List Mgmt. 2021 draft pool.

[Lore]

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

Be interesting what we do if Hobbs & Ward is gone.
Do we take Rachelle and if we do i think we should groom Baker over the summer for the midfield role.
Do we take Johnson?
Or do we trade pick 7 for a future 1st(hawks/Stk/Norf/Coll/Freo)as i believe we'll have more clarity in next years draftees than this year.
Go in this year with 15/26/(27)/28.
2022-5/7/19/26

 

[Dr Tigris]

Be interesting what we do if Hobbs & Ward is gone.
Do we take Rachelle and if we do i think we should groom Baker over the summer for the midfield role.
Do we take Johnson?
Or do we trade pick 7 for a future 1st(hawks/Stk/Norf/Coll/Freo)as i believe we'll have more clarity in next years draftees than this year.
Go in this year with 15/26/(27)/28.
2022-5/7/19/26

Depends on who else we are looking at. One thing this year is that there are a heap of quality mids (with flaws) around. If we pick for strengths as usual and develop well, as usual, then we can build a deep midfield this draft. Are we looking around and see a genuine A grade talent that is going to be around if Hobbs/Ward are gone?

But, yes, it could be interesting to see if we do the big trade into next year thing. Would make some sort of sense if the right deal can be made.

 

[Mr Magic]

Depends on who else we are looking at. One thing this year is that there are a heap of quality mids (with flaws) around. If we pick for strengths as usual and develop well, as usual, then we can build a deep midfield this draft. Are we looking around and see a genuine A grade talent that is going to be around if Hobbs/Ward are gone?

But, yes, it could be interesting to see if we do the big trade into next year thing. Would make some sort of sense if the right deal can be made.

Actually it makes no sense unless you live with a security blanket.

The only sense was like Melbourne go to the draft because despite the stuff ups with Tompas, Scully and Trengrove v Martin etc... Jack Watts they still won a premiership through the draft


With more info, guess what? The better players will be higher and the future picks will not be able to reach them so its only a bail out for the nervous nellies that do not know what they are doing

 

[richoatthedisco]

Be interesting what we do if Hobbs & Ward is gone.
Do we take Rachelle and if we do i think we should groom Baker over the summer for the midfield role.
Do we take Johnson?
Or do we trade pick 7 for a future 1st(hawks/Stk/Norf/Coll/Freo)as i believe we'll have more clarity in next years draftees than this year.
Go in this year with 15/26/(27)/28.
2022-5/7/19/26

Do you expect to finish 12th again?

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

Depends on who else we are looking at. One thing this year is that there are a heap of quality mids (with flaws) around. If we pick for strengths as usual and develop well, as usual, then we can build a deep midfield this draft. Are we looking around and see a genuine A grade talent that is going to be around if Hobbs/Ward are gone?

But, yes, it could be interesting to see if we do the big trade into next year thing. Would make some sort of sense if the right deal can be made.

Or keep 7 and maybe offer up 15 too Carlton for their future 1st.

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

Do you expect to finish 12th again?

Nah just going off this years.lol
Hoping somewhere very close to pick 18.

 

[tiger_tough]

Still think we should be targeting pick 2 or 3 if there is a player we want that is likely to be gone by 7. Surely GC will want to aquire a couple of decent picks seeing as their 2nd isn't until 97.

 

[jthanos]

You are underestimating your opposition.

Rachelle is no comparison to Oliver and Petracca for size and we have a thousand small forwards already

What makes you think Goater will be there at 15?

After 30 usually its junk time unless Larke Medalists slip through

I love how people talk up players at picks that never get there unless they are no good or the other recruiters are idiots which is rare but can happen although one can't bank on it.

Why do you think Melbourne traded into this draft?? Because this draft is probably deeper than next years as well as bird in the hand and can trade futures

Instead of worrying about certain players at certain picks one is better off getting better types and fits that pop up because, one may not like to admit it, but better picks will come around to get better high end types so it pays not to reach or comprise the list and understand where the list really is at.

So when we are getting Rachelle are we really saying we are looking to trade Bolton and treating Stack like Higgins? Don't get me wrong Rachelle looks a good player but how does he fit in our squad already littered with small forwards?

