Analysis 2017 List Management Discussion

[Malifice]

Pundits who are fixated on high draft picks don’t get it. Thank goodness SOS and his team do and that is why we can see a successful future ahead.

I get what you're saying but that doesn't account for the fact that there is a direct correlation between draft number and games played across the AFL.

Top 10 draft picks are far more likely to reach the 100 game mark then are players taken between 20 and 30. Players taken in the 20 to 30 band average more games than those taken in the 50 to 60 band.

Here is the 2007 draft by games played (and you can search any other year while you're there):

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/ft_drafts?year=2007&t=N

Sorted by players paying 100 or more games/ players that played less than 50 games:

Top 10: 7 - 0
11-20: 6 - 2
21-30: 1 - 6
31-40: 3 - 7
41-50: 4 - 5
51-60: 2 - 8
61-70: 0 - 6 (only 6 selected)

Statistically speaking, around 70 percent of all players taken outside the top 20 didnt make it to 50 games (around 3 in 4 players). Only 10 players (out of 46 drafted after the top 20) went on to play 100 or more games, while 32 out of those 47 players never made it to 50 games.

On the other hand, 13 out of the top 20 went to to play 100 or more games (65 percent success rate), and only 2 failed to make it to 50 games (10 percent busts). There is a reason why the points value of a draft pick starts at 3000 points for pick 1 and tapers off dramatically.

The blue line indicates (roughly) a players chances of making it to 100 games based on draft position:

You'll notice the sharp drop from pick 1.

We have to be realistic here. Odds are that Kerr doesn't make it.

I'm not saying that to be cruel, or mean, or pessimistic. I'm just saying from an objective list management position, we shouldn't be putting all our eggs in the McKay and Kerr basket. We need to maximize our odds of success with an eye to the long term.

I see our priorities as a KPF (in the Cameron, Patton, Lynch, Hawkins, Kennedy, Walker, Franklin, Hogan, Riewoldt and Riewoldt mold), a ruckman (Kruezer has 3 years left, if he doesnt leave this year as a F/A) and around half a dozen midfielders (at least 2 of whom are elite/ AA).

 

[Malifice]

You're rewriting rules on what constitutes a KPP,

No. I'm not. JSOS is more a half forward in the LeCras mold. Charlie I see as a utility in the Kouta mold.

The only big key marking forwards we have are Casboult, Kerr and McKay.

The latter two players are question marks at present. We simply dont yet know if they are going to make it at AFL level. McKay could be the next Cameron or Lynch, but he could be the next Gumbleton or Mitch Thorp. Kerr was a very late speculative pick that recruiters had rated from pick 30 to undrafted. Statistically speaking, he's unlikely to make it.

The supporter in me says they're both going to make it, become multiple Coleman medalists and all Australians. The coldly rational list manager in me (playing the numbers) says that Kerr probably wont make it, leaving all our KPF eggs in the McKay basket, and we wont know for some years yet if that egg is golden, or rotten - by which time it'll be too late to do anything about it, and we'll be left with a gaping hole in the list and a serious weakness when we are contemplating challenging.

Contrast with KPD's and we have more than enough (we have a surplus when you consider Mcreadie is playing in the reserves at present, and Weitering is playing forward). We're fine in that department going forward. For rebounding medium defenders, we have Williamson, Docherty, Byrne and Buckley. For small forwards we have Pickett (Wright is not included because I'm only looking at the window for 2020-2025). Midfielders its Cripps, SPS, Cunningham and Fisher. Medium forwards/ utilities its C Curnow, and JSOS. Rucks its no-one.

We need a ruck (Kruezer replacement), a third young KPF (with three of them developing over the next 2-3 years, we are a better than 50 percent chance to produce a 50+ goal a year KPF, and God willing we may even be able to produce two) and around half a dozen mids (including at least two in the area of the AA/ Elite category of Murphy and Cripps).

 

[BBlood]

No. I'm not. JSOS is more a half forward in the LeCras mold. Charlie I see as a utility in the Kouta mold.

The only big key marking forwards we have are Casboult, Kerr and McKay.

The latter two players are question marks at present. We simply dont yet know if they are going to make it at AFL level. McKay could be the next Cameron or Lynch, but he could be the next Gumbleton or Mitch Thorp. Kerr was a very late speculative pick that recruiters had rated from pick 30 to undrafted. Statistically speaking, he's unlikely to make it.

