2017 Afl Draft

[Roddy27]

If wright leaves to take on another position, so be it.

I'd be tempted to hire Buckenara back to take over that head position, and let him facilitate the development of a new recruiting team. Bucky is a true talent in the field of talent identification. Have no idea how good a manager of people he is, however.

 

[Dewnior]

I don't get this whole notion of a pre-determined weak or strong draft, surely you can't judge a draft until a few years after the actual draft when players can further develop their game.

You can judge at any time. Doesn't mean you are going to get it right.

 

[Collins-Langford-Ayres]

I don't get this whole notion of a pre-determined weak or strong draft, surely you can't judge a draft until a few years after the actual draft when players can further develop their game.

But you can take a stab at a point in time. If the bell curves are low for a draft across a number of things like speed, agility, leap, beep test, kicking test, etc and the quality of the the games or top end talent is not as high as expected into the TAC etc, why would you not be able to assess the draft as weak?

 

[TheFourPillars]

If wright leaves to take on another position, so be it.

I'd be tempted to hire Buckenara back to take over that head position, and let him facilitate the development of a new recruiting team. Bucky is a true talent in the field of talent identification. Have no idea how good a manager of people he is, however.

He is now MD or CEO of Frankston who are set to join the VFL again next year

 

[tommyk72]

But you can take a stab at a point in time. If the bell curves are low for a draft across a number of things like speed, agility, leap, beep test, kicking test, etc and the quality of the the games or top end talent is not as high as expected into the TAC etc, why would you not be able to assess the draft as weak?

This makes sense, but only if you'e managed to measure these things. Which takes place at the draft camp, which hasn't happened yet right?

 

[StalkingHawk]

This makes sense, but only if you'e managed to measure these things. Which takes place at the draft camp, which hasn't happened yet right?

So ah, you get that it takes a fair bit of talent to even be a chance at being drafted yeah?

It's a really small number of people that actually end up drafted each year. It's prone, due to small number, to fluctuations in talent. Some years, there just isn't the talent there (which led to calls for less teams as the supposed quality of teams dropped when the expansion teams came in).

For instance, if the top 20 of any draft decided to play soccer, become Dr's, stoners, or anything other then AFL players, that draft would like very average.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Thaihawk]

I don't think this years draft was high on our priority list. We have academy and f/s who maybe we value higher than some early picks, and as we know we can get these players with multiple higher picks, and at a discount too.

I am very interested in our strategy come trade and draft time this year.

 

[jenniferHAWKinS]

I don't get this whole notion of a pre-determined weak or strong draft, surely you can't judge a draft until a few years after the actual draft when players can further develop their game.

For people still sooking over the Jaeger trade this is the worst draft crop in a long time especially out of Victoria. No obvious number 1 or certain superstars in this bunch. Even weaker if Will Sutherland chooses cricket instead of AFL.

 

[threesixpio]

Hey Hawkers, thought you might be interested in this video that I have created of one of your Academy prospects:

One of the most intriguing prospective recruits for Hawthorn is Changkuoth Jiath, who is of African descent and is eligible to be taken by the Hawks as a multicultural academy player. Jiath, an athletic 185cm midfielder for the Gippsland Power, performed well in the Under 17s All-Stars match last September.



Other player videos from the Championships are in this playlist:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLSnqJQe5E7_ZeCvQZrVBf8eNIYFf5_X2o

Weird clip for me. Really good quick decision making and athletic

Shit kick. If you could improve his kicking he'd be pretty awesome

 

[threesixpio]

He looks damn good.

Until he kicks the ball. That being said he has a lot to work with. Very athletic and if we can polish his skills we might have a player.

Brad was a crap kick. Ended up pretty darn good

 

[tommyk72]

So ah, you get that it takes a fair bit of talent to even be a chance at being drafted yeah?

It's a really small number of people that actually end up drafted each year. It's prone, due to small number, to fluctuations in talent. Some years, there just isn't the talent there (which led to calls for less teams as the supposed quality of teams dropped when the expansion teams came in).

For instance, if the top 20 of any draft decided to play soccer, become Dr's, stoners, or anything other then AFL players, that draft would like very average.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not sure why you're going around quoting my posts in multiple threads and then having a go at them. But I'm glad you're having fun.

As for the above, you've actually just reinforced my insinuation, that drafts can vary in quality. Let me lay it out for you:

1. Drafts vary in quality.
2. You can measure the difference in quality between drafts.
3. You can't realistically do this until you can benchmark quality against defined, consistent indicators.

This in no way is meant to be an opinion on whether the draft in 2017 is strong or weak. Just that different drafts will have different levels of quality. But you cannot measure these quality really definitively until at least after draft camp (or maybe even years into the future).

I made absolutely no reference to or insinuation about how good you need to be to even make it to the draft.

 

[StalkingHawk]

Not sure why you're going around quoting my posts in multiple threads and then having a go at them. But I'm glad you're having fun.

As for the above, you've actually just reinforced my insinuation, that drafts can vary in quality. Let me lay it out for you:

1. Drafts vary in quality.
2. You can measure the difference in quality between drafts.
3. You can't realistically do this until you can benchmark quality against defined, consistent indicators.

