So SCarey, I hear you saying we should draft Willie Rioli and Ben Long after pick 31.
Or before if they are the best players for EFC available at pick 20 or 29.
Draft strategy pick the best players available.
Baguley at this stage is irreplaceable. We've got nothing. There is a certain individual with whom we are all very familiar who I desperately hope ends up on our list soon, as he is a fair chance of being decent at that role.https://youtube.com/watch?v=gxPF9AeHznE
Matty Dea says hi, and while not nearly as good at lockdown, is as good as an attacking player and a better mark. If Dea can improve his defensive game it would be great, but even based on his 2016 he would walk into the side if Baggers was out. The certain individual may even end up as a mid. His clearance work at the end of the year was really good.
At our pick 41 or later, if we are not thinking about players who have exposed senior competition form and most likely are 19 or older, the odds of a successful pick (current AFL list retention) are much lower going on EFC recruitment form in the last 9 drafts (65 draft picks - all 3 draft types).
The form indicates our chances of success:
- For an 18YO with no senior experience at pick 32 or later are 1.5%.
- For an 18YO with senior experience the chance is 4.5% at pick 32 or later.
- For a player who is at least 19 at the time of the draft and has significant senior competition experience the chances at pick 32 or later are over 15%.
- For a player with senior experience but no AFL experience taken in the rookie draft (and PSD when these players could be selected there - they can't any more) is also running at over 15%.
- Our success (current AFL list retention) rate after pick 53 with 18YO with no senior experience is 0% for 2007 onwards.
- For every player drafted by Essendon still on an AFL senior or rookie list including Jobe, Stants, Houli and Heater, Heater is the only player who was taken after pick 53 who was an 18YO with no senior experience. This includes 3 drafted less than a year ago (Eades, Gach and Wallis).
- Where also from last years draft, the 3 with senior experience and who were 22YO or older who were drafted after pick 53 are in contention for best 22 for 2017 (Walla, Harts and Brown).
Baguley at this stage is irreplaceable. We've got nothing. There is a certain individual with whom we are all very familiar who I desperately hope ends up on our list soon, as he is a fair chance of being decent at that role.https://youtube.com/watch?v=gxPF9AeHznEMatty Dea says hi, and while not nearly as good at lockdown, is as good as an attacking player and a better mark. If Dea can improve his defensive game it would be great, but even based on his 2016 he would walk into the side if Baggers was out. The certain individual may even end up as a mid. His clearance work at the end of the year was really good.
Dea is a deceptively good kick but still not on Baguleyās level IMO who would be top 10 on the list by foot.
Unfortunately despite being mobile and a hard nut he got torched by a few smalls this year, hopefully he can do some more work on that area of his game.
Baguleyās kicking isnāt that good.
In terms of list balance what do we need to draft? Even though we finished as wooden spooners I think our list is in good shape. Over the next 2-3 years we will only lose Watson, Kelly and Stanton to retirement. And we've just lost Dempsey, a developing ruckman and a series of second-string fringe midfielders/flankers. I'm assuming we will sign Green as DFA and we will take McCluggage as best available.So I think everyone will agree that as long as we draft in another ruck prospect and a few midfielders/back flank options (preferably inside midfielders and versatile defenders with speed) we will make this offseason a success. This is a great position to be in because we donāt have to reach at any picks to fill a hole e.g. Freo and Carlton reaching for talls. So going best available at all picks should set us up pretty well. We will most likely have a pick earmarked for another ruckman but you would say that will most likely be a late ND/rookie pick.
An ideal situation would be:
Pick 1: McLuggage - best available; what a luxury to add another super smart, highly skilled well-rounded midfielder to slot alongside Zerrett, Heppell and Parish. Sick of years past where our midfield was so one dimensional. With Hugh we now have a solid core who can win a lot it inside and out, but most importantly make really good decisions and then execute with brilliant disposal.
Pick 20, 29, 41: best available; which at these picks, is generally in line with our current (but only slight) needs. Easy to find inside midfielders and speedy versatile flankers at these picks. Because our list is so balanced at the moment we can afford to choose a tall kpp/ruckman if one slips. e.g. Tim English @ 20, Todd Marshall @ 20, 29,41. You can laugh at this examples but it happens all the time. You wouldnāt mind picking a kpp if theyāre too good to pass. I remember when we picked Carlisle at 23-ish one year we had already heaps of tall options and probably needed more midfield prospects but Iām sure people donāt regret that decision.