The supporter in me says they're both going to make it, become multiple Coleman medalists and all Australians. The coldly rational list manager in me (playing the numbers) says that Kerr probably wont make it, leaving all our KPF eggs in the McKay basket, and we wont know for some years yet if that egg is golden, or rotten - by which time it'll be too late to do anything about it, and we'll be left with a gaping hole in the list and a serious weakness when we are contemplating challenging.

Contrast with KPD's and we have more than enough (we have a surplus when you consider Mcreadie is playing in the reserves at present, and Weitering is playing forward). We're fine in that department going forward. For rebounding medium defenders, we have Williamson, Docherty, Byrne and Buckley. For small forwards we have Pickett (Wright is not included because I'm only looking at the window for 2020-2025). Midfielders its Cripps, SPS, Cunningham and Fisher. Medium forwards/ utilities its C Curnow, and JSOS. Rucks its no-one.

We need a ruck (Kruezer replacement), a third young KPF (with three of them developing over the next 2-3 years, we are a better than 50 percent chance to produce a 50+ goal a year KPF, and God willing we may even be able to produce two) and around half a dozen mids (including at least two in the area of the AA/ Elite category of Murphy and Cripps).

I think I need to re-make by point on the 2016 GF.

Based on your logic Jahannisen, Boyd, Biggs, Morris, Picken, Cordy, Dickson (Dogs) and Lloyd, Grundy, Smith, Laidler, Rampe, Jack, Papley, McGlynn, Naismith, Richards (Swans) - ALL 50 PLUS OR ROOKIES - should not have played. That is one big statistical anomaly.

The draft can't be all about stats. Good recruiters need to be able to consider stats but pick players on experience and intuition otherwise you compete in the pack. All recruiters work off the same data!

 

[bluemahogany]

Everyone rewatch the Sydney game as a blueprint of what Weitering will become, running all day and being the connection from the midfield to the forward line, he is the perfect CHF. His kicking is very very good and his hands are strong. Soon enough he'll be able to wrestle more 1 on 1 and that's when the easy goals will flow in for him. He has a very good tank already but his challenge will be to push himself to the limits like Riewoldt.

 

[Dramoth]

How old is Jones? Maybe he could be a big body gorilla full back to replace Rowe

Jones is more likely to try and mark the ball when playing in defence. IIRC, he is about the same height and weight as Rowe (1cm shorter and 3kg heavier). And he is only 26 (27 next season) compared to Rowe being 29 (30 next year).

It's possible that we might get 3 years out of jones in that situation.

 

[HARKER]

I initially had my doubts about him being a key forward. Not so much anymore.

First Jacob Weitering but ultimately the next line in the evolution of what Nick Riewoldt did in his prime (still does but not quite to the same extent) and what Matthew Richardson did in the twilight of his career. With his mobility and game smarts he'll absolutely pants the majority of similarly sized key defenders to the point where he'll demand a double team every week. A double team consisting of the key defender and a more agile smaller player who has a greater propensity of sticking with him around the ground but obviously lacks the strength, that JW should build, to compete in contested positions.

This will create a ton of space for a second or third key forward be that Harry McKay, Ben Silvagni, etc. let alone a third tall forward be that Jack or Charlie whose mobility again will be a massive factor for us. If Pickett and another player (LeBois?) can become dangerous small forwards on a consistent basis then look out. That's one of the more lethal forward set ups in the league. It doesn't take much to see it happening either if JW is the linchpin.

Yes, we will ultimately need a stronger key position defender but that's not Jacob's calling. He doesn't need to play back when we have Plowman, Marchbank and quite possibly Macreadie who already offer similar traits and skills that JW offers down back albeit probably not quite to the level that he offers. But plenty good enough to become unarguably one of the top defensive setups in the league.

The more time goes by the more it becomes likely JW is the next champion mobile forward of the game. If he can consistently kick 44+ goals per year (2 per game) then the rest will be gravy as he'll be creating a ton more.

Let's walk through it, knowing things could change.

I feel we may still need that one pure shut down defender post Rowe/ASilvagni.
You don't though invest a #1 pick for that guy..................that would be crazy.

