A discussion on drafting

[hammo]

Some trivia on the 2006 super draft: Who are the only two players taken in the top 50 not to have yet played a senior game of AFL football?

Answer: Daniel O'Keefe and Daniel Currie (both Sydney Swans)

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_drafts?year=2006&t=N&s=P

I am not picking on O?Keefe and Currie and hope both can become good players for us, but it is instructive. The fact we only used two picks in the top 50 in that draft and neither have debuted sums up some of the problems we currently have in developing young players to replace the Halls, Kirks and Barrys.

Roos' drafting philosophy until very recently has been that outside the first round, the draft is a crap shoot. Roos bucked the AFL trend on this (almost the only one) by saying bottoming out had never been proven to win a premiership. He relied instead on his research of US sports with an emphasis away from the draft. With Hawthorn now having 'proved' the theory, Roos now appears to be backing away from his own theory at a hundred miles an hour. I interpret his post-Collingwood remarks about lack of class as an admission you need to rebuild via the draft, not via trading and rookie list elevations as the Swans have attempted to do. Let's hope it's not 3 years too late.

This isn't intended to be anti-Roos thread, but I want to contrast our recent drafting efforts with Adelaide, who we play this week. In 2005-06 the Crows and Swans had a similar list profiles and both clubs were inside their 'premiership window'. Of course, the Swans did win a flag and narrowly missed another (had we played Adelaide in those finals series we may not have achieved this given our record against them) while Adelaide missed out and began the rebuild. The Swans in contrast have tried to prolong their current run of finals appearances by trading away draft picks for the likes of Everitt, Mattner and Shaw and forgoing draft picks to elevate rookies (Brennan, Phillips, Simpkin).

Adelaide is now regarded as having one of the most exciting young lists in the AFL (three rising star noms already this year) while generally it?s accepted the Swans will struggle for a few years with little exciting talent coming through. Like us, Adelaide has not had access to a raft of early picks.

Two of the Crows? rising star nominations were taken with second round picks ? exactly the picks the Swans have willingly traded away in recent years to snare ready-made players. The Crows took Andy Otten at pick 27 in 2007 and Kurt Tippett at pick 32 in 2006. Both play positions the Swans desperately need: a key defender and key forward / ruck. This is only a cursory look at the Crows, I am sure there are similar stories at other clubs.

The Swans? spend more on the football department than any other club in the AFL. How much of this is spent on recruiting? Clearly not enough. The draft is only a crap shoot if you don?t do your research.

It?s worth having a discussion as the club begins to seriously looks at our playing list beyond 2009. My fear is that the 2006-08 drafts will go down lost years for youth development with not enough picks being taken.

There is a place for rookies, but they can?t be relied upon to develop a list. For every rookie elevated, the club forgoes a draft pick. Players who are not regarded as being in the top 50 or 60 in the country as a teenager will rarely develop into the top class players you need to build a premiership team around.

[Melbournehammer]

I'm just not that certain we've done that badly

For my part I think the disappointments have not really been with our (to use a perjorative phrase) top-ups.

And i don't think you can necessarily say that we did poorly from our higher draft picks pre roos - goodes, o'keefe

I do think we have been a little unlucky as well - our high draft picks have come in average years - mcveigh, jude, fosdike and ferguson were all better than average players but none are chris judd or buddy franklin. But for example if you compare jude with lenny hayes i don't reckon we did worse for our pick than what we might have.

I think Bolton, Mattner, Schauble, Williams etc have all been excellent trades. I have reasonable expectations from Shaw. The only complete stuff up was the trade for chambers.

From other trades I think Spriggs was a fraction unlucky. I reckon brennan was not quite there but didn't cost much.

Overall we have been ok in trading and recruitment since roos came - we haven't unearthed any goodes or o'keefe's as late picks - but not too many other clubs have as well.

[Triple B]

I do think we have been a little unlucky as well - our high draft picks have come in average years - mcveigh, jude, fosdike and ferguson were all better than average players

Careful, Big Brother is watching all mistakes.

[dimelb]

I think the jury's still out on the talent coming through. DOK, Currie, Pyke, Murphy, Johnston, Schmidt, Laidlaw, Veszpremi, Smith, Hannebery, Thornton have all given indications that there may well be as yet unrealised potential. As for Bird, White and Jack, they are already above average to good, and in Bird's case may turn out to be great - though I don't want to put the mockers on the young fella. I'll watch the development with interest.

[Jewels]

I think the jury's still out on the talent coming through. DOK, Currie, Pyke, Murphy, Johnston, Schmidt, Laidlaw, Veszpremi, Smith, Hanneberry, Thornton have all given indications that there may well be as yet unrealised potential. As for Bird, White and Jack, they are already above average to good, and in Bird's case may turn out to be great - though I don't want to put the mockers on the young fella. I'll watch the development with interest.