In my opinion youāve under-estimated our pending retirements. Over the next 2-3 years I expect we will see Goddard, Baguley, Hocking and Howlett retire as well as those you list (Watson / Kelly / Stanton).
Francis is a fair chance at replacing Goddard in the utility role.
Watson, Hocking and Howlett as inside mids are more difficult. Bird will be getting on by then as well. We must find some big bodies for our midfield going forward. It is one of the reasons I think Langford, for all his forward skills, is being given so much midfield time. Still, we need some more coming through. A priority in my view, and why Iām a bit surprised Brodie isnāt the obvious #1 draft pick.
Kelly has a number of suitors for his role. Not that any of them are great options yet, but all are at least serviceable and some have good upside.
Stanton has a bunch of suitors for his role as well. Having stated that, Iām not sure weāve found one that can play a game and not be tagged out of it. Still, not our biggest concern as I think we have plenty of potential wingman. And truth be told, Stants might not keep his spot as a starting wingman this year indicating that we already have him reasonably covered.
Baguley at this stage is irreplaceable. Weāve got nothing. There is a certain individual with whom we are all very familiar who I desperately hope ends up on our list soon, as he is a fair chance of being decent at that role. A priority in my opinion, but can be filled pretty reliably from the mature age pool of players.
Other than that, I agree with you, just get more talent onto the list. We do have room on the list for one more tall and one more ruckman. But if we get them this year or next or the one after, I donāt think it matters much.
I did accidentally miss out Goddard who is definitely in that Watson, Kelly, Stanton age group that will probably be retired or at least almost retired. But in 2 years time Baguely will be 31, Hocking 30, Howlett 30, thats not really in the ātake em out to the fields and shoot themā age just yet. Sure we will have to draft for their replacements at some point but we still have another 2 drafts after this year to replace themā¦even then they are ātypesā of players that arenāt hard to find.
The point I was trying to communicate was that we have a good balance of KPP and young talented midfielders (and to a lesser extend ruck division) coming through that shouldnāt leave us with any glaring holes on our list over the next 2 years. Draft best available with an eye on inside midfielders and flankers, plus picking up another ruck prospect this year will have our list in a pretty healthy state IMO.
Baguley's kicking isn't that good.
Itās a lot better than it was in his early days.
Nothing induces the stress that used to come with Bradley and Welsh kicking short to each other deep in defenceā¦or Pev kicking to anybody after 2001. He was such a good pass in his first seasonā¦after that, he was absolutely horrible.
In terms of list balance what do we need to draft? Even though we finished as wooden spooners I think our list is in good shape. Over the next 2-3 years we will only lose Watson, Kelly and Stanton to retirement. And we've just lost Dempsey, a developing ruckman and a series of second-string fringe midfielders/flankers. I'm assuming we will sign Green as DFA and we will take McCluggage as best available.So I think everyone will agree that as long as we draft in another ruck prospect and a few midfielders/back flank options (preferably inside midfielders and versatile defenders with speed) we will make this offseason a success. This is a great position to be in because we donāt have to reach at any picks to fill a hole e.g. Freo and Carlton reaching for talls. So going best available at all picks should set us up pretty well. We will most likely have a pick earmarked for another ruckman but you would say that will most likely be a late ND/rookie pick.
An ideal situation would be:
Pick 1: McLuggage - best available; what a luxury to add another super smart, highly skilled well-rounded midfielder to slot alongside Zerrett, Heppell and Parish. Sick of years past where our midfield was so one dimensional. With Hugh we now have a solid core who can win a lot it inside and out, but most importantly make really good decisions and then execute with brilliant disposal.
Pick 20, 29, 41: best available; which at these picks, is generally in line with our current (but only slight) needs. Easy to find inside midfielders and speedy versatile flankers at these picks. Because our list is so balanced at the moment we can afford to choose a tall kpp/ruckman if one slips. e.g. Tim English @ 20, Todd Marshall @ 20, 29,41. You can laugh at this examples but it happens all the time. You wouldnāt mind picking a kpp if theyāre too good to pass. I remember when we picked Carlisle at 23-ish one year we had already heaps of tall options and probably needed more midfield prospects but Iām sure people donāt regret that decision.