Not under estimating at all, they are guns but these are the traits that these boys have and what we need, size and speed.
If Goater is gone, maybe Knevitt or Ned Long maybe Johnson or Roberts, the name doesn't matter its traits that I am looking at.

Who knows in a few years Rachelle may be able to interchange mid & fwd like Dusty and Bolton do and we have Bolton/Rachelle swapping. Just because because we have 3 smalls already in George, Aarts and MRJ another well round small with tricks who can play mid wouldnt hurt with Shedda and Lambert retiring soon.

Also many a gun players have been picked post 30, almost a third of our team have been picks 50 & above/rookies and these guys have multiple premiership medals.
No one is right or wrong here mate, its a forum where can have our say or have some fun.

 

[richoatthedisco]

No one is right or wrong here mate

Wrong

 

[Noidnadroj]

You are underestimating your opposition.

Rachelle is no comparison to Oliver and Petracca for size and we have a thousand small forwards already

What makes you think Goater will be there at 15?

After 30 usually its junk time unless Larke Medalists slip through

I love how people talk up players at picks that never get there unless they are no good or the other recruiters are idiots which is rare but can happen although one can't bank on it.

Why do you think Melbourne traded into this draft?? Because this draft is probably deeper than next years as well as bird in the hand and can trade futures

Instead of worrying about certain players at certain picks one is better off getting better types and fits that pop up because, one may not like to admit it, but better picks will come around to get better high end types so it pays not to reach or comprise the list and understand where the list really is at.

So when we are getting Rachelle are we really saying we are looking to trade Bolton and treating Stack like Higgins? Don't get me wrong Rachelle looks a good player but how does he fit in our squad already littered with small forwards?

We need to be careful not to make assumptions on drafting. When analysing drafts from 2013-2018, and looking at picks 1-10, 11-20 etc… so 60 players in each block, here are average games played:

1-10: 74.6
11-20: 61.1
21-30: 57.7
31-40: 33.5
41-50: 33.7
51-60: 39.4

So the actual facts tell you picks 51-60 have proven more valuable than 31-50. And picks 21-30 are comparable to 11-20.

Digging a little deeper, and looking at players who’ve played zero games and then less than 10 games, here are the stats:

1-10: 0 and 1. So not a single player played zero
and only 1 less than 10 games.

11-20: 0 and 4.

21-30: 5 and 8. (so 13 total played less than 10 games)

31-40: 7 and 14

41-50: 11 and 9

51-60: 9 and 7

So from picks 51-60, 74% have played 10+ games. So any suggestion late draft picks are garbage is not backed up by facts.

What it does say is don’t be afraid of packaging up earlier picks to give the receiving club better points value and just hang on to later picks, as data says you’re just as likely to hit the jackpot at 55 as you are at 35.

I analysed 2013-18 as it was post draft concessions for GWS and GC and provided enough time for players to have made their debut or otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Mr Magic]

Not under estimating at all, they are guns but these are the traits that these boys have and what we need, size and speed.
If Goater is gone, maybe Knevitt or Ned Long maybe Johnson or Roberts, the name doesn't matter its traits that I am looking at.

Who knows in a few years Rachelle may be able to interchange mid & fwd like Dusty and Bolton do and we have Bolton/Rachelle swapping. Just because because we have 3 smalls already in George, Aarts and MRJ another well round small with tricks who can play mid wouldnt hurt with Shedda and Lambert retiring soon.

Also many a gun players have been picked post 30, almost a third of our team have been picks 50 & above/rookies and these guys have multiple premiership medals.
No one is right or wrong here mate, its a forum where can have our say or have some fun.

This is the problem, you are comparing Goater to Knevitt with Ned Long and Johnson and Roberts. Its laughable. Those players are not even in the same ball park

If those can't be distinguished separately what are our recruiters doing??

A lot of our team is carried by Dusty and some others and they are role players.

People can have their say buts its fun when our recruiters get it right and are not misled

Rachelle will never be Dusty, never, does not have the body type. Rachelle will never have a effective Dusty don't argue, physically impossible. Bolton is a freak, players like Bolton do not come around willy nilly. Rachelle might be a good player, but whether he has Bolton's upside is another story

 

[Mr Magic]

We need to be careful not to make assumptions on drafting. When analysing drafts from 2013-2018, and looking at picks 1-10, 11-20 etc… so 60 players in each block, here are average games played:

1-10: 74.6
11-20: 61.1
21-30: 57.7
31-40: 33.5
41-50: 33.7
51-60: 39.4

So the actual facts tell you picks 51-60 have proven more valuable than 31-50. And picks 21-30 are comparable to 11-20.

