List Mgmt. 2025 AFL Draft - Draft Analysis

[chriso11]

And probably 80% of the draft thread nuffies on here got completely sucked in with the Robey hype.

Yep. Me included

 

[THE_GUN]

I mean yeah the draft was a week and a half ago and was on live tv. How much more confirmation you want?

Show me the contract otherwise you talking shit again
morro was right

 

[spky1234]

I think it would be easier looking at a list of say pick 26's v a list of pick 8's. Let's say 2005 to 2019, 15 years so we can get a decent handle on how all the players in the sample are resolving.

Bold = elite, marquee wage level player
Green = strong career never marquee wage level
Red = outright failure

Pick 8

Oakley-Nichols
Ben Reid
L Henderson
Vickery
Butcher
Heppell
Longer
Mayes
L McDonald
P Wright
C Ah Chee
Logue
Coffield
Taryn Thomas
Serong

(Of those drafted since 2019, D Curtin is probably shaping as a really high end player at this stage)

Pick 26

Ibbotson
Shane Edwards
Meredith
Post
Colyer
Darling
Elton
Viney
Z Merrett
T McLean
K Collins
Parfitt
Liam Ryan
Rhylee West
Gould

(of those drafted since 2019, Will Graham looks like being a high end talent, perhaps wouldn't have quite the value of Curtin at this point)

Maybe if we compared picks 7-9 to picks 25-27 we might get a more accurate picture. Because 8 v 26, I am not seeing any great difference between the amounts of strong players coming from these picks. What we see is there are about twice as many outright failures at pick 26.

If you looked at the above and no other evidence, you are trading pick 8 for 2 x pick 26 any day of the week. But I don't pretend that is the real value of the picks, these are probably historic outliers to some extent.

Pick 7s:
David Hale - A
Andrew Mackie - A
K Tenance - F
Jordan Lewis - A+
Patrick Ryder - A
Joel Selwood - A+
Rhys Palmer - C
Daniel Rich - A
Brad Sheppard - B+
Josh Caddy - B
Nick Haynes - B+
Ollie wines - A
James Aish - B
Paul Ahern - F
Jacob Hopper - B+
Jack Scrimshaw - B+
Hunter Clark - C
Bailey Smith - A
Hayden Young - A

Pick 9s:
L Molan - F
H McInotsh - B
D Trotter - F
J Russell - D
M Clark - C
D Armitage - B
B McEvoy - A
J Ziebell - A
A Moore - F
D Prestia - A
A Tomlinson - C
N Vlastuin - A+
C Salem - B+
D Moore - A+
S Weideman - D
W Brodie - D
A Naughton - A+
C Jones - C
L Henry - C

Pick 25s:
S Amstrong - D
C Urch - F
H Miller - F
A Hartlett - F
W Mills - F
N Djkerrkura - F
T Colllier - F
J Redden - A
A Black - F
P Karnezis - F
S Ross - A
S White - F
D Mcstay - B+
D Nielson - F
J Dunkley - A+
B Long - B+
N Balta - B+
J Rowbottom - B
J Mead - C

Pick 27s:
T Davidson - F
D Walsh - F
A Campbell - F
P Garner - F
D addison - D
B Howard - F
A Otten - D
S Wright - D
C Bartlett - F
K harper - F
S Kerridge - D
J Stewart - C
S Lemmens - C
L Webb - F
D Tucker - C
Z Fisher - C
B Daniels - B+
T Sparrow - C+
J Sharp - D

24 players from pick 7/9 that are B or higher. 5 complete fails.
8 players from 25/27 that are B or higher. 18 complete fails.

 

[We are back baby!]

What those figures all appear to me to show is pick 8 would be roughly twice the value of a pick in the mid 20's on average. Or in other words, equally as valuable as two picks in the mid 20's.

