Analysis Fix our drafting now. Picks 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 since 2013.

[SaintsSeptember]

As evidenced by all of the stars that we've drafted. Some people are very easily pleased. Worpol is the same age as Hunter Clark. He's got further scope still. Crouch has a few years left. Smith is close to a star player already, Hunter again might be as good but then so might Paton.

The days of sides dominating



That was my point, if we failed to develop talent surely once they got into other systems they would have a huge uptick in performance.

Worpel slid because, similar to Constable he was regarded as limited in a similar way to how Dunstan was limited.
Mind you , i thought both those guys would have been good for us.
We took Clavarino just ahead of Constable and Paton just after Worpal.

This tells the pre-draft impressions of the guys , and if we were dumb for picking Clavarino, most of the footy junior footy observers were equally dumb.

AFL draft 2017: Profiles of EVERY player selected on draft night

Tomorrow’s stars: Every AFL draftee profiled in depth

www.foxsports.com.au

To paraphrase the purple idiot.

IF : We still had Dunstan.
THEN : There would be not much point having Constable or Worpel.

IF : Clavarino had lived up to his potential.
THEN : We would have our back line sorted for a while.

Remember that back in that draft .....
We expected that Jack Steven would still be playing for 5 or 6 years. We got 1. ( He's 30 now ).
We had traded in Koby Stevens and thought he should still be playing for 5 or 6 years. We got 2 games.

I'm not dissatisfied with our draft selections that year. From memory a lot of us were hoping Cerra would slide, not a chance in hell.
Pretty sure you were on the Bonar wagon Gringo, though that might have just been for the puns.

We can bitch about management, but its really just that s**t keeps happening to StKilda, and its not achieving anything more than punching holes in the coach box wall.

As for Paddy, he's in the process of proving that he can actually play footy ( Swan's aren't playing him for fun ). He was retired and de-listed from StKilda due to injury. I'm not sure that's the best thing for his health, but i can understand him not wanting to go down in history as the spud that he's made out to be.

 

[pebblesofsand]

Early days but that looks like a pretty good haul so far

Rowbottom at 25 and McIerny at 44 look like steals

Yeah - pretty good haul - especially if you forget about Stephens, Gould and Taylor.

Top 10 - a bit of a lottery as to whether you get AA players or just VGP's (very good players)

10 - 20 - a bit of a lottery as to whether you get VGP's or GOP's

21+ A bit of a lottery

AFL Draft Picks Broken Down by Pick Number - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

 

[bird_man]

Yeah - pretty good haul - especially if you forget about Stephens, Gould and Taylor.

Top 10 - a bit of a lottery as to whether you get AA players or just VGP's (very good players)

10 - 20 - a bit of a lottery as to whether you get VGP's or GOP's

21+ A bit of a lottery

AFL Draft Picks Broken Down by Pick Number - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

Those guys have been in the system 2 years and Gould is a key defender so it's really no surprise that he hasnt played yet. Stevens needs to put on some weight but looked good against the Giants.

Taylor looking like the only bust so far

If 21+ is a bit of a lottery he managed to win the lotto twice in a year by the looks of it.

 

[bergholt]

We expected that Jack Steven would still be playing for 5 or 6 years. We got 1. ( He's 30 now ).

Nah he turns 32 in a few days

 

[bergholt]

Yeah - pretty good haul - especially if you forget about Stephens, Gould and Taylor.

Top 10 - a bit of a lottery as to whether you get AA players or just VGP's (very good players)

10 - 20 - a bit of a lottery as to whether you get VGP's or GOP's

21+ A bit of a lottery

AFL Draft Picks Broken Down by Pick Number - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

More detail:

AFL Draft Pick Value Comparison - All Time - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

Picks 1 to 2: 1 in 2 picks is an AA
Picks 3 to 5: 1 in 3+ picks is an AA
Picks 6 to 10: 1 in 5+ picks is an AA
Picks 11 to 20: 1 in 5+ picks is an AA
Picks 21 to 50: 1 in 10+ picks is an AA
Picks over 50: 1 in 40+ picks is an AA
Rookie picks: 1 in 40+ picks is an AA

From that you'd basically say picks under 5 are great, then picks under 20 are good, then picks under 50 are ok, the rest are an absolute lottery.

