Critical on early draft Selections… Wasted!

[BUCKS]

First and second round picks in the draft should turn into quality AFL players.

What happened with these players below?

James Wasley - This player was never going to be a footballer. He could not kick a ball (King of turnovers) and could not find the ball. Yet I am fascinated in what Collingwood saw in him.
From first glimpse he was never going to make it - what did they see in him? (Wasted 2nd round pick)

Brent Tuckey - Good mark that's it. What did Collingwood see in him? (Wasted 1st round pick)

Ben Wilson - Looked to have the attributes but something was missing (Sydney as well thought so and dumped him) (Wasted 1st round pick) What did Collingwood see in him?

Danny Roach - Injuries (Jury still out)
(Could be a Wasted 1st round pick)

Alan Didak - Now don't bite my head off, but he is not the most aerobic player I have seen and does lack hight. But truthfully I'm still confident in his skilful ability to find and use the ball. And will prove his worth as our first round pick.

But I guess what I'm getting at is this - first and second round picks should not be wasted with all the info gathered on these players (Its critical).

What do you think?

[Lockyer24]

Youre a very critical person BUCKS! But Im hopeful them days of crappy recruiting are in the past.

For every Wasley and Wilson we have a Tarrant and Lonie

Them players have left the club now, lets move on and look to the future instead of wondering what coulda been

[Legga]

I have certainly been a critic of our recruiting, especially high draft choices in the past. Considering Wasley was taken at 24, I don't think you can be too critical of Judkins. I have heard MM say that Wasley was a pretty good junior footballer and that West Coast were keen on him back in '97. I suppose when you consider that the next pick nationally was Port adelaides, and they took Nick Stevens, then maybe we missed out there.
Tucks again was a big, strong marking junior that just seemed to struggle in later years. He is certainly not the only player that has ever fallen into that catergory.
Ben Wilson must have had something, or Sydney would not have had him in the deal for Anthony (along with Mark Orchard). I believe that both Collingwood and Sydney thought he could make a good forward out of him, and once again he didn't come on. at least we off loaded him early, and got something for him. I think we certainly won that trade.
As for Danny Roach, well, I just don't want to go there. Should we go over old ground with that trade? I am still convinced that that has been the most disasterous trade Collingwood has ever made. A trade that increase the dole queue numbers by at least one recruiter.
Alan Didak WILL be a gun-no doubt!! Ask any SA resident, and in particular Port Adelaide supporters just how good this kid is. Take nothing away from Reiwoldt and Kosinki(??), they are excellent players, but this kid was the absolute standout midfielder in the draft last year, and will prove to be better than Paul Haselby. Just be patient.
Trades or recruiting that you should be concerned about- Schauble for Mark Kinnear who hadn't played for 2 years then walked after 1 week at Vic Park (never had any interest in playing)-Pick 3 to Sydney (Nic Fosdycke) for Orchard and Licuria
Pick 12 to Essenscum (Ramanaskus) for Olerenshaw and pick 36 (Jacotine), of course King and Pick 3 (Aaron Fiora) for McKee and pick 7 (Roach).
We made some good picks, we have made some bad. I have always said that for a club that has finished out of the 8 for the past 7 years, and finished 14,16,15 in 3 years running, we haven't done enough with our picks, and infact, I believe we have traded high picks for little return.
Thats in the past, lets hope our recruiters have got smarter and increase the talent that is there over the next couple of years.

[BUCKS]

You both are correct in what you have said - that mistakes are going to be made and all we can do is look forward to the future and learn from our mistakes. But when in comes to early picks in the draft, they should not be making mistakes like Tuckey or Wilson. We have so much tests (to test these players) and scouts looking at them the year through. They should be able to see for example that a Wasley can not kick a football.

There is too much at stake to make errors like that.

I still think AFL CLUBS SHOULD BE ABLE TO GUARANTEE WITH THEIR FIRST AND SECOND ROUND PICKS GOOD FUTURE AFL PLAYERS.






[This message has been edited by BUCKS (edited 30 October 2001).]

[Dgen]

It's not just Collingwood choosing players early in the draft that don't make it and it's not just early draft picks that do make it.
For example: 1986 Pick 7 Stephen Edgar and Pick 21 Peter Doyle to Carlton. Pick 9 Essendon Andrew Payze. 1987 Essendon pick 6 Andrew Rogers. All low picks but I've never heard of any of them. In 1987 David Grenvold was pick 45 and played over 100 games.
David King pick 46 in '93 Brent Harvey pick 47 in '95 and Byron Pickett Pick 67 in '96.
Obviously you would love your low draft picks to become stars but you can only draft on what you can see and what you think you can develop a player into. You can't always be right.
We have had some successes though: Graham Wright pick 3 in '87 Presti pick 10 in '95 Chris Tarrant pick 8 in '97 and of course Josh pick 1 in 1999.
I think we just kept players for too long after realising they couldn't play (Jason Wild for example).

