Top 5 biggest drafting mistakes!

[wian]

i think the sign of a good recruitment officer at a team is the person who can identify the good players from picks 10 to 40 - i think the dogs have scored really well over teh last 5 years with these picks, namely Robert Murphy, Brian Lake, Ryan Hargrave, Daniel Cross etc

This part of the draft is crucial to identify talent

cheers

wian

 

[Bacon8]

This is why i hate collingwoods No d#@kheads -policy becuase d#@kheads win u games and nice guys finish last.

You've got Alan Dadik... you have the Brownlow Medalist of d#@kheads right there!

 

[Scotland]

Collingwood 1999.

Had picks 1 & 3. Opted for Fraser at #1.

Traded 3 & Clinton King for Steve McKee and Pick 7.

Missed the chance of drafing Pavlich at #3 (or Fiora ), then opted for Danny Roach at #7, ahead of Joel Corey at #8.

 

[the ranger]

Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls will be fine. Way too early to label him a dud. He was always going to take some time because he was skinny and still growing when drafted. He's had some injury setbacks as well. He should get some games for us in the second half of the year.

And I have to defend the Trailblazers choice of Bowie over Jordan. Portland had picked future Hall of Famer Clyde Drexler the year before and he was the heir to Jim Paxson at shooting guard (that's Jim, not John...Jim was a 20ppg player). What they needed was a dominant big man and they wanted Akeem Olajuwon. But they lost the coin toss with Houston for the first pick. The Rockets took Olajuwon and Portland took Bowie. Bowie was National Player of the Year in High School and an All-American in college. Unfortunately, his knees were crap and he hardly played for Portland after his rookie season. Still, he was valuable enough to get All-Star Buck Williams to Portland in a trade with the Nets.

If Portland had drafted Jordan, it's likely that neither he nor Drexler would have become the players they did.

 

[markr]

but as i said before, all of us are clever in hindsight, and all 3 teams in the draft ____ed up !

Hawthorn went in to the draft wanting two talls, and came out of the draft with those two talls.

The thing is, everyone thought they knew the order of the draft: Richmond would take Deledio, Hawthorn would take Tambling (he even stayed with one of our recruiters), Dogs were always going to take Griffen, Richmond would take Roughead (the day before the draft they rang him to tell him where the post-draft BBQ was going to be), then the Hawks would take Franklin. Leaving us with the highly rated Tambling and our second choice tall.

By taking Roughead at two, we knew Richmond wouldn't pass Tambling and we would still get Franklin, and end up with the two talls we wanted.

I'm pretty sure we rated Roughead higher, or certainly more of a sure thing, than Franklin, but Franklin was always going to fall to us no matter what, the only question was Roughead or a mid.

 

[iGNITER]

Collingwood 1999.

Had picks 1 & 3. Opted for Fraser at #1.

Traded 3 & Clinton King for Steve McKee and Pick 7.

Missed the chance of drafing Pavlich at #3 (or Fiora ), then opted for Danny Roach at #7, ahead of Joel Corey at #8.

 

[Bound 4 september]

With Franklin, let's not forget Dogs and Hawthorn also passed him up, not only Richmond (albeit twice). In fairness, it was roundly said by quite a few recruiters that Tambling was likely to go at 2.

All clubs have made drafting errors, some more then others, becuase it is not an exact science. How can you really tell who will be the best player over time.

Reiwoldt is probably the only no. 1 draft pick, you could categorically say, is the best player is his draft.

As far as drafting blunders go though, has everyone forgotten that both
Hawthorn and St.Kilda passed on Chri$ Judd.

The guy is an all-time great at the age of 23/24.

Dont Forget Cooney he was probably also the best player in his draft. I agree i think people forget in the lead up to that draft that Tambling was almost definantly earmarked to go number 2 by recruiters and the media.
As people have said hindsight is a wonderful thing ....

 

[Bound 4 september]

Collingwood 1999.

Had picks 1 & 3. Opted for Fraser at #1.

Traded 3 & Clinton King for Steve McKee and Pick 7.

Missed the chance of drafing Pavlich at #3 (or Fiora ), then opted for Danny Roach at #7, ahead of Joel Corey at #8.

A lot of people give Richmond stick for picking Fiora ahead of Pavlich but this draft blunder is equally as bad. Although the pies got a good player in Fraser with pick 1, they traded and pick 3 and C.King for Steve Mckee which at the time may have seemed a good idea but in hindsight passed on both Corey at 8 and Pavlich at 4 which have turned out to be very good players. It just goes to show sometimes the draft is a lucky dip at times

 

[Adoyle]

Hawthorn went in to the draft wanting two talls, and came out of the draft with those two talls.