In my opinion youāve under-estimated our pending retirements. Over the next 2-3 years I expect we will see Goddard, Baguley, Hocking and Howlett retire as well as those you list (Watson / Kelly / Stanton).
Francis is a fair chance at replacing Goddard in the utility role.
Watson, Hocking and Howlett as inside mids are more difficult. Bird will be getting on by then as well. We must find some big bodies for our midfield going forward. It is one of the reasons I think Langford, for all his forward skills, is being given so much midfield time. Still, we need some more coming through. A priority in my view, and why Iām a bit surprised Brodie isnāt the obvious #1 draft pick.
Kelly has a number of suitors for his role. Not that any of them are great options yet, but all are at least serviceable and some have good upside.
Stanton has a bunch of suitors for his role as well. Having stated that, Iām not sure weāve found one that can play a game and not be tagged out of it. Still, not our biggest concern as I think we have plenty of potential wingman. And truth be told, Stants might not keep his spot as a starting wingman this year indicating that we already have him reasonably covered.
Baguley at this stage is irreplaceable. Weāve got nothing. There is a certain individual with whom we are all very familiar who I desperately hope ends up on our list soon, as he is a fair chance of being decent at that role. A priority in my opinion, but can be filled pretty reliably from the mature age pool of players.
Other than that, I agree with you, just get more talent onto the list. We do have room on the list for one more tall and one more ruckman. But if we get them this year or next or the one after, I donāt think it matters much.
I did accidentally miss out Goddard who is definitely in that Watson, Kelly, Stanton age group that will probably be retired or at least almost retired. But in 2 years time Baguely will be 31, Hocking 30, Howlett 30, thats not really in the ātake em out to the fields and shoot themā age just yet. Sure we will have to draft for their replacements at some point but we still have another 2 drafts after this year to replace themā¦even then they are ātypesā of players that arenāt hard to find.
The point I was trying to communicate was that we have a good balance of KPP and young talented midfielders (and to a lesser extend ruck division) coming through that shouldnāt leave us with any glaring holes on our list over the next 2 years. Draft best available with an eye on inside midfielders and flankers, plus picking up another ruck prospect this year will have our list in a pretty healthy state IMO.
You did say 2-3 years. 
I was more doing the āafter 3 more seasonsā thing. Historically we have very few players that play into the year they turn 32. Although with free agency that is changing.
But I do fully agree with the point you were trying to communicateā¦ and generally just wanted something to reply to in order to alleviate off-season boredom.
In terms of list balance what do we need to draft? Even though we finished as wooden spooners I think our list is in good shape. Over the next 2-3 years we will only lose Watson, Kelly and Stanton to retirement. And we've just lost Dempsey, a developing ruckman and a series of second-string fringe midfielders/flankers. I'm assuming we will sign Green as DFA and we will take McCluggage as best available.So I think everyone will agree that as long as we draft in another ruck prospect and a few midfielders/back flank options (preferably inside midfielders and versatile defenders with speed) we will make this offseason a success. This is a great position to be in because we donāt have to reach at any picks to fill a hole e.g. Freo and Carlton reaching for talls. So going best available at all picks should set us up pretty well. We will most likely have a pick earmarked for another ruckman but you would say that will most likely be a late ND/rookie pick.
An ideal situation would be:
Pick 1: McLuggage - best available; what a luxury to add another super smart, highly skilled well-rounded midfielder to slot alongside Zerrett, Heppell and Parish. Sick of years past where our midfield was so one dimensional. With Hugh we now have a solid core who can win a lot it inside and out, but most importantly make really good decisions and then execute with brilliant disposal.
Pick 20, 29, 41: best available; which at these picks, is generally in line with our current (but only slight) needs. Easy to find inside midfielders and speedy versatile flankers at these picks. Because our list is so balanced at the moment we can afford to choose a tall kpp/ruckman if one slips. e.g. Tim English @ 20, Todd Marshall @ 20, 29,41. You can laugh at this examples but it happens all the time. You wouldnāt mind picking a kpp if theyāre too good to pass. I remember when we picked Carlisle at 23-ish one year we had already heaps of tall options and probably needed more midfield prospects but Iām sure people donāt regret that decision.
