-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Thomson Dow
- Thread starter fastin bulbous
- Start date
Yep. Aside from the generally accepted norm that the first few picks are the guaranteed superstars, it's more fan / meedjia speculation and wishful thinking regarding the rest of the players drafted.
There's usually bugger all difference in the raw footy ability of most of the players picked from five to a hundred. But there's a humungous difference to the expectation of success. If a kid taken in the first round doesn't at least reach 150 games n become a very good player then he's a spud. Conversley if a kid taken as a rookie plays a 100 games n contributes solidly as a role player behind some very very good players, he's a draft steal.
Lucky for us, our drafters have been robbing the system blind in previous years.
The Castagna of 2017-20 is way better than today’s Castagna - therein lies his problem
Dow at least has the possibility of improvement.
YES a few years back I did a look at 10 + draft years
and losely marked players as stars , good solid players or nothing
and grouped by picks 1-10 , 11-20 , 21-30 etc
surprise surprise , the top 10 picks produced more stars than any other group and just about as much as all other groups
1-10 typically had more solid players than 11-20 and they had more than 21-30
things got a little sketchy from pick 50
My first thoughts were , that passes the pub test , Martin , Cotchin , Deledio were top 10 picks
lets not get hung up on the likes of Tambling , Conca and Jack Watts for the moment
but they do highlight just having a top 10 pick doesn't mean your get a champion or even a solid player
Rivers sliding was a big surprise was considered a far superior prospect to Dow. Deven Robertson no one could believe he was still on the board at our pick. We were screaming for onballers and overlooked him. Terrible decision to overlook him. Just had 17 touches and 10 tackles in a preliminary final that his team lost. Played three finals and was serviceable in all. Said it at draft time, he was the pick.
We whiffed on Dow, didn't have outstanding TAC numbers but had some flashy moments. We took moments over substance. Dow is a good example of drafting guys who don't have clearly defined roles at the next level. If you can't immediately pinpoint what role the draftee is going to play at the next level, you don't take them with picks inside 25.
I think thats a pretty solid rule that would leave you ahead long term
I forgot how funny that scene was … ‘take me to your leader’ - ‘oh my god - you had sex!’
I think you're being a bit disrespectful to the amount of effort that our team put into recruiting and that they didn't think he'd have a defined role. Remember rules have changed, and we had a distinct style that separated us from everyone else in the league. We may have been targetting someone to meet our criterion, not to meet the criterion for 17 other clubs.
With respect to our recruiters I know that not only do they look at the physical characteristics as a player, and their strengths and weaknesses skill wise, they also compare the draftee to an existing player to illustrate the type of role that the player would most likely be able to perform. They look at the percentile they're at in terms of speed, agility, endurance, etc. They make notes about what skills the player has demonstrated they have, how often they display them and at what level/standard of competition they display them at (eg the old can perform when there's time, but can't when pressure goes up test).
Dow may not furnish the way we would like, but to simplify the selection as per the above - I would think to our recruiters - is borderline offensive.
How is the view from that high horse? I'm well aware as to how players are picked.
Whatever the method, he was the wrong pick it's that simple. As for being borderline offensive, I wasn't aware that the recruiting team is beyond being questioned. They need to be held to account, our early picks (take out the 2021 crop at this stage too early. Gibcus, Sonsie and Clarke look promising, jury out on the other two at this stage) have been iffy. Zips goes on about it but his overall point is correct. We draft well late. Not so well early.
Sometimes I wonder if we drafted him only because Cartoon drafted his bro.
Historically, the chances of a draft pick playing 200 games is the same for a player taken 21-30 in the draft as it is for a player taken 31-50. Obviously there are more players in the 31-50 bracket but maybe, just maybe the difference in quality of a late first round pick and an early third round pick is just not that much. And, because we’ve had more picks in the second and third rounds in the last 5-7 years and therefore more chances to pick good players there is a perception that we somehow do better with later picks when in fact we’ve just had more goes at it.
Or maybe Zips is right and Clark is a hack and should be sacked immediately.
I don't know - you tell me?
You act like you have superior insight into why a player was taken than our own recruiting team.
"Dow is a good example of drafting guys who don't have clearly defined roles at the next level. If you can't immediately pinpoint what role the draftee is going to play at the next level, you don't take them with picks inside 25."
How do you know what was discussed at the club level? You've assumed when we drafted him we have no idea what role he'd play for us (before we've got him into training and see him at AFL level and can perform the role we envisaged of course). There's one thing to say our recruiting team can't be critiqued, it's another thing assuming that they haven't got a strategy or a basic idea of how to draft a player.
100 % Agreed.
It's pure common sense when one thinks about it.
And we know how uncommon that common sense is these days.
Bump…
I thought he had a reasonable game and a great first half. A pleasant surprise.
I thought he had a reasonable game and a great first half. A pleasant surprise.
Let's hope he breaks out this season. More mids the better.