The thing is, everyone thought they knew the order of the draft: Richmond would take Deledio, Hawthorn would take Tambling (he even stayed with one of our recruiters), Dogs were always going to take Griffen, Richmond would take Roughead (the day before the draft they rang him to tell him where the post-draft BBQ was going to be), then the Hawks would take Franklin. Leaving us with the highly rated Tambling and our second choice tall.

By taking Roughead at two, we knew Richmond wouldn't pass Tambling and we would still get Franklin, and end up with the two talls we wanted.

I'm pretty sure we rated Roughead higher, or certainly more of a sure thing, than Franklin, but Franklin was always going to fall to us no matter what, the only question was Roughead or a mid.

Mate, as a fellow Hawk it's nice to think that way but the reality is the we outsmarted ourselves straight into Buddy,
the top 5 in the 04 were (pre draft) rated clearly higher than the rest, we wanted a tall and a small and presumed the Tigers wanted the same.
Hence we thought we'll take our number 1 rated tall (Roughie) with our first pick thinking the Tiges will be forced to take Franklin at 4 hence still leaving Tambling to us at pick 5.
If you watch the draft replay you can clearly see the panic in Bucky's eyes after then Tiges called out Tambling at 4 and the desperate shuffling of paper to hurriedly find Lance Franklin in the list.
Further to that after missing out on Tambling we were forced to take our next highest rated mid (Jordan Lewis) at 7 instead of the ruckman that was planned (likely John Meesen or maybe Cam Wood) and so outsmarted ourselves once again into a brillant decision.
It doesn't alter the fact that we rated all the players drafted highly and therefore chose them given the way things panned out,
but it's a great demonstration into how despite the best scouting and planning luck still plays a huge part in the final outcome.

 

[94_Eagles]

Hawthorn had 3 picks in the top 7 that year, Adoyle?

 

[WALL-e]

Hawthorn had 3 picks in the top 7 that year, Adoyle?

Yep THREE

We picked 8th took Meesen

And with 3 priority picks that year means our real possy was picking at 5

Franklin was available at 5

This is how the draft works aye.

Very easy to look back on things.

Our supporters seemingly went ape shit when we took Dangerfield over Ebert, but since he's averaging 25 touches and 3.5 goals in the TAC cup this year they've shut up a bit.

It's hard to predict a talent such as Franklin, especially because of his eratic personality and behaviour. If he was taken at 1 that year Richmond fans would have chucked a hissy fit.

 

[WALL-e]

Mate, as a fellow Hawk it's nice to think that way but the reality is the we outsmarted ourselves straight into Buddy,
the top 5 in the 04 were (pre draft) rated clearly higher than the rest, we wanted a tall and a small and presumed the Tigers wanted the same.
Hence we thought we'll take our number 1 rated tall (Roughie) with our first pick thinking the Tiges will be forced to take Franklin at 4 hence still leaving Tambling to us at pick 5.
If you watch the draft replay you can clearly see the panic in Bucky's eyes after then Tiges called out Tambling at 4 and the desperate shuffling of paper to hurriedly find Lance Franklin in the list.
Further to that after missing out on Tambling we were forced to take our next highest rated mid (Jordan Lewis) at 7 instead of the ruckman that was planned (likely John Meesen or maybe Cam Wood) and so outsmarted ourselves once again into a brillant decision.
It doesn't alter the fact that we rated all the players drafted highly and therefore chose them given the way things panned out,
but it's a great demonstration into how despite the best scouting and planning luck still plays a huge part in the final outcome.

Very intelligent and accurate post.

 

[Brad Pearce]

Carlton picked Livingston, Wiggins and Sporn before Daniel Kerr and Burgoyne

 

[markr]

I've heard that opinion before, but I find it very hard to believe that we thought Richmond would pass on Tambling. And if we were desperate for a ruckman why pass on all of them until Taylor in round 4? He was a Box Hill kid and presumably we were always going to take him late in the draft.

 

[Barry Schneider]

Don't know if this has been mentioned in the thread but Sydney had the chance to draft James Hird as a zone selection.

"Our recruiting people at the time didn't rate him highly enough," said former Swans captain, coach and at the time chairman of their match committee, Rick Quade. "There's no good sugar-coating it. It's a tragedy, but it does happen. He slipped through the net. We all make mistakes in recruiting."


http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/seen-but-not-hird-for-swans/2007/06/01/1180205511203.html

Imagine we could have had Carey,Hird and Longmire in the same team.I think most recruiting blunders pale into insignificance when compared to those.

 

[Wallaby]

What do all these guys have in common?

Polak, X Clarke, Sampi, Molan, Cole, Brent Reilly, Ash Watson, Brooks, S Power, Ladson, S Harvey, Elstone.

All those guys were between positions 4-20 in the 2001 Super-Draft. After the Big 3, you had Hale, Bartel, Dal Santo and Kelly. Then a fair share of 'ordinaries'. So a top-20 pick in a super-draft - still a lucky dip, and more likely to get a dud than a champ.