We can see from trading patterns however clubs generally think pick 8 is worth more than 2 x mid 20's picks. Under the draft points system in place in 2024, North gave up about 100 points. Equal to a pick in the 60's. The current model it would be like North giving up the value of pick 35.

But in the end, North get value from recruiting the player a year earlier and also by getting access to the right player types at their fair positions in the draft.

Let's just say North had pick 11 this year and took Dovaston with that pick. Or pick 17 last year and took Whitlock with that pick, it wouldn't have raised a ripple. But they would have been giving up similar value. It just isn't worth the fuss that was made about it. Which was my point from the outset.

 

[Mr Magic]

Sharp went to Essendon.

Who let Sharp go through to the keeper??? Melbourne

Who else did Melbourne let go through to the keeper??? Dusty

May not be the same, but just saying, could be an omen

Adelaide who wanted to jump up, arguably more intel, possible bias granted, wanted him

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Pick 7s:
David Hale - A
Andrew Mackie - A
K Tenance - F
Jordan Lewis - A+
Patrick Ryder - A
Joel Selwood - A+
Rhys Palmer - C
Daniel Rich - A
Brad Sheppard - B+
Josh Caddy - B
Nick Haynes - B+
Ollie wines - A
James Aish - B
Paul Ahern - F
Jacob Hopper - B+
Jack Scrimshaw - B+
Hunter Clark - C
Bailey Smith - A
Hayden Young - A

Pick 9s:
L Molan - F
H McInotsh - B
D Trotter - F
J Russell - D
M Clark - C
D Armitage - B
B McEvoy - A
J Ziebell - A
A Moore - F
D Prestia - A
A Tomlinson - C
N Vlastuin - A+
C Salem - B+
D Moore - A+
S Weideman - D
W Brodie - D
A Naughton - A+
C Jones - C
L Henry - C

Pick 25s:
S Amstrong - D
C Urch - F
H Miller - F
A Hartlett - F
W Mills - F
N Djkerrkura - F
T Colllier - F
J Redden - A
A Black - F
P Karnezis - F
S Ross - A
S White - F
D Mcstay - B+
D Nielson - F
J Dunkley - A+
B Long - B+
N Balta - B+
J Rowbottom - B
J Mead - C

Pick 27s:
T Davidson - F
D Walsh - F
A Campbell - F
P Garner - F
D addison - D
B Howard - F
A Otten - D
S Wright - D
C Bartlett - F
K harper - F
S Kerridge - D
J Stewart - C
S Lemmens - C
L Webb - F
D Tucker - C
Z Fisher - C
B Daniels - B+
T Sparrow - C+
J Sharp - D

24 players from pick 7/9 that are B or higher. 5 complete fails.
8 players from 25/27 that are B or higher. 18 complete fails.

Thanks for that. It certainly balances things up a bit. I had only gone back to 2005 to get 15 years. The A, A+, C+ gradings etc are of course all debatable but I think you have done a decent job of it overall.

What we were discussing was the likelihood of getting needle shifting guns with a single pick around 8 versus 2 picks around 26.

No matter how you define it, the gradings are always going to be debatable.

You have in your picks 7 & 9 contingent a few I would grade differently. Certainly if you looked at their salaries some of them wouldn't have been paid like A Graders.

A graders you have: Hale Mackie Ryder Rich Wines Smith Young McEvoy Ziebell Prestia.

A+ Graders you have: Lewis, Vlastuin, Selwood, Darcy Moore, Naughton.

Others may disagree, but to be an A+ player(the highest possible grade) I think you need to be doing something really noteworthy. For Key Forwards winning Colemans or near enough, mids winning Brownlow's or Coach MVP's or consistently finishing near the top for a number of years or be a consistently very strong big game performer.

I would reduce your A+'s to Selwood.

To be an A grader you need to be a marquee wage player, really strong consistent performer over a decent period, reliably stand up in big games, and be a top 10% in your role level player for a number of years.

