BRAD LLOYD... is he any good
- Thread starter PurpleReign95
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Lots of blind defending and howls to shut the thread down in this thread. I don't get it. It's a valid question.
Lloyd has got a lot more wrong than right. How much of draft picks are pure luck??
Lloyd has got a lot more wrong than right. How much of draft picks are pure luck??
Sums it up perfectly. Nail on the head mightymouse75.
No there isn't. Blind defending would be where people don't present any reasons to defend Lloyd.
Its a stupid thread because the OP didn't make any effort.
The OP just copy pasted a trading, drafting history with no analysis whatsoever, except to say "No". Thats not exactly deep thinking.
You've done the same.Lloyd has got a lot more wrong than right and draft picks are luck anyway. Good picks are good luck? Bad picks are bad luck? Or, any successes are luck and any failures are because he is no good?
meesy
Cancelled
- Apr 14, 2012
- 636
- 906
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
The thing I don't get is the trading of future second rounders. We got Bennell for a downgrade and should have left it at that. To bring in a pick at the expense of pick 21-22ish for Balic looked bad then and effectively really stupid now. Does he just not rate the second round at all? We got Fyfe with a second rounder. There's a few blokes in this draft (Balta, Allen) I really like and would improve our diabolical forward line yet wont last till our third. It just frustrates me.
Meh, interesting to look at it on the face of it. Few successes, lots of failures, bunch of players with hype and potential that never lived up to it.
Probably more on the unfortunate than fortunate side of things but very few of those players were 'duds'. Our luck will turn folks.
Probably more on the unfortunate than fortunate side of things but very few of those players were 'duds'. Our luck will turn folks.
That error to trade back into the 2nd round, which ultimately got us Balic (should have been Marcus Adams but the Bulldogs were bold selecting a player who looked like leaving), has been perpetually costly. We are missing our 2nd, 3rd and 4th rounders next year.
Wally Walpamur
Norm Smith Medallist
- Sep 23, 2016
- 6,150
- 11,930
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
The proper way to compare our trading with other teams is to take out GCS and GWS because they had so many first round concessions, take out players that were academy and take out players that were drafted under the father/son rules, because we wouldn't have had a shot at them. The Bulldogs premiership winning list was full of father sons, the GWS is full of academy and first round picks, you could argue GCS are the biggest failure of the lot given the amount of concessions and picks they got. Melbourne also had so many shitty first round selections when they were a rabble, West Coast have busted on their first round picks with the exception of NN... It's a tough gig.
take a look at this paper
https://eis.uow.edu.au/content/groups/public/@web/@inf/@math/documents/doc/uow074440.pdf
Selection rank / Estimated Median Career Games
1 204
10 170
20 139
30 98
40 54
50 32
basically once you go above pick ~40 you are in spud territory on average. Generally there are around 75 players drafted every year. So half the players you draft on average will be spuds.
You would then need to assess this against freo's track record but also it would skewed by the clubs available resources etc obviously.
- Apr 26, 2011
- 10,428
- 12,331
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Wimbledon AFC
Adelaide are the kings. Freo average. Gws, carlton, g.c, melb and Brissy all failures with the amount of high draft picks they have had.
Arcassius
Team Chaplain
- Take out concession teams
- Take out father-sons or at least rate them pre-discount to normalise their value
- Take out priority picks
- Look at games played across the players drafted compared to peers taken in other teams
- Perhaps weight players based on their draft position taken and games played - compare players against those taken at the same point in the draft, showing how Apeness, Simpson or Pitt go against their peers for instance (-), or how Luke Ryan, Sean Darcy, Barlow do (+)
- Perhaps take into account where the teams finished to normalise draft positions
And then after all that we'll probably work out that we've done ok out of the draft. Shitty with our early picks and great with our later ones and the rookie draft, and not as good as teams who've been bottom dwellers for the last few seasons and have had a lot of high draft picks to use.
- May 3, 2007
- 36,534
- 21,175
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- Other Teams
- Man City, Valencia, Lazio, Panthers
If you want to know why the crows drafting from 2007-2011 was very good, you can thank Matt Rendell. The crows have got guys like Sloane, Dangerfield, Taylor Walker, Talia, Jenkins and Jacobs all under his watch.
Yep and the poor bastard copped it for speaking his views but was a very good recruiter.
I am happy to keep on trading out second and third round picks if it lands the likes of
Bennell
Wilson
Hill
Matera
Mccarthy
Hamling
The logic of an established player picked high in the draft with a few years of development put into them to then be traded out for a second or third round pick is ludicrous.
Lloyd is ahead of the curve with this strategy. I don't think I could be convinced that we could get the same return from the draft.
Bennell
Wilson
Hill
Matera
Mccarthy
Hamling
The logic of an established player picked high in the draft with a few years of development put into them to then be traded out for a second or third round pick is ludicrous.