In my opinion youāve under-estimated our pending retirements. Over the next 2-3 years I expect we will see Goddard, Baguley, Hocking and Howlett retire as well as those you list (Watson / Kelly / Stanton).
Francis is a fair chance at replacing Goddard in the utility role.
Watson, Hocking and Howlett as inside mids are more difficult. Bird will be getting on by then as well. We must find some big bodies for our midfield going forward. It is one of the reasons I think Langford, for all his forward skills, is being given so much midfield time. Still, we need some more coming through. A priority in my view, and why Iām a bit surprised Brodie isnāt the obvious #1 draft pick.
Kelly has a number of suitors for his role. Not that any of them are great options yet, but all are at least serviceable and some have good upside.
Stanton has a bunch of suitors for his role as well. Having stated that, Iām not sure weāve found one that can play a game and not be tagged out of it. Still, not our biggest concern as I think we have plenty of potential wingman. And truth be told, Stants might not keep his spot as a starting wingman this year indicating that we already have him reasonably covered.
Baguley at this stage is irreplaceable. Weāve got nothing. There is a certain individual with whom we are all very familiar who I desperately hope ends up on our list soon, as he is a fair chance of being decent at that role. A priority in my opinion, but can be filled pretty reliably from the mature age pool of players.
Other than that, I agree with you, just get more talent onto the list. We do have room on the list for one more tall and one more ruckman. But if we get them this year or next or the one after, I donāt think it matters much.
I did accidentally miss out Goddard who is definitely in that Watson, Kelly, Stanton age group that will probably be retired or at least almost retired. But in 2 years time Baguely will be 31, Hocking 30, Howlett 30, thats not really in the ātake em out to the fields and shoot themā age just yet. Sure we will have to draft for their replacements at some point but we still have another 2 drafts after this year to replace themā¦even then they are ātypesā of players that arenāt hard to find.
The point I was trying to communicate was that we have a good balance of KPP and young talented midfielders (and to a lesser extend ruck division) coming through that shouldnāt leave us with any glaring holes on our list over the next 2 years. Draft best available with an eye on inside midfielders and flankers, plus picking up another ruck prospect this year will have our list in a pretty healthy state IMO.
You did say 2-3 years.
But I do fully agree with the point you were trying to communicateā¦ and generally just wanted something to reply to in order to alleviate off-season boredom.
All good
Yeah even if any of them go to a 3rd year they are still player types that easily replaced. A year ago we were really looking like we could potentially have a huge Kpp crisis if any injuries struck but in the space of one year weāve fixed that problem by grabbing Brown, Hartley, Stewart for peanuts and even Francis if you class him as a kpp. Not to mention the reinvention of Ambrose. Huge effort by the list management team to turn a weakness into a strength in such a short amount of time. Really funny to see how Freo and Carlton have struggled to put together a team of talented kpp over 3+years let alone a list.
In Dodoro we trust.
Anyone checked out that young Western Australian kid surname English, 200cms all and still growing, very mobile ruckman and a good kick.In terms of list balance what do we need to draft? Even though we finished as wooden spooners I think our list is in good shape. Over the next 2-3 years we will only lose Watson, Kelly and Stanton to retirement. And we've just lost Dempsey, a developing ruckman and a series of second-string fringe midfielders/flankers. I'm assuming we will sign Green as DFA and we will take McCluggage as best available.So I think everyone will agree that as long as we draft in another ruck prospect and a few midfielders/back flank options (preferably inside midfielders and versatile defenders with speed) we will make this offseason a success. This is a great position to be in because we donāt have to reach at any picks to fill a hole e.g. Freo and Carlton reaching for talls. So going best available at all picks should set us up pretty well. We will most likely have a pick earmarked for another ruckman but you would say that will most likely be a late ND/rookie pick.
An ideal situation would be:
Pick 1: McLuggage - best available; what a luxury to add another super smart, highly skilled well-rounded midfielder to slot alongside Zerrett, Heppell and Parish. Sick of years past where our midfield was so one dimensional. With Hugh we now have a solid core who can win a lot it inside and out, but most importantly make really good decisions and then execute with brilliant disposal.
