Here's the thing when discussing who we could have drafted vs who we should have drafted vs who we did draft.
You can never compare apples with apples so any could have / should / did arguments by their very nature are completely suspect.
Some clubs are very good at bringing young players into the game and turning their potential into on field performance. Some clubs are horrible at trying to achieve the same thing.
Blokes like Stack (yes he's a genuine gun) have developed in a different environment to that at Freo. Stephenson at Colonwood was another that everybody last year expressed disappointment at not drafting. He's another gun but I doubt he would be successful at Freo. Bucks has used him in an open forward line at Colonwood and given him his head to take the game on.
Here he would likely play a game or two at half back then back to Peel.
If we had drafted Stack, Hill or Stephenson or whoever, we would likely be saying the same things about them when they don't develop like we hoped.
Development of young players into the AFL system isn't a simple process. These are blokes that need to be carefully managed on an individual basis while they find their feet in the game and then, like all players, they have to be used to take advantage of their strengths.
Whether you like the current coaching panel or not, it is impossible to make a case that we are good at developing young players. We are terrible at it and then most people can't see past the obvious poor performance and blame the recruiters for picking duds.
I cannot believe that almost every player we draft is a dud when they show so much potential before they're drafted. We either have the absolute worst luck in recruiting or we are failing to develop these players properly. I don't believe that any club could have a run of luck that bad for so long.