Digging a little deeper, and looking at players who’ve played zero games and then less than 10 games, here are the stats:

1-10: 0 and 1. So not a single player played zero
and only 1 less than 10 games.

11-20: 0 and 4.

21-30: 5 and 8. (so 13 total played less than 10 games)

31-40: 7 and 14

41-50: 11 and 9

51-60: 9 and 7

So from picks 51-60, 74% have played 10+ games. So any suggestion late draft picks are garbage is not backed up by facts.

What it does say is don’t be afraid of packaging up earlier picks to give the receiving club better points value and just hang on to later picks, as data says you’re just as likely to hit the jackpot at 55 as you are at 35.

I analysed 2013-18 as it was post draft concessions for GWS and GC and provided enough time for players to have made their debut or otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Have you adjusted the figures for Larke Medalists when the recruiters where shown to be morons?

The other thing is you have to factor in body type, retirement age for body type, eg. Ruck, tall types take longer to develop less games etc Taller types also prone to injuries to knees etc..

I would assume Bulldogs have a better hit and miss simply because of the body type they usually recruit in the draft as a percentage

 

[richoatthedisco]

We need to be careful not to make assumptions on drafting. When analysing drafts from 2013-2018, and looking at picks 1-10, 11-20 etc… so 60 players in each block, here are average games played:

1-10: 74.6
11-20: 61.1
21-30: 57.7
31-40: 33.5
41-50: 33.7
51-60: 39.4

So the actual facts tell you picks 51-60 have proven more valuable than 31-50. And picks 21-30 are comparable to 11-20.

Digging a little deeper, and looking at players who’ve played zero games and then less than 10 games, here are the stats:

1-10: 0 and 1. So not a single player played zero
and only 1 less than 10 games.

11-20: 0 and 4.

21-30: 5 and 8. (so 13 total played less than 10 games)

31-40: 7 and 14

41-50: 11 and 9

51-60: 9 and 7

So from picks 51-60, 74% have played 10+ games. So any suggestion late draft picks are garbage is not backed up by facts.

What it does say is don’t be afraid of packaging up earlier picks to give the receiving club better points value and just hang on to later picks, as data says you’re just as likely to hit the jackpot at 55 as you are at 35.

I analysed 2013-18 as it was post draft concessions for GWS and GC and provided enough time for players to have made their debut or otherwise.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

Not sure that data says anything about jackpots. Number of games doesn't tell you anything about their quality. Nathan Jones played 302 games, Maurice Rioli 118.

 

[AstuteTiger]

Hard to compare apples and oranges, and quite pointless. Teams have changed , other things have changed

We can pump up all we like, reality will be more evident and relevant in 2022 in the matchups as well as beyond.'

Why look in the past except maybe to learn for the future?

If anything just highlights the draft is important

Lmao, I was replying to an actual question put forward by birdman. SEN themselves put up the same who's best would win Richmond V Melbourne and I would say that 99.9% said Richmond. Pump up? lol, we are nearing the end of our window, dees in the middle of it hence why I said our best would beat theirs and we have the runs on the board with 3 flags. I do believe we can challenge them next year, but in short, all I was doing was answering a question.

 

[Mr Magic]

Not sure that data says anything about jackpots. Number of games doesn't tell you anything about their quality. Nathan Jones played 302 games, Maurice Rioli 118.

See how many game Lipinksi gets after leaving the Bulldogs. A lot depends on how weak your teammates are like the Brownlow

 

[Mr Magic]

Lmao, I was replying to an actual question put forward by birdman. SEN themselves put up the same who's best would win Richmond V Melbourne and I would say that 99.9% said Richmond. Pump up? lol, we are nearing the end of our window, dees in the middle of it hence why I said our best would beat theirs and we have the runs on the board with 3 flags. I do believe we can challenge them next year, but in short, all I was doing was answering a question.

Melbourne are not in the middle of their window, they are just starting their window.

