2014 Draftees versus 2015 Draftees

Remove this Banner Ad

12Chill said:
Armitage = average?
"racks it up... with little effect" -
Actually, Armitage's disposal efficiency is 72.9% which is considered a pretty good percentage of effectiveness.

Below is a list of the top 15 midfielders last season for average disposals per game;
1. Sam Mitchell
2. Josh P. Kennedy
3. Daniel Hannebery
4. Matthew Priddis
5. Andrew Gaff
6. Dane Swan
7. Jordan Lewis
8. Scott Pendlebury
9. Nathan Fyfe
10. Leigh Montagna
11. David Armitage
12. Dayne Beams
13. Adam Treloar
14. Taylor Adams
15. Lachie Neale

So what happens when we compare the disposal efficiency of the top 15 and re-rank the list?

1. Scott Pendlebury - 76.5%
2. Lachie Neale - 75.5%
3. Adam Treloar - 74.5%
4. Leigh Montagna - 74.1%
5. Sam Mitchell - 73.1%
6. David Armitage - 72.9%
7. Daniel Hannebery - 71.3%
8. Jordan Lewis - 70.9%
9. Andrew Gaff - 70.8%
10. Matthew Priddis - 69.9%
11. Nathan Fyfe - 69.4%
12. Dayne Beams - 68.8%
13. Dane Swan - 66.9%
14. Josh P. Kennedy - 64.3%
15. Taylor Adams - 62.4%

Armitage jumps to number 6. (Just 0.2% below Sam Mitchell by the way, who fwiw is considered one of the better kicks/most efficient players in the comp). Cripps would fit in between Fyfe and Beams, at 69.1%. Cripps is also handball-heavy, an easy way to get an effective stat, with just 2 less total handballs for the season in comparison to Armitage.
Armitage has 124 more kicks than Cripps in season 2015.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-08-28/the-inquirer-just-for-kicks
Oh, and Cripps was ranked as having the 2nd worst kicking efficiency in terms of what was expected, 10.6% below the expected result. I just find the whole Armitage is ineffective thing amusing when Cripps ranks below him in many of these aspects.

"racks it up in the worst midfield in the comp with little effect and I highly doubt he would be doing much if he were playing for competitive teams in the top 8"
You know you could literally say the exact same thing for Cripps? This comment makes very little sense and is a ridiculous exercise. Usually as teams become better and there is added supporter, the players who usually had to do all the heavy lifting are allowed to have more rounded games and actually benefit from it.

I don't intend to bash Cripps at all btw. Carlton have a serious player on their hands and I look forward to watching him over the next decade However, I do believe at this stage, Armitage and Steven are both much better players. Yes, there's a good chance Cripps will overtake Armitage or someone else as he improves and develops further, but that was not the statement made. The statement was that Cripps IS better than all of St Kilda's midfielders. IS means present time, and at this present time I'd have to say no.

note; It would be pointless to say Cripps eventually will become better than any of St Kilda's midfielders too, because if we allow Cripps the benefit of developing you'd have to do the same for our young mids such as Billings, Sinclair, Dunstan, Acres, Gresham and Freeman.
There are too many variables at this stage. Cripps will be a very very good player though, no doubt. I just think you said some ridiculous things in your comment regarding Armitage.
Click to expand...
I seriously think Armys one of the more underrated inside mids of the comp. What he did last year should have had him in the all Aus squad. I dont get the whole "hes not effiecent enough" bullshit. I think last year he proved that he was a top 10-15 mid of the competitions no questions asked. Yes he does get a few clangers but that is less to do with Armys ability and more to do with his role in the team. Look at all the players who got more clangers than him last season, Josh Kennedy, Jordan Lewis, Jack Stevens, Dustin Martin, Jack Ziebell, Scott Thompson AND SAM MITCHELL who are all high end inside midfielders who do a lot of clearance work for their teams much like Army
 
Last edited:
Adnan said:
I seriously think Armys one of the more underrated inside mids of the comp. What he did last year should have had him in the all Aus squad. I dont get the whole "hes not effiecent enough" bullshit. I think last year he proved that he was a top 10-15 mid of the competitions no questions asked. Yes he does get a few clangers but that is less to do with Armys ability and more to do with his role in the team. Look at all the players who got more clangers than him last season, Josh Kennedy, Jordan Lewis, Jack Stevens, Dustin Martin, Jack Ziebell, Scott Thompson AND SAM MITCHELL who are all high end inside midfielders who do a lot of clearance work for their teams much like Army
Click to expand...