Picks we've used the last 12 years (ignoring recycled):

Picks 1 to 5 - 3: King, McCartin, Billings
Picks 6 to 20 - 6: Wanganeen-Milera, Clark, Coffield, Gresham, Dunstan, Acres
Picks 21 to 50 - 25: Owens, Windhager, Allison, Highmore, Bytel, Parker, Clavarino, Paton, Long, Battle, White, Rice, Goddard, McKenzie, Lonie, Wright, White, Murdoch, Saunders, Ross, Markworth, Newnes, Webster, Cripps, Crocker
The rest - 38: Adams, Kyle, Peris, Hayes, Heath, Sharman, Byrnes, Connolly, Bell, Hind, Young, Wilkie, Mayo, Alabakis, Langlands, Phillips, Marshall, Connellan, Joyce, O'Kearney, Coughlan, Sinclair, Saad, Payne, Templeton, Weller, Holmes, Pierce, Lever, Dunell, Shenton, Staley, Minchington, Ledger, Siposs, Curren, Andreoli, Ferguson


Expected value:

• 3 players inside 5 should equal 1 AA
• 6 players inside 20 should equal 1.2 AAs
• 25 players inside 50 should equal 2.5 AAs
• 38 players over 50 should equal 1 AA

So by the numbers we should have got about 5 - 6 AAs from those picks. If we don't then the probability suggests we picked badly.


But also what this shows me is that we haven't had our picks in good areas. Over 12 years of being mostly bad, we've only taken 9 players inside 20 in the draft. Surely that's not enough to properly rebuild.

 

[lewdogs]

Nah he turns 32 in a few days

Still, makes you wonder what could have been if we'd had him firing the last few seasons.

Bloody bad luck. He was a gem was Jack.

 

[gringo2011]

Do you mean someone like Simon Dalrymple - acknowledged as one of the best - after all he was the one who selected Bont, McCrae and Stringer when he was at the Doggies.

Clearly must be a gun at identifying talent but after joining Sydney in 2018 he has selected

2018 Nick Blakey (Pick 10 - Academy) James Rowbottom Pick 25, Justin McInerny (44) and Zac Foot (51).

2019 - Dylan Stephens (Pick 4 - 15 games in his 3 seasons) Will Gould (Pick 26 - yet to play a game) Elijah Taylor (delisted)

Hardly spectacular outcomes. Just confirms that drafting is a bit of a lottery

Sydney has one of the best youth groups in footy. They don't tend to rush players in. Blakey will be a star, Rowbottom was looking like a potential star early but needs to go up a gear and I love McInerney. Taylor was an off field issue not talent.

Sydney played a huge amount of youth last year and missed a lot of games to guys like Buddy yet still finished higher than us. I think you'll see Sydney's youth end up with about 15 absolute B+ to stars in the next few years as those kids mature. They also get ridiculous access to the academy with players like Braden Campbell and Heeney for way unders.

I'd swap their list with ours in a heartbeat. A lot hinges on Logan McDonald making it though.

 

[gringo2011]

Worpel slid because, similar to Constable he was regarded as limited in a similar way to how Dunstan was limited.
Mind you , i thought both those guys would have been good for us.
We took Clavarino just ahead of Constable and Paton just after Worpal.

This tells the pre-draft impressions of the guys , and if we were dumb for picking Clavarino, most of the footy junior footy observers were equally dumb.

AFL draft 2017: Profiles of EVERY player selected on draft night

Tomorrow’s stars: Every AFL draftee profiled in depth

www.foxsports.com.au

To paraphrase the purple idiot.

IF : We still had Dunstan.
THEN : There would be not much point having Constable or Worpel.

IF : Clavarino had lived up to his potential.
THEN : We would have our back line sorted for a while.

Remember that back in that draft .....
We expected that Jack Steven would still be playing for 5 or 6 years. We got 1. ( He's 30 now ).
We had traded in Koby Stevens and thought he should still be playing for 5 or 6 years. We got 2 games.

I'm not dissatisfied with our draft selections that year. From memory a lot of us were hoping Cerra would slide, not a chance in hell.
Pretty sure you were on the Bonar wagon Gringo, though that might have just been for the puns.