After Hodge Hawthorn had 3 other picks BEFORE they selected Mitchell at 36.

Interestingly, in light of the Hodge v Judd debate, is the best player from the draft actually No 40? G Ablett Jnr (F/S, so no-one else had a crack at him). I am the biggest Judd fan, but if Ablett keeps going at this level.....

 

[awesome wells]

Pick 7. David Hale
Pick 8. Jimmy Bartel

 

[dazzledavey36]

is everyone forgetting tim walsh at pick 4 and luke livingstone aswell on pick 4!
and luke molan at pick 9 still gives me nightmares considering we could of have nick dal santo or david rodan

 

[Wallaby]

i think the sign of a good recruitment officer at a team is the person who can identify the good players from picks 10 to 40 - i think the dogs have scored really well over teh last 5 years with these picks, namely Robert Murphy, Brian Lake, Ryan Hargrave, Daniel Cross etc

This part of the draft is crucial to identify talent

cheers

wian

Brian Harris (Lake) was # 71. You picked Sam Power (10), Kieran McGuinness (42) and Brent Colbert (57) before him. You also traded Pick #49 for Marcus Picken and Shannon Rusca. You also followed up with Aaron James at #83.

That's not talent identification, that's luck. And that's drafting.

 

[juddy_Like]

What do all these guys have in common?

Polak, X Clarke, Sampi, Molan, Cole, Brent Reilly, Ash Watson, Brooks, S Power, Ladson, S Harvey, Elstone.

All those guys were between positions 4-20 in the 2001 Super-Draft. After the Big 3, you had Hale, Bartel, Dal Santo and Kelly. Then a fair share of 'ordinaries'. So a top-20 pick in a super-draft - still a lucky dip, and more likely to get a dud than a champ.

When will people realise that the Big 3 was actually the Big 4???
Polak was just as good if not better than then the mids. Still today he was and is the best contested mark of any junior i have ever seen.

If Freo kept their first pick, they would of picked Polak regardless and consequently throw all this Big 3 crap down the shitter.

As for the others (Sampi, Molan, Power, etc). They were all good picks at the time so why are we debating this now?? The only one that i questioned was Harvey who was drafted on his name rather than his ability.

So why do we always question our recruitment staff when its the development officers that really should be looked at????

 

[11sjw]

From the NFL.

The New Orleans Saints traded all of the their 1999 draft picks to get Ricky Williams, as well as a 1st and 3rd pick the following year. This was the first time one player was the only draft pick of an NFL team.

He was traded to the Miami Dolphins 3 years later for two 1st round picks and didn't do much in his time at the Saints. He is now a backup/timesharer with Ronnie Brown at the Dolphins.

Pretty big blunder for mine. Pretty much cost Mike Ditka his job as well as setting the Saints back a few years with all the lost picks.

 

[juddy_Like]

Pick 7. David Hale
Pick 8. Jimmy Bartel

4 years ago you would of been laughing at Geelong for that.

Bartel looked soft and stocky and consequently dropped where-as Hale showed a couple of signs here and there.

4 times is a long time hey.

 

[juddy_Like]

From the NFL.

The New Orleans Saints traded all of the their 1999 draft picks to get Ricky Williams, as well as a 1st and 3rd pick the following year. This was the first time one player was the only draft pick of an NFL team.

He was traded to the Miami Dolphins 3 years later for two 1st round picks and didn't do much in his time at the Saints. He is now a backup/timesharer with Ronnie Brown at the Dolphins.

Pretty big blunder for mine. Pretty much cost Mike Ditka his job as well as setting the Saints back a few years with all the lost picks.

Bigger blunder was how the hell did the Washington Redskins not build a dynasty out of those picks?

I mean even if half your picks panned out...

 

[markr]

After Hodge Hawthorn had 3 other picks BEFORE they selected Mitchell at 36.

Yup, and 2 of the 3 are in our best 22. Of our first 5 picks in that draft only Elstone didn't turn out.

 

[Adoyle]

When will people realise that the Big 3 was actually the Big 4???
Polak was just as good if not better than then the mids. Still today he was and is the best contested mark of any junior i have ever seen.

If Freo kept their first pick, they would of picked Polak regardless and consequently throw all this Big 3 crap down the shitter.

As for the others (Sampi, Molan, Power, etc). They were all good picks at the time so why are we debating this now?? The only one that i questioned was Harvey who was drafted on his name rather than his ability.

So why do we always question our recruitment staff when its the development officers that really should be looked at????

Dunno about that,
it may have been Big 4 only for the Dockers,
I remember at the time a West Coast recruiter saying to me he wished the Dockers had kept the 1st pick as it would've saved them from the supporter backlash of picking the Vic kid ahead of the local boy,
they were always taking Judd ahead of Polak