2013 senior list average age

[Mitchell Madness]

Age means nothing
Experience is the key

It's no good looking at one without the other

Example, if a team had an average age of 22, but games were pushing 100, a fair correlation would be that the side is in it's window

But if a side recruited older players, age could be up toward 25 with games near 20

Your AFL development begins when you're recruited, not when your born

You age determines how long you could get the best out of yourself (theoretically)

 

[aussierulesrules]

So did Richmond. There are eight sides who plan to make the finals again and about four or five who plan to sneak in there.

My point with that was that the young ones we are bringing in get to play in a team that is very competitive with pretty much every team in the comp and as such get to play in highly competitive games, which will be great for their development and are used to winning regularly, as opposed to those being brought into teams that are getting smashed on almost a weekly basis, who at some stage are going to have to get out of the habit of losing and not being very competitive and "learn how to win", especially "big games" which can take time.

Yes, because free agency has been so kind to St Kilda this year.

It has been OK to us actually. We got pick 13 for someone who hasn't been at his best consistently for 2 years and who is coming into his later 20's and doesn't necessarily have great mobility any more and who wanted more money than was really deserving for someone who hadn't been all that great for two years and we traded that pick 13 for Tom Hickey, who we rate very highly and it also allowed us to get Spencer White, who could be anything and has about as high a "ceiling" as anyone taken in this year's draft, especially outside the top dozen or so. I think both clubs will be very happy with who they have on their list as a result of that situation.

Aside from that, like I said, we didn't try to get anyone through free agency this year because it would have cost us the compo pick we were going to get for losing Goddard, so they likely wouldn't have been worth it, but if we re-sign everyone we want to next year (and like I said, we'll have a heap of money to make that a lot easier), then we can go very hard at free agency (not to mention trading) next year, with a very big cheque book.

What you don't have is Sydney's fantastic trading history.

Whether we have a fantastic trading history is pretty irrelevant when it comes to free agency, because you don't have to deal with any other clubs, hence Essendon being able to get Goddard this year, after struggling to get anyone really good through a trade in many years, by the sound of it.

Tom Hickey nominated us as his preferred destination this year, despite various levels of interest from at least 3 of the other clubs in Melbourne (Hawthorn, North and Collingwood were the clubs mentioned in the media), Josh Caddy named us as one the 3 Melbourne/Vic clubs that he was prepared to go to and Mitch Brown also wanted to come here, if West Coast would free him from the last year of his contract, so we are far from a club that no-one wants to come to.

And if someone very good becomes available through free agency, you won't have to be as astute at spotting talent as Sydney have been, to be able to recognise them, I don't imagine.

Your ability to top up via free agency is also provided to every other club in the league.

It is indeed, but what we will most likely have that other clubs won't necessarily have is a heap of room in our salary cap, to be able to offer those available through free agency a big chunk of money, as we did when we landed Gehrig, Hamill and Lawrence, the last time we had a bunch of cap space free.

 

[Richo83]

Eh, I could say something, but just read Ron's post.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Thanks for sharing.

 

[aussierulesrules]

But they never get played at St.Kilda. H&A games by under-24's:

Club|2008|2009|2010|2011|2012

\St.Kilda|127|157|121|107|146

Here's the thing. In those first three years, we were right up the very pointy end of the AFL ladder and as such didn't get many high draft picks and a lot of the focus of the recruiting was to get anyone that we thought could help us right then and there (and a lot of that was apparently driven by Ross Lyon, who was all about the here and now and not so much about planning for the future) to win a premiership (hence trading our first DP one year for Andrew Lovett, for example) and as such we drafted a lot who were "recycled" in the drafts (the likes of Dean Polo, Brett Peake, Ryan Gamble and so on) and didn't have as much of a focus on younger talent that we could develop, and then a lot of those younger ones we did draft were either not good enough, or were not developed well enough (or a combination of both).

Being in premiership contention also meant that only those who were the best option at the time were getting games (we weren't gifting anyone games just because they happened to be a certain age) and because so much of our best side of that time were recruited in the early 2000's and had played finals in 2004-2006, they just happened to be over 24 by that 2008-onwards period. We were playing to win and were playing our best side and that is reflected in the table you posted.

Our recruiting in those years (especially 2009) was pretty ordinary overall, though and from what I've heard the development of many of those we did recruit was also sub-standard, but thankfully the club have taken major steps in the past 18 months to remedy both these situations, by getting a new recruiting team in, who's work we are loving so far and creating the development academy, with specialist coaching staff and so far it looks like they are doing a terrific job of helping to undo a lot of the "mess" of those they took over from and to put us in a strong position going forward.