We can bitch about management, but its really just that sh*t keeps happening to StKilda, and its not achieving anything more than punching holes in the coach box wall.

As for Paddy, he's in the process of proving that he can actually play footy ( Swan's aren't playing him for fun ). He was retired and de-listed from StKilda due to injury. I'm not sure that's the best thing for his health, but i can understand him not wanting to go down in history as the spud that he's made out to be.

If we'd won the Powerball we'd be rich logic.

I was just half joking about Bonar, he was a high risk type with not much exposure. He looked like bargain bin shopping and hasn't really worked out. I didn't want to trade out of the previous draft because I said it was stupid to delay a year when we were in a hurry to rebuild. I got yelled down like you'd be crazy not to get a pile of picks that we'd waste on s**t players anyway. I've always been into using your high picks including second rounders.

Trying to fast track is usually the slow way, just ask Carlton and Essendon. Steele is pretty much the only thing we have to show for trading way second rounders and players to get back into them.

 

[MrFoster]

It's one of those things, it's the one area that St Kilda FC has had 20 years of issues with. Identifying talent in the draft. Drafting zero AA quality players since Brendan Goddard isn't a bit of bad luck and something we should just hope turns around when the moon is in a Capricorn rising or some sh*t. Just sack half the pointless staff members and put everything into a proven high level recruiting manager and get them to bring IP and train a bunch of younger ambitious recruiting kids straight out of uni. Set us up, don't keep doing the same thing that hasn't worked for 20

It’s all 3 things.

1. Coaching - should Richo recognise that our midfield is crap and short in numbers, he should have given the recruitment orders to go after pure mids at all costs.

2. Recruiters - we went for Billings/Acres/Dunstan/Wright/Cripps/Clark/Coffield/Gresham/Mckenzie, what do they have in common? almost all are first round picks, and apart from Dunstan, none of the others were pure mids in the juniors, basically we picked up 1 mid and 8 flankers where we know pure mids should be the priority. No wonder we don’t have a miller, or a worple/constable in the ranks. The recruitment team is in the mantra of this flanker has a higher ceiling and may become a mid in the future, so let’s gamble and hope it turns out.

3. Development - We had a diabolical setup at Sandringham before, where the youngsters development can not be managed by our own coaches. Or can’t play the same position/system to progress. Good teams have strong VFL teams as well.

 

[pebblesofsand]

More detail:

AFL Draft Pick Value Comparison - All Time - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

Picks 1 to 2: 1 in 2 picks is an AA
Picks 3 to 5: 1 in 3+ picks is an AA
Picks 6 to 10: 1 in 5+ picks is an AA
Picks 11 to 20: 1 in 5+ picks is an AA
Picks 21 to 50: 1 in 10+ picks is an AA
Picks over 50: 1 in 40+ picks is an AA
Rookie picks: 1 in 40+ picks is an AA

From that you'd basically say picks under 5 are great, then picks under 20 are good, then picks under 50 are ok, the rest are an absolute lottery.

Picks we've used the last 12 years (ignoring recycled):

Picks 1 to 5 - 3: King, McCartin, Billings
Picks 6 to 20 - 6: Wanganeen-Milera, Clark, Coffield, Gresham, Dunstan, Acres
Picks 21 to 50 - 25: Owens, Windhager, Allison, Highmore, Bytel, Parker, Clavarino, Paton, Long, Battle, White, Rice, Goddard, McKenzie, Lonie, Wright, White, Murdoch, Saunders, Ross, Markworth, Newnes, Webster, Cripps, Crocker
The rest - 38: Adams, Kyle, Peris, Hayes, Heath, Sharman, Byrnes, Connolly, Bell, Hind, Young, Wilkie, Mayo, Alabakis, Langlands, Phillips, Marshall, Connellan, Joyce, O'Kearney, Coughlan, Sinclair, Saad, Payne, Templeton, Weller, Holmes, Pierce, Lever, Dunell, Shenton, Staley, Minchington, Ledger, Siposs, Curren, Andreoli, Ferguson


Expected value:

• 3 players inside 5 should equal 1 AA
• 6 players inside 20 should equal 1.2 AAs
• 25 players inside 50 should equal 2.5 AAs
• 38 players over 50 should equal 1 AA

So by the numbers we should have got about 5 - 6 AAs from those picks. If we don't then the probability suggests we picked badly.


