Draft Fallacies

[Eastern Rangers]

The ironic thing is that the 2006 draft was considered before the draft to be one of the strongest ever. The fact that even a draft predicted to be one of the best ever can still end up producing so many duds in the Top 20 makes your point even better.

I don't see many duds from the top 20. Thorp, Steller, O'Keefe, Hislop.

Was conisdered so good because of it's KPP strength and that proved to be true.

 

[Tazwegian]

I don't see many duds from the top 20. Thorp, Steller, O'Keefe, Hislop.

Was conisdered so good because of it's KPP strength and that proved to be true.

The KPP's, aside from Reid and Reiwoldt, in that draft haven't been massively exciting. Bit harsh on Gumbleton, he has been injured a lot, but I'd add Scott Gumbleton, David Armitage, and Andrejs Everitt to your list also. They rest are all pretty good to serviceable, but Selwood, Reid and Reiwoldt are the only real A graders from that draft and there were a few failures in the top 20.

The point is, some people get carried away as though a top 20 selection is almost guaranteed to be a very good player, but history says otherwise.

 

[sydney eagle]

That drafting players from the WAFL and SANFL that are 20-21 is wasting draft picks.

Who ever said that ? I would think that the opposite is more likely to be true.

 

[Portmanteau]

Draft fallacy: that because James Hird and Chris Grant were drafted at pick 9,000 you can get players of this quality at that stage of the draft now.

Times have changed folks, they don't conduct the draft at Pizza Hut all-you-can-eat any more.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

The KPP's, aside from Reid and Reiwoldt, in that draft haven't been massively exciting. Bit harsh on Gumbleton, he has been injured a lot, but I'd add Scott Gumbleton, David Armitage, and Andrejs Everitt to your list also. They rest are all pretty good to serviceable, but Selwood, Reid and Reiwoldt are the only real A graders from that draft and there were a few failures in the top 20.

The point is, some people get carried away as though a top 20 selection is almost guaranteed to be a very good player, but history says otherwise.

You're leaving James Frawley out of your discussion, but I agree with the rest of it.

 

[Tazwegian]

Times have changed folks, they don't conduct the draft at Pizza Hut all-you-can-eat any more.

LOL. I think it is less probable to happen, but it is always an outside chance.

 

[Tazwegian]

You're leaving James Frawley out of your discussion, but I agree with the rest of it.

Frawley is a very good player. Maybe a bit harsh of me to leave him out.

 

[swansfan51]

Draft fallacy: that because James Hird and Chris Grant were drafted at pick 9,000 you can get players of this quality at that stage of the draft now.

Times have changed folks, they don't conduct the draft at Pizza Hut all-you-can-eat any more.

How recently do you want to go? I'll start with a full 9 years after Hird:

Ryan O'Keefe - pick 56 in 1999 (Norm Smith, All Australian)
Dean Cox - rookie pick 28 in 2000 (best+fairest winner, 6x All Australian)
Dane Swan - pick 58 in 2001 (Brownlow, 4x All Australian)
Andrew Carrazzo - rookie pick 5 in 2001 (best+fairest winner)
Aaron Sandilands - rookie pick 33 in 2001 (3x All Australian, best+fairest winner)
Ben Rutten - rookie pick 40 in 2001 (All Australian)
Andrew Swallow - pick 43 in 2005 (3x best+fairest winner)
Matthew Priddis - rookie pick 31 in 2005 (runner-up in best+fairest 2 years running)
Kieren Jack - rookie pick 57 in 2005 (best+fairest winner)
Sam Jacobs - rookie pick 1 in 2006
Shane Mumford - rookie pick 57 in 2007
Tom Rockliff - PSD pick 5 in 2008 (best+fairest winner)
Michael Barlow - rookie pick 8 in 2009

It is too early to fully judge more recent players but it is easy to see many of them going on to win multiple best and fairest awards plus All Australian honours.

 

[Partridge]

How recently do you want to go? I'll start with a full 9 years after Hird:

Ryan O'Keefe - pick 56 in 1999 (Norm Smith, All Australian)
Dean Cox - rookie pick 28 in 2000 (best+fairest winner, 6x All Australian)
Dane Swan - pick 58 in 2001 (Brownlow, 4x All Australian)
Andrew Carrazzo - rookie pick 5 in 2001 (best+fairest winner)
Aaron Sandilands - rookie pick 33 in 2001 (3x All Australian, best+fairest winner)
Ben Rutten - rookie pick 40 in 2001 (All Australian)
Andrew Swallow - pick 43 in 2005 (3x best+fairest winner)
Matthew Priddis - rookie pick 31 in 2005 (runner-up in best+fairest 2 years running)
Kieren Jack - rookie pick 57 in 2005 (best+fairest winner)
Sam Jacobs - rookie pick 1 in 2006
Shane Mumford - rookie pick 57 in 2007
Tom Rockliff - PSD pick 5 in 2008 (best+fairest winner)
Michael Barlow - rookie pick 8 in 2009

It is too early to fully judge more recent players but it is easy to see many of them going on to win multiple best and fairest awards plus All Australian honours.