This in no way is meant to be an opinion on whether the draft in 2017 is strong or weak. Just that different drafts will have different levels of quality. But you cannot measure these quality really definitively until at least after draft camp (or maybe even years into the future).

I made absolutely no reference to or insinuation about how good you need to be to even make it to the draft.

You were just the latest post on the Hardwick thread, nothing personal, and it was probably better directed at who-ever coined the term I guess.

In this thread, you are consistent in saying that you can't measure quality of draftees until the draft camp, or even years after the draft.

That strikes me as false for a host of reasons.

1. Clubs pay recruiters to watch players for YEARS prior to being drafted. They would not do this, if there wasn't a benefit.

2. I choose bananas at the store, and know before I take them home, which ones I want to eat, and which ones are rotten. (This can be trickier with mandarins, but you get my drift)

3. The National Combine is but one tool of many used by recruiters to assess a player's value/potential as a prospective player. It usually confirms opinions already set, with a couple of bolters/sliders at each years draft. (Ie Doedee)

4. My point about making it to the draft is relevant to scarcity. We have a draft with 18 clubs, with early 1st round commonly believed to be the limit of elite talent. Fluctuations in scarcity can have a huge bearing therefore on relevant strengths of drafts.

5. I imagine you see the draft as a lottery, and I do agree the draft is a bit of a lottery. That doesn't mean there aren't strong and weak lotteries tho.

Hopefully you find this post more considered and less nuclear [emoji6]



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tommyk72]

You were just the latest post on the Hardwick thread, nothing personal, and it was probably better directed at who-ever coined the term I guess.

In this thread, you are consistent in saying that you can't measure quality of draftees until the draft camp, or even years after the draft.

That strikes me as false for a host of reasons.

1. Clubs pay recruiters to watch players for YEARS prior to being drafted. They would not do this, if there wasn't a benefit.

2. I choose bananas at the store, and know before I take them home, which ones I want to eat, and which ones are rotten. (This can be trickier with mandarins, but you get my drift)

3. The National Combine is but one tool of many used by recruiters to assess a player's value/potential as a prospective player. It usually confirms opinions already set, with a couple of bolters/sliders at each years draft. (Ie Doedee)

4. My point about making it to the draft is relevant to scarcity. We have a draft with 18 clubs, with early 1st round commonly believed to be the limit of elite talent. Fluctuations in scarcity can have a huge bearing therefore on relevant strengths of drafts.

5. I imagine you see the draft as a lottery, and I do agree the draft is a bit of a lottery. That doesn't mean there aren't strong and weak lotteries tho.

Hopefully you find this post more considered and less nuclear [emoji6]



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Far less nuclear, and a far better post for it

To be fair, I think you can get insight into a draft before it's occurred. On my original post I was more respond to another poster (CLA I think?) who suggested that you can measure drafts objectively using combine results. I was just saying that in that case we can't measure 2017.

I think the insight is always helpful, but there are also a lot of bolters/failures (I'd suggest, of the top of my head, 10-20 percent perform with significant variance to what was predicted). So it's not a perfect system of measurement. And then a lot of it depends on the environment the players go into. So many unknowns impact the eventual ranking of the drafts in hindsight, let alone predicting into the future!

Anyways, enough from me. I gotta catch a flight. But just watch out with posting all this rational considered stuff. You'll get me replying to you more often

 

[Gralin]

When people are comparing the strength of the current draft to previous drafts, they are talking about how players look compared to other players at the same stage

that is all they can do

it is unlikely that you have an entire draft class of late bloomers so if this draft looks weak compared to others at the same stage it probably is

there will still be some talented players and plenty that have careers but there doesn't have to be truly elite talent available every year

 

[Luv_our_club]

Steven May signs with GC, and they then announce that all contract negotiations with all other players are on hold for the rest of the season. Why?

@GW watch

 

[Birdofprey]

Does anyone know how long GW is contracted for at Hawthorn?

Rumors are always swirling about other clubs wanting to poach him, and again on radio yesterday, Please let us keep some of our staff!!!

I believe GW is contracted to Hawthorn to end of 2018. Might be wrong, but I am sure I have read that elsewhere (i.e., not BF).

I hope we don't lose him before then. I know that people move on for good opportunities, and our club has always been generous in supporting that. But we have lost so many good people the last few years.

I understand other clubs want to replicate a lot of our processes, and grab a piece of our football IP. But FFS - would be great if we could be left alone, for just a little while.

 

[Aramis]

Not sure why you're going around quoting my posts in multiple threads and then having a go at them. But I'm glad you're having fun.

As for the above, you've actually just reinforced my insinuation, that drafts can vary in quality. Let me lay it out for you:

1. Drafts vary in quality.
2. You can measure the difference in quality between drafts.
3. You can't realistically do this until you can benchmark quality against defined, consistent indicators.

This in no way is meant to be an opinion on whether the draft in 2017 is strong or weak. Just that different drafts will have different levels of quality. But you cannot measure these quality really definitively until at least after draft camp (or maybe even years into the future).

I made absolutely no reference to or insinuation about how good you need to be to even make it to the draft.

the clue is in his name.

 

[cryptor]

Steven May signs with GC, and they then announce that all contract negotiations with all other players are on hold for the rest of the season. Why?

@GW watch

Out of money.