Roos..Excellent coach, Lousy recruiter

[AnnieH]

Stats man ... what are Roosey's Win/Loss stats?

[liz]

Stats man ... what are Roosey's Win/Loss stats?

His career record (presumably excluding pre-season) is 60% winning ratio. Only Craig has a higher ratio (62%) amongst current coaches, but doesn't have even a GF appearance, let alone a premiership. Thompson is up with them too, on 59%.

Methinks some of us are a little spoiled by the team's consistency and success.

[AnnieH]

His career record (presumably excluding pre-season) is 60% winning ratio. Only Craig has a higher ratio (62%) amongst current coaches, but doesn't have even a GF appearance, let alone a premiership. Thompson is up with them too, on 59%.

Methinks some of us are a little spoiled by the team's consistency and success.

Fanks heaps Liz.

Maltmouth's w/l ratio is 50/50.
So long as we're doing better than the wobbles ....

[ernie koala]

His career record (presumably excluding pre-season) is 60% winning ratio. Only Craig has a higher ratio (62%) amongst current coaches, but doesn't have even a GF appearance, let alone a premiership. Thompson is up with them too, on 59%.

Methinks some of us are a little spoiled by the team's consistency and success.

As I've said earlier, the Swans record over the the last 6 years is second to none, ie with Roos as coach. This is undeniable, hats off to him and the team.... But.... it was done with an inherited list, particularly in the glorious years of 03-06. So I don't see the relevance to this thread.

[AnnieH]

As I've said earlier, the Swans record over the the last 6 years is second to none, ie with Roos as coach. This is undeniable, hats off to him and the team.... But.... it was done with an inherited list, particularly in the glorious years of 03-06. So I don't see the relevance to this thread.

The relevance to me is that Roosey is a better coach that Maltmouth.
Nuff said.

[bigswan]

I'm amazed at the ease which DOK has been discarded by some. Give him a season in Canberra and then start to pass judgement on him. As for the drafting policy, McVeigh, Malceski, Veszpremi, Bird, Jack, Moore, and Bevan have all been drafted in recent years. Barlow, White, Smith, Grundy, Schmidt and O'Dwyer are on the cusp. The others need time. It takes about 5 years to develop. I don't see a problem. In comparison the trading policy has been excellent-Shaw, Bolton, Jolly, Richards, Mattner have all been successes. Schauble and Williams were also successes. Hall also.

I think criticism of the club's recruiting policy is premature.

[ShockOfHair]

The relevance to me is that Roosey is a better coach that Maltmouth.
Nuff said.

Except when we actually play COllingwood.

[liz]

As I've said earlier, the Swans record over the the last 6 years is second to none, ie with Roos as coach. This is undeniable, hats off to him and the team.... But.... it was done with an inherited list, particularly in the glorious years of 03-06. So I don't see the relevance to this thread.

I provided the information because Annie asked for it.

But relevance to this thread...

- lack of access to the best picks. No club has had less access to the "exicting youngsters" generated by top 10 picks than the Swans during the Roos era. The Crows would be pretty comparable. Geelong's best has been better but their worst over this period has also been worse - enabling them to dip down and pick up Joel Selwood (and Hawkins in the same year, though luck of genes).

- lack of opportunity. At Carlton or Melbourne or Essendon or Freo or West Coast (at the moment) or Richmond players pretty much just have to be young, on the list and have two functioning legs to get themselves senior games. So their "exciting youngsters" get lots of exposure to wow their fans and the media with their youth and excitingness. Of course, it doesn't help their clubs win many games, or even make the finals. Even teams who have had success generated by their "exciting youngsters" - like Hawthorn and Collingwood - have been forced to give these kids early opportunities because of their lack of decent mid-aged players on the lists.

Reality is that it is too early to make much of an assessment of the success of the last few years' drafts for the Swans. And unless you do a specific comparison to other clubs' drafts, including the access to picks they had and the actual output of the players they selected, it is all too easy to make generalised, throw-away comments about the Swans being dismal without any real facts or analysis to back this up.

[connolly]

[QUOTE=ernie koala;429158]

Malceski, Vez and Bird all have 200+ games written all over them, injuries permitting. And for many of the others it is far too soon to say they don't have 200 game potential.
QUOTE]

Bird was effectively a first round pick, Ves was a first round pick. ( Picked ahead of Rioli may I add). I'm not saying we haven't picked up any decent players, just it appears our cupboard of youngsters is less impressive than what I've seen of most other sides. I agree with Legs, too many left field gambles and too many taken on body shape and athletism...not enough natural footballers.