But also what this shows me is that we haven't had our picks in good areas. Over 12 years of being mostly bad, we've only taken 9 players inside 20 in the draft. Surely that's not enough to properly rebuild.

Good info but a slight maths issue.

You are compressing the stats that Draft Guru derive from 35+ draft years and applying it to only 12 years of our drafting so the projections are only based on 33% of the data.

Skews the outcomes significantly. Max King and Gresh make it as AA's over the next few years and its all probably back on track

 

[bergholt]

Good info but a slight maths issue.

You are compressing the stats that Draft Guru derive from 35+ draft years and applying it to only 12 years of our drafting so the projections are only based on 33% of the data.

Skews the outcomes significantly. Max King and Gresh make it as AA's over the next few years and its all probably back on track

Oh yeah totally, their careers are still in progress so anything could happen from here. But there are plenty in that list we can rule out being AAs.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

If we'd won the Powerball we'd be rich logic.

I was just half joking about Bonar, he was a high risk type with not much exposure. He looked like bargain bin shopping and hasn't really worked out. I didn't want to trade out of the previous draft because I said it was stupid to delay a year when we were in a hurry to rebuild. I got yelled down like you'd be crazy not to get a pile of picks that we'd waste on s**t players anyway. I've always been into using your high picks including second rounders.

Trying to fast track is usually the slow way, just ask Carlton and Essendon. Steele is pretty much the only thing we have to show for trading way second rounders and players to get back into them.

You're doing the same though.

Ohhhh if we'd bought a ticket in 2016 we could have won the Powerball.

You do have a point though, it was basically swap pick for future pick with a 2nd rounder thrown in to make it worth it.
I've got to say that our choice of Ben Long with the pick we got put a dampener on the whole deal. If we'd taken any of the four players that went after him i'd be really happy with the deal. ( Bulldogs guy goes back to the club after meeting Ameet over beer. " I told him we were going to draft Ben Long ......muffled laughter " They must have s**t that they were forced to get Lipinski )

So yeah instead of Clark and Long we could have had :
Florent : Looking good 96 games in.
Simpkin : A better option than Bytel, and probably Dunstan.
Venables : could have been a better result for everyone.

 

[bird_man]

If we'd won the Powerball we'd be rich logic.

I was just half joking about Bonar, he was a high risk type with not much exposure. He looked like bargain bin shopping and hasn't really worked out. I didn't want to trade out of the previous draft because I said it was stupid to delay a year when we were in a hurry to rebuild. I got yelled down like you'd be crazy not to get a pile of picks that we'd waste on s**t players anyway. I've always been into using your high picks including second rounders.

Trying to fast track is usually the slow way, just ask Carlton and Essendon. Steele is pretty much the only thing we have to show for trading way second rounders and players to get back into them.

We've actually used a heap of second round picks since we started the rebuild.

We've probably done better with the ones we've used to trade than we have with the ones we used at the draft

 

[Winmar2Lockett]

As evidenced by all of the stars that we've drafted. Some people are very easily pleased. Worpol is the same age as Hunter Clark. He's got further scope still. Crouch has a few years left. Smith is close to a star player already, Hunter again might be as good but then so might Paton.

The days of sides dominating



That was my point, if we failed to develop talent surely once they got into other systems they would have a huge uptick in performance.

They're all stars when they're drafted...stars of U18 footy!

They've all generally dominated junior footy so we expect that will naturally happen in the pointy end of the sport. We all get seduced by the comparisons then lose our minds when they don't play out that way.

I'll say it yet again, there has been very few draft selections made by the various StK draft managers that have been anything but what was expected/kids in that draft pick range.

It's been horrible development mixed with some horrendous bad luck with career threatening injuries that have prolonged our never ending rebuild. Plus we're still feeling the effects of what was horrible drafting & list decisions made a decade ago.

Easily pleased? How do you come to that comment? I'm just vehemently disagreeing with why we're still poo.