Premiers - 020310171927282930353653589003

[BUCKS]

I know its not only Collingwood, its alot of clubs. And I dont mind if we pick up a few dud players with our low picks. I just get angry when I see players like McAlister, Tuckey, Wilson, and Banik getting picked up with first round picks.

In this day and age clubs get so much information, videos and data on these young kids that they should at least get the first and second round picks correct.

[Brown26]

Leon Davis - late pick.
What number was Lockyer taken at (I really don't know this so I might be totally wrong)

Tarrant and Lonie (who wasn't a real high pick either I don't think)

Didak will be a champion - an absolute champion. sure he's short but he's got silky smooth skills and a special something about him - champion quality.

These guys have proven a bit that they can play, and when you consider that we got Nick Davis and Jason Cloak for a 2nd and 3rd round pick, we drafted pretty damn well with that lot.

And Legga - why question the trade that got us our current Copeland champion!!

In the past our recruiting has been ordinary, but it hasn't just been us, and I think the signs are it's geting better. We could definately have done better, but I don't think we're much worse off than others, I think the problem was we tried for a quick fix solution and it never worked, or will ever work.

Pies for Premiers 2002, 3, 4, 5, 6....

[MarkT]

Bucks, you are right. I know Rohan gets critisised in here but he is also right when he says that our recruiting has not been up to scratch in the past. It has been the single most influentual reason for our decline in the 90's. You can say what you like about Tony Shaw's coaching but you can't coach players who can't play. The point is really that we never made enought of our early choices.

Unfortunately Lockyer24 we don't have a tarrant for every Wilson. If we did we wouldn't have finished 2nd last and 9th in the last 2 years. BUT there are no gurantees because you are counting on improvement as bodies and the intangible "football nouse" to develop. The mistakes I think we made were to look at the type of player we needed rather than the outright quality, we failed to adequately consider the players size and maturity level phisically comparred to his peers (ie was he bigger/stronger but would not be in seniors) and we failed to take any account of the personality (therefore drafting some real drongo's).

It seems that we have lifted our game dramatically of recent times. Bear in mind that no club has a 100% success rate and the success rate was even lower in the early 90's when clubs were less sophistcated in recruiting juniors.


[This message has been edited by MarkT (edited 30 October 2001).]

[MAGPIRA]

GRRRRRRR You are critical...you may have a point about the others but DIDAK!!!! Not aerobic enough for you...LOL!! OOOOHHHHH Just you and wait and see.....that is gonna come back and bite ya on the bum BIG TIME!! Mark my words....this kid is gonna be an exceptional player...he just turned 18 not that long ago...give him time!

[Dgen]

Brown26, Just to answer some of your questions:
Leon Davis pick 34
Tarrant pick 8
Lonie pick 34
Didak pick 3
Lockyer was a rookie elevation. I'm not sure how that works.



Premiers - 020310171927282930353653589003

[Member]

Someone said we picked up wasley and the next pick was ports who picked up Nick Stevens.

That year you could only pick one 17 year old. We picked up Tarrant. We couldnt pick up Nick Stevens (unfortunately).
Wasley was regarded as a good Junior he even made his debut for norwood as a 17 year old.
Unfortunately he couldnt make the next step.
Shit happens.

Mick Malthouse should be judged on what he picks up when he started coaching the club. So far he has been quite good with the players he (coaching/recruiting staff)have picked up.

The only question mark they have at the moment is the development of Danny Roach.
Malthouse likes the way pavlich plays. But then again if we had picked him up he probably would have wanted to go back to adelaide anyway.

I hope Danny Roach makes some headway this year.

As for Tony Shaw's four years as coach has set us back 8 years in player developement.
Great player but shit coach.

Should see the shit he cops on the other collingwood web site.
Fromtheouter.com

Lets look Forward.
My mail is that they are hoping that Xavier Clarke or Richard Cole dont get picked up before pick 11.

[MarkT]

Member,
Tony Shaw was no supercoach I know, but he wasn't as bad as most seem to indicate. He inherited and ageing list that suffered from 5 years of pathetic recruiting. The trading was little better with a couple of notable exceptions in Buck's and A.Rocca (who still hasn't performed to expectations - which were huge at the time).

The 1990 side was young and good recruiting would have seen more premiershiops. Instead by the time shaw took over the better players were either injury plagued or getting too old to perform at the top level they had become known for.

I know it is easy to bag the coach but I really think Shaw was doomed from the start due to incompetent player list management. I recall Paul Williams in the early 90's as a young gun we drafted and little else up to the late 90's. If Shaw was a poor coach with a poor list then what of MM in 2000? His result was little better but there was far more of a positive outlook because we had some promising kids. The difference was the recruiting.

The coach plays a part in recruiting but he doesn't watch players throughout the year and relies on the feedback from recruiters. I get the impression, ythough, that Mick playes a bigger part in drafting and trading than some other coaches and that may be one of his strengths.

