Resource Grommot's Links
- Thread starter GrommoT
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
![[static.tvtropes.org] walace_and_grommit.png](https://www.bigfootycontent.com/attachments/442/442151-34986d7cce62c203bfd198a676448c5f.jpg?hash=NJhtfM5iwg "[static.tvtropes.org] walace_and_grommit.png")
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
LINKS INDEX
Crows Big Footy
* Crows' game style
Adelaide Crows
* List Management
-- Tom Doedee [post Brisbane 20180721 game]
-- Rory Sloane [post Brisbane 20180721 game]
-- Don Pyke [post Brisbane 20180721 game]
* Crows and drafting
AFL - Draft / Trade
* Lore's Resources, Rules and Regulations: A Guide to the Draft, Trading and Free Agency in the AFL
.... everything you could possibly need or want to know
* Finalised AFL Premiership Ladders
* Draft Misc Items
.... Picks for matching bids 2020
.... Pick Trading Back between 2 Clubs
.... Rookie Elevation - 2021 Once Off Rule Tweak
.... Previously Delisted Players Become Free Agents
* Draft pick blowout myth
* League adds safety net to draft future picks - matching bids
* Bid matching
.... points deficit limit [Emma Quayle, The Age]
.... a club can trade their next draft pick to another club to match a bid [Matt Balmer, foxsports]
.... a club can use its 5mins to trade picks, move down order, then match bid with later picks [afl.com.au]
.... How can Geelong not have 2015, 2016 & 2017 1st round picks
.... Clubs notorious for avoiding r1 draft picks
.... How did Geelong build their 2007/2009/2011 Premiership lists?
.... What about Hawthorn and their 2013/2014/2015 Premiership lists?
.... Premierships ... luck of the bounce
.... On-field support of youth
.... Knightmare on GWS, GC & Carlton
* Pick #1 history
.... WCE 1992
AFL - Misc
.... AFL confirms 2022 list sizes, tweaks rule for rookies [20210804]
* Football dept spending:
* Gil McLachlan
* Midfielders: inside vs outside
.... my post 6379
.... AFL Midfielders: A Guide to Positions, ...
.... AFL POSITIONS EXPLAINED - GUIDE BY RIVALRY
Big Footy
.... Talent Identification
.... Player Development
.... Veteran Leadership
.... Midfielder Types
.... Scorpus' Statistical Analysis
Pooer
* Swampland happenings
.... 2009 Internal Disunity & Captaincy
.... Wazza 1 vote
* Olive ball
Crows Big Footy
[ Wayne Milera - Magic Moments Compilation ]
2020 Promising FS/NGA/A Candidates
2019 DRAFT
Hamish Ogilvie at the Crows
2018 DRAFT
- Lore's Nominal 2018 Draft Picks
- Whatever happened to ...
- Lukosius All In POLL
- Top draft hope Izak Rankine reveals why he'd love to play alongside Eddie Betts at the Crows
- Luke Edwards 2020 Draft Plan - Crows Need More Edwardses
- Kane Viska (son of Mark) is not a Father-Son candidate for Crows
- Killer instinct?
* Crows' game style
- Crows Father-Son candidates
- arrowman's AFL Resources: Laws of the Game, Draft, Father-Son, Free Agency etc etc etc
- 20 metre sprint times, Vertical Jump, etc.
* Some Crows Defining Events- MacGregor v Pavlich
- Pavlich - the one that got away
- The Sando Years
- Davis, Bock and the start up teams
- Gibbs-Borlase Roach Irony
* The Chapman Legacy- The Tipp
- The Mind Camp
- Crows' 2018 Season (from He!!)
- The Kangatech Kock Up
- Season 2019 (of farewells)
- Campo Sacking
- Burton Sacking
- In a nutshell...
- Crows-Carlton 2019 Pick Swap
- AFC Trades/Draft 2015-2018
- Member Recollections of Past Trades (& failed trades) - Pavlich, Carey
Adelaide Crows
* List Management
- Justin Reid
- Media Reports of AFC Player Contract Amounts
- AFC Player Contracts - Updates Please
- Secondhand News About The Crows ***
- Interview transcripts [jenny61_99]
- courageous_tom - TPP management
-- Tom Doedee [post Brisbane 20180721 game]
-- Rory Sloane [post Brisbane 20180721 game]
-- Don Pyke [post Brisbane 20180721 game]
* Crows and drafting
- Selecting the best available talent
- What does it take to draft and successfully developing Elite footballers?
- Crows & SANFL
- SANFL finals (assuming same rules as Poot)
- Football Park land status [lease ends 2048] [Geoffa32 post]
- Victorian Media Bias
AFL - Draft / Trade
* Lore's Resources, Rules and Regulations: A Guide to the Draft, Trading and Free Agency in the AFL
.... everything you could possibly need or want to know
* Finalised AFL Premiership Ladders
* Draft Misc Items
.... Picks for matching bids 2020
.... Pick Trading Back between 2 Clubs
.... Rookie Elevation - 2021 Once Off Rule Tweak
.... Previously Delisted Players Become Free Agents
* Draft pick blowout myth
* League adds safety net to draft future picks - matching bids
* Bid matching
.... points deficit limit [Emma Quayle, The Age]
.... a club can trade their next draft pick to another club to match a bid [Matt Balmer, foxsports]
.... a club can use its 5mins to trade picks, move down order, then match bid with later picks [afl.com.au]
- Draft Tampering
- Pick parking loophole closed
- AFL free agency compensation: The trade period’s most confusing and controversial rule [20201028]
- AFL's secret formula for free agency compensation [20180221]
- Trading first-round picks: Misunderstood rule explained
- End-of-first-round compensation selection does not count in a club's rolling four-year tally.
- Future trading:
.... How can Geelong not have 2015, 2016 & 2017 1st round picks
.... Clubs notorious for avoiding r1 draft picks
.... How did Geelong build their 2007/2009/2011 Premiership lists?
.... What about Hawthorn and their 2013/2014/2015 Premiership lists?
.... Premierships ... luck of the bounce
- But wait! There's also: ... the AFL would consider applications to vary the requirements
- Some good history of draft affecting Crows & Port [RussellEbertHandball]
- Partners and the go-home factor [WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]
- SA draftee percentages
- Revealed: What it takes to earn first-round free agency compensation [2015-10-07]
- The AFL's secret formula for free agency compensation [21 Feb 2018]
- Next Generation Academy players available to all clubs in the first 25 or 30 draft picks
- Next Generation Academy (NGA) Zones [clickable image]
- live pick trading before matching a bid
- Rebuilding Player Lists 101
.... On-field support of youth
.... Knightmare on GWS, GC & Carlton
* Pick #1 history
.... WCE 1992
AFL - Misc
- Rising star nominations
- AFLPA infographic on the 2017-2022 payment structure - min. wage, TPP, etc
- AFL Rules - 28 February 2018 [PDF]
- Rule changes on player lists:
.... AFL confirms 2022 list sizes, tweaks rule for rookies [20210804]
* Football dept spending:
* Gil McLachlan
* Midfielders: inside vs outside
.... my post 6379
.... AFL Midfielders: A Guide to Positions, ...
.... AFL POSITIONS EXPLAINED - GUIDE BY RIVALRY
Big Footy
- Player potential floor and ceiling
- What does it take to draft and successfully developing Elite footballers?
.... Talent Identification
.... Player Development
.... Veteran Leadership
.... Midfielder Types
.... Scorpus' Statistical Analysis
- 2017 Player trade movements since 09 [Next Gen Rookie] [post]
- Media Numpties
- Should have vs Should of, Would Have or Would of?
Pooer
* Swampland happenings
.... 2009 Internal Disunity & Captaincy
.... Wazza 1 vote
* Olive ball
Last edited:
Danoz
Dananananananana Statman (òÓ,)_\,,/
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2010
- Posts
- 21,707
- Reaction score
- 14,074
- Location
- Waverley Park
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Dragons FFC
You're correct in how rankings are based after finals.
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2017
- Posts
- 9,141
- Reaction score
- 7,597
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
I think there's not much on the "finalised premiership ladder", because it doesn't really have much meaning. As in, nobody really cares for that sort of thing!
In AFL it's pretty simple:
Minor rounds - you want top 8
Major rounds - you want top 2 (these will be the only teams remembered henceforth)
If you lie outside this range in either Minor or Major rounds - fans/players/coaches/wives/babies -> no care!