Runs on the board years ago count for zip going forward. Houli and co are not going to help us in 2022 and beyond apart from rule changes

 

[lumpinee]

Not sure that data says anything about jackpots. Number of games doesn't tell you anything about their quality. Nathan Jones played 302 games, Maurice Rioli 118.

yeah but Maurice only decided to come over to Vic when he was 24,i think you'll find he played over 250 games of senior footy

 

[Noidnadroj]

Have you adjusted the figures for Larke Medalists when the recruiters where shown to be morons?

The other thing is you have to factor in body type, retirement age for body type, eg. Ruck, tall types take longer to develop less games etc Taller types also prone to injuries to knees etc..

I would assume Bulldogs have a better hit and miss simply because of the body type they usually recruit in the draft as a percentage

There are a million things that could be factored in … but taking out Graham the average games played for 51-60 is 37.5….. 60 x players across 6 x drafts is a huge data set and large enough to at least make some general assumptions. My main conclusion is that pick 55 is as good/bad as pick 35.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Mr Magic]

There are a million things that could be factored in … but taking out Graham the average games played for 51-60 is 37.5….. 60 x players across 6 x drafts is a huge data set and large enough to at least make some general assumptions. My main conclusion is that pick 55 is as good/bad as pick 35.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

And I am stating your stats are misleading in terms of helping to win premierships because they are far too simplistic.

I am stating you are more likely to get a smaller type later, for example, and that smaller type will player earlier and have less injuries and play more games but does not necessarily help you win premierships as a general trend without going into other specifics so your analysis is ineffective when trying to draft for premierships

 

[juss]

Entertain my Trade Radio trade special here:

38 + our future 2nd for Collingwood's pick 27,

26 + 27 + 28 for Port Adelaide's 12 or St Kilda's 9

Hit the draft with 7, 9/12, 15, 38.

 

[Dr Tigris]

Actually it makes no sense unless you live with a security blanket.

The only sense was like Melbourne go to the draft because despite the stuff ups with Tompas, Scully and Trengrove v Martin etc... Jack Watts they still won a premiership through the draft


With more info, guess what? The better players will be higher and the future picks will not be able to reach them so its only a bail out for the nervous nellies that do not know what they are doing

If we can get a trade that is to our advantage then we should do it. So if we traded pick 15 for Carlton's first (Tiger_Of_Old you genius) then let's do it. If we can't then don't so it.

This year we have too many valuable picks, so we will trade some. Whatever is the best deal we do. That's all I'm saying

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

If we can get a trade that is to our advantage then we should do it. So if we traded pick 15 for Carlton's first (Tiger_Of_Old you genius) then let's do it. If we can't then don't so it.

This year we have too many valuable picks, so we will trade some. Whatever is the best deal we do. That's all I'm saying

Nothing surer than Carlton still Coming.

 

[fargothegreat]

There are a million things that could be factored in … but taking out Graham the average games played for 51-60 is 37.5….. 60 x players across 6 x drafts is a huge data set and large enough to at least make some general assumptions. My main conclusion is that pick 55 is as good/bad as pick 35.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

I think once it gets out to that end of the draft a lot of the time one club may be willing to take a player at 35 that another club wouldn't take until 55, if at all. We seem to be pretty good at picking diamonds in the rough with our later picks, especially in the rookie draft.

 

[Noidnadroj]

Not sure that data says anything about jackpots. Number of games doesn't tell you anything about their quality. Nathan Jones played 302 games, Maurice Rioli 118.

51-60 has 15 x players who’ve played 70+ games. and 8 who’ve played 90+. 31-40 has just 9 who’ve played 70+ and 4 at 90+.

I realise this isn’t taking into account B&F’s and AA’s etc…. but as a large data set it’s fairly compelling that 31-40 should not be valued much higher than 51-60. So if trading for a future 2nd, it really needs to come from a likely bottom-8 club if we plan to use it in the draft.


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Mr Magic]

If we can get a trade that is to our advantage then we should do it. So if we traded pick 15 for Carlton's first (Tiger_Of_Old you genius) then let's do it. If we can't then don't so it.

This year we have too many valuable picks, so we will trade some. Whatever is the best deal we do. That's all I'm saying

How do you know that's to our advantage? Are Carlton not coming?