No, just no. Leave the room son.
 
Schraderbrau said:
Disposal efficiency is a bs stat which is demonstrated by your comparisons showing that there is .2% splitting Mitchell and Armitage. This is laughable and discredits disposal efficiency as a useful stat.

A better thing to look at is average clangers per game which Armitage ranks 7th in the comp and is compounded by the fact that he is a high possession winner. He is an elite turnover merchant and given that he is St Kilda's biggest possession winner makes for pretty bad reading if you happen to be a forward or a defender at that club.

It is telling Armatage's improvement as a player is directly correlated with St Kilda's move down the ladder. He's nothing more than a good player in a crap team imo. If St Kilda had the midfield options that better teams have then he becomes a fringe player just like he was when Goddard, Dal Santa, Hayes etc were playing in the Saints midfield.

And I don't think you can shut down debate on how good Cripps will end up compared to St Kilda listed players. Nobody other than Saints fans would disagree that Cripps is clearly going to be better than the young Saints players you've mentioned. In fact the players you mention are a pretty modest group in terms of ability especially given St Kilda has been rubbish since 2013. I doubt any of them would be in most people's top 25 list of young players in the AFL whereas Cripps would be in most top 5's.
Click to expand...

I love your first point. You claim it's laughable that Armitage's DE is only .2% below Mitchell's, and says that makes the stat lose all credibility. Then you say that average clangers a game is a better way to look at how effective they are, citing that Armitage is 7th in the comp for clangers, as if this would truly reveal the difference between Armitage's effectiveness and the effectiveness of other top mids such as Mitchell.

I think you forgot to mention that Armitage is ranked =7th in the league for clangers per game, at 3.71. Yes, the = is important. Who is he equal with? Ha, it's Sam Mitchell, would you look at that. I'm not sure if you had your blinkers on when you looked up the stats or if you expected me not to check, either way, turn it up. That just discredits everything you've said about his efficiency. The other players who all over around 3.71 clangers per game include Josh P. Kennedy, Nathan Fyfe, Dustin Martin, Joel Selwood, and of course Sam Mitchell. And most of these players are playing for top 8 sides with stronger teams, game plans and forwards to kick to. You mention Armitage's clanger count as a means for why he is average, when in actuality there are many high level midfielders with the same amount of clangers.

I think you're forgetting something. Armitage was a fringe player when our midfield consisted of Lenny Hayes, Nick Dal Santo, Leigh Montagna, Brendon Goddard, Luke Ball and Clint Jones as a week in week out tagger. We had a very strong midfield in our almost-glory years of 2009-10, which is when Armitage was a fringe player. In his first 4 seasons he was a player on the fringe, with game totals of 3, 13, 3 and 9. Let's remember that he was under 22 years old in these years and our coach was Ross Lyon, who didn't play many youngsters at all (instead he preferred the likes of McQualter and Eddy) and we had a strong enough midfield. He has played every game when available from 2011-now. He missed a bit over a month with injury in 2014 but other than that has been a regular member of our team. And from the last 4 seasons he has averaged over 20 disposals a game in every year.

Your idea of his improvement as a player is clearly based on your lack of knowledge of Armitage. Sure in his '12, '13 and '14 years you might think "well 20 disposals isn't that much", you need to look further as to why he has improved. The reason, well known to us Saints fans, is because he dropped a fair amount of weight to improve his running ability, to shape his game further in the mold of Jordan Lewis. He has admitted that he thought he was overweight in previous seasons, and as he dropped weight leading up to this year, his running ability improved greatly and he was able to stay on the ground for longer, get to more contest, influence the game on the inside and outside of the pack and overall improve as a player.