I would say your A Grade list should be more like Lewis, Wines(just and probably being generous due to Brownlow) Smith, Young, Vlastuin, Prestia, Naughton(I am biased towards him due to a belief he is worth a lot more than his goals.). You could possibly throw in Darcy Moore but you could as easily argue he is not quite at this level.

Mackie is not an A Grader, good player, but he is not a needle shifter.

Hale, same. Neither a top end ruckman nor forward. Very handy second ruck but this is not A Grade.

Rich too many exploitable weaknesses to be considered an A Grader.

Lewis is not A+ he is not in the top shelf of players in the comp ever. Probably an A Grader though.

Moore is not A+ he has probably had a couple of years where he flirted with being in the top 2 key defenders. Has some poor finals.

Naughton I love but is not an A+ Key Forward.

Ryder has not had an A Grade career, very good career but not consistently top few in his position.

McEvoy, Ziebell, just not A Grade careers.

Equally you might be a bit generous with Redden and Seb Ross as A Grade careers.


So for the purposes of the debate I would just reduce it to something like this:

Picks 7, 8, 9

Highest echelon - Selwood, Serong.

Really strong careers - Lewis, Wines, Moore, Smith, Prestia, Vlastuin, Naughton, Young(can raise his rating yet)


Picks 25, 26, 27

Highest echelon - Merrett, Dunkley

Really strong careers - S Edwards, Darling, Viney

Where you can argue some of the A Graders in the pick 7-8-9 cohort are or will be A+, you probably cannot say that with the Edwards, Darling, Viney.


I don't know. I think it sort of supports my view that 2 picks in the mid 20's are almost, but not quite as likely to find you a needle shifter as 1 pick in the 7-9 range. This analysis seems to me to confirm the trading behaviour of the clubs, the value is mainly tilted to the side of one 7-9 range pick over 2 x mid 20's picks but not to the extent you would forever rule out doing a trade like North did with Richmond. If you get exceptional circumstances like a really strong draft v a really weak draft, or particular positional needs, you wouldn't rule that trade out based on the whole relevant history of the picks in question.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

Sharp went to Essendon.

Who let Sharp go through to the keeper??? Melbourne

Who else did Melbourne let go through to the keeper??? Dusty

May not be the same bust just saying, could be an omen

Adelaide who wanted to jump up, arguably more intel, possible bias granted, wanted him

Crows need good all round mids urgently, and Sharp looks pretty ready made. The question is his ceiling. But this would explain the Crows high interest in him.

 

[ShereKhan]

I think it would be easier looking at a list of say pick 26's v a list of pick 8's. Let's say 2005 to 2019, 15 years so we can get a decent handle on how all the players in the sample are resolving.

Bold = elite, marquee wage level player
Green = strong career never marquee wage level
Red = outright failure

Pick 8

Oakley-Nichols
Ben Reid
L Henderson
Vickery
Butcher
Heppell
Longer
Mayes
L McDonald
P Wright
C Ah Chee
Logue
Coffield
Taryn Thomas
Serong

(Of those drafted since 2019, D Curtin is probably shaping as a really high end player at this stage)

Pick 26

Ibbotson
Shane Edwards
Meredith
Post
Colyer
Darling
Elton
Viney
Z Merrett
T McLean
K Collins
Parfitt
Liam Ryan
Rhylee West
Gould

(of those drafted since 2019, Will Graham looks like being a high end talent, perhaps wouldn't have quite the value of Curtin at this point)

Maybe if we compared picks 7-9 to picks 25-27 we might get a more accurate picture. Because 8 v 26, I am not seeing any great difference between the amounts of strong players coming from these picks. What we see is there are about twice as many outright failures at pick 26.

If you looked at the above and no other evidence, you are trading pick 8 for 2 x pick 26 any day of the week. But I don't pretend that is the real value of the picks, these are probably historic outliers to some extent.