You don't need to go back very far looking for reasons. Take the Bulldogs last year, just scraping in ranked 7th on minor round ladder, then having the best 4 weeks of their lives and voila! First prize! On the flip side, a team can have the best number of games won and best percentages, but then having 2 stinkers in a row and bow out of the Finals! So in reality, the finalised standings are just a reflection of who performed better in the Finals series, but not the overall season.
In AFL it's pretty simple:
Minor rounds - you want top 8
Major rounds - you want top 2 (these will be the only teams remembered henceforth)
If you lie outside this range in either Minor or Major rounds - fans/players/coaches/wives/babies -> no care!
You don't need to go back very far looking for reasons. Take the Bulldogs last year, just scraping in ranked 7th on minor round ladder, then having the best 4 weeks of their lives and voila! First prize! On the flip side, a team can have the best number of games won and best percentages, but then having 2 stinkers in a row and bow out of the Finals! So in reality, the finalised standings are just a reflection of who performed better in the Finals series, but not the overall season.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Finalised AFL Premiership Ladders
Curiously, there does not seem to be many web pages which list the final AFL Premiership Ladder after finals series are completed even though there are many that list the pre-finals ladder, perhaps I'm just not searching using the right keywords.
I was also interested in the way in which teams are ranked when they get knocked out of finals matches, and again I wasn't able find a link which covers this (I'd be interested to know if you do)
Based on looking at the ladder positions after the last minor rounds, the finals matches results and the initial draft selection order, the final rankings of clubs in the top 8 positions seemed to be decided (up until 2016) as follows, where losers of the:
Example: North and WCE lost 2016 EF matches and as WCE was 6th and North 8th pre-finals, North ended up at 8th and WCE at 7th.
Draft pick points
![Draft Points [e].jpg](https://www.bigfootycontent.com/attachments/442/442143-ee46f4152a55b1c8e04ccdc063a21b3a.jpg?hash=7kb0FSpVsc "Draft Points [e].jpg")
From: Bidding System Review -- F/S and Academy (May 2015)
Curiously, there does not seem to be many web pages which list the final AFL Premiership Ladder after finals series are completed even though there are many that list the pre-finals ladder, perhaps I'm just not searching using the right keywords.
I was also interested in the way in which teams are ranked when they get knocked out of finals matches, and again I wasn't able find a link which covers this (I'd be interested to know if you do)
Based on looking at the ladder positions after the last minor rounds, the finals matches results and the initial draft selection order, the final rankings of clubs in the top 8 positions seemed to be decided (up until 2016) as follows, where losers of the:
() Elimination Finals are finally ranked 7 & 8
() Semi Finals are finally ranked 5 & 6
() Preliminary Finals are finally ranked 3 & 4
according to their final minor round positions.Example: North and WCE lost 2016 EF matches and as WCE was 6th and North 8th pre-finals, North ended up at 8th and WCE at 7th.
Draft pick points
1. Geelong
2. Sydney
3. Collingwood
4. Brisbane Lions
5. Melbourne
6. Fremantle
7. Richmond
8. Western Bulldogs
9. Carlton
10. St Kilda
11. Port Adelaide
12. Gold Coast
13. Hawthorn
14. Adelaide
15. Essendon
16. GWS
17. West Coast
18. North Melbourne
2. Sydney
3. Collingwood
4. Brisbane Lions
5. Melbourne
6. Fremantle
7. Richmond
8. Western Bulldogs
9. Carlton
10. St Kilda
11. Port Adelaide
12. Gold Coast
13. Hawthorn
14. Adelaide
15. Essendon
16. GWS
17. West Coast
18. North Melbourne
1. Melbourne
2. Western Bulldogs
3. Port Adelaide
4. Geelong
5. Brisbane Lions
6. GWS
7. Sydney
8. Essendon
9. West Coast
10. St Kilda
11. Fremantle
12. Richmond
13. Carlton
14. Hawthorn
15. Adelaide
16. Gold Coast
17. Collingwood
18. North Melbourne
2. Western Bulldogs
3. Port Adelaide
4. Geelong
5. Brisbane Lions
6. GWS
7. Sydney
8. Essendon
9. West Coast
10. St Kilda
11. Fremantle
12. Richmond
13. Carlton
14. Hawthorn
15. Adelaide
16. Gold Coast
17. Collingwood
18. North Melbourne
1. Richmond
2. GWS
3. Geelong
4. Collingwood
5. Brisbane Lions
6. West Coast
7. Western Bulldogs
8. Essendon
9. Hawthorn
10. Port Adelaide
11. Adelaide
12. North Melbourne
13. Fremantle
14. St Kilda
15. Sydney
16. Carlton
17. Melbourne
18. Gold Coast
2. GWS
3. Geelong
4. Collingwood
5. Brisbane Lions
6. West Coast
7. Western Bulldogs
8. Essendon
9. Hawthorn
10. Port Adelaide
11. Adelaide
12. North Melbourne
13. Fremantle
14. St Kilda
15. Sydney
16. Carlton
17. Melbourne
18. Gold Coast
1. West Coast
2. Collingwood
3. Richmond
4. Melbourne
5. Hawthorn
6. GWS
7. Sydney
8. Geelong
9. North Melbourne
10. Port Adelaide
11. Essendon
12. Adelaide
13. Western Bulldogs
14. Fremantle
15. Brisbane Lions
16. St Kilda
17. Gold Coast
18. Carlton
2. Collingwood
3. Richmond
4. Melbourne
5. Hawthorn
6. GWS
7. Sydney
8. Geelong
9. North Melbourne
10. Port Adelaide
11. Essendon
12. Adelaide
13. Western Bulldogs
14. Fremantle
15. Brisbane Lions
16. St Kilda
17. Gold Coast
18. Carlton
1. Richmond
2. Adelaide
3. Geelong
4. GWS
5. Sydney
6. West Coast
7. Port Adelaide
8. Essendon
9. Melbourne
10. Western Bulldogs
11. St Kilda
12. Hawthorn
13. Collingwood
14. Fremantle
15. North Melbourne
16. Carlton
17. Gold Coast
18. Brisbane Lions
2. Adelaide
3. Geelong
4. GWS
5. Sydney
6. West Coast
7. Port Adelaide
8. Essendon
9. Melbourne
10. Western Bulldogs
11. St Kilda
12. Hawthorn
13. Collingwood
14. Fremantle
15. North Melbourne
16. Carlton
17. Gold Coast
18. Brisbane Lions
1. Brisbane Lions
2. Fremantle (received from Gold Coast via Lachie Weller trade)
3. Carlton
4. North Melbourne
5. Fremantle
6. Collingwood
7. St Kilda (received from Hawthorn in 2016)
8. St Kilda
9. Western Bulldogs
10. Carlton (received from Adelaide via Bryce Gibbs trade, originally received from Melbourne via Jake Lever trade)
11. Greater Western Sydney (received from Essendon via Devon Smith trade)
12. Adelaide (received from Brisbane Lions for Charlie Cameron, originally received from Port Adelaide in 2016)
13. West Coast
14. Sydney
15. Brisbane Lions (received from Richmond via pick swap, originally received from Geelong in 2016, via Carlton and GWS on-trades)
16. Western Bulldogs (received from Carlton via pick swap, originally received from Adelaide via Bryce Gibbs trade)
17. Richmond
2017 Indicative National Draft Order
GWS lose 2017 first-round draft pick as consequence for Lachie Whitfield drugs scandal
2. Fremantle (received from Gold Coast via Lachie Weller trade)
3. Carlton
4. North Melbourne
5. Fremantle
6. Collingwood
7. St Kilda (received from Hawthorn in 2016)
8. St Kilda
9. Western Bulldogs
10. Carlton (received from Adelaide via Bryce Gibbs trade, originally received from Melbourne via Jake Lever trade)
11. Greater Western Sydney (received from Essendon via Devon Smith trade)
12. Adelaide (received from Brisbane Lions for Charlie Cameron, originally received from Port Adelaide in 2016)
13. West Coast
14. Sydney
15. Brisbane Lions (received from Richmond via pick swap, originally received from Geelong in 2016, via Carlton and GWS on-trades)
16. Western Bulldogs (received from Carlton via pick swap, originally received from Adelaide via Bryce Gibbs trade)
17. Richmond
2017 Indicative National Draft Order
GWS lose 2017 first-round draft pick as consequence for Lachie Whitfield drugs scandal
1. Western Bulldogs
2. Sydney
3. Geelong
4. Greater Western Sydney
5. Hawthorn
6. Adelaide
7. West Coast
8. North Melbourne
9. St Kilda
10. Port Adelaide
11. Melbourne
12. Collingwood
13. Richmond
14. Carlton
15. Gold Coast
16. Fremantle
17. Brisbane Lions
18. Essendon
2. Sydney
3. Geelong
4. Greater Western Sydney
5. Hawthorn
6. Adelaide
7. West Coast
8. North Melbourne
9. St Kilda
10. Port Adelaide
11. Melbourne
12. Collingwood
13. Richmond
14. Carlton
15. Gold Coast
16. Fremantle
17. Brisbane Lions
18. Essendon
1. Essendon
2. GWS (from Brisbane)
3. Brisbane Lions (originally from Fremantle)
4. Gold Coast
5. Carlton
6. Gold Coast (from Richmond)
7. Fremantle (originally from Collingwood)
8. Gold Coast (from Melbourne)
9. Sydney Swans (from Port Adelaide)
10. Gold Coast (originally from St Kilda)
11. North Melbourne
12. West Coast
13. Adelaide
14. Port Adelaide (originally from Hawthorn)
15. GWS
16. Brisbane Lions (originally from Geelong)
17. Port Adelaide (from Sydney)
18. Western Bulldogs
Final draft order: Every club, every pick
2. GWS (from Brisbane)
3. Brisbane Lions (originally from Fremantle)
4. Gold Coast
5. Carlton
6. Gold Coast (from Richmond)
7. Fremantle (originally from Collingwood)
8. Gold Coast (from Melbourne)
9. Sydney Swans (from Port Adelaide)
10. Gold Coast (originally from St Kilda)
11. North Melbourne
12. West Coast
13. Adelaide
14. Port Adelaide (originally from Hawthorn)
15. GWS
16. Brisbane Lions (originally from Geelong)
17. Port Adelaide (from Sydney)
18. Western Bulldogs
Final draft order: Every club, every pick
1. West Coast
2. Hawthorn
3. Fremantle
4. North Melbourne
5. Sydney
6. Adelaide
7. Richmond
8. Western Bulldogs
9. Port Adelaide
10. Geelong
11. Greater Western Sydney
12. Collingwood
13. Melbourne
14. St Kilda
15. Essendon
16. Gold Coast
17. Brisbane Lions
18. Carlton
2. Hawthorn
3. Fremantle
4. North Melbourne
5. Sydney
6. Adelaide
7. Richmond
8. Western Bulldogs
9. Port Adelaide
10. Geelong
11. Greater Western Sydney
12. Collingwood
13. Melbourne
14. St Kilda
15. Essendon
16. Gold Coast
17. Brisbane Lions
18. Carlton
1. Carlton
2. Brisbane Lions
3. Melbourne (from Gold Coast)
4. Essendon
5. Essendon (from St Kilda)
6. Gold Coast (from Melbourne)
7. Melbourne (originally from Collingwood)
8. Carlton (from GWS)
9. Adelaide (from Geelong)
10. GWS (originally from Port Adelaide)
11. Carlton (from Western Bulldogs)
12. Richmond
13. Adelaide
14. St Kilda (from Sydney)
15. Hawthorn (from North)
16. Gold Coast (from Fremantle)
17. North Melbourne (originally from West Coast)
18. Hawthorn
Final draft order: Which picks is your club taking to this year's draft?
2. Brisbane Lions
3. Melbourne (from Gold Coast)
4. Essendon
5. Essendon (from St Kilda)
6. Gold Coast (from Melbourne)
7. Melbourne (originally from Collingwood)
8. Carlton (from GWS)
9. Adelaide (from Geelong)
10. GWS (originally from Port Adelaide)
11. Carlton (from Western Bulldogs)
12. Richmond
13. Adelaide
14. St Kilda (from Sydney)
15. Hawthorn (from North)
16. Gold Coast (from Fremantle)
17. North Melbourne (originally from West Coast)
18. Hawthorn
Final draft order: Which picks is your club taking to this year's draft?
