Hard to argue with that.

i agree our adressing of our rucks stocks has been poor.

who has the final call on our draft selections?
from what I understand is that the coaches leave the final decisions upto the recruiting dept on draft day.

this is also where a policy of 'pick best availabe' can let a club down.

maybe it's just me being crazy in believing that you should be playing for the jumper or at least playing for personal pride.

personally i don't think pagan has lost respect as its hard to explain how you go from the performances put in against north, adel, wb and port, to what we dished up against haw and say its a respect issue.

Okay I can't make my point without mentioning names.

1, We picked up Russell early mainly for his athleticism - agreed probably not the best selection.

2, Picked Kennedy ahead of Pendlebury - Pendlebury looks the goods though the jury is still out on Kennedy. You would have to mark that one down as a no for selecting the athlete first.

3, Could have drafted a player at pick 35 in last year’s draft that could slip strait into the side but picked up Austin instead. This has nothing to do with picking the athlete fist and more to do with chasing a key defender.

4, We needed a ruckman last year so we took the athletic Sampson ahead of the more advanced Renouf. May have taken the more athletic player first (bearing in mind one of the things that attracted our recruiters might be the fact that Hampson is more explosive) but we don't know the 'results' yet.

5, Picked up the Benjamin, who is an athlete, with a late pick last year but who else was there?

6, Pearce from Port goes alright and he starred at the draft camp but we ignored him.

7, Drafted the athletic Walker but who is questioning that decision now?

It all seems to add up to a bit of a furphy if you ask me. If you can point the blame at anything it would be that our recruiting is far too stolid and needs based. Be it for a particuler position, more speed, whatever. We have taken the human angle out of it. We also need to trust it a bit more and trade into it.

_________________
Just because I'm offended, doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Well it would seem that with our decision to take Hampson in the National Draft and Jacobs in the Rookie Draft - we have finally taken a long term view with respect to sorting out our ruck deficiency.

It is a pity that we were reamed again by the AFL with respect to their decision to change the Priority Pick rule - I am pretty sure we would have taken Gibbs and Leuenberger with Pick 1 and 3 in the National Draft of 2006.

Thats why its critical for us to gain the Priority Pick in 2007 - and try and get Kreuzer and the best available mid-fielder whether it be Cotchin or whoever else it is deemed to be.

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill

You’re doing it too. What if the two players that are deemed 'best' don't suite our 'needs'? Do we overlook them? That is courting disaster.

_________________
Just because I'm offended, doesn't mean I'm wrong.

Most of the pundits rate Kreuzer higher than Leuenberger - which probably means he will be a top 3 selection in this years Draft. If we win one more game it means our first pick is Pick 2 or 3 - so we are caught between the devil and the deep blue sea - because we flowering hell need a ruckman as well as more mid-field talent.

This is why I have argued so vehemently in other threads we desparately need the Priority Pick - so we have at least the luxury of trying to get the best Ruckman and best mid-fielder in this draft.

But you are right - because our selections have been so piecemeal in the past we have found ourselves in a situation now where we are nearly almost unable to select the "best available talent" in the draft rather now we are almost forced into selecting the "best available position" in the draft.

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill

Couldn't agree more. I am not pro-tank, but we are better off winning 4 games than 5-7 games.

All this talk in the last few days of how Hawthorn has built its list so well...they did it by making the absolute best of their time at the bottom (and good trading, with a fair deal of luck thrown in (Thompson and Rawlings wanted to leave)).

We need to do the same, while we are struggling, gleam the absolute cream of the drafts while we can.

I can't see it happening now, as I think we will win more games this year, but 2 top 5 picks this year would be a massive bonus for us.

_________________
Mens sana in corpore sano.

Bring back the laurel wreath logo!!!

Anyone disagree with GT's opinion on where we are at?
No real discussion here thought I'd throw it up

_________________
Stay tuned We're in for a BUMPY ride

I agree with you wangers are recruiting under WH concerns me at the moment but I keep on saying maybe in 1- 2yrs time then all his recruits can be judged. Under O'Sullivan while he didnt have much luck with his early picks he was okay with his middle to late picks. Why does it seem like all our recruits need development time, then there's other clubs who have first or second year players that show something very early, its so fustrating. I'm also sick of Pagan using the we are young excuse after each loss.

The dawks did it so well one year the AFL changed the qualification criteria because of it!!! They lost a couple of games late in 2005 being 4 goals up with 5-7 minutes to go. Not saying it was deliberate but with about 8 weeks to go they simply weren’t doing their all to win.

The filth were the same when they booked in a plethora of there best players for season ending surgery 6-8 weeks out. They prospered and we suffered the consequences the year after!!! C@nts!!!

I don’t think anyone really grasps the concept of wanting to acquire a PP. It’s not like there is any encouragement for the team to lose deliberately, just greater embracing of long term thinking and the promotion of some of our younger talent into the seniors for fast-tracked development.

I reckon that we will definitely win another game or two regardless and therefore disqualify us from the PP but NO-ONE here can deny that having picks 1-3 this year is a LOT BETTER than having just pick 2. Especially considering there are 6-7 standouts for the draft. This cant be debated. After Friday, I think it will have caused sufficient damage to make it a struggle to bounce back quickly. The performance was that inept and pathetic. We probably wont see another win for a while

_________________
C'mon Blueboys!

Hmm, well there are 2 components ... selecting the players, and developing them. WH seems to have a reasonable track record ...

Now who is responsible for the 2nd component?

Are you on drugs? Take away our top 10 and go through the list. WH has been an absolute disgrace and fooled the club for too many years. His best work can be seen from 2000 - 2005. How many of those picks have been delisted? No matter what you say, you simply can't blame anyone other than him and his recruiting buddies.

Um, I'm pretty sure Wayne Hughes has only been with us since the 2004 draft....

[quote="tomalvin"]Are you on drugs? quote]


Mind and History altering, apparently.

_________________
"Hence you will not say that Greeks fight like heroes but that heroes fight like Greeks"?

Winston Churchill

I'm not sure.

How many of Hughes' selections have been delisted to date?
Perhaps you could make a list for our perusal?

_________________
Looking forward to seeing our potential realised.

I think our friend is confusing WH with the previous recruiting officer....jury is out on WH's selection's although it might be delivering a verdict on Russell and Hartlett who were his 2004 top picks....

_________________
"When you have the attitude of a champion, you see adversity as your
training partner."
- Conor Gillen