Pick 20, 29, 41: best available; which at these picks, is generally in line with our current (but only slight) needs. Easy to find inside midfielders and speedy versatile flankers at these picks. Because our list is so balanced at the moment we can afford to choose a tall kpp/ruckman if one slips. e.g. Tim English @ 20, Todd Marshall @ 20, 29,41. You can laugh at this examples but it happens all the time. You wouldnāt mind picking a kpp if theyāre too good to pass. I remember when we picked Carlisle at 23-ish one year we had already heaps of tall options and probably needed more midfield prospects but Iām sure people donāt regret that decision.
In my opinion youāve under-estimated our pending retirements. Over the next 2-3 years I expect we will see Goddard, Baguley, Hocking and Howlett retire as well as those you list (Watson / Kelly / Stanton).
Francis is a fair chance at replacing Goddard in the utility role.
Watson, Hocking and Howlett as inside mids are more difficult. Bird will be getting on by then as well. We must find some big bodies for our midfield going forward. It is one of the reasons I think Langford, for all his forward skills, is being given so much midfield time. Still, we need some more coming through. A priority in my view, and why Iām a bit surprised Brodie isnāt the obvious #1 draft pick.
Kelly has a number of suitors for his role. Not that any of them are great options yet, but all are at least serviceable and some have good upside.
Stanton has a bunch of suitors for his role as well. Having stated that, Iām not sure weāve found one that can play a game and not be tagged out of it. Still, not our biggest concern as I think we have plenty of potential wingman. And truth be told, Stants might not keep his spot as a starting wingman this year indicating that we already have him reasonably covered.
Baguley at this stage is irreplaceable. Weāve got nothing. There is a certain individual with whom we are all very familiar who I desperately hope ends up on our list soon, as he is a fair chance of being decent at that role. A priority in my opinion, but can be filled pretty reliably from the mature age pool of players.
Other than that, I agree with you, just get more talent onto the list. We do have room on the list for one more tall and one more ruckman. But if we get them this year or next or the one after, I donāt think it matters much.
Anyone checked out that young Western Australian kid surname English, 200cms all and still growing, very mobile ruckman and a good kick.In terms of list balance what do we need to draft? Even though we finished as wooden spooners I think our list is in good shape. Over the next 2-3 years we will only lose Watson, Kelly and Stanton to retirement. And we've just lost Dempsey, a developing ruckman and a series of second-string fringe midfielders/flankers. I'm assuming we will sign Green as DFA and we will take McCluggage as best available.So I think everyone will agree that as long as we draft in another ruck prospect and a few midfielders/back flank options (preferably inside midfielders and versatile defenders with speed) we will make this offseason a success. This is a great position to be in because we donāt have to reach at any picks to fill a hole e.g. Freo and Carlton reaching for talls. So going best available at all picks should set us up pretty well. We will most likely have a pick earmarked for another ruckman but you would say that will most likely be a late ND/rookie pick.
An ideal situation would be:
Pick 1: McLuggage - best available; what a luxury to add another super smart, highly skilled well-rounded midfielder to slot alongside Zerrett, Heppell and Parish. Sick of years past where our midfield was so one dimensional. With Hugh we now have a solid core who can win a lot it inside and out, but most importantly make really good decisions and then execute with brilliant disposal.
Pick 20, 29, 41: best available; which at these picks, is generally in line with our current (but only slight) needs. Easy to find inside midfielders and speedy versatile flankers at these picks. Because our list is so balanced at the moment we can afford to choose a tall kpp/ruckman if one slips. e.g. Tim English @ 20, Todd Marshall @ 20, 29,41. You can laugh at this examples but it happens all the time. You wouldnāt mind picking a kpp if theyāre too good to pass. I remember when we picked Carlisle at 23-ish one year we had already heaps of tall options and probably needed more midfield prospects but Iām sure people donāt regret that decision.
In my opinion youāve under-estimated our pending retirements. Over the next 2-3 years I expect we will see Goddard, Baguley, Hocking and Howlett retire as well as those you list (Watson / Kelly / Stanton).
Francis is a fair chance at replacing Goddard in the utility role.
Watson, Hocking and Howlett as inside mids are more difficult. Bird will be getting on by then as well. We must find some big bodies for our midfield going forward. It is one of the reasons I think Langford, for all his forward skills, is being given so much midfield time. Still, we need some more coming through. A priority in my view, and why Iām a bit surprised Brodie isnāt the obvious #1 draft pick.
