Phantom said:
We still don't seem to get the underlying strategy of rebuilding right.
The clubs who show the intestinal fortitude of staying down for 2 years, not just one, especially under the current rules seem to do much better.
Reckon our mistake was clearly coming up too early in 2005 & 2006.
Che sera!
Still not convinced about this strategy. There is not a lot of evidence to support it.
The Saints picked up a swag of early picks from 1999-2002 in consecutive drafts but have only risen to thereabouts but not quite.
The Hawks are assumed to be the big winners from the 2004-2006 drafts, and they most likely are, but so far only Franklin, Roughead, Lewis and Birchill have made any impact in the senior team. The core group that drives that team is unquestionably Mitchell, Hodge, Bateman, Croad, Williams, Sewell, Brown, Ladson, Campbell, Crawford, Clarke and Osborne most of whom were recruited with middle to late picks during the period when the Saints recruiting was supposedly dominant. If they happen to win this year's flag it won't be due to the recruiting during the Clarkson era, it will be due to their recruiting when they were middle of the road. Same with the Cats who have not really had early picks at all.
Carlton? Three number ones and a few more top 20 picks running around but they are looking towards a Judd led recruiting spree over the next couple of seasons to build their team. They will search for more senior bodies, not more kids in 2009-10.
There is not a lot of evidence to support the notion that two or three seasons in row at the bottom will enhance success in future, simply because no-one has had enough early picks to build a complete team, even over two or three years. On the contrary, the emergence of rookie list and other lowly picks at all clubs suggests that there are always good players available, regardless of when you are choosing. Dean Cox, anyone? Or Bock and Rutten? Our own Nathan Foley? Goldsack?
By way of contrast, one good draft in 2006 (specifically Thomas and Pendlebury) might be enough for Collingwood to go all the way over the next couple of seasons. Brisbane and PA rebuilt quickly (albeit on the back of their existing superstars) with only one year down the foot of the ladder. These clubs have all chosen well at the blunt end, as have the Tigers.
Natanui might well become a superstar but who is game enough to suggest that the same draft will not also yield three other ruckmen who start off as rookies and end up just as valuable?
Early picks merely give you a chance to dip in before others, increasing the chance of success. But how many do you get? One? Two? Giving the new teams access to 7 or 8 in one go will be another story. That is what should be scaring the existing clubs. Let's hope the pressure goes back onto the Kangaroos to fall on their sword.