Now, now, now, no positive posts.
It's all doom and gloom remember!

[Plugger46]

I think the jury's still out on the talent coming through. DOK, Currie, Pyke, Murphy, Johnston, Schmidt, Laidlaw, Veszpremi, Smith, Hannebery, Thornton have all given indications that there may well be as yet unrealised potential. As for Bird, White and Jack, they are already above average to good, and in Bird's case may turn out to be great - though I don't want to put the mockers on the young fella. I'll watch the development with interest.

My thoughts exactly.

[ernie koala]

I agree with Hammo's general sentiments. I'm not saying the players we have drafted from 06-08 are duds, it's too early to tell...but we should of started off loading some older players and drafted more youngsters, instead of hanging on to all the older players, off loading two 24 year olds in Schnieds and Dempster and then adding players like Playfair and Everitt in particular..both had a long history of injury problems, Everitt was close to retirement and Playfair was an ordinary player at best.
As I keep harping on, we are now faced with 6-7 imminent retirements coinciding with severely compromised drafts. Poor planning from a footy department with more resources than any other club.

[Doctor J.]

I agree with Hammo's general sentiments. I'm not saying the players we have drafted from 06-08 are duds, it's too early to tell...but we should of started off loading some older players and drafted more youngsters, instead of hanging on to all the older players, off loading two 24 year olds in Schnieds and Dempster and then adding players like Playfair and Everitt in particular..both had a long history of injury problems, Everitt was close to retirement and Playfair was an ordinary player at best.
As I keep harping on, we are now faced with 6-7 imminent retirements coinciding with severely compromised drafts. Poor planning from a footy department with more resources than any other club.

You make it sound like we dumped Schneids & Demptser and picked up Playfair & Everitt.

If Schneids & Dempster were not traded we wouldn't have Meredith. I see a much greater future in Meredith than both the aforementioned, and I was the driver of the Sean Dempster bandwagon.

[Doctor J.]

I do think we have been a little unlucky as well - our high draft picks have come in average years - mcveigh, jude, fosdike and ferguson were all better than average players but none are chris judd or buddy franklin.

Careful, Big Brother is watching all mistakes.

I did wonder who tf ferguson was!! thanks for completing the picture Triple

[The Big Cat]

Jolly and Ball were pretty handy trades too. Just wait a couple of years for that spine of ??, Murphy, Hanneberry, Johnston, ??

[Bas]

Good thread Hammo.

The dorks and saints have shown the importance of the fall down the ladder. In a few years Carlton will be doing same.

Father son also helped Geelong better than any rookie listing.

Geelong had much the same list for years before it fired. As did the Dorks and even longer for the Saints.

Many say we won in 2005 with an ordinary list.

I think our most significant acquisitations had been Roos and Plugger as players. Didn't win us a premiership but did win the Swans lots of fans and media attention.

Micky O was a third round pick and Goodes was up there as well.

So I think apart from a few stuff ups, our recruiters have done well. They covered the loss of Plugger, Roos, Kelly, Schwass, Dunkley and our man Luffy to win a premiership in only 3 years or so. Have they held onto the current aged players too long?.

Micky has done the honourable thing but I think Crouch and L Barry have to do same. Perhaps even Capt Kirk has slowed too much.

We can't tank any lower than 5th last because the teams below us are worse off at the moment.

[RogueSwan]

... I reckon brennan was not quite there but didn't cost much.

Except holding back another youngster??

[hammo]

A further comparison between Sydney and Adelaide.

In the past 3 drafts (2006-08), Adelaide has taken 17 players via the national draft (including 1 NSW scholarship player - Taylor Walker).

Sydney by comparison has used just 10 picks (1 NSW scholarship player - Craig Bird).

In the same period we have elevated the following seven rookies to the senior list at the end of a season (thus forgoing draft picks): Phillips, Simpkin, Barlow, Brennan, Jack, O'Dwyer, Smith. We have also traded picks for Everitt, Mattner, Playfair and Shaw.

[giant]

Nice try but...

Some trivia on the 2006 super draft: Who are the only two players taken in the top 50 not to have yet played a senior game of AFL football?

Answer: Daniel O'Keefe and Daniel Currie (both Sydney Swans)

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_drafts?year=2006&t=N&s=P

I am not picking on O?Keefe and Currie and hope both can become good players for us, but it is instructive. The fact we only used two picks in the top 50 in that draft and neither have debuted sums up some of the problems we currently have in developing young players to replace the Halls, Kirks and Barrys.

Are you suggesting we should have dropped Hall & Kirk for DOK & Currie?