Kelly has a number of suitors for his role. Not that any of them are great options yet, but all are at least serviceable and some have good upside.
Stanton has a bunch of suitors for his role as well. Having stated that, Iām not sure weāve found one that can play a game and not be tagged out of it. Still, not our biggest concern as I think we have plenty of potential wingman. And truth be told, Stants might not keep his spot as a starting wingman this year indicating that we already have him reasonably covered.
Baguley at this stage is irreplaceable. Weāve got nothing. There is a certain individual with whom we are all very familiar who I desperately hope ends up on our list soon, as he is a fair chance of being decent at that role. A priority in my opinion, but can be filled pretty reliably from the mature age pool of players.
Other than that, I agree with you, just get more talent onto the list. We do have room on the list for one more tall and one more ruckman. But if we get them this year or next or the one after, I donāt think it matters much.
He wonāt last till our 2nd pick, I donāt think. If he did, Iād be sorely tempted to take him.
Baguley at this stage is irreplaceable. We've got nothing. There is a certain individual with whom we are all very familiar who I desperately hope ends up on our list soon, as he is a fair chance of being decent at that role.https://youtube.com/watch?v=gxPF9AeHznEMatty Dea says hi, and while not nearly as good at lockdown, is as good as an attacking player and a better mark. If Dea can improve his defensive game it would be great, but even based on his 2016 he would walk into the side if Baggers was out. The certain individual may even end up as a mid. His clearance work at the end of the year was really good.
Dea is a deceptively good kick but still not on Baguleyās level IMO who would be top 10 on the list by foot.
Unfortunately despite being mobile and a hard nut he got torched by a few smalls this year, hopefully he can do some more work on that area of his game.
Not sure if its a core problem of his physical, or he lacks concentration, or is just not willing to suppress his "take the game on " instincts and lock down pesky small guys like Pupopolo. Rioli, Betts, and even Garlett or Tipungwuti. if they get off the chain even for 15 minutes they can kick a bag. If Dea is physically capable of playing the role its a matter of striking the balance about decision makingā¦when to run off his opponent, and when to wear him like a glove.
At our pick 41 or later, if we are not thinking about players who have exposed senior competition form and most likely are 19 or older, the odds of a successful pick (current AFL list retention) are much lower going on EFC recruitment form in the last 9 drafts (65 draft picks - all 3 draft types).I think you're reading way too much into an insufficient amount of data.The form indicates our chances of success:
- For an 18YO with no senior experience at pick 32 or later are 1.5%.
- For an 18YO with senior experience the chance is 4.5% at pick 32 or later.
- For a player who is at least 19 at the time of the draft and has significant senior competition experience the chances at pick 32 or later are over 15%.
- For a player with senior experience but no AFL experience taken in the rookie draft (and PSD when these players could be selected there - they can't any more) is also running at over 15%.
- Our success (current AFL list retention) rate after pick 53 with 18YO with no senior experience is 0% for 2007 onwards.
- For every player drafted by Essendon still on an AFL senior or rookie list including Jobe, Stants, Houli and Heater, Heater is the only player who was taken after pick 53 who was an 18YO with no senior experience. This includes 3 drafted less than a year ago (Eades, Gach and Wallis).
- Where also from last years draft, the 3 with senior experience and who were 22YO or older who were drafted after pick 53 are in contention for best 22 for 2017 (Walla, Harts and Brown).
Dea can quite comfortably take Baguleyās role if required, but Iām not sure heās as good one on one yet
At our pick 41 or later, if we are not thinking about players who have exposed senior competition form and most likely are 19 or older, the odds of a successful pick (current AFL list retention) are much lower going on EFC recruitment form in the last 9 drafts (65 draft picks - all 3 draft types).I think you're reading way too much into an insufficient amount of data.The form indicates our chances of success:
- For an 18YO with no senior experience at pick 32 or later are 1.5%.
- For an 18YO with senior experience the chance is 4.5% at pick 32 or later.
- For a player who is at least 19 at the time of the draft and has significant senior competition experience the chances at pick 32 or later are over 15%.
- For a player with senior experience but no AFL experience taken in the rookie draft (and PSD when these players could be selected there - they can't any more) is also running at over 15%.
