FFS - Develop some perspective!

[Cannibal]

labrooy made a comment in another thread - on the Lonies. After replying, I thought it unfair to make these comments in a thread on the Lonie brothers, so am creating this new thread. Fire away!

J26, ask yourself this question, is 13th good enough? We clearly do not have the list to be competitive against the better teams in the competition.

Sorry, pal, but I disagree with this. I think we DO have the list to be competitive and the reason we finished 13th was because we had a pretty damn bad run with injuries, compared with 2002 and 2003 when we played GF's and because of our relative youth.

Because of that youth, what we didn't have was the experienced depth to cover those injuries, by virtue of the fact that we've been recruiting for the last five years to build up a list capable of winning a flag and it takes time for those kids to gain the experience that Brisbane has.

I think you forget that Brisbane started off much like us. They endured years down at the bottom, even after recruiting blokes like Michael Voss. Voss was drafted by Brisbane in 1991 and made his debut in round 18, 1992 (not much of an earlier start to his career than, say, the Clokes). His first GF was in 2001 and, although he is now a triple premiership player, it took him ten years to get there!

It seems to me that so many of us think Brisbane just suddenly became a premiership side but their team was many, many years in the making. Clark Keating was recruited in the 1991 draft (as a Qld "zone" selection), Justin Leppitsch in 1992, Nigel Lappin in 1993, Jason Akermanis in 1994 (also as a Qld "zone" selection), Simon Black in 1997 and even Tim Notting, widely thought of as a recent recruit, was drafted in 1996!

This is a collection of players who have spent years and years together. Our kids are in the very early stages - roughly comparable with Brisbane in the early 1990's - in terms of player development but we've played in two GF's, FFS! We're actually progressing quicker and better than Brisbane, OK?

If we were to allow our guys the same amount of time as Brisbane took, we wouldn't have played a GF until 2011 and, yet, you guys think we're travelling badly?!

Get real.

And give MM the time to develop the kids properly instead of demanding massive turnover to satisfy your cravings for an instant premiership.

[Nath]

Couldn't agree more Cannibal. I think we need to look at the fact that elmost every commentator and 'football expert' running around suggested that we played above ourselves in the two previous years and in theory, the reason that teams make the Grand Final is that they are able to string together a good month of football at the end of the year, and I still believe our premiership clock is well and truly ticking.

13th isn't good enough, enugh said, but neither is running through the last half of the year without a key forward, the last 6 weeks without key defenders and essentially playing teams with 22 midfielders in the team. Perspective is needed and must be taken into account. Many, like I would say that the season was in bad shape as soon as the pre season came around, something I hold firm on, we just never got the total package on the deck and its too hard in this day and age to play catch p throughout the year.

Wholesale changes don't need to be made, most people acknowledge what we need, it'll only take one good trade and a few progressive draft picks and guys like Rowe and Maxwell to be better off for the run, and a kid like Morrison to have a good pre-season and we are running again. Take a chill pill until at least the completion of the Draft, Trade and Delisting period.

[labrooy]

Cannibal,

I don't mind you attacking my comments but DON'T put words in that I didn't utter. I have never, ever asked for a massive turnover in order to get an instant premiership.

We do have a young list and they are going to develop. But is that enough to win a premiership, either next year or in 5 years. The answer is, IMHO, no.

All clubs trade to get better. You brought up the subject of Brisbane. They didn't draft all of their players. They have been active traders for many years. We need to do the same. The secret is to get a good blend of trading and drafting to address areas of potential weakness.

I stand by my comments concerning this year. We did have a lot of injuries. So did Port Adelaide. We finished 13th and Port are in the Preliminary Final. So which team has the list to be competitive?

Instead of telling me to get real you should get your facts straight. You might realise that I agree with a lot of what you say.

[Cannibal]

labrooy, my apologies; whilst I have used the quotation from your post, the attack I launched was aimed, not at you specifically, but everyone who is going nuts to get us involved in this or that trade.

However, you did say you thought we should be trading. I've long argued against this (except for a really top line player), as I believe drafting and long-term development produces a better outcome. So, I will add to my earlier post about Brisbane.

Believe it or not, Brisbane's current list contains just THREE players whom they have traded for - Blake Caracella (2002), Mal Michael (2000) and Brad Scott (1997). They have 30 players on their list recruited through the National Draft, 2 from the Pre-Season Draft and 2 elevated from the rookie list after being recruited through a Rookie Draft.

This is scarcely active trading by anyone's definition!

And I think it makes it clear (once and for all, I hope), that ultimate Premiership success comes from drafting and long-term development of kids.

[BBHS]

what about, Lynch, Chris Johnson , Martin Pike may not have been traded for but definetly not the product of Brisbane Lions Junior Development.

[Cannibal]

I concede on Lynch. My mistake. I assumed he went north during the merger but had my facts wrong. The Bears recruited him during summer, 1993/94 from Fitzroy, three years before the merger (how could I forget - a ten year contract at $100k per year - a bloody good deal!).