You've left out the best one of the lot......

Corey Enright - pick 47 in 1999 draft. 2-time Best and Fairest winner (both times in premiership years), 4 successive All-Australian selections, and a critical member of 3 premiership sides.

I've got no doubt sides like Melbourne are where they are because they think draft picks are all you need. It is a lottery for 17-year-olds. There is no guarantee that any of them will make it, and plenty of attributes an elite sportsman needs - dedication, desire, discipline - can't be measured on beep tests.

 

[Tazwegian]

Some players are late bloomers also, or they slide due to perceived attitude problems that turn out not to be problematic. I think we will see a few really nice rookies coming through in the next few years, due to the new tiered system where players who are athletically gifted come from other sports to learn the game.

The higher your pick, the more likely they are going to be good. But you can always have a chance to take some gems late, it's just not as probable.

 

[100action]

1. The undervaluation of draft picks

An argument frequently used by BigFooty'ers is to bring up the history of top 10 picks and justify a player is worth more based on the history of the picks such as Pick 6.

High drafts picks are undervalued for the fact they can deliver you an elite A grader like Buddy and Pendlebury. The pure gamble that is the chance to land an A grader is worth its weight in gold alone. A classic example would be a serviceable player in a gun side like Dawes being traded for pick 18, many illogically cried "look at the history of players picked at 18!" , personally a bird in the bush is better than a shit in the hand.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I agree regarding the drafting of experienced players. It depends what your club wants.
In some ways its like selling your lottery ticket for $100. You are probably better off, but at the same time you give up your chance to win a Million dollars.

 

[autocol]

An argument frequently used by BigFooty'ers is to bring up the history of top 10 picks and justify a player is worth more based on the history of the picks such as Pick 6.

No doubt you'll continue to purchase lottery tickets while magically avoiding getting hit by a bus, then.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

The KPP's, aside from Reid and Reiwoldt, in that draft haven't been massively exciting. Bit harsh on Gumbleton, he has been injured a lot, but I'd add Scott Gumbleton, David Armitage, and Andrejs Everitt to your list also. They rest are all pretty good to serviceable, but Selwood, Reid and Reiwoldt are the only real A graders from that draft and there were a few failures in the top 20.

The point is, some people get carried away as though a top 20 selection is almost guaranteed to be a very good player, but history says otherwise.

Armitage not "good to seviceable"??? Well maybe you should include Boak as well, since he really doesnt have much of an edge on Armitage.
( mind you Armitage took a long time to arrive , thanks Lyon ).

 

[Tazwegian]

Armitage not "good to seviceable"??? Well maybe you should include Boak as well, since he really doesnt have much of an edge on Armitage.
( mind you Armitage took a long time to arrive , thanks Lyon ).

You're right, I take Armitage back. But yes, he did take a while to arrive. He was good this year.

 

[Falchoon]

I was thinking about some of the mistakes, in my opinion, that people make when thinking about the draft selections. I thought I'd make a list and may add to it later.

1. The overvaluing of draft picks: You see this all the time during trade week. Often you will see a club pick up an experienced needs player in trade for a selection, and many people vehemently claim that the club was robbed or payed massive overs. In some cases, it's true or at least debatable. However, often the opposition to the trade comes from an overrating of draft picks. For example, the Wellingham trade. Westcoast took Wellingham for pick #18, and many claimed West Coast payed overs. The fact is Wellingham is an experienced and ready made almost 100 game premiership player, and there are definitely no guarantees that you will get anyone better at pick 18.

For instance, the 2006 top twenty contained these players, most of which aren't as good as Wellingham:

Without a salary cap, a player like Wellingham would be higher valued, but you're not necessarily comparing apples with apples.

Wellingham's $450k salary has to factored in. There's an element of risk therein, particularly when extrapolated over 4 years.

At $250k he's possibly well worth pick 10ish, @ $450k you're already paying overs before you offer a draft pick, @$650k you wouldn't offer a pick.