 

[bergholt]

I'll say it yet again, there has been very few draft selections made by the various StK draft managers that have been anything but what was expected/kids in that draft pick range.

Except for Allison, Parker, Hind, Young, Long, Lonie, Markworth etc I agree with you.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Except for Allison, Parker, Hind, Young, Long, Lonie, Markworth etc I agree with you.

Not sure what Allison was , but i don't know why we didn't take Berry or Poulter. Have we decided the outcome of his AFL career?

I thought that Parker and Hind were pretty much everything you could expect from that sort of mature draft pick taken late.
Both still on lists. But i'm confused , If we didn't want that sort of player why did we take them?
Parker was pick 47 and has played 25 games and still on a list. Only around 50% of AFL players taken at picks 40-50 ever reach 25.
Hind was pick 57 and has played 44 games. Something only 1/3 of players taken at his pick achieve, and still going strong.

Young was pick 67. Half the players taken after pick 60 never debut.

Jack Lonie was taken pick 41. Less than 20% of players taken with that pick reach 87 games . ( Wonder if he was laughing at the antics of Kent and co last week ).

So i agree , Markworth didn't work out.

Parker and Hind and Lonie exceeded expectations.

Young was pretty much what was expected.

Round 20 – the “survival function” of AFL draftees, and Port’s makeshift ruck

Today we’re going show a simple “survival function” analysis, inspired by a query from Soccermetrics on Twitter who ran a similar analysis of MLS draft pick career tenures. Surviv…

hurlingpeoplenow.wordpress.com

 

[bird_man]

Not sure what Allison was , but i don't know why we didn't take Berry or Poulter. Have we decided the outcome of his AFL career?

I thought that Parker and Hind were pretty much everything you could expect from that sort of mature draft pick taken late.
Both still on lists. But i'm confused , If we didn't want that sort of player why did we take them?
Parker was pick 47 and has played 25 games and still on a list. Only around 50% of AFL players taken at picks 40-50 ever reach 25.
Hind was pick 57 and has played 44 games. Something only 1/3 of players taken at his pick achieve, and still going strong.

Young was pick 67. Half the players taken after pick 60 never debut.

Jack Lonie was taken pick 41. Less than 20% of players taken with that pick reach 87 games . ( Wonder if he was laughing at the antics of Kent and co last week ).

So i agree , Markworth didn't work out.

Parker and Hind and Lonie exceeded expectations.

Young was pretty much what was expected.

Round 20 – the “survival function” of AFL draftees, and Port’s makeshift ruck

Today we’re going show a simple “survival function” analysis, inspired by a query from Soccermetrics on Twitter who ran a similar analysis of MLS draft pick career tenures. Surviv…

hurlingpeoplenow.wordpress.com

Not sure he was suggesting they were all failures.

The point was that not every pick was expected to go the way it did

Petracca was clearly the best player in the draft for example

I doubt too many expected us to take Ben Long when we did and most were expecting Bolton

Allison was a bit of a shock

Anyway, I don't think good drafting is just necessarily picking the kids where they are expected to go, otherwise we'd all be able to do it and just take Cal Twomeys phantom draft.

The best recruiters seem to reach for the right players

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Not sure he was suggesting they were all failures.

The point was that not every pick was expected to go the way it did

Petracca was clearly the best player in the draft for example

I doubt too many expected us to take Ben Long when we did and most were expecting Bolton

Allison was a bit of a shock

Anyway, I don't think good drafting is just necessarily picking the kids where they are expected to go, otherwise we'd all be able to do it and just take Cal Twomeys phantom draft.

The best recruiters seem to reach for the right players

First round is usually pretty much a consensus.
If we didn't take Paddy he'd have been top 5. We just happened to be desperate for a forward.

I think second round sorts the real recruiters from the pretenders.
Apart from trading out of second round a lot, we don't have a good track record there.

When i have a bit of time i'll look at that article i posted and compare the Saints drafting to the AFL averages they look at.

 

[bird_man]

First round is usually pretty much a consensus.
If we didn't take Paddy he'd have been top 5. We just happened to be desperate for a forward.

