List Mgmt. 2016 AFL Draft

[matt_bas]

I thought he was a small forward

And we just lost a ruckman in Brown

He was both

 

[Coinz]

Is there any chance someone will pick SPP before our first pick?

 

[nameless]

In what way? With the rookie list you're really 1st prize aiming for McGovern's, Cox's, Priddis's - guys that given 2 years of time to develop show top 10 list potential. 2nd prize is having vets that can step in and cover adequately in the case of several injuries. I don't see Marsh carrying either of those. He was a put when he was drafted (more athlete than footballer), and him being delisted by Collingwood wouldn't indicate that he's really worth the gamble.

He wasn't delisted, he quit.
Both players did - in fact both clubs tried hard to make their players stay.

A Cox/Gov/Priddis/Fletcher rookie is extremely rare - 95% of rookie players are rubbish, most never play.
At least we know both players are up to AFL standard, albeit currently a low standard.

 

[SpaceClef]

Is there any chance someone will pick SPP before our first pick?

Next to no chance IMO

 

[SpaceClef]

95% of rookie players are rubbish, most never play.

Yet every year there's a former rookie or two playing in a premiership side, and an article written about how they supposedly defied the odds.

I bet if you look into past successes in a bit more detail you'd find that for certain types the success rate would be better than 5%.

 

[frenchconnection]

Next to no chance IMO

I think most are saying he's not worth a first round pick but definitely a second round pick so probably unlikely any other team will pick him before we get first go. Of course you just never know. Depends upon a teams needs. I wouldn't stress over it though as think it's most unlikely and of course we would have to hope that the hierarchy at the Eagles are of the same opinion!!

 

[kerr87]

Would we pick Shai Bolton first?

 

[FatPizza]

Is there any chance someone will pick SPP before our first pick?

In a weird way that would probably do us a favour. I don't know if he's worth pick 13, yet we're in a position where we might use it on him anyway.

 

[Milenko]

Whoever we pick first, history says that on average our second pick will be a tater.

 

[JohnW]

Have we had any BOND 007 info mixed into all this crap?

 

[paran]

He wasn't delisted, he quit.
Both players did - in fact both clubs tried hard to make their players stay.

A Cox/Gov/Priddis/Fletcher rookie is extremely rare - 95% of rookie players are rubbish, most never play.
At least we know both players are up to AFL standard, albeit currently a low standard.

Both players? Who are "both"? Why'd they quit,?

 

[nameless]

Both players? Who are "both"? Why'd they quit,?

Marsh and Garlett.

Both returned to Perth due to homesickness.

 

[bombard]

Also sounds like a website Nat Fyfe would be interested in

Nah, he only uses Fyfr - a dating website for people who look like Nat Fyfe.

 

[kane249]

Zac Clarke signs back up with Freo. Thank god we avoided that flaming dumpster fire from getting onto our list.

 

[ZergMinion]

Whoever we pick first, history says that on average our second pick will be a tater.

Daniel Kerr, Luke Shuey, Sam Butler, Mark Lecras, Jack Darling, Eric Mackenzie all our second pick overall at the draft. I think our strike rate for good players is about average.

 

[paran]

Marsh and Garlett.

Both returned to Perth due to homesickness.

I think Garlett is excellent and there was always a severe "go home" factor for him when drafted - really want us to grab him. Marsh, just don't think he offers anything we don't already have. He's not a Barrass and he's not a lockdown KPD. I'd rather punt on a raw 18yo, but that's just me. Where do you see his value?

 

[nameless]

Yet every year there's a former rookie or two playing in a premiership side, and an article written about how they supposedly defied the odds.

I bet if you look into past successes in a bit more detail you'd find that for certain types the success rate would be better than 5%.

OK, we've rookied about 60 players since 1998.

8 have been a 'success' (Fletcher, Cox, Nicoski, Lynch, Priddis, Sinclair, Armstrong, McGovern)

So 13% make it, with the vast majority of those who don't make it not even playing a game.

Marsh and Garlett are worth a look in, expect to get the best out of them given they'll be comfortable playing in their home state.

 

[Godfather32]

OK, we've rookied about 60 players since 1998.

8 have been a 'success' (Fletcher, Cox, Nicoski, Lynch, Priddis, Sinclair, Armstrong, McGovern)

So 13% make it, with the vast majority of those who don't make it not even playing a game.

Marsh and Garlett are worth a look in, expect to get the best out of them given they'll be comfortable playing in their home state.

Be interesting to see how many of our rookie listed players have been other teams cast-offs because we seem to have gone that route far too often imo, hasn't really worked out yet

 

[Feeling Groovy]

Be interesting to see how many of our rookie listed players have been other teams cast-offs because we seem to have gone that route far too often imo, hasn't really worked out yet

Completely agree with this. I think we are better off using the rookie list for those types that take time to mature but show something (speculative), or that fill a specific need and are ready made depth (i.e. a ruck man), rather than cast offs from other clubs that we think we can turn into decent players. It hasn't worked for us. That said, neither Marsh or Garlett are cast offs as such.

 

[nameless]

Completely agree with this. I think we are better off using the rookie list for those types that take time to mature but show something (speculative), or that fill a specific need and are ready made depth (i.e. a ruck man), rather than cast offs from other clubs that we think we can turn into decent players. It hasn't worked for us. That said, neither Marsh or Garlett are cast offs as such.

I agree we take too many delisted player as rookies - however, as you point out Garlett and Marsh are not this.

Be a mistake not to take them IMO.

 

[paran]

OK, we've rookied about 60 players since 1998.

8 have been a 'success' (Fletcher, Cox, Nicoski, Lynch, Priddis, Sinclair, Armstrong, McGovern)

So 13% make it, with the vast majority of those who don't make it not even playing a game.

Marsh and Garlett are worth a look in, expect to get the best out of them given they'll be comfortable playing in their home state.

Ok, with Marsh, how do you see him fitting what we (WCE) need? Cheap KPD backup?

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

"Grinder" sounds stronger!

Jack Darling questions this nic name.

 

[flamingEMBERS]

OK, we've rookied about 60 players since 1998.

8 have been a 'success' (Fletcher, Cox, Nicoski, Lynch, Priddis, Sinclair, Armstrong, McGovern)

So 13% make it, with the vast majority of those who don't make it not even playing a game.

Marsh and Garlett are worth a look in, expect to get the best out of them given they'll be comfortable playing in their home state.

Brett Jones. 9.

 

[nameless]

Ok, with Marsh, how do you see him fitting what we (WCE) need? Cheap KPD backup?

Yeah, he'll provide depth if we get a LTI to a medium defender or forward.

 

[nameless]

Brett Jones. 9.

15% success rate