Your comparisons are on $80k a year for 2 years and there's a ~25-50% chance that they'll at least equal if not be better Wellingham, who some would perceive as benefiting from being the 5th or 6th option in a dynamite midfield, not a luxury he will be afforded elsewhere.

 

[Mofra]

You've left out the best one of the lot......

Corey Enright - pick 47 in 1999 draft. 2-time Best and Fairest winner (both times in premiership years), 4 successive All-Australian selections, and a critical member of 3 premiership sides.

Matthew Boyd was drafted as a rookie from Frankston seconds, and there's no way we're handing back Luke Dahlhaus or Dale Morris (both rookies) or Daniel Cross (pick 56)

 

[NUFC Tiger]

every year: Player x is an incredible prospect who could be the standout of the draft. Has all the attributes to show he can make it and is the most exciting prospect in recent years.

 

[Footy Smarts]

The KPP's, aside from Reid and Reiwoldt, in that draft haven't been massively exciting. Bit harsh on Gumbleton, he has been injured a lot, but I'd add Scott Gumbleton, David Armitage, and Andrejs Everitt to your list also. They rest are all pretty good to serviceable, but Selwood, Reid and Reiwoldt are the only real A graders from that draft and there were a few failures in the top 20.

The point is, some people get carried away as though a top 20 selection is almost guaranteed to be a very good player, but history says otherwise.

Surely not!

Considering they've only had 6 seasons and very few key position players do much in their first 3 seasons it's an exceptional draft (and rookie) period for talls:

Reid
Reiwoldt
Hawkins
Frawley
Tippett
Schofield
Gumbleton
Hansen
Dawes
N Brown
MacKenzie
Jamison
T Lonergan

They're all solid AFL standard players (Gumbleton would be if not for injury) and there's a few that are out and out guns. Throw in Luenberger, Goldstein and Jacobs as ruckmen. If that's not a gun draft for talls then I don't know what is.

 

[Footy Smarts]

The biggest draft fallacy is to draft in pace early. Generally pace is only talked up when the rest of that player's game isn't great. I always pity the team who picks up the player in the top 20 known for their "blistering pace". Think Tambling, Tenace, etc. Lewis Jetta goes alright though...

 

[saintgary]

That if you are drafting a player over 18 they are no longer a kid and have no scope for improvement.

It was funny people criticizing St Kilda for 'wasting' high picks on unproven 21 year olds Hickey and Lee, like the high picks were some sort of guarantee to draft a superstar. We may have overpaid for them, but the reasoning we overpaid, because both were unproven is just ridiculous.​

​

Clubs for some reason seem scared to pick up a 19-22 year old from the state leagues, because they are worried they have no more scope for improvement. For example, I won't understand if a player like Kyle Hartigan doesn't get picked up. He is playing extremely well in a state league and he will still have plenty of improvement once he joins a professional club, not to mention he still is very young. Just because he isn't the draft age of 18, shouldn't mean he is done. There are plenty more examples...​

​

Also people posting on here that they don't want to pick up Ben Jacobs, but rather a 'kid' instead... Well, Ben Jacobs is still a kid and still developing! Just because he isn't 18, doesn't mean he is a finished product.​

​

Fortunately this thought process is slowly changing.​

 

[LB2Snake]

You've left out the best one of the lot......

Corey Enright - pick 47 in 1999 draft. 2-time Best and Fairest winner (both times in premiership years), 4 successive All-Australian selections, and a critical member of 3 premiership sides.

I've got no doubt sides like Melbourne are where they are because they think draft picks are all you need. It is a lottery for 17-year-olds. There is no guarantee that any of them will make it, and plenty of attributes an elite sportsman needs - dedication, desire, discipline - can't be measured on beep tests.

Adam goodes wasn't a high draft pick either was he?

 

[swansfan51]

Adam goodes wasn't a high draft pick either was he?

That's right - Pick 43, but my post was replying to someone complaining that you can't get these players anymore - so I tried to choose more recent ones.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

The players I follow closely tend to be StKilda players, and so far the signs are pretty good for rookies Fergason (NSW scholarship ) , Dunnel, and Curran as well as late draftee Arryn Sippos.

 

[Richo83]

I definitely think the top talent are going earlier than every before, and a top ten draft pick is worth more than ever before. But I also think a rookie pick is worth more than ever before. Why? Because I think kids and their coaches are better trained for the rigours of modern footy, there's better structures for football development meaning that not only will there be better players as sporting development becomes more scientific and professional, but the volume will be greater, meaning there will be some gems that fall to the psd and rookie draft. I just think overall each pick or either of the three drafts becomes more valuable each year.