Ins and Outs

[gilze]

Not too sure about Spriggs as he certainly doesn't fill me with confidence, wouldn't mind if he got the axe

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by Go Swannies
My comment was not down on bringing kids in but rather on dropping kids. I would have thought that was obvious. Everyone bitches that we don't give kids a chance then continually crucifies the youngest players on the senior team (Bevan, Buchanan, LRT, Schneider). I would have thought that going into the seniors then being dropped back to the magoos would be even more soul destroying than not being raised to the seniors at all.

I very much doubt that. Most juniors will understand that they will get a shot at the seniors and might get dropped back again unless they are particularly good. They will be happy just getting a shot at the seniors rather than being left in the reserves for ever.

It's not like the four mentioned above haven't had a decent shot at playing well in the seniors. They've each played at least 4 games this year plus a number of games in the past two years.

I'd drop Spriggs too - I think he was a wasted selection.

[gilze]

Bringing in Schaubs last week was just wasting the opportunity to give Moore or Malceski a go IMO as he certainly didn't look ready.

[Newbie]

Originally posted by gilze
Bringing in Schaubs last week was just wasting the opportunity to give Moore or Malceski a go IMO as he certainly didn't look ready.

Our player welfare management has been first class but our player management has been very average. Plus our draft position has been very average, our trade policy has been very ordinary. Our draft selection record is not so better than average. This sums up the position we are in which bolds well with mediocrity.

God helps us.

[barry]

Originally posted by Newbie
Our player welfare management has been first class but our player management has been very average. Plus our draft position has been very average, our trade policy has been very ordinary. Our draft selection record is not so better than average.

Our drafting has been first class.

In the last two years we have:
Got Davis for a late 2nd round pick: Win to Swans
Got Jolly for a late 1st round pick: He's big, young, good and will get better.
In that same period we havent lost anyone to homesickness, or lost a player to poaching.
We also got spriggs for nothing, and although not a champion, is at least keeping Fosdike out of the team (along with injuries - for the pedants).

[gilze]

I'm sure we would have seen Fosdike in by now if he hadn't hurt his knee

[motorace_182]

Originally posted by j s
LRT will play I believe

Pretty obvious buddy, seeing as he is the last big man at the club with any games under his belt.

[Newbie]

Originally posted by barry
Our drafting has been first class.

In the last two years we have:
Got Davis for a late 2nd round pick: Win to Swans
Got Jolly for a late 1st round pick: He's big, young, good and will get better.
In that same period we havent lost anyone to homesickness, or lost a player to poaching.
We also got spriggs for nothing, and although not a champion, is at least keeping Fosdike out of the team (along with injuries - for the pedants).

That is average drafting/trading. A first round pick is expected to return a decent player and with a shot to a top tier player. Del Santo would be a good counter example. He was drafted with a late 1st round pick, same for James Kelly from Geelong.

Davis for a late 2nd round pick is a small win but Mc Veigh with pick 5 has not been anything to write about. Agreeingly, jury is still out on him but he has not shown anything so far to justify his pick 5 tag. None of our 1st and 2nd round draftees of 2003 have progressed well enough to warantee a debut.

[footyhead]

Originally posted by Go Swannies
So two young players can't hack it. Bring in the next two. All grist to the mill.

You apparently no very little about developing young AFL players. When they are young and in experienced, you ought to play them when they are :
1 physically ready
2 in form.

The team then tends to get picked on form.

If they lose form they should be dropped to the 2's to regain that form and hopfuly push their way back into the senior side.

As they gain more consistancy, it then becomes a matter of playing the best and most consistant players in the starting 22.

The up and comers hopfully are then putting constant pressure on the starting 22 becuase they know that if they 3 or 4 weeks bad form in a row, then they may well be dropped.

Do it any other way and the kids learn that they can't count on rewards for work done and form found, plus the seniors get lazy.

Buchy, Schnieder and company will be better for a run in the 2's and will be back soon enough.

Stewie should be given 2-3 weeks of to spend with his kids and and another in form kid from the reserves should be brought in also, and they all should get more than Roos's normal 3 - 5 minutes a 1/4 on the feild.

[Benevolent Ert]

Just a note on McVeigh - while he's certainly not as advanced as early draft picks from other years, when compared with the other players from the first round of the 2002 he measures up quite favourably

1. St Kilda - Brendon Goddard (Gippsland Power)
2. Kangaroos - Daniel Wells (Peel Thunder)
3. Brisbane - Jared Brennan (Southern Districts)
4. Western Bulldogs - Timothy Walsh (Northern Knights)
5. Sydney - Jarrad McVeigh (NSW/ACT Rams)
6. Port Adelaide - Steven Salopek (Dandenong Stingrays)
7. Geelong - Andrew Mackie (Glenelg)
8. Hawthorn - Luke Brennan (North Ballarat Rebels)
9. Kangaroos - Hamish McIntosh (Murray Bushrangers)
10. Essendon - Jason Laycock (Tassie Mariners)
11. Essendon - Jason Winderlich (Gippsland Power)
12. Richmond - Jay Schulz (Woodville-West Torrens)
13. Fremantle - Byron Schammer (West Adelaide)
14. Melbourne - Daniel Bell (Glenelg)
15. Melbourne - Nicholas Smith (Norwood)

Wells is clearly the standout, but of the others, only Goddard and Schammer are established senior players

McVeigh is probably the next most advanced

[motorace_182]

Quick question... Why the hell didnt we take Laycock??!! We clearly were ****e in the ruck, we had an ageing Ball and uncoordinated Doyle. Our midfield was ok and macca wasnt going to be a saviour.. whats going on? Was Laycock a smokey?

[Benevolent Ert]

actually, our midfield was considered pretty ordinary at the end of 2002, we had just lost Kelly and Schwass and were pretty desperate for a future midfielder

Ruck was not a concern at all considering we had traded Stafford only 12 months earlier, presumably the thought was that with Ball, Goodes and Doyle we had a versatile ruck combination

[NMWBloods]

I think comparing him to players of his own year is only part of the story. Should also compare to players of different years. If it was considered a dud year then we should have traded the draft pick for a better player.

[stellation]

Should also compare him to players who average 15 minutes on the field per game.

[Newbie]

Originally posted by stellation
Should also compare him to players who average 15 minutes on the field per game.

That is not the other teams' fault that he is only playing 15 minutes per game.

To be fair to him, we have too many defensive players in the midfield. It would be very hard for him to anticipate the play if the ball getters are usually second to the contest. He should purely be used as a runner at the moment.