1. Hawthorn
2. Sydney
3. Port Adelaide
4. North Melbourne
5. Geelong
6. Fremantle
7. Essendon
8. Richmond
9. West Coast
10. Adelaide
11. Collingwood
12. Gold Coast
13. Carlton
14. Western Bulldogs
15. Brisbane Lions
16. Greater Western Sydney
17. Melbourne
18. St Kilda
2. Sydney
3. Port Adelaide
4. North Melbourne
5. Geelong
6. Fremantle
7. Essendon
8. Richmond
9. West Coast
10. Adelaide
11. Collingwood
12. Gold Coast
13. Carlton
14. Western Bulldogs
15. Brisbane Lions
16. Greater Western Sydney
17. Melbourne
18. St Kilda
1. St Kilda
2. Melbourne
3. Melbourne (free-agency compensation)
4. Greater Western Sydney
5. Collingwood (from Brisbane)
6. Greater Western Sydney (from Western Bulldogs)
7. Greater Western Sydney (from Carlton)
8. Gold Coast
9. Collingwood (father-son pick)
10. Geelong (from Adelaide)
11. West Coast
12. Richmond
13. Fremantle
14. Adelaide (from Geelong)
15. Gold Coast (originally Geelong compensation)
16. North Melbourne
17. Essendon (from Port Adelaide)
18. Sydney Swans (academy pick)
19. Carlton (originally from Hawthorn)
20. Essendon (moved from pick 12, sanctions)
Indicative order for 2014 NAB AFL Draft
2. Melbourne
3. Melbourne (free-agency compensation)
4. Greater Western Sydney
5. Collingwood (from Brisbane)
6. Greater Western Sydney (from Western Bulldogs)
7. Greater Western Sydney (from Carlton)
8. Gold Coast
9. Collingwood (father-son pick)
10. Geelong (from Adelaide)
11. West Coast
12. Richmond
13. Fremantle
14. Adelaide (from Geelong)
15. Gold Coast (originally Geelong compensation)
16. North Melbourne
17. Essendon (from Port Adelaide)
18. Sydney Swans (academy pick)
19. Carlton (originally from Hawthorn)
20. Essendon (moved from pick 12, sanctions)
Indicative order for 2014 NAB AFL Draft
1. Hawthorn
2. Fremantle
3. Geelong
4. Sydney
5. Port Adelaide
6. Carlton
7. Richmond
8. Collingwood
9. Essendon
10. North Melbourne
11. Adelaide
12. Brisbane Lions
13. West Coast
14. Gold Coast
15. Western Bulldogs
16. St Kilda
17. Melbourne
18. GWS
2. Fremantle
3. Geelong
4. Sydney
5. Port Adelaide
6. Carlton
7. Richmond
8. Collingwood
9. Essendon
10. North Melbourne
11. Adelaide
12. Brisbane Lions
13. West Coast
14. Gold Coast
15. Western Bulldogs
16. St Kilda
17. Melbourne
18. GWS
1. GWS
2. GWS (from Melbourne)
3. St Kilda
4. Western Bulldogs
5. Gold Coast
6. Collingwood (from West Coast)
7. Brisbane Lions
.. < Adelaide pick sanctioned >
8. North Melbourne (father-son pick)
9. Melbourne (from GWS)
.. < Essendon pick sanctioned >
10. Collingwood
11. West Coast (from Collingwood; f.a. comp.)
12. Richmond
13. Carlton
14. GWS (from Port Adelaide)
15. Sydney Swans
16. Geelong
17. Fremantle
18. St Kilda (from Hawthorn)
19. St Kilda (from Hawthorn, f.a. comp.)
Final selection order for the 2013 NAB AFL Draft
2. GWS (from Melbourne)
3. St Kilda
4. Western Bulldogs
5. Gold Coast
6. Collingwood (from West Coast)
7. Brisbane Lions
.. < Adelaide pick sanctioned >
8. North Melbourne (father-son pick)
9. Melbourne (from GWS)
.. < Essendon pick sanctioned >
10. Collingwood
11. West Coast (from Collingwood; f.a. comp.)
12. Richmond
13. Carlton
14. GWS (from Port Adelaide)
15. Sydney Swans
16. Geelong
17. Fremantle
18. St Kilda (from Hawthorn)
19. St Kilda (from Hawthorn, f.a. comp.)
Final selection order for the 2013 NAB AFL Draft
1. Geelong
2. Collingwood
3. Hawthorn
4. West Coast
5. Carlton
6. Sydney
7. St Kilda
8. Essendon
9. North Melbourne
10. Western Bulldogs
11. Fremantle
12. Richmond
13. Melbourne
14. Adelaide
15. Brisbane Lions
16. Port Adelaide
17. Gold Coast
2. Collingwood
3. Hawthorn
4. West Coast
5. Carlton
6. Sydney
7. St Kilda
8. Essendon
9. North Melbourne
10. Western Bulldogs
11. Fremantle
12. Richmond
13. Melbourne
14. Adelaide
15. Brisbane Lions
16. Port Adelaide
17. Gold Coast
1. GWS (start up 1)
2. GWS (start up 2)
3. GWS (start up 3)
4. GWS (<< GC)
5. GWS (start up 5)
6. Port Adelaide
7. GWS (start up 7)
8. Brisbane Lions
9. GWS (start up 9)
10. GWS (<< Adelaide)
11. GWS (start up 11)
12. Brisbane Lions (<< Melbourne)
13. GWS (start up 13)
14. GWS (<< Richmond)
15. Richmond (<< GWS [start up 15])
16. Fremantle
17. Western Bulldogs
18. North Melbourne
19. Essendon
20. Fremantle (<< GWS << St Kilda)
21. Sydney
22. Carlton
23. West Coast
24. Gold Coast (<< Adelaide [Gunston] << Hawthorn)
25. St Kilda (<< GWS << Collingwood)
26. Richmond (<< Gold Coast << Geelong)
27. Adelaide (<< Gold Coast PP)
28. West Coast (<< Port Adelaide PP)
29. Fremantle (<< Hawthorn << Brisbane PP)
30. Brisbane Lions ( << Fremantle Compo [Palmer])
2. GWS (start up 2)
3. GWS (start up 3)
4. GWS (<< GC)
5. GWS (start up 5)
6. Port Adelaide
7. GWS (start up 7)
8. Brisbane Lions
9. GWS (start up 9)
10. GWS (<< Adelaide)
11. GWS (start up 11)
12. Brisbane Lions (<< Melbourne)
13. GWS (start up 13)
14. GWS (<< Richmond)
15. Richmond (<< GWS [start up 15])
16. Fremantle
17. Western Bulldogs
18. North Melbourne
19. Essendon
20. Fremantle (<< GWS << St Kilda)
21. Sydney
22. Carlton
23. West Coast