It's certainly not the real value, as it makes no sense to compare only pick-8 v pick-26. It's like comparing pick-6 (average of 69 games played), to draft pick-56 (average of 76 games) and saying you'd trade pick-56 for pick-6 every day of the week as a long history tells you this would be a winner.

It's interesting to look at a few other sets of data - for example to not look at coaches vote averages (can by SKU'd heavily by top end performers), and look at 'medians'...the 'middle' value.

So for example, for picks 6-10, the coaches vote 'median' across 130 x players taken in 26 x drafts is 24. So 65 x players have less than 24 votes, 65 have more than 24. For players 21-30 (260 players), the coaches vote median is 3. So 130 x players have less than 3 x votes, 130 x players have more than 3 votes. SO from 21-30 you're a 50% chance of getting a player who receives 3 x coaches votes or less in their career.

Unlike median, averages are SKU'd heavily by the outliers .....some players taken in the 20's - Merrett, Edwards, Petrie, Darling, Stevie J, Gunston, Duncan and so on....

Another quick comparison of 6-10 v 21-30 is to look at AA final team:
6-10 : 49 selections
21-30 : 36 (from twice as many players)

So a pick from 6-10 is 2.72x more likely to be selected in an AA team each year than a pick taken 21-30.

The funny thing is, if the data compared 7-11 v 21-30 it would be even more of a discrepancy, as for no logical reason at all pick-6 is an absolute graveyard. Having said that, maybe some of the picks from 21-30 are abnormally horrendous as well.

There's no perfect science of course, other than the very clear data that shows picks 6-10 are on average vastly superior to picks taken 21-30.

However...previous research and a quick review now does show the quality on average really drops away from pick-31 onwards, so if you ever are going to trade picks into later rounds, making sure they remain top-30 should be a huge priority.

 

[ShereKhan]

This thread is 'draft' analysis....... And we are analysing the absolute bejeezus out of it....... but we all should realise, these historical averages and medians and the like would be the drafting bible for the likes of Blair Hartley. I know most don't, but I find the actual science behind the building of a list very interesting, as I strongly believe if you follow the 'science' (what history shows works) for long enough success is almost guaranteed to come your way.

Too many clubs lose patience and look for sugar hits and succumb to pressure from outside....and they inevitably fail.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

It's certainly not the real value, as it makes no sense to compare only pick-8 v pick-26. It's like comparing pick-6 (average of 69 games played), to draft pick-56 (average of 76 games) and saying you'd trade pick-56 for pick-6 every day of the week as a long history tells you this would be a winner.

It's interesting to look at a few other sets of data - for example to not look at coaches vote averages (can by SKU'd heavily by top end performers), and look at 'medians'...the 'middle' value.

So for example, for picks 6-10, the coaches vote 'median' across 130 x players taken in 26 x drafts is 24. So 65 x players have less than 24 votes, 65 have more than 24. For players 21-30 (260 players), the coaches vote median is 3. So 130 x players have less than 3 x votes, 130 x players have more than 3 votes. SO from 21-30 you're a 50% chance of getting a player who receives 3 x coaches votes or less in their career.

Unlike median, averages are SKU'd heavily by the outliers .....some players taken in the 20's - Merrett, Edwards, Petrie, Darling, Stevie J, Gunston, Duncan and so on....

Another quick comparison of 6-10 v 21-30 is to look at AA final team:
6-10 : 49 selections
21-30 : 36 (from twice as many players)

So a pick from 6-10 is 2.72x more likely to be selected in an AA team each year than a pick taken 21-30.

The funny thing is, if the data compared 7-11 v 21-30 it would be even more of a discrepancy, as for no logical reason at all pick-6 is an absolute graveyard. Having said that, maybe some of the picks from 21-30 are abnormally horrendous as well.

There's no perfect science of course, other than the very clear data that shows picks 6-10 are on average vastly superior to picks taken 21-30.