Marchbank looks on track to become our Rance. A rebounding CHB.
Macreadie is an agile tall that add lots of run and flexibility.
Plowman does what Plowman does so very well.
Docherty........is Docherty
Byrne makes for another rebounding defender all be it a mid sized one.
Williamson if he stays here, has already shown what he is capable of.
Sheehan if we need him and if he can stay clear of injury.

There's a pretty good foundation right there for mine, so if we look at having to replace Rowe, than that will be much easier and cheaper than throwing down your #1 pick player.
I know Weitering isn't kicking multiple goals just yet but we know what kind of player he is and is yet to become...so you don't throw that guy back to muscle with gorillas.

Right now a sore (and younger) Weitering is showing so much more forward than Schache, McCartin and D.Moore are, but somehow that's not quite good enough yet. Guy's a gun and not one you'd want to waste down back unless you're absolutely inundated with forward riches...............and we're not.

 

[Arr0w]

Rather than placing KPP in a " Only Forward" or " Only Backman" box, continue to use early picks for quality players. Once more quality KPP are drafted, then the side will start to take some shape (Along with more quality mids)

When Carlisle was at *, together with Hurley and Hooker, they had options that were more than capable at both ends of the ground.

Whether Weitering and or Marchbank finish their careers as better forwards than backs or visa versa, makes no difference, they will be 10 years players of quality.

 

[Canyouhearthedrums]

Malfice is right about our KPF stocks in my opinion.

There are currently only two who are both known quantities and AFL quality - Weitering and Levi. CC is not a KPF, nor is Jack. CC maybe in the future, I'll accept that, but I think that's almost a waste. But lets call it 2.5 for the sake of argument.

After that there's McKay and Kerr. McKay is promising and I think we can say a better than even chance of 'making it'. Kerr is completely speculative imo.

If McKay comes on, he, Weitering and Levi will probably be in the same side, along with Charlie. It would be crazy to think we're set with just Kerr in the reserves.

 

[Broadside]

Let's walk through it, knowing things could change.

I feel we may still need that one pure shut down defender post Rowe/ASilvagni.
You don't though invest a #1 pick for that guy..................that would be crazy.

Marchbank looks on track to become our Rance. A rebounding CHB.
Macreadie is an agile tall that add lots of run and flexibility.
Plowman does what Plowman does so very well.
Docherty........is Docherty
Byrne makes for another rebounding defender all be it a mid sized one.
Williamson if he stays here as already shown what he is capable of.
Sheehan if we need him and if he can stay clear of injury.

There's a pretty good foundation right there for mine, so if we look at having to replace Rowe, than that will be much easier and cheaper than throwing down your #1 pick player.
I know Weitering isn't kicking multiple goals just yet but we know what kind of player he is and is yet to become...so you don't throw that guy back to muscle with gorillas.

Right now a sore (and younger) Weitering is showing so much more forward than Schache, McCartin and D.Moore are, but somehow that's not quite good enough yet. Guy's a gun and not one you'd want to waste down back unless you're absolutely inundated with forward riches...............and we're not.

how is Jesse G-M tracking? I'd like to see Williamson as a midfielder or wing eventually.

 

[Malifice]

I think I need to re-make by point on the 2016 GF.

Based on your logic Jahannisen, Boyd, Biggs, Morris, Picken, Cordy, Dickson (Dogs) and Lloyd, Grundy, Smith, Laidler, Rampe, Jack, Papley, McGlynn, Naismith, Richards (Swans) - ALL 50 PLUS OR ROOKIES - should not have played. That is one big statistical anomaly.

No, you've made this point. I get it. But you're not refuting mine.

Fact 1: Statistically speaking players taken with picks in the top twenty are far more likely to turn out good 100+ game players than players taken with later picks are.

Fact 2: Players taken after pick 20 are statistically speaking more likely to be delisted before reaching 50 games, or to be delisted before playing a single game than picks in the top 20 are.

Fact 3: As a direct consequence of Facts 1 and 2, draft picks in the top 10 are more valuable than draft picks in the 60's are.

The draft can't be all about stats.

I'm not saying it is. I'm not saying we should skimp on development of drafted players, or simply play it exclusively by the numbers. In fact to be successful we need to nail those later draft picks (its why Im so pleased to see Williamson impress) in addition to the earlier ones.