24. Gold Coast (<< Adelaide [Gunston] << Hawthorn)
25. St Kilda (<< GWS << Collingwood)
26. Richmond (<< Gold Coast << Geelong)
27. Adelaide (<< Gold Coast PP)
28. West Coast (<< Port Adelaide PP)
29. Fremantle (<< Hawthorn << Brisbane PP)
30. Brisbane Lions ( << Fremantle Compo [Palmer])
1. Geelong
2. Port Adelaide
3. North Melbourne
4. Collingwood
5. West Coast
6. Hawthorn
7. Sydney
8. Adelaide
9. St Kilda
10. Brisbane
11. Fremantle
12. Essendon
13. WB
14. Melbourne
15. Carlton
16. Richmond
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_AFL_season
2. Port Adelaide
3. North Melbourne
4. Collingwood
5. West Coast
6. Hawthorn
7. Sydney
8. Adelaide
9. St Kilda
10. Brisbane
11. Fremantle
12. Essendon
13. WB
14. Melbourne
15. Carlton
16. Richmond
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_AFL_season
1. West Coast
2. Sydney
3. Adelaide
4. Fremantle
5. Melbourne
6. WB
7. Collingwood
8. St Kilda
9. Richmond
10. Geelong
11. Hawthorn
12. Port Adelaide
13. Brisbane
14. North Melbourne
15. Essendon
16. Carlton
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_AFL_season
2. Sydney
3. Adelaide
4. Fremantle
5. Melbourne
6. WB
7. Collingwood
8. St Kilda
9. Richmond
10. Geelong
11. Hawthorn
12. Port Adelaide
13. Brisbane
14. North Melbourne
15. Essendon
16. Carlton
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_AFL_season
1. Sydney
2. West Coast
3. Adelaide
4. St Kilda
5. Geelong
6. Port Adelaide
7. North Melbourne
8. Melbourne
9. WB
10. Fremantle
11. Brisbane
12. Richmond
13. Essendon
14. Hawthorn
15. Collingwood
16. Carlton
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_AFL_season
2. West Coast
3. Adelaide
4. St Kilda
5. Geelong
6. Port Adelaide
7. North Melbourne
8. Melbourne
9. WB
10. Fremantle
11. Brisbane
12. Richmond
13. Essendon
14. Hawthorn
15. Collingwood
16. Carlton
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_AFL_season
1. Port Adelaide
2. Brisbane
3. St Kilda
4. Geelong
5. Sydney
6. Essendon
7. Melbourne
8. West Coast
9. Fremantle
10. North Melbourne
11. Carlton
12. Adelaide
13. Collingwood
14. WB
15. Hawthorn
16. Richmond
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_AFL_season
2. Brisbane
3. St Kilda
4. Geelong
5. Sydney
6. Essendon
7. Melbourne
8. West Coast
9. Fremantle
10. North Melbourne
11. Carlton
12. Adelaide
13. Collingwood
14. WB
15. Hawthorn
16. Richmond
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_AFL_season
1. Brisbane
2. Collingwood
3. Port Adelaide
4. Sydney
5. Adelaide
6. Essendon
7. Fremantle
8. West Coast
9. Hawthorn
10. North Melbourne
11. St Kilda
12. Geelong
13. Richmond
14. Melbourne
15. Carlton (banned from round 1&2 picks, but got priority r1 pick anyway)
16. WB
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_AFL_season
2. Collingwood
3. Port Adelaide
4. Sydney
5. Adelaide
6. Essendon
7. Fremantle
8. West Coast
9. Hawthorn
10. North Melbourne
11. St Kilda
12. Geelong
13. Richmond
14. Melbourne
15. Carlton (banned from round 1&2 picks, but got priority r1 pick anyway)
16. WB
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_AFL_season
1. Brisbane
2. Collingwood
3. Port Adelaide
4. Adelaide
5. Essendon
6. Melbourne
7. North Melbourne
8. West Coast
9. Geelong
10. Hawthorn
11. Sydney
12. WB
13. Fremantle
14. Richmond
15. St Kilda
16. Carlton
2002 AFL season - Wikipedia
2. Collingwood
3. Port Adelaide
4. Adelaide
5. Essendon
6. Melbourne
7. North Melbourne
8. West Coast
9. Geelong
10. Hawthorn
11. Sydney
12. WB
13. Fremantle
14. Richmond
15. St Kilda
16. Carlton
2002 AFL season - Wikipedia
1. Essendon
2. Melbourne
3. Carlton
4. North Melbourne
5. Brisbane
6. Hawthorn
7. Geelong
8. WB
9. Richmond
10. Sydney
11. Adelaide
12. Fremantle
13. West Coast
14 Port Adelaide
15. Collingwood
16. St Kilda
2000 AFL season - Wikipedia
2. Melbourne
3. Carlton
4. North Melbourne
5. Brisbane
6. Hawthorn
7. Geelong
8. WB
9. Richmond
10. Sydney
11. Adelaide
12. Fremantle
13. West Coast
14 Port Adelaide
15. Collingwood
16. St Kilda
2000 AFL season - Wikipedia
1. North Melbourne
2. Carlton
3. Essendon
4. Brisbane
5. WB
6. West Coast
7. Port Adelaide
8. Sydney
9. Hawthorn
10. St Kilda
11. Geelong
12. Richmond
13. Adelaide
14 Melbourne
15. Fremantle
16. Collingwood
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_AFL_season
2. Carlton
3. Essendon
4. Brisbane
5. WB
6. West Coast
7. Port Adelaide
8. Sydney
9. Hawthorn
10. St Kilda
11. Geelong
12. Richmond
13. Adelaide
14 Melbourne
15. Fremantle
16. Collingwood
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_AFL_season
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
My view on AFC's 2018 draft
... "shortcut" to post below
Comparing Crows & The Poo
Just before the 2018 trade period, clubs had picks (from Lore's post):
AFC: 7, 15, 19, 37, 69, ...
PAP: 9, 21, 27, 45, 46, ...
Some priority picks bumped the above picks down some spots.
The following is a summary of Poo's trading from Poo board:
Going into the 2018 draft, clubs had picks (from Lore's post):
AFC: 8, 13, 16, 21, 73, ...
PAP: 5, 10, 15, ...
