I posted this in the Martyn thread but probably sits better hereReally liked what I heard on the Tiger Talk podcast last week.
Something about how over a long period of time the drafting in U.S. sports has shown that people overestimate their ability to judge a talent’s value, so it’s better not to over-indulge in on-the-day trading for specific talents.
The difference between talents really isn’t that large, so when a Gold Coast or a Carlton are paying to jump ahead and pick someone they rate significantly higher, over the long run they’ll end up losing with this method.
Meanwhile, Richmond play it smart and reduce our chance of hurting ourselves from our own natural biases.
No doubt we’re a club that is well aware of the shortcomings of human perception.
Rather than bother reading a single AFL media article on the draft, the real story of the draft to me is how the #1 team of the past few years is attempting to stay ahead of the curve.
We got graded a C by Matt Doerre.
Fair enough assessment. Hindsight will obviously tell us more but i thought for a highlight package Martyn and Ralphsmith's looked pretty underwhelming. The good news is we can back our team in these days with a fair amount of confidence.
I read it that we weren't fussed over who we picked & also don't rate St Kilda's chances in '20.The trade doesn't really make sense then if we weren't interested in Bianco. The only way I could see this coming about is if Tigers were planning on taking Bianco but agreed with Collingwood not to for a sweetener which ended in the 2nd round draft pick swap (St Kilda's position next year I understand).
I'd only enter that agreement if they agree to stay away from the kids in the open Draft. This system is an absolute rort that only a handful of Clubs gain from every yr.I thought there was a sort of gentlemans agreement to not draft Acadamy players,
Especially the long term development boys?
My guess is Matt Doerre has only seen highlight packages too. Thankfully clubs do a little bit more research than that.
There was also a gentlemans agreement not to win two premierships in three years.I thought there was a sort of gentlemans agreement to not draft Acadamy players,
It's quite a while since the terms 'AFL' and 'gentlemen' have been used in the same sentence.I thought there was a sort of gentlemans agreement to not draft Acadamy players,
Depending on how the Mabs/Biggie experiment turns out, we'll either look like Tweedledee or Tweedledum.Biggie could be anything (or not)
For the record I would've went this way.
Robertson
Bianco
Ralphsmith
O'Neil
Hilder.
I'm not saying we got a dud crop or it's a disaster, I just would've gone another way. But at this point in the club's journey, only a fool would carry on, got to back the blokes who have got us this far, to these lofty heights we couldn't dream of five years ago. And you can see a plan and type we are going after.
Let the chefs pick the ingredients, we get to enjoy the meal, nothing more.
Good post. I can see why you're called Baloo and not Baloney. Yes, we'll cherry pick proven players when required.I wonder if the fact we're a destination club, and players tend to move more easily these days, allows us to take riskier picks. If we see a hole in our list coming up soon we can always go the trade/FA/RFA route to fill that with the knowledge we'd appeal to many players