and Keane wanted Hurley. Do you expect us to announce our choice prior to the draft?How do you know they didn't have 5 players rated the same and as Hurley filled a need he was chosen?All you are doing is making guesses to things that neither you, I or anyone else will probably ever know

What makes you think we'd take Trengove? I have not heard anywhere that we were intending on taking him at 23 and the quickness of us reading Zaharakis' name suggests we were planning on taking him at 23

Because i know for fact that we did and after the draft was over, Dodoro showed Jackson the filled out paperwork.
I posted this information after the draft and it isn't speculation or guesses it is fact.

No need for the sly dig

It is not a sly dig as I was also a Youtube recruiter this year, as i have pointed out in virtually all my posts.. The previous year i had seen a bit of Junior footy and had access to a lot of the WAFL games as well as all the champs. This year i didn't have such luxuries.

 

[bomba4eva]

None of them are fact and are merely speculation and what that person sees as a need for that club.
What outsiders and our club see as needs are sometimes vastly different.

Hurleys name was always at the top in our recruiting departments eyes and they are the only ones that count.

Where did you expect hear reports that Dodoro and Keane wanted Hurley. Do you expect us to announce our choice prior to the draft?How do you know they didn't have 5 players rated the same and as Hurley filled a need he was chosen?All you are doing is making guesses to things that neither you, I or anyone else will probably ever know

Because i know for fact that we did and after the draft was over, Dodoro showed Jackson the filled out paperwork.
I posted this information after the draft and it isn't speculation or guesses it is fact.

Generally little snippets escape from the inner sanctum. Plenty of information out there and most of it suggested they were interested in Yarren. How do you know that Hurley was rated the same as the other handful of players contemplated for Pick 5. Reading in between the lines after the draft it seems like we didn't go best available.

I'll take your word on Trengove though I find it strange that they called out Zaharakis' name with such haste.

 

[Merv]

This is my last reply as tbh i don't give a flying fig anymore but all you are doing, even by your own admission, is reading between the lines, taking little snippets of a rumour here and there etc etc.

i didn't say they rated 5 players the same, i asked you how do you know they didn't.

How i know what i know is my business and you can take it or leave it, it matters none to me.

 

[Burzum]

AFAIK Hurley was on our radar as early as last year and the rumours of Yarran weren't going around until a couple months prior to the draft which probably stemmed from the Prescott article and some interest shown by Dodoro/Keane.

 

[Smyth94]

As far as best available goes - who ever questions if Hurley was chosen on a best available basis, head down to training and watch him kick the footy - also ask one of our coaches what they think of him and they will invariably tell you that he is a gem and the club and coaching panel are rapt to have him.