Joined AFC Nov 2006 east coast recruiting scout
DRAFTS
2007
2008
2009
2010
* # (r)
2011
--- GWS start up concessions
Adelaide Crows replace Matt Rendell with Hamish Ogilvie (Mar 2012)
- as lead recruiter
2012
2013
2014
2015
* Paul Seedsman (2010 draft #76)
2016
2017
2018
DRAFTS
2007
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
2008
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
2009
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
2010
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
* # (r)
2011
--- GWS start up concessions
- Sam Kerridge (Vic) #27 (pp)
- Mitchell Grigg #41 (r2)
- Nicholas Joyce #46 (r2)
- Cam Ellis-Yolmen #4 (r3)
- Rory Laird #5 (r1)
- Dylan Orval (Vic) #23 (r2)
- Tim McIntyre #41 (r3)
- Will Young #58 (r4)
- Luke Brown
- Tom Lynch (Vic) (2008 draft #13)
- Josh Jenkins (Vic) (2010 rookie draft #12)
Adelaide Crows replace Matt Rendell with Hamish Ogilvie (Mar 2012)
- as lead recruiter
2012
- Sam Siggins #62 (r3)
- Rory Atkins #81 (r4)
- Kyle Hartigan #14 (r1)
- Jack Osborn #36 (r3) - basketball
- Tim Klaosen #42 (r4) - basketball
2013
- Matt Crouch #23 (r2)
- Riley Knight #46 (r3)
- Charlie Cameron #7 (r1)
- James Battersby #24 (r2)
- Jake Kelly #40 (r3)
- Alex Spina #52 (r4)
2014
- Jake Lever #14 (r1)
- Harrison Wigg #35 (r2)
- Mitch McGovern #43 (r3)
- Harry Dear #58 (r3)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- Reily O'Brien #9 (r1)
- Keenan Ramsay #27 (r2)
- Anthony Wilson #44 (r3)
2015
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
* Paul Seedsman (2010 draft #76)
2016
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
2017
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
2018
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
- # (r)
DON'T DELETE THESE PIX ATTACHMENTS...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
AFL makes changes to draft points system
Nov 18, 2020
...
Under normal AFL rules, clubs who are matching bids for northern Academy, Next Generation Academy and father-son players are only allowed to use draft points from the amount of picks that is equal to the number of their available list spots.
...
But clubs will not be bound by that rule at next month's national draft after the League gave clearance for clubs to use points from draft picks even if they are not going to use the selections to draft players.
...
The AFL will revert to its usual rule next year, having allowed the clubs a one-off change given some had prepared for matching bids by already trading out future selections during last year's exchange period.
AFL makes changes to draft points system [portadelaidefc.com.au]
Nov 18, 2020
...
Under normal AFL rules, clubs who are matching bids for northern Academy, Next Generation Academy and father-son players are only allowed to use draft points from the amount of picks that is equal to the number of their available list spots.
...
But clubs will not be bound by that rule at next month's national draft after the League gave clearance for clubs to use points from draft picks even if they are not going to use the selections to draft players.
...
The AFL will revert to its usual rule next year, having allowed the clubs a one-off change given some had prepared for matching bids by already trading out future selections during last year's exchange period.
AFL makes changes to draft points system [portadelaidefc.com.au]
AFL confirms 2022 list sizes, tweaks rule for rookies
covering moving players from the Senior list to Rookie list (among other things):
...
But the rule that allowed clubs to move primary-listed players to the rookie list between the first and second list lodgment periods to open up senior spots will not be permitted this off-season.
...
They will, however, be able to shift players on the senior list to the rookie list in the time between the national and rookie drafts if the player is contracted for 2022.
...
Means we wouldn't be able to shift players to free up spots on main list for the 2021 draft, but we can do that after the draft.
covering moving players from the Senior list to Rookie list (among other things):
...
But the rule that allowed clubs to move primary-listed players to the rookie list between the first and second list lodgment periods to open up senior spots will not be permitted this off-season.
...
They will, however, be able to shift players on the senior list to the rookie list in the time between the national and rookie drafts if the player is contracted for 2022.
...
Means we wouldn't be able to shift players to free up spots on main list for the 2021 draft, but we can do that after the draft.
AFL clarifies free agency compensation situation [LINK]
By Daniel Cherny, August 22, 2019 — 7.52pm
The AFL has clarified its rules surrounding compensation for clubs affected by recent changes to free agency rules.
The league changed rules for delisted free agents this year, meaning players who have previously been delisted become free agents at the end of every subsequent contract.
...
There had been some uncertainty in recent months – both at AFL headquarters and amongst clubs – as to whether a club would be eligible for a compensation pick if a former delisted free agent left under these new rules.
However the league confirmed to The Age on Thursday that clubs would be eligible for compensation as these former delisted free agents are classified as unrestricted free agents.
By Daniel Cherny, August 22, 2019 — 7.52pm
The AFL has clarified its rules surrounding compensation for clubs affected by recent changes to free agency rules.
The league changed rules for delisted free agents this year, meaning players who have previously been delisted become free agents at the end of every subsequent contract.
...
There had been some uncertainty in recent months – both at AFL headquarters and amongst clubs – as to whether a club would be eligible for a compensation pick if a former delisted free agent left under these new rules.
However the league confirmed to The Age on Thursday that clubs would be eligible for compensation as these former delisted free agents are classified as unrestricted free agents.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Draft Tampering
[ copied from THIS post ]
Ok, I never quite understood why the Tiprat saga was deemed draft tampering so did a bit of oogling.
It looks like the "rule" (or more like a principle) being broken is that of fairness in the draft between all Clubs (... this action was contrary to the rules, as it circumvented the fairness of the draft. [1] ) and there are different ways this can be broken.
In our case, it was having it written in Tiprat's contract that we would trade him to another Club for a second draft (SEE... [2]), which is unders - and unfair to all other Clubs. This is what OOC wrote "Maybe we could guarantee that we will trade him for a low price or something?".
The "Veale Deal" (BF link [3], wiki link [4] ) was an interesting exercise where WB's having first pick the the PSD did a deal involving Hawks & Essendon to get Rawlings in the PSD closely scrutinised by the AFL. The deal was "within the rules, if not the spirit, of the trading period" [Jake Niall]
And another way for fairness to be violated is the Chalmers' case (... who had contacted most clubs in an effort to ensure that only Collingwood would draft him. [5])
The Chad Wingard Case
[ from www.afl.com.au ]
... said he had no option but to be totally up front with then senior assistant coach Mark Williams and coach Kevin Sheedy when the pair interviewed him ahead of the draft.
In what was a brave, considerate and mature move, he made it clear to the Giants they'd regret drafting him.
"I was pretty honest in how I was feeling," Wingard said.
"They're trying to build a team from nothing and if I lied to them and said 'yeah I want to be here and I'm going to be here for your future', they're putting all their chips on me [only] to find I want to go home in two years.
"They're pretty much going to lose me for nothing. [6]
As far as I'm aware - Wingard said he would serve that 2 years.
That isn't draft tampering. [7]
References
[ copied from THIS post ]
Ok, I never quite understood why the Tiprat saga was deemed draft tampering so did a bit of oogling.
It looks like the "rule" (or more like a principle) being broken is that of fairness in the draft between all Clubs (... this action was contrary to the rules, as it circumvented the fairness of the draft. [1] ) and there are different ways this can be broken.
In our case, it was having it written in Tiprat's contract that we would trade him to another Club for a second draft (SEE... [2]), which is unders - and unfair to all other Clubs. This is what OOC wrote "Maybe we could guarantee that we will trade him for a low price or something?".
The "Veale Deal" (BF link [3], wiki link [4] ) was an interesting exercise where WB's having first pick the the PSD did a deal involving Hawks & Essendon to get Rawlings in the PSD closely scrutinised by the AFL. The deal was "within the rules, if not the spirit, of the trading period" [Jake Niall]
The Veale Deal, where unknown youngster Lochlan Veale was traded by Hawthorn to the Western Bulldogs in a lopsided three-way deal involving Essendon. In the deal Hawthorn gained Danny Jacobs, Essendon gained Mark Alvey and the number six selection in the draft and the Bulldogs officially only received Veale, and had an understanding Hawthorn that they would not trade Jade Rawlings to any other club, allowing the Bulldogs to select him with the first selection in the pre-season draft.
wiki link [4]
wiki link [4]
And another way for fairness to be violated is the Chalmers' case (... who had contacted most clubs in an effort to ensure that only Collingwood would draft him. [5])
The Chad Wingard Case
[ from www.afl.com.au ]
... said he had no option but to be totally up front with then senior assistant coach Mark Williams and coach Kevin Sheedy when the pair interviewed him ahead of the draft.