Lloyd is ahead of the curve with this strategy. I don't think I could be convinced that we could get the same return from the draft.
Purpellian Anchor
Purple Admiralty
Hi PR 98 - suppose it is reasonable to have a little scrutiny of Brad's work but it is really a case of having to include statistics of each years success rate in the AFL draft across all players in that year. I think it is on average across all drafts something like 2 in 3 are successful to about 150 game average re picks 1-18. It slides fairly quickly after that to be only 1 in three playing a 100 games or more after pick 25 to 65. I think it is something like that but with variabilty within each year.
The point is, you have to be a genius and very lucky in recruiting to do much better that one in three. Each years draft also has marginally better or lower success rates which change a lot when say a few players from a grouping of picks play out a long career. 2 Players say out of picks 40-60 playing 200 plus games make the group look more successful that it really is. Sam Mitchell case in point & Edit: Dane Swan
Lloyd currently is doing very well, and even some picks that failed in the past did not mean the player was no good. Pitt, Ruffles, Morabito, Smith, Gumbleton, it was not that that they were not good selections but were struck down by serious injury/health and were never in the hunt to recover.
Hypothetically, in ten years a club could draft 80-100 players. Depending on where one is on the ladder, it becomes obvious that a reasonable squad of say 30 out of 40 players (10 developing etc) puts the successful percentage at about one in three (and would they all play for ten years?).
Cheers
The point is, you have to be a genius and very lucky in recruiting to do much better that one in three. Each years draft also has marginally better or lower success rates which change a lot when say a few players from a grouping of picks play out a long career. 2 Players say out of picks 40-60 playing 200 plus games make the group look more successful that it really is. Sam Mitchell case in point & Edit: Dane Swan
Lloyd currently is doing very well, and even some picks that failed in the past did not mean the player was no good. Pitt, Ruffles, Morabito, Smith, Gumbleton, it was not that that they were not good selections but were struck down by serious injury/health and were never in the hunt to recover.
Hypothetically, in ten years a club could draft 80-100 players. Depending on where one is on the ladder, it becomes obvious that a reasonable squad of say 30 out of 40 players (10 developing etc) puts the successful percentage at about one in three (and would they all play for ten years?).
Cheers
Last edited:
Ranger245
Debutant
- Aug 13, 2015
- 120
- 243
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Read that article and it says the median games played is determined by a Cox regression. As such I don't believe the figures. Old Dean Cox is a bit dopey and those fancy maths formulas look far too complicated for him.
I think it's fair to say most Freo fans appreciate the fact Lloyd's been very hit and miss. Like a fair few long-term AFL recruiters. He's not the best, nor is he the worst. Does really well with late draft picks, but tends to burn higher ones (big litmus test this year).
I think it's also fair to say we've come to that conclusion again and again and again every year we talk about it. Copying and pasting from wikipedia and then not even replying to your own thread is fairly indicative of this one's quality.
Yep surprised it's gone on for so long.
Don’t know if Lloyd has actually failed with high picks (I’d only really consider top ten picks as high picks tbh) but perhaps been a little too clear and/or taken too much risk with later first rounders in the hope of finding a gun that’s just as good as many of the guys in the top ten. If he’d gone safer we’d probably still be complaining most of the time. I’m talking the guys we were realistically going to draft not other teams Lachie Neales or gun payers who play positions we didn’t need at the time.
The only two top ten picks Lloyd has had are Morabito and Logue. Morabito had had almost no injuries pre draft and was as close to a sure thing as any player we’ve ever selected - S.Hill was far more of a risk a year earlier - so was Fyfe. The problems he had could not have been foreseen. Logue it’s still far too early to tell.
The only two top ten picks Lloyd has had are Morabito and Logue. Morabito had had almost no injuries pre draft and was as close to a sure thing as any player we’ve ever selected - S.Hill was far more of a risk a year earlier - so was Fyfe. The problems he had could not have been foreseen. Logue it’s still far too early to tell.
I think he has been proved pretty correct, unfortunately was thrown under the bus.
- Banned
- #47
2011 National draft
16: Tom Sheridan, 20: Hayden Crozier, 29: Alex Forster
32 Joel Hamling 33 Bradley Hill 34 Shane Kersten
I never got over that draft, Lloyd is s**t.
16: Tom Sheridan, 20: Hayden Crozier, 29: Alex Forster
32 Joel Hamling 33 Bradley Hill 34 Shane Kersten
I never got over that draft, Lloyd is s**t.
Lachie Neale for pick 58. Time to get over this draft.
- Banned
- #49
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
The Nat Fyfe Drafting wasn't Lloyd's doing, if wasn't for Phil Smarts temper tantrum on the way out we would have drafted a country Victorian kid.
Talking about broken clocks