However...previous research and a quick review now does show the quality on average really drops away from pick-31 onwards, so if you ever are going to trade picks into later rounds, making sure they remain top-30 should be a huge priority.

My sense and the trading activity of clubs and the previous and current draft points index values indicate a pick in the 6-10 range would be worth roughly in the range 2.25-2.75 x the value of a pick in the mid 20's on average, probably tending towards the higher end of that range.

So if you go by that alone, North has undercharged Richmond for pick 8 by getting back picks 26 & 27. By a factor of around 20-25%, which is substantial, but not completely outrageous. But as I said in my previous post on this thread, it makes a bit more sense as North are targeting specific positional needs for their list, and also one of the picks they got was in the uncommonly deep & strong 2024 draft.

It definitely doesn't look anywhere near as lopsided as receiving picks 26 & 27 for pick 3. Though if you looked at it in terms of open pool players only, then correctly stated, it would be picks 17 & 23 for pick 4.

 

[THE THIN MAN]

Thanks for that. It certainly balances things up a bit. I had only gone back to 2005 to get 15 years. The A, A+, C+ gradings etc are of course all debatable but I think you have done a decent job of it overall.

What we were discussing was the likelihood of getting needle shifting guns with a single pick around 8 versus 2 picks around 26.

No matter how you define it, the gradings are always going to be debatable.

You have in your picks 7 & 9 contingent a few I would grade differently. Certainly if you looked at their salaries some of them wouldn't have been paid like A Graders.

A graders you have: Hale Mackie Ryder Rich Wines Smith Young McEvoy Ziebell Prestia.

A+ Graders you have: Lewis, Vlastuin, Selwood, Darcy Moore, Naughton.

Others may disagree, but to be an A+ player(the highest possible grade) I think you need to be doing something really noteworthy. For Key Forwards winning Colemans or near enough, mids winning Brownlow's or Coach MVP's or consistently finishing near the top for a number of years or be a consistently very strong big game performer.

I would reduce your A+'s to Selwood.

To be an A grader you need to be a marquee wage player, really strong consistent performer over a decent period, reliably stand up in big games, and be a top 10% in your role level player for a number of years.

I would say your A Grade list should be more like Lewis, Wines(just and probably being generous due to Brownlow) Smith, Young, Vlastuin, Prestia, Naughton(I am biased towards him due to a belief he is worth a lot more than his goals.). You could possibly throw in Darcy Moore but you could as easily argue he is not quite at this level.

Mackie is not an A Grader, good player, but he is not a needle shifter.

Hale, same. Neither a top end ruckman nor forward. Very handy second ruck but this is not A Grade.

Rich too many exploitable weaknesses to be considered an A Grader.

Lewis is not A+ he is not in the top shelf of players in the comp ever. Probably an A Grader though.

Moore is not A+ he has probably had a couple of years where he flirted with being in the top 2 key defenders. Has some poor finals.

Naughton I love but is not an A+ Key Forward.

Ryder has not had an A Grade career, very good career but not consistently top few in his position.

McEvoy, Ziebell, just not A Grade careers.

Equally you might be a bit generous with Redden and Seb Ross as A Grade careers.


So for the purposes of the debate I would just reduce it to something like this:

Picks 7, 8, 9

Highest echelon - Selwood, Serong.

Really strong careers - Lewis, Wines, Moore, Smith, Prestia, Vlastuin, Naughton, Young(can raise his rating yet)


Picks 25, 26, 27

Highest echelon - Merrett, Dunkley

Really strong careers - S Edwards, Darling, Viney

Where you can argue some of the A Graders in the pick 7-8-9 cohort are or will be A+, you probably cannot say that with the Edwards, Darling, Viney.