In what was a brave, considerate and mature move, he made it clear to the Giants they'd regret drafting him.
"I was pretty honest in how I was feeling," Wingard said.
"They're trying to build a team from nothing and if I lied to them and said 'yeah I want to be here and I'm going to be here for your future', they're putting all their chips on me [only] to find I want to go home in two years.
"They're pretty much going to lose me for nothing. [6]
As far as I'm aware - Wingard said he would serve that 2 years.
That isn't draft tampering. [7]
References
[ ... from Wikipedia, 20180116]
Draft tampering
The 1992 draft suffered from three high-profile cases of draft tampering involving highly rated South Australian players: No. 6 selection Robert Pyman, No. 10 selection Brett Chalmers, and No. 13 selection Andrew McKay. Prior to the draft, all three players contacted AFL clubs which they did not want to play for, and told those clubs that they would remain in South Australia if drafted by them; at the time, the players could still play a respectable career and earn reasonable money in the SANFL, and would be tied to the AFL club that drafted them for only three years (after which they could re-enter the draft and be selected by another club), so they held a bargaining position to make these demands. However, this action was contrary to the rules, as it circumvented the fairness of the draft.
The most serious offence was by Chalmers, who had contacted most clubs in an effort to ensure that only Collingwood would draft him. He was fined $30,000, and was made ineligible to play for Collingwood for three years;[2] he never played a senior game for Collingwood, but later played for Adelaide and Port Adelaide. McKay and Pyman, who had warned only the AFL's struggling clubs (Sydney, Brisbane Bears, Richmond and Fitzroy) against drafting them, but had not contrived to end up at a specific club, were fined only $10,000 and were permitted to continue playing for their new clubs.[3] Brisbane Bears zone selection Nathan Buckleyand the North Melbourne Football Club were also forced to defend accusations that they had come to a draft-tampering agreement for Buckley to later be traded to North Melbourne, but after a long and costly legal battle both parties were found not guilty.[4]
Draft tampering
The 1992 draft suffered from three high-profile cases of draft tampering involving highly rated South Australian players: No. 6 selection Robert Pyman, No. 10 selection Brett Chalmers, and No. 13 selection Andrew McKay. Prior to the draft, all three players contacted AFL clubs which they did not want to play for, and told those clubs that they would remain in South Australia if drafted by them; at the time, the players could still play a respectable career and earn reasonable money in the SANFL, and would be tied to the AFL club that drafted them for only three years (after which they could re-enter the draft and be selected by another club), so they held a bargaining position to make these demands. However, this action was contrary to the rules, as it circumvented the fairness of the draft.
The most serious offence was by Chalmers, who had contacted most clubs in an effort to ensure that only Collingwood would draft him. He was fined $30,000, and was made ineligible to play for Collingwood for three years;[2] he never played a senior game for Collingwood, but later played for Adelaide and Port Adelaide. McKay and Pyman, who had warned only the AFL's struggling clubs (Sydney, Brisbane Bears, Richmond and Fitzroy) against drafting them, but had not contrived to end up at a specific club, were fined only $10,000 and were permitted to continue playing for their new clubs.[3] Brisbane Bears zone selection Nathan Buckleyand the North Melbourne Football Club were also forced to defend accusations that they had come to a draft-tampering agreement for Buckley to later be traded to North Melbourne, but after a long and costly legal battle both parties were found not guilty.[4]
[ from www.sydneyswans.com.au 20180116 ]
Tippett in trade limbo
Nick Bowen October 26, 2012 9:19 AM
WITH just hours of the Gillette AFL Trade Period remaining, Kurt Tippett is increasingly likely to be left in football limbo when Friday's 2pm deadline ticks by.
After playing 104 games for Adelaide since debuting in round one, 2008, Tippett announced he wanted a trade to this year's premiers, the Sydney Swans, earlier this month.
However, this week's explosive revelations of a side deal made by Tippett and the Crows when he re-signed with Adelaide in 2009 has not only made Tippett's trade to the Swans unlikely, but also exposed the Crows, Tippett and his manager, Peter Blucher, to an AFL investigation into possible draft and salary cap violations.
The Crows had been ready to send Tippett to the Swans in exchange for pick No. 23 and fringe Swans forward Jesse White last Friday, but got cold feet.
It was then that Crows CEO Steven Trigg disclosed the Tippett side deal to the AFL.
The deal stated that the Crows would trade Tippett to the club of his choice for a second-round pick at the end of his playing contract, an arrangement that might constitute draft tampering.
The deal also reportedly guaranteed Tippett $200,000 outside the playing contract lodged by Adelaide with the AFL, to be paid to him by third-party companies or the Crows.
If Tippett is not traded on Friday, he will most likely nominate for November's NAB AFL Draft or December's pre-season draft, when last year's two lowest finishers, GWS and Gold Coast, have indicated they could consider selecting him.
Tippett in trade limbo
Nick Bowen October 26, 2012 9:19 AM
WITH just hours of the Gillette AFL Trade Period remaining, Kurt Tippett is increasingly likely to be left in football limbo when Friday's 2pm deadline ticks by.
After playing 104 games for Adelaide since debuting in round one, 2008, Tippett announced he wanted a trade to this year's premiers, the Sydney Swans, earlier this month.
However, this week's explosive revelations of a side deal made by Tippett and the Crows when he re-signed with Adelaide in 2009 has not only made Tippett's trade to the Swans unlikely, but also exposed the Crows, Tippett and his manager, Peter Blucher, to an AFL investigation into possible draft and salary cap violations.
The Crows had been ready to send Tippett to the Swans in exchange for pick No. 23 and fringe Swans forward Jesse White last Friday, but got cold feet.
It was then that Crows CEO Steven Trigg disclosed the Tippett side deal to the AFL.
The deal stated that the Crows would trade Tippett to the club of his choice for a second-round pick at the end of his playing contract, an arrangement that might constitute draft tampering.
The deal also reportedly guaranteed Tippett $200,000 outside the playing contract lodged by Adelaide with the AFL, to be paid to him by third-party companies or the Crows.
If Tippett is not traded on Friday, he will most likely nominate for November's NAB AFL Draft or December's pre-season draft, when last year's two lowest finishers, GWS and Gold Coast, have indicated they could consider selecting him.
[ from Wikipedia 20180116 ]
2003 AFL draft
...
The trading period also contained The Veale Deal, where unknown youngster Lochlan Veale was traded by Hawthorn to the Western Bulldogs in a lopsided three-way deal involving Essendon. In the deal Hawthorn gained Danny Jacobs, Essendon gained Mark Alvey and the number six selection in the draft and the Bulldogs officially only received Veale, and had an understanding Hawthorn that they would not trade Jade Rawlings to any other club, allowing the Bulldogs to select him with the first selection in the pre-season draft.[2]
...
2003 AFL draft
...
The trading period also contained The Veale Deal, where unknown youngster Lochlan Veale was traded by Hawthorn to the Western Bulldogs in a lopsided three-way deal involving Essendon. In the deal Hawthorn gained Danny Jacobs, Essendon gained Mark Alvey and the number six selection in the draft and the Bulldogs officially only received Veale, and had an understanding Hawthorn that they would not trade Jade Rawlings to any other club, allowing the Bulldogs to select him with the first selection in the pre-season draft.[2]
...
[ from Wikipedia 20180116 ]
Draft tampering
The 1992 draft suffered from three high-profile cases of draft tampering involving highly rated South Australian players: No. 6 selection Robert Pyman, No. 10 selection Brett Chalmers, and No. 13 selection Andrew McKay. Prior to the draft, all three players contacted AFL clubs which they did not want to play for, and told those clubs that they would remain in South Australia if drafted by them; at the time, the players could still play a respectable career and earn reasonable money in the SANFL, and would be tied to the AFL club that drafted them for only three years (after which they could re-enter the draft and be selected by another club), so they held a bargaining position to make these demands. However, this action was contrary to the rules, as it circumvented the fairness of the draft.
