I wasn't slow to provide an alternative, my solution was to keep bloody Harvey, win premierships in 2012,13, 14, and reload. Not headhunt a one trick pony with delusions of grandeur to grind out any semblance of creativity in our players, bore supporters to death, and then drop us off a cliff. And not listen to rah rah johnny come lately Steve apologists with their manky stats. Want more?
That has to be my favourite post of the year Block, well done.
You don't seem to be understanding DK, games played is a completely innacurate measure of how good a player is let alone using that to decide whether that makes them a good draft pick. There are so many other factors to consider in making that judgement and games played isn't high on the list.
Just for example, James Walker played over 150 games for Freo but was an average player. Tony Modra played less than 50 games for us but some might say he was a pretty good player. By your measure Modra was a dud pick and player while Walker was a gun pick and player.
You can't just throw out your arbitrary stat to try and prove your point when it has a loose correlation and no one can be bothered going through each individual draft decision to prove you wrong. Most have the common sense to realise that's a ludicrous argument and few have the time to bother making it.
Other important factors in rating a draft pick may include what pick is used, what type of player the club needs, what type of players are available, what talent is available, how that player is developed, what position that player is groomed for, what position that player is effective in, any injuries both before and after the draft, what state that player is from, what attitude that player has and the general ability of the player. Purely using the number of games played is not going to win you any arguments, only make you look like a goose.