- Our success (current AFL list retention) rate after pick 53 with 18YO with no senior experience is 0% for 2007 onwards.
- For every player drafted by Essendon still on an AFL senior or rookie list including Jobe, Stants, Houli and Heater, Heater is the only player who was taken after pick 53 who was an 18YO with no senior experience. This includes 3 drafted less than a year ago (Eades, Gach and Wallis).
- Where also from last years draft, the 3 with senior experience and who were 22YO or older who were drafted after pick 53 are in contention for best 22 for 2017 (Walla, Harts and Brown).
I agree it isnāt a comprehensive analysis, more like a form guide on what is a good punt.
My hunch before looking into it was that we were performing relatively better with our mature picks, vs our 18YO picks.
I must admit that I was surprised that the actual outcome was so stark for players taken later in the draft who have only played underage football, a lot of commentators point out that underage only players can have trouble coping with the fact they canāt dominate in the same way in open competition, especially the bigger players, we also know the tallest players can take longer to come on and we can struggle to be patient enough to nurture them on a small list, and for ruckmen there may only be 2 players in the whole list who get a good go at being the main ruckman. It almost seems pointless to try to grow these players on your list, which is my take home learning from the Gach experience.
If I can be bothered I will do a similar but briefer analysis of the Bulldogs list, given they have grown a premiership list largely through good drafting, that would be a reasonable test of my hypothesis, but I also suspect it might be a better test of where the Bulldogs recruiting staff strengths lay, which was part of the point of confining it to the EFC list to inform us where the relative strengths of our recruiting department are.
I think the impressive thing is we have done very well from late draft and rookie picks with young mature age players, and I donāt think this should be discounted. I would value senior competition form about 1000 times more informative than draft combine testing, which doesnāt often correlate with a good draft pick.
The other thing to consider is relative quality of those mature vs junior players.
Is the mature guy drafted to play a specific, defined role to a known level. Thatās an entirely different proposition than trying to project āupsideā out if 18 yos.
And that ends up coming back to list balance and the like. Draft a Brendan Lee into a list that suits his qualities and he probably has a ācareerā, seat him into the wrong list for him and heās gone very quickly.
I think for a ācomplete rebuildā youād want to play it differently compared to the āfill holesā. Draft 18 yo upside picks for a couple of years, turning them over until you find a couple to complement the top end you get from early picks, giving you a slightly larger A grade contingent, then switch to the conservative strategy to fill the holes with the sort of B grade role players that you needā¦
Iām also interested in how you rate the WA our SA guys who pay a lot more senior footy as 17/18 yos than the Victorians, probably due to the reduced depth at U18 level in those states, and the extra opportunities that having state league aligned U18 competitions affords
Do you push up a Bailey Banfield on the back of a 25 possession WAFL seniors final for instance when compared to a TAC cup final?
Itās complicated, and obviously thereās no one size fits all answer, we just have to back the recruitment team to be making the right judgements about the ability if players to take the next step (or 2 or 3) from wherever theyāre displaying their skillsā¦
The other thing to consider is relative quality of those mature vs junior players.Is the mature guy drafted to play a specific, defined role to a known level. Thatās an entirely different proposition than trying to project āupsideā out if 18 yos.
And that ends up coming back to list balance and the like. Draft a Brendan Lee into a list that suits his qualities and he probably has a ācareerā, seat him into the wrong list for him and heās gone very quickly.
I think for a ācomplete rebuildā youād want to play it differently compared to the āfill holesā. Draft 18 yo upside picks for a couple of years, turning them over until you find a couple to complement the top end you get from early picks, giving you a slightly larger A grade contingent, then switch to the conservative strategy to fill the holes with the sort of B grade role players that you needā¦
I'm also interested in how you rate the WA our SA guys who pay a lot more senior footy as 17/18 yos than the Victorians, probably due to the reduced depth at U18 level in those states, and the extra opportunities that having state league aligned U18 competitions affordsDo you push up a Bailey Banfield on the back of a 25 possession WAFL seniors final for instance when compared to a TAC cup final?
Itās complicated, and obviously thereās no one size fits all answer, we just have to back the recruitment team to be making the right judgements about the ability if players to take the next step (or 2 or 3) from wherever theyāre displaying their skillsā¦
These are the players who were over 18 when recruited and had played in senior football competitions.