The most serious offence was by Chalmers, who had contacted most clubs in an effort to ensure that only Collingwood would draft him. He was fined $30,000, and was made ineligible to play for Collingwood for three years;[2] he never played a senior game for Collingwood, but later played for Adelaide and Port Adelaide. McKay and Pyman, who had warned only the AFL's struggling clubs (Sydney, Brisbane Bears, Richmond and Fitzroy) against drafting them, but had not contrived to end up at a specific club, were fined only $10,000 and were permitted to continue playing for their new clubs.[3] Brisbane Bears zone selection Nathan Buckleyand the North Melbourne Football Club were also forced to defend accusations that they had come to a draft-tampering agreement for Buckley to later be traded to North Melbourne, but after a long and costly legal battle both parties were found not guilty.[4]
Draft tampering
The 1992 draft suffered from three high-profile cases of draft tampering involving highly rated South Australian players: No. 6 selection Robert Pyman, No. 10 selection Brett Chalmers, and No. 13 selection Andrew McKay. Prior to the draft, all three players contacted AFL clubs which they did not want to play for, and told those clubs that they would remain in South Australia if drafted by them; at the time, the players could still play a respectable career and earn reasonable money in the SANFL, and would be tied to the AFL club that drafted them for only three years (after which they could re-enter the draft and be selected by another club), so they held a bargaining position to make these demands. However, this action was contrary to the rules, as it circumvented the fairness of the draft.
The most serious offence was by Chalmers, who had contacted most clubs in an effort to ensure that only Collingwood would draft him. He was fined $30,000, and was made ineligible to play for Collingwood for three years;[2] he never played a senior game for Collingwood, but later played for Adelaide and Port Adelaide. McKay and Pyman, who had warned only the AFL's struggling clubs (Sydney, Brisbane Bears, Richmond and Fitzroy) against drafting them, but had not contrived to end up at a specific club, were fined only $10,000 and were permitted to continue playing for their new clubs.[3] Brisbane Bears zone selection Nathan Buckleyand the North Melbourne Football Club were also forced to defend accusations that they had come to a draft-tampering agreement for Buckley to later be traded to North Melbourne, but after a long and costly legal battle both parties were found not guilty.[4]
[ from www.afl.com.au 20180116 ]
Chad Wingard's Giant refusal in lead-up to draft
Harry Thring May 15, 2014 7:00 AM
AS CHAD Wingard's star continues to rise, most in the football world remain baffled as to how he was 'overlooked' by Greater Western Sydney at the 2011 NAB AFL Draft.
The Giants had the first five selections at the draft and despite the athletic 18-year-old from Murray Bridge being touted as a top three pick, he slipped to Port Adelaide at No. 6.
Wingard's first 50 games have seen All Australian selection, a John Cahill Medal as the Power's best and fairest and several match-winning performances; he's proving not only the best player from his draft but his accomplishments inside 50 games stand up to almost anyone in the modern era.
So how did the Giants miss such a rare talent? They didn't.
Speaking exclusively to AFL.com.au, Wingard said he didn't slip under their radar, he just didn't want to be part of what they were building.
He said he had no option but to be totally up front with then senior assistant coach Mark Williams and coach Kevin Sheedy when the pair interviewed him ahead of the draft.
In what was a brave, considerate and mature move, he made it clear to the Giants they'd regret drafting him.
"I was pretty honest in how I was feeling," Wingard said.
"They're trying to build a team from nothing and if I lied to them and said 'yeah I want to be here and I'm going to be here for your future', they're putting all their chips on me [only] to find I want to go home in two years.
"They're pretty much going to lose me for nothing.
"So I think that because I was so honest, they still got to pick someone else who wanted to be there and they didn't get nothing for their pick three, four or five which was what they would have had [me at]."
The Giants would instead draft Dom Tyson at pick No. 3, Will Hoskin-Elliott at No. 4 and Matt Buntine at No. 5.
Wingard's open and frank stance shouldn't be confused with arrogance.
Indeed, many stories about his perceived over confidence circulated upon his entry to the AFL but the Power star said those were based more on a lack of understanding than truth.
"I think I might have came across that way but I was actually really shy coming in," he said.
"That comes off as arrogance because you're really shy to talk to people, you don't have confidence and it comes across the other way – you come across as if you're cocky and arrogant and that you're too good for this team.
"The team that we have now, it doesn't have any space or time for that kind of ego, it's a really good space to be in, everyone's got each other's back."
...
Chad Wingard's Giant refusal in lead-up to draft
Harry Thring May 15, 2014 7:00 AM
AS CHAD Wingard's star continues to rise, most in the football world remain baffled as to how he was 'overlooked' by Greater Western Sydney at the 2011 NAB AFL Draft.
The Giants had the first five selections at the draft and despite the athletic 18-year-old from Murray Bridge being touted as a top three pick, he slipped to Port Adelaide at No. 6.
Wingard's first 50 games have seen All Australian selection, a John Cahill Medal as the Power's best and fairest and several match-winning performances; he's proving not only the best player from his draft but his accomplishments inside 50 games stand up to almost anyone in the modern era.
So how did the Giants miss such a rare talent? They didn't.
Speaking exclusively to AFL.com.au, Wingard said he didn't slip under their radar, he just didn't want to be part of what they were building.
He said he had no option but to be totally up front with then senior assistant coach Mark Williams and coach Kevin Sheedy when the pair interviewed him ahead of the draft.
In what was a brave, considerate and mature move, he made it clear to the Giants they'd regret drafting him.
"I was pretty honest in how I was feeling," Wingard said.
"They're trying to build a team from nothing and if I lied to them and said 'yeah I want to be here and I'm going to be here for your future', they're putting all their chips on me [only] to find I want to go home in two years.
"They're pretty much going to lose me for nothing.
"So I think that because I was so honest, they still got to pick someone else who wanted to be there and they didn't get nothing for their pick three, four or five which was what they would have had [me at]."
The Giants would instead draft Dom Tyson at pick No. 3, Will Hoskin-Elliott at No. 4 and Matt Buntine at No. 5.
Wingard's open and frank stance shouldn't be confused with arrogance.
Indeed, many stories about his perceived over confidence circulated upon his entry to the AFL but the Power star said those were based more on a lack of understanding than truth.
"I think I might have came across that way but I was actually really shy coming in," he said.
"That comes off as arrogance because you're really shy to talk to people, you don't have confidence and it comes across the other way – you come across as if you're cocky and arrogant and that you're too good for this team.
"The team that we have now, it doesn't have any space or time for that kind of ego, it's a really good space to be in, everyone's got each other's back."
...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
There are two separate rules relating to future trading:
1) "2/4y" rule - using two r1 picks in the draft in a rolling 4 year period
2) "F1/other" rule - trading a future r1 pick or other future picks (r2, r3, ...) but not both
2/4y Rule
Some interesting points:
* Clubs can trade one year in the future only. [1]
* Clubs must make at least two first-round selections in each four-year period. If they don't, they will face restrictions from trading any further first-round draft picks. [1]
* a r1 matched bid for Father-Son or Academy counts for a club's rolling 4y tally [2]
* an end-of-first-round compensation selection does not count in a club's rolling 4y tally [2]
* a club can apply for and receive special permission for an exception with the AFL weighing up the age of the players brought in and other draft selections used in that time [2]
* "The Hawks, however, can trade their 2021 first-round pick if they hold on to their 2020 top selection." [3] .... This is an interesting comment as in 2020, Hawks have only used 1 r1 pick in the previous 4 years so have violated the 2/4y rule - and remains in violation - until it actually uses a r1 pick in the 2020 draft and the comment implies Hawks are supposedly allowed to trade a future 2021 r1 pick.
References:
[1] Future trading given go-ahead but with restrictions [2015, www.afl.com.au]
[2] Trading first-round picks: Misunderstood rule explained [2018, www.afl.com.au]
[3] Hands tied: Why two big Vic clubs can't trade first pick [2020, www.afl.com.au]
1) "2/4y" rule - using two r1 picks in the draft in a rolling 4 year period
2) "F1/other" rule - trading a future r1 pick or other future picks (r2, r3, ...) but not both
2/4y Rule
Some interesting points:
* Clubs can trade one year in the future only. [1]
* Clubs must make at least two first-round selections in each four-year period. If they don't, they will face restrictions from trading any further first-round draft picks. [1]
* a r1 matched bid for Father-Son or Academy counts for a club's rolling 4y tally [2]
* an end-of-first-round compensation selection does not count in a club's rolling 4y tally [2]
* a club can apply for and receive special permission for an exception with the AFL weighing up the age of the players brought in and other draft selections used in that time [2]
* "The Hawks, however, can trade their 2021 first-round pick if they hold on to their 2020 top selection." [3] .... This is an interesting comment as in 2020, Hawks have only used 1 r1 pick in the previous 4 years so have violated the 2/4y rule - and remains in violation - until it actually uses a r1 pick in the 2020 draft and the comment implies Hawks are supposedly allowed to trade a future 2021 r1 pick.