Last year, Pelchan's first in charge, for instance, we were able to trade one draft pick (pick 20) for effectively Ahmed Saad, Terry Milera and Sebastian Ross, in one of the best trades you're ever likely to see and again this year we have managed to use picks 12 and 13 to get all of Tom Lee, Tom Hickey, Nathan Wright, Spencer White and Josh Saunders, which again looks like a terrific result from 2 draft picks and helps to bring in not just quality, but quantity, to help remedy our list position.

So the big decline in the games played by those 24 and under in 2010 and 2011, for instance, was due to a focus in 2008-2010 of the "here and now", poor drafting (in 2009 especially) and poor development (and also injuries to the young ones we were playing in 2011- all of Siposs, Cripps and Ledger got long term injuries after they looked very impressive early on), but as you can see that started to take an upward curve this year and I expect it will continue to go up in the next few years, especially on the back of our vastly improved drafting in the past couple of years (by the look of it and what we've seen so far, this season), the fact that we did still manage to unearth some quality in those previous drafts (eg. Siposs, Stanley, McEvoy, Steven, Ledger, Simpkin) and the change of focus to generally only trading for those who are under 25 and are likely to be able to play for the club long term, not just plug a gap for a year or so.

We're not going to just gift anyone games though, so it will only rise dramatically if we happen to fall way off the pace next year, but just because some are not playing senior level AFL footy doesn't mean they aren't still developing and most who follow St Kilda are now very comfortable with the direction the club is now heading and the way we are looking to rebuild the list. From the position the list was in just 14 months ago, I reckon those responsible have done a fantastic job so far. The proof will be in the pudding though, but so far it is going very well with what we've had to work with.

 

[aussierulesrules]

They'll need to be well above average to prevent St.Kilda falling off a cliff when the veterans depart.

All 29 of them?

I keep on hearing about this cliff we're going to fall off, but unless we get ravaged by injuries one year soon, I just don't see it happening. The reason I don't see it happening, is because it is highly unlikely that those you are referring to are all going to retire at the exact same time.

Their retirements are likely to be staggered over about a 4-5 year period, which will most likely significantly soften the blow. So that gives the 29 on our lists who are 24 or under (at the moment) time to develop and get experience and so on and gives us 3, 4, 5 years of drafts, trading and free agency periods to plug any gaps that need plugging and get more high quality talent onto the list.

Believe it or not, we are aware of those who are looking like retiring in the near future and the succession planning is already well underway in most cases.

 

[Byron_Clanger]

That West Coast age seems about right, young guys like Gaff and Darling playing with guys like Cox, Glass, Embley and Kerr who are propping that age up

 

[Ron The Bear]

Here's the thing. In those first three years, we were right up the very pointy end of the AFL ladder and as such didn't get many high draft picks and a lot of the focus of the recruiting was to get anyone that we thought could help us right then and there...

Don't disagree with anything you've said above, you were compelled to stick to the path while you were contending. The fact remains that, of St.Kilda's 11 oldest players, the only one to depart is Peake (1 game in 2012). Some room has been created in the 22 with Gram, Goddard, Clarke, Polo, but even these players represent 500+ games of lost experience. There's a strong sense of attempting to cheat the development process in recruiting Milera (24), Dennis-Lane (24), Saad (23), Lee (22 next month) and even Hickey (22 in March). These players are physically mature (relatively speaking) but have only ~60 games of AFL experience between them. When the kids come through, no matter how good they are, St.Kilda will take a hit, and the impact will be increased exponentially by the departure of the club greats/loyal servants. The Bulldogs are seeing this currently, and they haven't even bottomed out yet.

Yes, Sydney do it year in, year out, but they're a special case with a bulletproof club culture and the premierships to prove it. And yes, you're right to back the full-time professionals at your club against the opinion of someone with a database who's spent maybe a couple of hours pondering an opposition list. I just think there's a low probability of a favourable outcome if the vets are going to be played until they drop, unless there's an unusually high proportion of superstars coming in. Time will tell I guess.