Brown
Hartley
Walla
Ambrose
Baguley
Hibberd
Jenkins
Howlett
Crameri
Hooker
Currently I would put Hooker and Jenkins in the elite category, Walla, Hartley and Hibberd in the good with potential to be elite category, Baguley and Crameri in the very good category, and Brown, Ambrose and Howlett in the very serviceable category with all of these players either having or being capable of being 100 game players. Not bad for players selected to perform a role, Sydney have been famous for doing this with recycled players to great effect (eg: Ted Richards).
If you add in Fantasia and Bellchambers you are including the players later picked players who came from interstate and were 18 when selected, admittedly Hooker was close to being one of these, turning 19 just before the draft. And as you say, players from interstate have less under 18 opportunities, so are more likely to play senior football. The sample is way too small to make major statements about, but would you say that Jerrett and Marty Gleeson who were later picks who didnāt give the recruiters the benefit of playing senior football before being drafted were as good a selection as the even later picked Fantasia, Hooker and Bellchambers?
Anyone checked out that young Western Australian kid surname English, 200cms all and still growing, very mobile ruckman and a good kick.In terms of list balance what do we need to draft? Even though we finished as wooden spooners I think our list is in good shape. Over the next 2-3 years we will only lose Watson, Kelly and Stanton to retirement. And we've just lost Dempsey, a developing ruckman and a series of second-string fringe midfielders/flankers. I'm assuming we will sign Green as DFA and we will take McCluggage as best available.So I think everyone will agree that as long as we draft in another ruck prospect and a few midfielders/back flank options (preferably inside midfielders and versatile defenders with speed) we will make this offseason a success. This is a great position to be in because we donāt have to reach at any picks to fill a hole e.g. Freo and Carlton reaching for talls. So going best available at all picks should set us up pretty well. We will most likely have a pick earmarked for another ruckman but you would say that will most likely be a late ND/rookie pick.
An ideal situation would be:
Pick 1: McLuggage - best available; what a luxury to add another super smart, highly skilled well-rounded midfielder to slot alongside Zerrett, Heppell and Parish. Sick of years past where our midfield was so one dimensional. With Hugh we now have a solid core who can win a lot it inside and out, but most importantly make really good decisions and then execute with brilliant disposal.
Pick 20, 29, 41: best available; which at these picks, is generally in line with our current (but only slight) needs. Easy to find inside midfielders and speedy versatile flankers at these picks. Because our list is so balanced at the moment we can afford to choose a tall kpp/ruckman if one slips. e.g. Tim English @ 20, Todd Marshall @ 20, 29,41. You can laugh at this examples but it happens all the time. You wouldnāt mind picking a kpp if theyāre too good to pass. I remember when we picked Carlisle at 23-ish one year we had already heaps of tall options and probably needed more midfield prospects but Iām sure people donāt regret that decision.
In my opinion youāve under-estimated our pending retirements. Over the next 2-3 years I expect we will see Goddard, Baguley, Hocking and Howlett retire as well as those you list (Watson / Kelly / Stanton).
Francis is a fair chance at replacing Goddard in the utility role.
Watson, Hocking and Howlett as inside mids are more difficult. Bird will be getting on by then as well. We must find some big bodies for our midfield going forward. It is one of the reasons I think Langford, for all his forward skills, is being given so much midfield time. Still, we need some more coming through. A priority in my view, and why Iām a bit surprised Brodie isnāt the obvious #1 draft pick.
Kelly has a number of suitors for his role. Not that any of them are great options yet, but all are at least serviceable and some have good upside.
Stanton has a bunch of suitors for his role as well. Having stated that, Iām not sure weāve found one that can play a game and not be tagged out of it. Still, not our biggest concern as I think we have plenty of potential wingman. And truth be told, Stants might not keep his spot as a starting wingman this year indicating that we already have him reasonably covered.
Baguley at this stage is irreplaceable. Weāve got nothing. There is a certain individual with whom we are all very familiar who I desperately hope ends up on our list soon, as he is a fair chance of being decent at that role. A priority in my opinion, but can be filled pretty reliably from the mature age pool of players.
Other than that, I agree with you, just get more talent onto the list. We do have room on the list for one more tall and one more ruckman. But if we get them this year or next or the one after, I donāt think it matters much.
Wont make it to pick 20