What I am saying is we need to be objective and realistic about player prospects when forecasting into 2020-25 from a list management perspective. We cant be penciling Kerr (a KPF taken at pick 70 odd, and rated by recruiters outside the top 30) into our future side, because the probability of him making it is low. In addition to quality recruiting, talent identification and player development, we also need to play the odds.

My mind works on logic, not faith.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Jones is more likely to try and mark the ball when playing in defence. IIRC, he is about the same height and weight as Rowe (1cm shorter and 3kg heavier). And he is only 26 (27 next season) compared to Rowe being 29 (30 next year).

It's possible that we might get 3 years out of jones in that situation.

He may have improved on this, but I'm not sure Jones reads the play well enough to be able to play as the key full back. Rowe, for the most part, knows when to take the body, when to leave his man, when to spoil (though sometimes he could mark...). He's gotten more proactive as a defender in the last couple of seasons.

That's not to say Jones couldn't learn how to do it, but he'd need to hone that craft over a couple of seasons in the VFL I think, and at that point we're probably better taking a mature-age key defender (ala Marcus Adams) who has an extra five years in them.

 

[Jimmae]

Malifice, I think another point you're missing from BBlood's post is that drafting has become much more exact for a fair portion of clubs over the last 6 to 7 years.

They might have different valuations of the same player, but they are very much breaking everything down quite critically, compared to their vague pros and cons lists of the past that might be peppered with some analysis of their skills. This kids are looked at in terms of production and then modelled into the future, possibly alongside (and using data from) players who are identified as archetypes for their game style.

Then there's all the character assessments and match viewings that BBlood mentions. If I was looking for concrete data on drafting success, I'd probably start at 2013 and write the previous 26 years off as growing pains.

We wouldn't be moving them on mate. It would be a case of them accepting an offer from a different club to play for them, and then leaving us for more money. They are the ones that are choosing to leave the club for a bigger salary. We aren't trading them or pushing them out the door.

Kruezer is likely to attract an offer of around half a million a year if he maintains his current form. Possibly more seeing as rucks come at a premium. If Levi continues at his current form he'll probably attract an offer in the 350 to 400k range.

I'm sure we will table offers to both players as well, but the nature of free agency is that to get a free agent to move, you often have to table a significantly larger sum.

If we offer MK 400k p/a for 2 years, and he elects to leave (to say... the Dogs) for 500k p/a on 3 year deal then good on him.

He is the one leaving. We're not trading him against his will. We are not the ones being 'disloyal' - he is (and he has every right to do so).

The same deal goes for Levi. If Richmond come up and offer 450 year for 3 years, and he accepts that offer, there is very little we can do about that.

The suggested TPP increase with the new CBA is as high as 22%, so the figures you suggest see MK probably taking a pay cut, and Levi barely getting an increase, once you adjust for TPP inflation.

 

[Dramoth]

how is Jesse G-M tracking? I'd like to see Williamson as a midfielder or wing eventually.

Fractured jaw, out for a couple of weeks apparently. From what I've heard, he's on track to start making appearances in the seniors next year. They are experimenting with swinging him forward as well. Kicked a couple of goals in a practice match this year.

 

[HARKER]

Malfice is right about our KPF stocks in my opinion.

There are currently only two who are both known quantities and AFL quality - Weitering and Levi. CC is not a KPF, nor is Jack. CC maybe in the future, I'll accept that, but I think that's almost a waste. But lets call it 2.5 for the sake of argument.

After that there's McKay and Kerr. McKay is promising and I think we can say a better than even chance of 'making it'. Kerr is completely speculative imo.

If McKay comes on, he, Weitering and Levi will probably be in the same side, along with Charlie. It would be crazy to think we're set with just Kerr in the reserves.

Why not? What doesn't he do that could make him a premium forward? Just his height?
How tall are Darling & Stringer, who occupy KPF posts?

If you have good players that can do a range of things well and put fear into their opponents, you have a good chance.
CCurnow will be force in the not too distant future. The more your opponent worries about you, the more mistakes he makes.

Charlie could be like what Stringer may become; A frigethening prospect forward but an equally frightening one in the midfield.....Perfect.

