Quote:
You also have to throw in that we couldn't trade into those rounds of the draft from which we were docked, and you're ignoring that we would have had pick 5 in 2003.
Scotland for our third rounder? Pretty fair.
Beaumont for Harford and Johnson? We were held to ransom.
McKernan for Digby and Teague? WE WERE HELD TO RANSOM.
The Murphy and Allen trades were probably fair.
Michael Rischitelli, Shane Tuck and Andrew Raines were speculative picks, we opted for mature bodies and attempts to inject our side with cover for our most lacking areas, pace and ruck.
I dare say we wouldn't have even picked up Raines even if we scored ourselves a time machine.
I don't see much wrong with 2004, missed out on Egan (Geelong from their VFL side) and Moran (debuted round 21, about as speculative as Setanta).
2005 saw another 'safe' trade made for Saddington, and we haven't see anyone arise from that to indicate it's a mistake yet (please don't say Bartram, I'm not convinced). Sydney pays a good chunk of his salary, he's been unlucky with his knee.
Perhaps in hindsight we could have snared Jackson and scored another rookie pick, but who's to say we would have still got Flint, or that Jacko deserved to be on the senior list at the start of the year. Massive speculation.
So despite all these so called drafting tragedies that have occurred in this time, Denis has played a role in trade talks, and rough directives to WH for the drafts.
We've played it safe, and chipped away where possible - without any perceived currency at our end - and we had to give players who were probably on the bottom third of another clubs list a crack with us if we've wanted mature bodies.
Now for a quick run over of coaching style.
2003 - Slash and burn year, tried a few things and experimented with the list to see what he had to work with, probably paying very little attention to a system of play, rather simple positioning of players. A sink or swim sort of approach.
2004 - Threw out the worst of the duds, traded away those with value who were disenchanted with the idea of working harder to push for better results. Noted a huge lack of leg speed so sought about playing contested footy. Game plan for the players - better results came - at the expense of nice draft choices in our first year without restrictions.
2005 - First true transitional year, with teething problems, to put it nicely. A man known for his firm belief in the value of contested football was wearing down an ever-growing band of younger players by employing a game plan built off it. Attempted to build a free running aspect into the game plan to counteract the growing number of contests created in an attempt to protect younger players. Hardened bodies in the clearances used as sacrificial lambs.
Worked nicely in the Wizard cup but gave clubs an extra 4 weeks to check out what Denis was doing with his fairly bare cupboard, again. All the running seemed to be taking a toll on young (lack of pre-seasons in the legs) and old (carrying injuries), no real talent in the tier between to hold it all together.
2006 - Youngsters beginning to look like men, but Denis and/or the Board were not convinced in the game plan in regards to score margins and skil level of individuals, built off many players with question marks over their heads.
Ergo, chip, chip and flood to bring a more defensive mindset into the team as shootouts weren't working. Continued to protect younger players as much as possible. Unfortunately couldn't continue to hedge his bets, with protection of younger players through the bench impacting those out on the field who wound up doing as much running as the year before, still due to skill errors. Slowly loosened the chains (admittedly under duress) with sporadic results. Strength and endurance training began to reap some rewards and allowed for some positional and role changes.
Decision making, overall kicking skill and agility still noted as an issue to be corrected as best as possible through coaching, but mainly through injection of new and better talent. Still searching through the list for key defensive post and at least one ruckman with some encouraging results late in the season.
To be continued?
This is a very long, in depth post Jimmae and I don't really have it in me to read every word.
However, I don't think people read my analogy properly. The "we probably wouldn't have picked that player anyway" theory is also a massive cop-out. 'Speculating' is an important part of recruiting if, indeed, speculating is the right word.
We could have played the recycling game to a lesser extent than we did. We should have been a lot more subtle about it.
We could have grabbed a number of players to help out in the short term and still had a few pics in place for speculating.
The club has come out and admitted as such, why can't the fans?
True rebuilding (albeit slightly half-hearted) might have started at the end of last year but the seeds should have been put into place at least at the 2002 national draft.
Login
Register
FAQ