 

[MarkT2]

Here's the average age of each clubs 22 (average over all 22 games) from 2012:


1 St Kilda 26.31
2 Sydney 25.94
3 Geelong 25.91
4 Fremantle 25.17
5 Hawthorn 25.06
6 Adelaide 24.98
7 West Coast 24.73
8 Carlton 24.69
9 Bulldogs 24.62
10 Essendon 24.59
11 Brisbane 24.46
12 North Melb 24.4
13 Collingwood 24.25
14 Port Adelaide 24.22
15 Melbourne 24
16 Richmond 23.89
17 Gold Coast 22.72
18 GWS 21.89

Pies achieving well on that stat. As I keep saying, a big cleanout since the 2010 flag and good signs for the future while still being strong contenders at present.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

I see that this pointless exercise has returned for it's yearly run.

 

[35Daicos]

I see that this pointless exercise has returned for it's yearly run.

Perhaps go and read the Fevola thread then if this isn't your thing.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

Perhaps go and read the Fevola thread then if this isn't your thing.

Are there any historically eye catching correlations that I can take from this data?

 

[theflea]

I see that this pointless exercise has returned for it's yearly run.

why bother commenting then.

 

[35Daicos]

Are there any historically eye catching correlations that I can take from this data?

If it doesn't interest you, why bother stopping in and making a negative comment? Go and play in another thread.

 

[Hard_to_Beat]

If it doesn't interest you, why bother stopping in and making a negative comment? Go and play in another thread.

Can you answer the question?

Is this data supposed to reveal anything aside from the statistical mean of birthdates?

 

[35Daicos]

Can you answer the question?

Yes, but only if I could be bothered, but I'm not.

 

[The Bomb]

2012 Crichton Medal AGE
Jobe Watson – 27
Dyson Heppell – 20
Dustin Fletcher – 37
Brent Stanton – 26
Ben Howlett – 23
David Zaharakis –22
Courtenay Dempsey –25
Stewart Crameri –24
Patrick Ryder – 24
Michael Hurley – 22

 

[Jade]

I find these threads interesting, and think haters who oversimplify the issue by joking that "youngest team wins lol" are quaint.

I CBF right now work out the eagles age manually, still interested in the result.

Yeah me too.

Granted, if your team is extremely young AND contending that can be a postive, or if older and stuck at the foot of the table not good - but generally this is a horrible way to compare sides.

I'm far more concerned with the state of my clubs list, not it's age.

 

[GarnerSmash]

Age means nothing
Experience is the key

March 31st 2013:
NM Age ave: 23 years, 197 days
Games played ave: 51 (or summit like that)

We have 7 100+ players (Harvey 346 and Petrie 222 our most experienced): Ave: 185.
9 players between 50 and 99 games: Ave: 66 games.
8 players between 20 and 49 games: Ave: 35 games.
9 between 1 and 19 games: Ave: 9 games
10 yet to debut.

All 16 players who have played 50 or more games are best 22 players for North. We cut 3 players from that group post season. Of that group:
7 are 26 or older (Harvey, Petrie, Wells, Firitto, Thompson, Grima and McMahon);
5 are 23-25 (Swallow, Adams, Hansen Thomas and Goldstein);
4 are 22 or under (Ziebell, Wright, Cunnington and Bastinac).

Of the 8 players who have played between 20 and 49 games 5 were best 22 by seasons end. Of that group:
2 are 23 - 25 (Tarrant and Anthony)
3 are 21 or younger (Macmillan, Harper and Atley)

Those not in the 22 from this group are Levi Greenwood (23), Ben Jacobs (20) and Luke Delaney (23).

Of the 9 players to have played between 1 and 19 games, one, Sam Gibson, was best 22 by seasons end. Of that group:
1 is 26 (Gibson)
1 is 25 (Richardson)
7 are 22 or younger (Speight, Gysberts, Hine, Mullett, C. Delaney, Black and McKenzie)

 

[telsor]

2012 Jack Dyer Medal
1st Trent Cotchin 22
2nd Brett Deledio 25
3rd Ivan Maric 26
4th Shane Tuck 31
5th Shaun Grigg 24
6th Alex Rance 23
7th Steven Morris 23
8th Shane Edwards 23
9th Jack Riewoldt 23
=10th Dustin Martin 21
=10th Bachar Houli 22

Experience profile.
8 100+ game players, highest Newman with 214. (2nd is Deledio with 172)
13 50-99 game players
5 20-49 game players
6 1-19 game players
5 0 games players

It's probably worth noting that with Newman starting to show his age, Chaplin was added to our backline for his experience (140 games) as much as anything...After Newman and Chaplin, the next most experienced defender is Rance with 66 games, followed by Batchelor with 30.