 

[Dramoth]

He may have improved on this, but I'm not sure Jones reads the play well enough to be able to play as the key full back. Rowe, for the most part, knows when to take the body, when to leave his man, when to spoil (though sometimes he could mark...). He's gotten more proactive as a defender in the last couple of seasons.

That's not to say Jones couldn't learn how to do it, but he'd need to hone that craft over a couple of seasons in the VFL I think, and at that point we're probably better taking a mature-age key defender (ala Marcus Adams) who has an extra five years in them.

Jones is reading the play well in defence in the VFL, we'd need to give him a game or two in the seniors to see how well he can read the play at AFL level. You have to remember that Rowe was thrown into the cauldron of defence and had a bit of a shaky first year. He's much better now.

 

[Blue__Balls]

No, you've made this point. I get it. But you're not refuting mine.

Fact 1: Statistically speaking players taken with picks in the top twenty are far more likely to turn out good 100+ game players than players taken with later picks are.

Fact 2: Players taken after pick 20 are statistically speaking more likely to be delisted before reaching 50 games, or to be delisted before playing a single game than picks in the top 20 are.

Fact 3: As a direct consequence of Facts 1 and 2, draft picks in the top 10 are more valuable than draft picks in the 60's are.



I'm not saying it is. I'm not saying we should skimp on development of drafted players, or simply play it exclusively by the numbers. In fact to be successful we need to nail those later draft picks (its why Im so pleased to see Williamson impress) in addition to the earlier ones.

What I am saying is we need to be objective and realistic about player prospects when forecasting into 2020-25 from a list management perspective. We cant be penciling Kerr (a KPF taken at pick 70 odd, and rated by recruiters outside the top 30) into our future side, because the probability of him making it is low. In addition to quality recruiting, talent identification and player development, we also need to play the odds.

My mind works on logic, not faith.

Something you need to consider though is that Kerr has been on our list for 6 months now, and has already improved substantially.

If you're comparing Pick 65 to Pick 39, then statistically one is a better prospect than the other.

But if you're comparing Patrick Kerr to Josh Battle, then the evidence to date runs counter to what the "statistics" would lead you to believe.

Kerr isn't a sure thing, but based on what he's shown so far this season, I think a retrospective draft would probably have him going in the late 20's or early 30's.

 

[bluemahogany]

Why not? What doesn't he do that could make him a premium forward? Just his height?
How tall are Darling & Stringer, who occupy KPF posts?

If you have good players that can do a range of things well and put fear into their opponents, you have a good chance.
CCurnow will be force in the not too distant future. The more your opponent worries about you, the more mistakes he makes.

Charlie could be like what Stringer may become; A frigethening prospect forward but an equally frightening one in the midfield.....Perfect.

Completely agree, equally it is ridiculous to write off SOS as KPF too, he is 193 cm - taller than Gunston and Darling. Wait till these young boys put some size on, they're already doing some great things with underdeveloped bodies. That photo of Weitering next to Dixon is startling, the size that the boys still need to put on is enormous.

 

[Blue__Balls]

Completely agree, equally it is ridiculous to write off SOS as KPF too, he is 193 cm - taller than Gunston and Darling. Wait till these young boys put some size on, they're already doing some great things with underdeveloped bodies. That photo of Weitering next to Dixon is startling, the size that the boys still need to put on is enormous.

A bit more info on SOS - he was interviewed on SEN(?) ahead of the Collingwood game on the weekend, and was specifically asked about where he sees himself playing in the future. Says his instincts lean towards playing forward, but he'd like to spend a year or two down back to further develop his game, and if possible push into the middle at times as well.

I genuinely think his best position in a few years time is going to be on the wing, pushing forward. Will need a bit of work on his part to get his fitness base up, but I think he's versatile enough to be used in a position where he can impact offensively and defensively as the game requires.

 

[Dramoth]

Something you need to consider though is that Kerr has been on our list for 6 months now, and has already improved substantially.

If you're comparing Pick 65 to Pick 39, then statistically one is a better prospect than the other.

But if you're comparing Patrick Kerr to Josh Battle, then the evidence to date runs counter to what the "statistics" would lead you to believe.

Kerr isn't a sure thing, but based on what he's shown so far this season, I think a retrospective draft would probably have him going in the late 20's or early 30's.