Roos' drafting philosophy until very recently has been that outside the first round, the draft is a crap shoot. Roos bucked the AFL trend on this (almost the only one) by saying bottoming out had never been proven to win a premiership. He relied instead on his research of US sports with an emphasis away from the draft. With Hawthorn now having 'proved' the theory, Roos now appears to be backing away from his own theory at a hundred miles an hour. I interpret his post-Collingwood remarks about lack of class as an admission you need to rebuild via the draft, not via trading and rookie list elevations as the Swans have attempted to do. Let's hope it's not 3 years too late.

I think his comment was that high draft picks "guarantee" class - as evidenced by Didak's match winning performance. Interestingly, the Pies other two recent high drafts, Thomas & Pendlebury, had very little impact on the game, but nevertheless it's certainly the case that if you don't have top 5 kicks (or fabbo f/s selections) it's bloody hard to find the real cream. In any event, unless we'd tanked, we wouldn't have had any of these high draft picks in the last few years.

This isn't intended to be anti-Roos thread, but I want to contrast our recent drafting efforts with Adelaide, who we play this week. In 2005-06 the Crows and Swans had a similar list profiles and both clubs were inside their 'premiership window'. Of course, the Swans did win a flag and narrowly missed another (had we played Adelaide in those finals series we may not have achieved this given our record against them) while Adelaide missed out and began the rebuild. The Swans in contrast have tried to prolong their current run of finals appearances by trading away draft picks for the likes of Everitt, Mattner and Shaw and forgoing draft picks to elevate rookies (Brennan, Phillips, Simpkin).

Adelaide is now regarded as having one of the most exciting young lists in the AFL (three rising star noms already this year) while generally it?s accepted the Swans will struggle for a few years with little exciting talent coming through. Like us, Adelaide has not had access to a raft of early picks.

Two of the Crows? rising star nominations were taken with second round picks ? exactly the picks the Swans have willingly traded away in recent years to snare ready-made players. The Crows took Andy Otten at pick 27 in 2007 and Kurt Tippett at pick 32 in 2006. Both play positions the Swans desperately need: a key defender and key forward / ruck. This is only a cursory look at the Crows, I am sure there are similar stories at other clubs.

The Swans? spend more on the football department than any other club in the AFL. How much of this is spent on recruiting? Clearly not enough. The draft is only a crap shoot if you don?t do your research.

It?s worth having a discussion as the club begins to seriously looks at our playing list beyond 2009. My fear is that the 2006-08 drafts will go down lost years for youth development with not enough picks being taken.

The Crows have done very well with their recruitment - but the stats don't lie, the draft is a crap shoot after the first 10. Mattner, Shaw, Richards & Jolly are comfortably in our best 22 and will all hopefully have a role to play in our next gen renaissance.

There is a place for rookies, but they can?t be relied upon to develop a list. For every rookie elevated, the club forgoes a draft pick. Players who are not regarded as being in the top 50 or 60 in the country as a teenager will rarely develop into the top class players you need to build a premiership team around.

And yet this is exactly the draft picks the Swans would presumably have given up in choosing a rookie player (in the 50s & 60s). A few years back the success stories of Cox, Glass and others had everyone scouring the rookie lists - these things go in cycles.

[hammo]

[QUOTE=giant;444794]

Are you suggesting we should have dropped Hall & Kirk for DOK & Currie?

No. I referred to O'Keefe and Currie as they're the only two players to be taken in the top 50 in 2006 NOT to have played a senior game. I'm suggesting that for a club facing a series of key retirements in the next year, our rebuild would be less daunting had recruits from that draft already established themselves as senior players with at least 20-30 games. Its not a comment on those individuals per say.

I think his comment was that high draft picks "guarantee" class - as evidenced by Didak's match winning performance. Interestingly, the Pies other two recent high drafts, Thomas & Pendlebury, had very little impact on the game, but nevertheless it's certainly the case that if you don't have top 5 kicks (or fabbo f/s selections) it's bloody hard to find the real cream. In any event, unless we'd tanked, we wouldn't have had any of these high draft picks in the last few years.

My original post pointed out the types of players the Crows had taken with second round picks in contrast to the Swans' undervaluing of anything after the first round. I still think you are more likely to pick up a classy player in the draft than in the rookie draft or by trading.

The Crows have done very well with their recruitment - but the stats don't lie, the draft is a crap shoot after the first 10. Mattner, Shaw, Richards & Jolly are comfortably in our best 22 and will all hopefully have a role to play in our next gen renaissance.

As I said I disagree about the crap shoot. If the Swans spend more than any other club on their football department, then they should have very sound knowledge of all the potential draftees. Anyway, if developing players via the rookie list is a better option (and technically a club should know these players inside out after 1 or 2 years as rookies), we've made some puzzling promotions in recent years.

Of the players you name, certainly Jolly and Richards were taken when our premiership window was open. From a purely recruiting / looking to the future perspective, the other two trades do not make sense, putting aside where they fit in our current list.