I think second round sorts the real recruiters from the pretenders.
Apart from trading out of second round a lot, we don't have a good track record there.

When i have a bit of time i'll look at that article i posted and compare the Saints drafting to the AFL averages they look at.

Yeah I think we just got sucked in to taking a key forward when there was a player there that most were saying was a generational type.

It was nearly 10 years ago now though so no point banging on about it.

I think we've done better with our rookie picks than the 2nd rounders weve taken to the draft.

Done very well with a few trades we've used our 2nd rounders on though, which is why I don't mind trading them out for the right player. You can often find a bargain youngster with a couple of years of footy into them.

 

[gringo2011]

You're doing the same though.

Ohhhh if we'd bought a ticket in 2016 we could have won the Powerball.

You do have a point though, it was basically swap pick for future pick with a 2nd rounder thrown in to make it worth it.
I've got to say that our choice of Ben Long with the pick we got put a dampener on the whole deal. If we'd taken any of the four players that went after him i'd be really happy with the deal. ( Bulldogs guy goes back to the club after meeting Ameet over beer. " I told him we were going to draft Ben Long ......muffled laughter " They must have s**t that they were forced to get Lipinski )

So yeah instead of Clark and Long we could have had :
Florent : Looking good 96 games in.
Simpkin : A better option than Bytel, and probably Dunstan.
Venables : could have been a better result for everyone.

We would have won the premiership last year if we hadn't lost too many games.

They're all stars when they're drafted...stars of U18 footy!

They've all generally dominated junior footy so we expect that will naturally happen in the pointy end of the sport. We all get seduced by the comparisons then lose our minds when they don't play out that way.

I'll say it yet again, there has been very few draft selections made by the various StK draft managers that have been anything but what was expected/kids in that draft pick range.

It's been horrible development mixed with some horrendous bad luck with career threatening injuries that have prolonged our never ending rebuild. Plus we're still feeling the effects of what was horrible drafting & list decisions made a decade ago.

Easily pleased? How do you come to that comment? I'm just vehemently disagreeing with why we're still poo.

You're easily pleased because you say it's pretty much a non issue and comes down to a bit of bad luck.

 

[gringo2011]

First round is usually pretty much a consensus.
If we didn't take Paddy he'd have been top 5. We just happened to be desperate for a forward.

I think second round sorts the real recruiters from the pretenders.
Apart from trading out of second round a lot, we don't have a good track record there.

When i have a bit of time i'll look at that article i posted and compare the Saints drafting to the AFL averages they look at.

Also that recruiters let the media know what sort of range they think kids will go in.

 

[gringo2011]

Yeah I think we just got sucked in to taking a key forward when there was a player there that most were saying was a generational type.

It was nearly 10 years ago now though so no point banging on about it.

I think we've done better with our rookie picks than the 2nd rounders weve taken to the draft.

Done very well with a few trades we've used our 2nd rounders on though, which is why I don't mind trading them out for the right player. You can often find a bargain youngster with a couple of years of footy into them.

Freeman was a s**t choice, there was this real arrogance that we had some kind of super special medicos that could turn broken down players into resilient types....only with no actual evidence.

 

[George]

Freeman was a s**t choice, there was this real arrogance that we had some kind of super special medicos that could turn broken down players into resilient types....only with no actual evidence.

No, that wasn't why they were highly regarded. They were highly regarded because they kept players on the park all year. We had the least amount of injuries in the league over a span of about half a decade and the selection of Freeman was during that time.

 

[bird_man]

Freeman was a s**t choice, there was this real arrogance that we had some kind of super special medicos that could turn broken down players into resilient types....only with no actual evidence.

He was a risk no doubt. I doubt anyone would have predicted he would end that poorly though. Pies were definitely keen to keep him.

You win some and lose some with second round picks so I have no issue with it.

Can't just get hung up on the ones that didn't work out and forget about the ones that did.

 

[gringo2011]

He was a risk no doubt. I doubt anyone would have predicted he would end that poorly though. Pies were definitely keen to keep him.

You win some and lose some with second round picks so I have no issue with it.

Can't just get hung up on the ones that didn't work out and forget about the ones that did.

I was adamant that he was ****ed. There were rumours that he was never going to get back his pace.