I agree, Kerr has been looking very good up forward over the last couple of weeks. What I saw of him last year was a very one dimensional forward... Would run straight lines well, but couldn't run patterns on the lead. So far this year, he's started to run patterns as well as his straight line leads and looks like a genuine forward prospect.

He may or may not make it but, thanks to his family traits, he will give everything to try and make it. There is a lot riding on his family name for him.

 

[Funk]

Keeping it simple; 4 quarter effort.

I'm not trying to prop up Jones but to put forward the current situation and some possibilities for the 15 rounds we have left.

It's not out of the realm of possibility that Jones continues his form, we lose a KPF and some back-up may now be required. It's possible, isn't it?

If all else fails we can do a straight trade with the Dogs for Caleb Daniel.........

 

[jj1978]

Wonder how many list changed we will have. For mine:

Armfield - retired
Buckley - put up for trade, delisted
Jacksch - put up for trade, delisted
Boekhurst - put up for trade, delisted
Gorringe - delisted
Thomas - I know his contract scenario has changed, think we will be ruthless and delist
Gibbs - traded

So that frees up maybe 5-7 spots on the senior list. I think Jones will be retained, Sumner and Lamb are ones I wonder about.

 

[Malifice]

Malifice, I think another point you're missing from BBlood's post is that drafting has become much more exact for a fair portion of clubs over the last 6 to 7 years.

I'm not disagreeing with that point. To be more specific, I absolutely agree with that point.

But it still stands to reason that players taken later in the draft are less likely to make it than players taken in the top 10 are. Conversely, players taken in the top 10 are more likely to make it than players taken later are.

Look mate, if a KPF we took at pick 75 just turns out to be good enough to play 100 games (role-player territory - Liam Jones has played 83), we will be laughing all the way to the bank, and I'll be as happy as a pig in shit.

Key forwards taken past the top 20 or so rarely make it. Picks past the top 40 are statistically likely to play less than 50 games before being delisted. It would be a major win if Kerr finishes with a career of 100 or more games, and he would be bucking several trends if he got there.

Thats not to diss Kerr. I hope he plays 250 games for us and wins the Coleman and snags several AA selections on the way. I wish him the best career. But I acknowledge that is overly optimistic. I acknowledge based on raw probabilities that him reaching 100 games would be an amazing effort.

We cant be gambling our future on bad odds. If we get in another KPF, we have three of them developing in the twos. The statistical odds of Carlton having at least one 60+ goal a season key forward improves from 50/50 at best at present (Mackay), to better than even.

 

[Jimmae]

I'm not disagreeing with that point. To be more specific, I absolutely agree with that point.

But it still stands to reason that players taken later in the draft are less likely to make it than players taken in the top 10 are. Conversely, players taken in the top 10 are more likely to make it than players taken later are.

Look mate, if a KPF we took at pick 75 just turns out to be good enough to play 100 games (role-player territory - Liam Jones has played 83), we will be laughing all the way to the bank, and I'll be as happy as a pig in shit.

Key forwards taken past the top 20 or so rarely make it. Picks past the top 40 are statistically likely to play less than 50 games before being delisted. It would be a major win if Kerr finishes with a career of 100 or more games, and he would be bucking several trends if he got there.

Thats not to diss Kerr. I hope he plays 250 games for us and wins the Coleman and snags several AA selections on the way. I mih him the best career. But I acknowledge that is overly optimistic. I acknowledge based on raw probabilities that him reaching 100 games would be an amazing effort.

We cant be gambling our future on bad odds. If we get in another KPF, we have three of them developing in the twos. The statistical odds of Carlton having at least one 60+ goal a season key forward improves from 50/50 at best at present (Mackay), to better than even.

I think the reason for the chances of success here are that he has fundamentally improved his biggest weakness inside 6 months at the club. That's usually a very good sign.

 

[AB_Blue]

Williamson has the step and the jets to play midfield

I think we are crying out for a small defender to complement that back six.......

Also we need another hardened inside mid (2 if Gibbs goes) to take the heat off Cripps


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Funk]

Hugely selfless act by Daisy. Deserves the fans admiration for this act and his form/dedication.

I think SOS has played this beautifully.

"Daisy - I can guarantee you will not reach your trigger this year. However if you forgo your trigger clause we will treat you like every other player and if form justifies it we will offer you another contract for 2018.

Entirely your decision though"..........