[Member]

Mark,

With all due respect, please don't try and convince me that Tony Shaw's stint as coach was positive for the club.

I am only talking about players acquired in the coaches tenure as coach, I am not talking about what was inherited.

And to suggest that the coach doesnt have a huge involvement in recruiting is just not correct.

Shaw had a huge say in what he drafted.

One example was the fact he went against Judkins call on olarenshaw. Judkins told him he had a bad back but Shaw and Weadon wanted to take the punt and gave up pick 11 or 12.

And we know who essendon got with that pick (ramanaskaus).

I respect Tony Shaw when he played.
I was happy when he was appointed coach
and I was happy when he departed the coaching position

I know one of the players at the club who played under him.
Shaw was asked on radio once how he went through the process of telling a player he was dropped for that week.
His reply was that a player gets sat down on Tuesday and told the reason why.

I found out that the majority of players dropped never went through this process and found out via radio or the newspaper the next day.

He gave the impression out in public that he was a players man.
But that was far from the truth.


But to be frank with you Mark, he has got more under my skin with his bullshit comments on radio bagging the Collingwood football club and Mick Malthouse over the last two years.

Only once last year he got some little respect from me, when he was questioned by a caller on 3AW about his recruiting.
He said quote "Looking back I didnt recruit the right type of players and I didn't make some hard decisions on those players at the time. I should of sacked most of them."

But then a week later he started bagging Malthouse again.

thanks

[Legga]

Member, Thank you for having the balls to come out and speak the awful truth about Tony Shaw. You gotta admire the bloke for what he did on the field, but as a coach, and the person who had the FINAL say in the players that came to and stayed at Collingwood over his time, he was pathetic.
Think back to jason Wild. Calssic example of a player that was never giong to make it. Terrible skills etc, yet Shaw kept him on our list for 4 years. I get sick and tired of hearing supporters saying that Tony had nothing to work with. Thats probably right, but he was such a terrible judge of footballers that we recruited the biggest spastics because that was the type of player Shaw identified as players we needed.
How can you as supporters suggest that Shaw had nothing to work with, yet miraculously Judkins recruiting has improved in the last 2 years, since MM took over. In 2 years we delisted some 34 players. Players that Shaw either inherited or brought to this club.
I have stated before that my opinion, and I believe it is pretty close to the mark, talking to some officials at other clubs, is that the recruiting staff can only identify the talent, the Football staff choose who they think they need for us to get better.
Member, you and I are leading down the same path with Shaw. He bags MM constantly, and really, the only reason some of the kids got a game in the last year was because Eddie directed Shaw to play the kids at all cost, to see what we had. Shaw would have coached us to a 12th or so position otherwise.
Brown26, my point with the Licuria trade is that Orchard is no longer with us, fantastic that Lica won the Copeland, but be honest, how many thought he had a chance, and he is about the most critisied player on our list, because of his skill, decision making etc. Fosdyke made the All Australian Squad this year.

[MarkT]

Member,
if I gave the impression that I thought Tony Shaw's coaching sting was positive it was not deliberate. The fact is that it was part (not all) of the worst period in our history. That relates to on field efforts and in most areas of off field performance also. My point in defending Shaw was that he was not nearly as entirely to blame for our slide as many people seem to think or say.

I still maintian the ills that beset our club started before Shaw became coach and the current upsurge in our off and on field performances began before he vacated the position.

I agree his record says he is not a good coach but I believe there is also an element of scape goating in comments I often hear, including on this site. No doubt he played a part, but he isn't "reason" we fell so far.

As for the Olarenshaw deal - it was a shocker, no doubt. As you said, Weadon had his opinion and Shaw had to pick who's advicwe to follow. In the end he probably went with the advice that matched his opinion which is only natural. No doubting it was a bad call but I also don't know that we would have drafted Ramanaskous either. But even so, it would still have been a bad decision.

Quote:
"I respect Tony Shaw when he played.
I was happy when he was appointed coach
and I was happy when he departed the coaching position"

Me too!

Quote:
"But to be frank with you Mark, he has got more under my skin with his bullshit comments on radio bagging the Collingwood football club and Mick Malthouse over the last two years."

I understand that view and it is a common view. There have been a few players/coaches who have resented being sacked and believe that contracts should be honered etc. Lets not forget that the club tried to replace him with Drum (phew). I thought the club and Shaw handled themselves with class throughout the whole ordeal of his eventual and inevitable sacking and I give Eddie great credit for that - it wasn't the usual Collingwood way thank goodness. As for his comments since then, I am not impressed either but I temper my anger/dissapointment with the view that he has been made a scapegoat more so than he deserved. Add to that his enormous contribution as a player, leader and Collingwood person and I just to see him slagged off so readily.

In short, Member, I agree in part with you but I have a different opinion on his degree of culpability and the degree justification for his apparant current (dissapointing) attitude.


[This message has been edited by MarkT (edited 31 October 2001).]