I don't know. I think it sort of supports my view that 2 picks in the mid 20's are almost, but not quite as likely to find you a needle shifter as 1 pick in the 7-9 range. This analysis seems to me to confirm the trading behaviour of the clubs, the value is mainly tilted to the side of one 7-9 range pick over 2 x mid 20's picks but not to the extent you would forever rule out doing a trade like North did with Richmond. If you get exceptional circumstances like a really strong draft v a really weak draft, or particular positional needs, you wouldn't rule that trade out based on the whole relevant history of the picks in question.

 

[spky1234]

Thanks for that. It certainly balances things up a bit. I had only gone back to 2005 to get 15 years. The A, A+, C+ gradings etc are of course all debatable but I think you have done a decent job of it overall.

What we were discussing was the likelihood of getting needle shifting guns with a single pick around 8 versus 2 picks around 26.

No matter how you define it, the gradings are always going to be debatable.

You have in your picks 7 & 9 contingent a few I would grade differently. Certainly if you looked at their salaries some of them wouldn't have been paid like A Graders.

A graders you have: Hale Mackie Ryder Rich Wines Smith Young McEvoy Ziebell Prestia.

A+ Graders you have: Lewis, Vlastuin, Selwood, Darcy Moore, Naughton.

Others may disagree, but to be an A+ player(the highest possible grade) I think you need to be doing something really noteworthy. For Key Forwards winning Colemans or near enough, mids winning Brownlow's or Coach MVP's or consistently finishing near the top for a number of years or be a consistently very strong big game performer.

I would reduce your A+'s to Selwood.

To be an A grader you need to be a marquee wage player, really strong consistent performer over a decent period, reliably stand up in big games, and be a top 10% in your role level player for a number of years.

I would say your A Grade list should be more like Lewis, Wines(just and probably being generous due to Brownlow) Smith, Young, Vlastuin, Prestia, Naughton(I am biased towards him due to a belief he is worth a lot more than his goals.). You could possibly throw in Darcy Moore but you could as easily argue he is not quite at this level.

Mackie is not an A Grader, good player, but he is not a needle shifter.

Hale, same. Neither a top end ruckman nor forward. Very handy second ruck but this is not A Grade.

Rich too many exploitable weaknesses to be considered an A Grader.

Lewis is not A+ he is not in the top shelf of players in the comp ever. Probably an A Grader though.

Moore is not A+ he has probably had a couple of years where he flirted with being in the top 2 key defenders. Has some poor finals.

Naughton I love but is not an A+ Key Forward.

Ryder has not had an A Grade career, very good career but not consistently top few in his position.

McEvoy, Ziebell, just not A Grade careers.

Equally you might be a bit generous with Redden and Seb Ross as A Grade careers.


So for the purposes of the debate I would just reduce it to something like this:

Picks 7, 8, 9

Highest echelon - Selwood, Serong.

Really strong careers - Lewis, Wines, Moore, Smith, Prestia, Vlastuin, Naughton, Young(can raise his rating yet)


Picks 25, 26, 27

Highest echelon - Merrett, Dunkley

Really strong careers - S Edwards, Darling, Viney

Where you can argue some of the A Graders in the pick 7-8-9 cohort are or will be A+, you probably cannot say that with the Edwards, Darling, Viney.


I don't know. I think it sort of supports my view that 2 picks in the mid 20's are almost, but not quite as likely to find you a needle shifter as 1 pick in the 7-9 range. This analysis seems to me to confirm the trading behaviour of the clubs, the value is mainly tilted to the side of one 7-9 range pick over 2 x mid 20's picks but not to the extent you would forever rule out doing a trade like North did with Richmond. If you get exceptional circumstances like a really strong draft v a really weak draft, or particular positional needs, you wouldn't rule that trade out based on the whole relevant history of the picks in question.

My rankings were just quick,

A - just meant great player who had a good prolonged career. A+ just meant great player for their position, not necessarily a top player in the comp. More reflective of how successful a club would think the pick was, than the player itself.

But yeah I agree. Should probably just adjust Merrett level players to an S tier.