 

[winty]

2012 Jack Dyer Medal
1st Trent Cotchin 22
2nd Brett Deledio 25
3rd Ivan Maric 26
4th Shane Tuck 31
5th Shaun Grigg 24
6th Alex Rance 23
7th Steven Morris 23
8th Shane Edwards 23
9th Jack Riewoldt 23
=10th Dustin Martin 21
=10th Bachar Houli 22

Experience profile.
8 100+ game players, highest Newman with 214. (2nd is Deledio with 172)
13 50-99 game players
5 20-49 game players
6 1-19 game players
5 0 games players

It's probably worth noting that with Newman starting to show his age, Chaplin was added to our backline for his experience (140 games) as much as anything...After Newman and Chaplin, the next most experienced defender is Rance with 66 games, followed by Batchelor with 30.

Might as well do one for Geelong...

Carji Medal Top 10

1. Tom Hawkins - 24
2. Joel Selwood - 24
3. Corey Enright - 32
4. Harry Taylor - 26
5. James Kelly - 28
6. Jimmy Bartel - 28
7. Steve Johnson - 29
8. Andrew Mackie - 28
9. Mitch Duncan - 21
10. Tom Lonergan - 28

Experience profile
100+ games - 15 (J.Corey, C.Enright, P.Chapman, J.Bartel, J.Kelly, S.Johnson, J.Hunt, A.Mackie, J.Selwood, M.Stokes, H.Taylor, T.Varcoe, T.Hawkins, J.Rivers, H.McIntosh)
50-99 games - 3 (T.Lonergan, J.Podsiadly, M.Duncan)
20-49 games - 7 (T.West, T.Hunt, A.Christensen, S.Motlop, D.Menzel, C.Guthrie, J.Caddy)
1-19 games - 12 (B.Smedts, N.Vardy, J.Stringer, J.Murdoch, J.Walker, D.Simpson, J.Sheringham, M.Brown, G.Horlin-Smith, J.Cowan, J.Schroder, L.McCarthy)
0 games - 9 (J.Thurlow, B.Hartman, S.Kersten, J.Hamling, J.Bews, C.Eardley, G.Burbury, M.Blicavs, R.Bathie)

 

[Dazb86]

Richmond are a unique case because they cleared out literally everyone with age and experience. Deledio was taken at the same time as Griffen and is their second most experienced player. That kind of blows my mind. If Griffen was our 2nd most senior player we'd be in a fair bit more strife than we currently are.

The only team that compares to that is maybe the Demons. It's probably not a good way to build a list.

 

[MightyTiger]

Richmond are a unique case because they cleared out literally everyone with age and experience. Deledio was taken at the same time as Griffen and is their second most experienced player. That kind of blows my mind. If Griffen was our 2nd most senior player we'd be in a fair bit more strife than we currently are.

The only team that compares to that is maybe the Demons. It's probably not a good way to build a list.

So bringing in senior players such as Miller, Chaplin, Knights, Maric, Grigg and Houli whilst also recruiting mature age players from lower leagues is the same as Melbourne dumping all it's senior players isn't it?

Our problem was a clear lack of senior players, hence our reason for going out and and recruiting/trading for senior players, we tried holding onto senior players we had after Wallace left, we made Simmonds play an extra year even though his body was shot, we kept Polak after he was quite clearly finished, held onto Hislop and Thompson because we had no other big bodied experienced midfielders, we've held onto McGuane, tried keeping Moore but his hips were shot, and held onto Thursfield but he was early not up to it.

Melbourne has used top draft picks to recruit senior players, we have gotten ours basically for free through either smart trading or recruiting and kept all of our top picks.

The difference in the way Richmond and Melbourne have gone through in building it's list is completely different.

 

[Dazb86]

I'd say it's been very similar with very similar results.

In an ideal situation Melbourne and Richmond wouldn't need to trade for others sides offcuts.

 

[theflea]

Richmond are a unique case because they cleared out literally everyone with age and experience. Deledio was taken at the same time as Griffen and is their second most experienced player. That kind of blows my mind. If Griffen was our 2nd most senior player we'd be in a fair bit more strife than we currently are.

The only team that compares to that is maybe the Demons. It's probably not a good way to build a list.

that really depends on how good those older players are. if the're spuds well off with their heads.it does mean that if those younger players that come in can be good players then you can have a team grow together and be of a similar age while you adjust the age profile of your list. bottom line not ideal but sometimes necessary.