However, Johnson and Pike weren't acquired through trading either.

Chris Johnson 1993 National Draft (Fitzroy)

Went to Brisbane during the 1996 merger and I think he is the only player taken from Fitzroy during it still on Brisbane's list.

Martin Pike was taken in the 2000 National Draft

Previously with Melbourne, Fitzroy - not taken during the merger - and North Melbourne. After being delisted by North, Brisbane picked him up during the draft.

I'm happy, though, to consider Pike as an experienced player coming from another club. Johnson, however, should not be.

5 Trades (Caracella, Michael, Scott, Lynch, Pike)
28 National Draft
2 Pre-Season Draft
2 Rookies


During the last five years, it is Collingwood who have been the aggressive traders for experienced players from other clubs. In another article I wrote, I said we'd recruited 17 players from other clubs (but have only 7 left on our list) since, and including, the 1999 Draft. During the same period, Brisbane recruited just four experienced players, with Caracella & Pike remaining on the list and Stefan Carey & Michael Martin having left.

Even if you go back to their merger origin ie 1997, you can add only another three trades to that - Brad Scott, who remains on their list, Hueskes & McKinnon, who have left.

The point remains that Brisbane have not been active traders. What they have done is selective trading and the huge emphasis remains on drafting kids.

[BBHS]

Also they have succesfully marketed players that have wanted to leave as real commodities. eg: Des Headland they got picks 5 and 21 from freo for him. And he is turing into "just a footballer"

Freo also gave away Mcphee for pick 60 , just thought I'd throw that in.

[Johnson#26]

I agree Cannibal. We can reload and relanch for the top 5 next season. Just a little tinkering with the side and we will be back. Injuries permitting of course.

[labrooy]

Cannibal,

It is my belief that trading should be used in conjunction with drafting. I don't believe either will result in premiership success on their own.

My comments were intended to point out that when trading no player should be considered "untouchable". I hate seeing our players go to other clubs but accept that it is a price that has to be paid to gain success.

[Big T]

Every club is different. Every list is different. You cannot apply the Bears example to any other club due to their unique recent history and massive concessions and flood of top draft picks, plus look at the players they have picked up through "zoning" which other clubs don't have.

This website is going to be shit boring if no one puts out possible trades and opinions on players futures. Labrooys previous comment is 100% correct.

[MagpieMad]

Big T, no one said you can't put in trade ideas and your opinions, Labrooy and Cannibal have different opinions, as I have to alot of others, but it is all good reading, it's not personal, we're all Magpies, we all want that bloody flag!

IMHO I think it's best to build from drafting young blokes, if they don't make the cut you haven't lost all that much, if they turn out to be great players, you then have the luxury of keeping them or trading them from a position of strength. But I also gain great satisfaction from watching a young kid like Benny J grow into a good footballer, it's the journey that keeps ya coming back.

[Cannibal]

Gees, there was a reason (more than one, actually) I picked on Brisbane for comparison! They are in our sights for having beaten us in two GF's in a row, they are our modern nemesis, they are arguably the best team ever since our own four-in-a-row mob, they are a tough, mean pack of SOB's, they are the measuring stick and they are the side everyone is trying to load up on to beat. Fair enough?

If you accept that we, along with every other club, are really trying to build a side to beat Brisbane, then it is common sense to look at how they have developed into what they are. The simple fact of the matter is that everyone who suggests this, that and the other trade in this forum, is trying to make a suggestion that will help build a side that will win us a flag and the sooner the better. I have no problem with that. I just think it isn't the way to go and I think it's fair enough that I should say so, but more importantly, why I think like that.

So often, perception is deemed the reality because people don't take (or maybe have not got) the time to investigate, in order to find out what the reality is.

In this case, the reality is that Brisbane didn't trade into the side they are now, they continually drafted kids and built it up over a period of ten years (arbitrarily dating their progress from the year they drafted Michael Voss), and only traded very selectively (and even there, got it right only half the time). When they traded a player away, they seem to have traded for more, and higher, draft picks and not players from another club.

Therefore, because it took Brisbane ten years to develop into a GF-winning side, I am also urging patience. Give MM and his staff the time to do the same. However, despite pointing out that it took Brisbane ten years to reach a GF, I also said we reached a GF in just three years under MM, therefore, our progress is already better and quicker than Brisbane's. Unfortunately, from what I see on this board, some people seem to think it would be smart to dump players who haven't turned into a Michael Voss in a couple of years on our list and find a ready-made replacement elsewhere. And I don't like it; I want to see the club take the time to develop the kids we've drafted properly.

I don't expect everyone to agree with what I say; obviously many do not! I don't have a problem with that, either. But if we're talking about our club's future, I think we need to be very careful. How many of you would, for example, like to go back to 1999 when we traded away draft pick 3 for Richmond's pick 7 and Steve McKee, in doing so passing up the chance to take Matthew Pavlich in the draft instead? I would hate to trade away our pick 7 (mentioned a stack of times in possible trades) and find out in five years time that we could have taken this draft's Pavlich.