Feels like your 3/4 times more likely to get a needle mover with a pick in the 7-9 range, whilst being 2.5 times more likely to find someone with successful afl potential. As such feel in general it's a shocking trade, but as you said the circumstances of a strong draft v a weak draft, it could be justifiable.

 

[tigs2010]

 

[Calcium Man]

Can someone please tell me what happened to Dyson Sharp? The kid was described as a generational talent, #1 pick, etc, etc, and ended up falling to #13 (Essendon)?

Who the **** said he was generational?

Interesting that pre draft everyone talking about Sharpe's leadership qualities as captain of SA but didn't hear the same with Grjl as captain of vic metro?
Think we have a beauty along with cumming.

Sharps leadership is levels above Grlj (and most 18 year olds) He put his team on his shoulders at champs, he lifted CD in a final last year they didn’t look like winning.

 

[Lsta062]

A flag list is built over 6-8 x seasons. Made up of literally hundreds of list management decisions across ND, RD, MSD, Trades, F/S, Academy and free agency.

It’ll be disappointing if Robey, Sharp and Taylor are superior players to Grlj. But if we turn into a flag contending list and Grlj is part of that team, then it’s sort of irrelevant. As maybe Grlj plays a more important role as a great team player than others may play as individuals.

Cripps and Merrett have both been outstanding individual players, far superior to Lambert or Edwards. Would I swap Lambert or Edwards for either of them? Not a chance. (We kicked 2 x goals in the entire last qtr of Port v Tigers PF … Lambert kicked both). He also chased Dusty’s man for most of his career.

So every recruiter will have more losses than hits… 95% of picks will have superior players taken after them.

It’s the sum of the parts over the entire build that’s important, not ‘Robey is better than Grlj’ so we don’t know what we’re doing…

If we are crud in 3-years then we’ve likely stuffed up too many decisions and heads should roll.

Grlj is an example, but I’m really talking about the sum of the 2024-2025 drafts including Lalor, Smillie, Hotton, Faull etc. All the 2024-2025 draftees.

If Grlj is crap, but Robert-Thomson’s a star, then it won’t be as much of an issue compared to bombing the entire draft. But the overall trend needs to be that we absolutely nailed the last two drafts, and I’ll stick to this. We’ve taken more first rounders than the average team takes, so the results also need to show we’re fielding a bunch of first-rounders.

My position is that if we didn’t nail these past two drafts looking back 5 years later, then I’ll lose confidence in our decision-making. We invested a lot in the draft over the last two years, and we clearly selected players on the rankings we prepared based on our greater vision for our side.

The club got leniency through some questionable list decisions IMO and chaos over the past 5 or so years because of the Premierships and I was also happy with that. But the line for me is with the 2024 draft and the accompanying 2-win season. From that point onwards it’s all about evidence and not just good vibes. They can make the decisions they want as the experts now, but the microscope on their decisions will come if it fails

 

[Drunken Wookie]

think public opinion on the grlj pick will change very very quickly.

 

[We are back baby!]

This thread is 'draft' analysis....... And we are analysing the absolute bejeezus out of it....... but we all should realise, these historical averages and medians and the like would be the drafting bible for the likes of Blair Hartley. I know most don't, but I find the actual science behind the building of a list very interesting, as I strongly believe if you follow the 'science' (what history shows works) for long enough success is almost guaranteed to come your way.

Too many clubs lose patience and look for sugar hits and succumb to pressure from outside....and they inevitably fail.

Pretty ground breaking stuff you guys are doing ... the results are that you usually get a better player at pick 7 and 9 than you do in the late 20's

 

[THE_GUN]

think public opinion on the grlj pick will change very very quickly.