Proof of this? Out of his 21 games this season, in 19 of them his TOG % was over 80 (with the two below being 77 and 79). Thats 90.47% of his games where he spent more than 80% time on ground.
In 2014, of his 15 games, he spent 80% TOG in just 3 of them. That's 20%.
In 2013, of his 21 games, he spent 80% TOG in just 6 of them. That's 28.5%.
In 2012, of his 21 games, he spent 80% TOG in 8 games. That's 38%.

So this year, he jumped 70% more of his games into 80% TOG territory compared to '14, jumped 62% more of his games into 80% TOG territory compared to '13 and jumped 52% more of his games into 80% TOG territory compared to '13.

It's not hard to see why his output increased dramatically from around 20-22 disposals a game to about 28. He was fitter and spent more time on the ground, there is very little correlation with us being a below average team.

I too think Cripps will be better than most of the group I mentioned, Cripps will be a star. But I believe Jack Billings has so much potential that there is every chance he matches Cripps, it's important to remember that Billings hasn't had the size, strength or running capacity to compete as a midfielder so far in his career, and I think we'll all be stoked to see how he goes as he begins to spend longer portions of his game there, and perhaps even full games if his tank allows him to do so, ultimately this is the plan for Billings.

Freeman needs to get his body right, Gresham has just been drafted and Sinclair is a jet and an absolute steal in the rookie draft, I too think that he will surprise many as he spends more time in the midfield in the coming seasons. Having said that I don't think he'll be better than Cripps, but rather I'm pointing out that the "modest ability" within the group I mentioned is absolutely ridiculous. You doubt any of them would be in anyone's top 25 list of young players? Now that's laughable, anyone that doesn't have Billings in their top 25 is kidding themselves. (HTPunter, before the 2015 season, ranked Billings as 23rd of players below 50 games, personally after what we saw this year I'd have him even higher, so there you go making silly claims again!)

I would probably put Cripps top 5, or close to it, as well, I think you're being ignorant when you say it's "clear(ly)" a fact that Cripps will be better than Billings, etc. It's way too early to tell. I'm sure everyone thought that Judd was clearly going to always be better than Gary Ablett jnr too! There is too much water to go under the bridge yet.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Marcelin have kept Sier away from Northern. If he played he would have come top three in their best and fairest (Fiorini and Gresham his competition) and could have played u18 Champs. Damn private schools.
 
grundog49 said:
Marcelin have kept Sier away from Northern. If he played he would have come top three in their best and fairest (Fiorini and Gresham his competition) and could have played u18 Champs. Damn private schools.
Click to expand...

Bont was also Marcelin but wasn't hidden like that. Seems an odd move
 
Defacto said:
People actually rate curnow ahead of duggan. Wow. Based on what exactly?

Duggan looked seriously impressive this year. Any team would love him. Including my own.
Click to expand...

For mine Curnow can be the more valuable player without necessarily being better. A real point of difference, playing as the increasingly popular third tall/inside mid role.
 
Rich01 said:
Looking forward to Charlie finally playing this role and showing what he can do in the midfield.
Click to expand...

There was a 20 minute video which had a fair bit of him pinch hitting in the ruck. Too short to ruck at AFL level but reckon he'll be utilised as that Blicavs style third up jumper.
 
Red Black and Blue said:
There was a 20 minute video which had a fair bit of him pinch hitting in the ruck. Too short to ruck at AFL level but reckon he'll be utilised as that Blicavs style third up jumper.
Click to expand...

I saw that video. It was on that Richmound recruiters website.
He was very impressive. Explosive on the lead and powerful around the stoppages.
Charlie's really hard to bring down in a tackle and good at getting his arms free.
Does needs to get cleaner with his hands.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

What a useless thread. The kids being picked up haven't even played a game of footy so how can they possibly be compared?

And what's more, the players matched aren't even correct.

Useless
 
Pat_Footy said:
No, just no. Leave the room son.
Click to expand...