I agree with what you are saying in part. We have been very good at recycling under performing players. But we should have picked Rioli in front of Vezpremi for his pace in particular. I haven't seen enough of the modest income O'Keefe to comment on that selection but we have really failed to recruit a very good, fast, skillful outside midfielders for several drafts.

[Jewels]

[QUOTE=connolly;429286]

I agree with what you are saying in part. We have been very good at recycling under performing players. But we should have picked Rioli in front of Vezpremi for his pace in particular. I haven't seen enough of the modest income O'Keefe to comment on that selection but we have really failed to recruit a very good, fast, skillful outside midfielders for several drafts.

We were not the only club to take a pick ahead of Rioli, so it wasn't only our lot that didn't rate him that high, I think your being quite unfair to Vez.
Rioli looks like he will be a champion but that doesn't mean that Vez will not. How about waiting a few years to see how their respective careers are panning out before make this call.

[ernie koala]

Reality is that it is too early to make much of an assessment of the success of the last few years' drafts for the Swans. And unless you do a specific comparison to other clubs' drafts, including the access to picks they had and the actual output of the players they selected, it is all too easy to make generalised, throw-away comments about the Swans being dismal without any real facts or analysis to back this up.

I'll say it again, I don't read the future.
What I'm saying is....AT PRESENT...our list of young players is looking ordinary...No midfielders have stood out, no defenders, and not one key position prospect(have we got any other than White?) has put their hand up. This is backed up by the fact the only player talked up at the moment is a Canadian rugby player..who's yet to play a senior game. Surely it's time to scrutinize our recruiting staff and stategy. When a player or coach underperforms for a more than 1 season, they get thouroughly scrutinized.

[stellation]

Look, I love a spot of Roos bashing as much as the next guy... but... isn't Stewart Maxfield in charge of recruiting?

[Nico]

Maybe it was the breathtaking mullet?!

Daniel O'Keefe's hair do is up there with Frazer Gehrig's in the category 'ski jump'.

I'm still surprised the club has never really tried to draft tall defenders both internally & externally. It has been our major Achilles heel since we won the flag & is only going to get worse as Craig Bolton & the Lewis Moppet-Thompson get older & slower. Mattner & Richards were ready made aquisitions who have largely been successful. But we are still wafer thin on the ground for tall defenders. Am not convinced about Grundy at all. He is a forward pocket/half forward played chronically out of position.

JF

That's a pretty good post. Not sure I agree on Richards though. He worries me a lot with his bouts of sheer laziness.

[liz]

I'll say it again, I don't read the future.
What I'm saying is....AT PRESENT...our list of young players is looking ordinary...No midfielders have stood out, no defenders, and not one key position prospect(have we got any other than White?) has put their hand up. This is backed up by the fact the only player talked up at the moment is a Canadian rugby player..who's yet to play a senior game. Surely it's time to scrutinize our recruiting staff and stategy. When a player or coach underperforms for a more than 1 season, they get thouroughly scrutinized.

You seem to be saying that because you're not excited by our list of 17-22 year olds, our recruiting team is crap.

I am trying to say that

a) I was not overly excited by the likes of Kirk, McVeigh, O'Keefe, Leapin' Leo when they were on our list as 17-22 year olds but by the time they were in their middle early twenties they became very exciting indeed - because they became regular, consistent matchwinners. That is far more exciting - to me - than over-optimistic projection of what raw teenagers might become before they've actually become it; and

b) I am reservedly excited (reservedly because I don't like to assume exponential improvement based on a few teenage games) about Vez, Bird, Jack, Moore, Currie and Murphy. I haven't seen much of Meredith but the little I have seen makes me almost reservedly excited. I've seen enough of O'Dwyer, Smith and Barlow to think that if they can sort out their intensity/concentration/confidence issues they might start to excite me in the very near future. And enough of Schmidt, Thornton and Laidlaw to believe that if they can overcome their physical afflictions, they are capable - at worst - of becoming solid senior players. I am going to wait until I've seen Johnston, Hannebery, Heath and Gilchrist actually kick a ball before I decide whether they excite me. Maybe I am just a very excitable person.

Sure, Willoughby was a bust. Faulks has gone. Numerous rookies have come and gone, with varying levels of contribution to our reserves' 4-in-a-row. DOK may well prove to be a bust, though none of us has a clue what he might be capable of if his body held up. But find me a club which doesn't have a similar list of busts over the past 6 or 7 years.

[liz]

Look, I love a spot of Roos bashing as much as the next guy... but... isn't Stewart Maxfield in charge of recruiting?

I think Maxfield took over the mantle for the 2007 draft from Barham. He might have been involved in some capacity before, but that was the first draft he got to sit at the head table and read out the numbers. And the club engaged Kinnear Beatson to complement the recruiting team in that year too.