Already has now after 1 training session and wearing the yellow & black

 

[clark1980]

I didn't know anything about the draft picks. from reading the forum I had a liking for robey and Taylor. but after the draft when you see more about who we drafted I couldn't be happier. Cummings looks like a 200+ game player. Grlj looks to be the exact player we need. 2 bits of vision. when he played for our vfl, the 2 handballs and handball receives in the same play and then the run from the training video. with stamina and pace the Bailey smith

3

Bailey Smith

Age

24

Ht

185cm

Wt

86kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

18.3

5star

K

8.5

3star

HB

9.8

5star

M

2.3

2star

T

3.8

5star

CL

2.7

4star

D

19.8

5star

K

9.6

4star

HB

10.2

5star

M

1.8

2star

T

3.2

4star

CL

3.2

4star

D

14.8

4star

K

7.6

3star

HB

7.2

5star

M

2.0

3star

T

3.4

5star

CL

1.6

4star

role could fit him to a tee. wing or half back and basically run with the play or just behind. zane and Noah look ok but never know with later picks. both have pace and attributes. it's going to make watching the afl and vfl interesting next year, watching the new players and the improvement in the last few crops.

 

[ShereKhan]

Pretty ground breaking stuff you guys are doing ... the results are that you usually get a better player at pick 7 and 9 than you do in the late 20's

Of course...but are 2 x mid-20's picks worth more than pick-8? What about Pick-12? And are 2 x B+ players worth as much/more than 1 x A-grader? If we aren't discussing this on November 30th, then please bring some nuggets for us.

 

[baazzaa]

I don't know. I think it sort of supports my view that 2 picks in the mid 20's are almost, but not quite as likely to find you a needle shifter as 1 pick in the 7-9 range.

Keep in mind list spots are themselves valuable.

You'd almost want to compare 1 pick in the 7-9 range + 1 rookie vs 2 picks in the mid 20s. I think this probably explains why clubs prefer top picks more than you'd expect based off just looking at % likelihood of becoming a gun.

Ofc another argument in the opposite direction is that clubs invest more in top picks in terms of getting games into them, letting them play their preferred position etc. (I think we over-invested in Dow say). So raw comparisons are probably overstating the true talent difference.

 

[grants guns]

Just watched the last ep of Gettable - Cal said that some clubs had Cumming as a top 3 pick

 

[Ralll]

In the interview with Richo, Gieschen mentioned there were 'players we moved towards the top of the list a little bit more' on account of us needing speed and outside run.
It proves it's not always 'take the best available' for those who believe this type of pre-draft media fluff:

I’m really confident that at the top of the order, we just go on best available talent. … As it goes deeper in the draft you might consider what your list needs, but we’ve always been draft the best available player and then you can work through that in list management later on.

 

[Rich01]

My sense and the trading activity of clubs and the previous and current draft points index values indicate a pick in the 6-10 range would be worth roughly in the range 2.25-2.75 x the value of a pick in the mid 20's on average, probably tending towards the higher end of that range.

So if you go by that alone, North has undercharged Richmond for pick 8 by getting back picks 26 & 27. By a factor of around 20-25%, which is substantial, but not completely outrageous. But as I said in my previous post on this thread, it makes a bit more sense as North are targeting specific positional needs for their list, and also one of the picks they got was in the uncommonly deep & strong 2024 draft.

It definitely doesn't look anywhere near as lopsided as receiving picks 26 & 27 for pick 3. Though if you looked at it in terms of open pool players only, then correctly stated, it would be picks 17 & 23 for pick 4.

Would you have been ok with us offloading pick 8 this year for 25 and 26?

 

[THE_GUN]

In the interview with Richo, Gieschen mentioned there were 'players we moved towards the top of the list a little bit more' on account of us needing speed and outside run.
It proves it's not always 'take the best available' for those who believe this type of pre-draft media fluff:

They would of had tiers and rankings just as an example
We might of had Peucker in tier 2 with ranking points of 74 but had another player say Cody Curtain as an example
also in tier 2 with a ranking points of 81
But felt Peucker fits what we need more due to what we have on the list already.

Same Tier players similar ranking but then go needs based
the same could have applied to say Grlj v Taylor