You're probably the one that should leave. On last year alone he was definitely around that mark.
 
gillo94 said:
1 Weitering versus McCartin
2 Schache versus Heeney
3 Mills versus Petracca
4 Oliver versus Brayshaw
5 Parish versus Moore
6 Francis versus Pickett
7 Hopper versus De Goey
8 Ah Chee versus Marchbank
9 Weideman versus Ahern
10 Harry McKay versus Wright
11 Milera versus Cockatoo
12 Curnow versus Duggan
13 Kennedy versus Ellis
14 Hipwood versus Weller
15 Rioli versus Lever
16 Himmelberg versus Garlett
17 Doedee versus Steele
18 Gresham versus Durdin
19 Burton versus Langford
20 Fiorini versus Boekhorst
21 Ben McKay versus Laverde
22 Lovell versus Goddard
23 Cunningham versus McKenzie
Click to expand...
 
Wouldbetackler said:
Shouldn't we give the new draftees a season to show what they do first? You can't compare them yet
Click to expand...

You can have a crack at it and then revisit the thread in a couple of years to see who got the closest.

Kind of like how people do mock drafts etc....

Just a bit of fun
 
1 Weitering versus McCartin
2 Schache versus Heeney
3 Mills versus Petracca
4 Oliver versus Brayshaw
5 Parish versus Moore
6 Francis versus Pickett
7 Hopper versus De Goey
8 Ah Chee versus Marchbank
9 Weideman versus Ahern
10 Harry McKay versus Wright
11 Milera versus Cockatoo
12 Curnow versus Duggan
13 Kennedy versus Ellis
14 Hipwood versus Weller
15 Rioli versus Lever
16 Himmelberg versus Garlett
17 Doedee versus Steele
18 Gresham versus Durdin
19 Burton versus Langford
20 Fiorini versus Boekhorst
21 Ben McKay versus Laverde
22 Lovell versus Goddard
23 Cunningham versus McKenzie

2014 was a pretty rubbish draft IMO. Only 9 wins, two of which were father sons/academy selections that were unavailable to 17 clubs.
 
gandaal said:
1 Weitering versus McCartin
2 Schache versus Heeney
3 Mills versus Petracca
4 Oliver versus Brayshaw
5 Parish versus Moore
6 Francis versus Pickett
7 Hopper versus De Goey
8 Ah Chee versus Marchbank
9 Weideman versus Ahern
10 Harry McKay versus Wright
11 Milera versus Cockatoo
12 Curnow versus Duggan
13 Kennedy versus Ellis
14 Hipwood versus Weller
15 Rioli versus Lever
16 Himmelberg versus Garlett
17 Doedee versus Steele
18 Gresham versus Durdin
19 Burton versus Langford
20 Fiorini versus Boekhorst
21 Ben McKay versus Laverde
22 Lovell versus Goddard
23 Cunningham versus McKenzie

2014 was a pretty rubbish draft IMO. Only 9 wins, two of which were father sons/academy selections that were unavailable to 17 clubs.
Click to expand...

Harry McKay over Peter Wright. Spare me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
LynchysMob said:
Harry McKay over Peter Wright. Spare me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I've been pretty consistently calling Wright a hack since before he was drafted. I've seen nothing that's changed my mind.

It'll actually pretty interesting comparing the two throughout their careers. Both had big fans and both have had their detractors.

Personally I think serviceable is probably Mckays ceiling, while I'll be shocked if Wright plays 50 games. We'll have to wait and see.
 
Last edited:
gandaal said:
I've been pretty consistently calling Wright a hack since before he was drafted. I've seen nothing that's changed my mind.

It'll actually pretty interesting comparing the two throughout their careers. Both had big fans and both have had their detractors.

Personally I think serviceable is probably Mckays ceiling, while I'll be shocked if Wright plays 50 games. We'll have to wait and see.
Click to expand...

Everyone's allowed an opinion so fair game. Very different to the expert consensus.

203cm big men who run a 15+ beep and can slot them from 50-60m don't grow on trees. Had a great development year in the NEAFL. Fourty odd goals in 16 games at CHF to go with 16d and 7 marks a game. Took some games by the absolute balls. I was also a sceptic round draft time but I think he can be a top 50 player.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Superstar swan
Analysis Alternative to longer draftee deals
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
Waterhouzin
W
Superstar swan
Analysis The go home factor, equalisation, draftees requesting trades
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
301
Views
15K
Mr Magic
M

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top