References:
[1] Future trading given go-ahead but with restrictions [2015, www.afl.com.au]
[2] Trading first-round picks: Misunderstood rule explained [2018, www.afl.com.au]
[3] Hands tied: Why two big Vic clubs can't trade first pick [2020, www.afl.com.au]
How can Geelong not have 2015, 2016 & 2017 1st round picks
From this article:
...
The rules are complicated and can be hard to make easy sense of, especially as clubs keep finding new ways to work them, but any inquiry since future trading was introduced ahead of last year's trade period would have been met with the same response.
First, clubs must make at least two future first-round picks in a four-year period. Those that don't will then face restrictions.
...
Secondly, clubs that have chosen to trade out a future first-round selection are not permitted to trade any other picks from the same draft unless they have brought in a replacement. As the AFL reiterated on Wednesday, it's about the net result.
This brings us, first of all, to Geelong, who sought clarification midway through the trade period that they were allowed to trade their 2017 first-round pick to Carlton as part of the deal for Zach Tuohy.
...
The Cats had already traded their 2015 first rounder to Adelaide, in the Patrick Dangerfield trade. They had also moved their first pick in this year's draft to Carlton, for Lachie Henderson. The Tuohy trade makes it three in a row. But if the Cats are (somehow) able to trade two first-round picks back in next year, and use them, they will have made the necessarily two first-round selections. They also have their 2018 first-rounder to come.
If they're not able to take those two picks in the next two years, they'll be prevented from trading any further first rounders. But given it is not yet impossible for them to do that, they could not have been prevented from trading a third.
...
From this article:
...
The rules are complicated and can be hard to make easy sense of, especially as clubs keep finding new ways to work them, but any inquiry since future trading was introduced ahead of last year's trade period would have been met with the same response.
First, clubs must make at least two future first-round picks in a four-year period. Those that don't will then face restrictions.
...
Secondly, clubs that have chosen to trade out a future first-round selection are not permitted to trade any other picks from the same draft unless they have brought in a replacement. As the AFL reiterated on Wednesday, it's about the net result.
This brings us, first of all, to Geelong, who sought clarification midway through the trade period that they were allowed to trade their 2017 first-round pick to Carlton as part of the deal for Zach Tuohy.
...
The Cats had already traded their 2015 first rounder to Adelaide, in the Patrick Dangerfield trade. They had also moved their first pick in this year's draft to Carlton, for Lachie Henderson. The Tuohy trade makes it three in a row. But if the Cats are (somehow) able to trade two first-round picks back in next year, and use them, they will have made the necessarily two first-round selections. They also have their 2018 first-rounder to come.
If they're not able to take those two picks in the next two years, they'll be prevented from trading any further first rounders. But given it is not yet impossible for them to do that, they could not have been prevented from trading a third.
...
Clubs notorious for avoiding r1 draft picks
Haw - 2018 [0] 2017 [0] 2016 [0] 2015 [2] -- 2014 [0] 2013 [0]
Geel - 2018 [1] 2017 [0] 2016 [0] 2015 [0] -- 2014 [1] 2013 [1]
Port - 2018 [3] 2017 [0] 2016 [2] 2015 [0] -- 2014 [0] 2013 [0]
Geelong in 2018 need to acquire and use two r1 picks to not break the 2-r1-picks/4-years rule but technically haven't broken that rule prior to the 2018 draft so should still be able to trade future picks during the 2018 trade period.
Note: Exemptions from this rule can be given by the AFL if (paraphrasing based on published articles):
* first round picks traded out are for younger players (as compared to trading in older veteran players), and
* club has made draft selections with near round one picks (eg. second round picks)
Haw - 2018 [0] 2017 [0] 2016 [0] 2015 [2] -- 2014 [0] 2013 [0]
Geel - 2018 [1] 2017 [0] 2016 [0] 2015 [0] -- 2014 [1] 2013 [1]
Port - 2018 [3] 2017 [0] 2016 [2] 2015 [0] -- 2014 [0] 2013 [0]
Geelong in 2018 need to acquire and use two r1 picks to not break the 2-r1-picks/4-years rule but technically haven't broken that rule prior to the 2018 draft so should still be able to trade future picks during the 2018 trade period.
Note: Exemptions from this rule can be given by the AFL if (paraphrasing based on published articles):
* first round picks traded out are for younger players (as compared to trading in older veteran players), and
* club has made draft selections with near round one picks (eg. second round picks)
How did Geelong build their 2007/2009/2011 Premiership lists?
It's often thought Geelong benefitted greatly from Father-Son draft picks to build their dynastic list but a look at their draft picks in the preceding 10 years or so indicate good drafting (& trading) was probably more significant - even if they were able to draft GAblett and THawkins with picks #40 and #41 respectively as F-S picks.
2007(1st) HTaylor(#17), also had FS pick
2006(10th) JSelwood(#7), Hawkins(#41 FS)
2005(5th) Varcoe(#15), no F-S
2004(4th) also had FS pick
2003(12th) also had FS pick
2002(9th) Mackie(#7) Lonergan(#23)
2001(12th) GAblett(#40 FS) Bartel(#8) JKelly(#17 Melb trade), SJohnson(#24)
2000(7th) no F-S
1999(11th) JCorey(#8) PChapman(#31 Carl trade) CLing(#38) CEnright(#47 North trade) no F-S
1998 THarley(Port trade), JMooney(Syd trade), no F-S
It's often thought Geelong benefitted greatly from Father-Son draft picks to build their dynastic list but a look at their draft picks in the preceding 10 years or so indicate good drafting (& trading) was probably more significant - even if they were able to draft GAblett and THawkins with picks #40 and #41 respectively as F-S picks.
2007(1st) HTaylor(#17), also had FS pick
2006(10th) JSelwood(#7), Hawkins(#41 FS)
2005(5th) Varcoe(#15), no F-S
2004(4th) also had FS pick
2003(12th) also had FS pick
2002(9th) Mackie(#7) Lonergan(#23)
2001(12th) GAblett(#40 FS) Bartel(#8) JKelly(#17 Melb trade), SJohnson(#24)
2000(7th) no F-S
1999(11th) JCorey(#8) PChapman(#31 Carl trade) CLing(#38) CEnright(#47 North trade) no F-S
1998 THarley(Port trade), JMooney(Syd trade), no F-S
What about Hawthorn and their 2013/2014/2015 Premiership lists?
Hawks finished 15th in 2004 and got priority pick #2 for Roughhead and their pick #5 got Franklin. Then finished 14th in 2005 got priority pick #3 for Ellis and had pick #6 (didn't have quite as prominent draft result that year).
They also traded Croad for Freo's pick #1 (a priority pick, to get Hodge), pick #20 and pick #36 (to get SMitchell) in 2001 when Hawks finished 4th - that was quite a move. They also drafted Campbell Brown at #32 that year.
Looks like receiving priority picks for finishing lowly for multiple years together with astute trading and drafting form significant bases for their dynastic list.
Hawks finished 15th in 2004 and got priority pick #2 for Roughhead and their pick #5 got Franklin. Then finished 14th in 2005 got priority pick #3 for Ellis and had pick #6 (didn't have quite as prominent draft result that year).
They also traded Croad for Freo's pick #1 (a priority pick, to get Hodge), pick #20 and pick #36 (to get SMitchell) in 2001 when Hawks finished 4th - that was quite a move. They also drafted Campbell Brown at #32 that year.
Looks like receiving priority picks for finishing lowly for multiple years together with astute trading and drafting form significant bases for their dynastic list.
.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Crows List Management
Media Reports of AFC Player Contract Amounts
Jordan Dawson
“The Adelaide proposal is $650,000 a year for five years, but this isn’t really about money - it’s about his family, his partner going home, him wanting to live in South Australia and wanting to build something from the ground up at the Crows.” [foxsports 20210922]
Eddie Betts
Mark Bickley questions Adelaide Crows on Jake Lever contract negotiations ... That the Crows have Walker on about $1 million a year, with Jenkins, Sloane, Eddie Betts, Daniel Talia, and Sam Jacobs reportedly on more than $600,000 each, means ... [Jon Pierik, The Age, 12 July 2017, 2:37pm]
Brad Crouch (2016)
Brad Crouch rejects rival interest to stay at Crows ... The deal is believed to be worth up to $2.4 million over the four years. ... [www.afl.com.au].
Sam Jacobs
Mark Bickley questions Adelaide Crows on Jake Lever contract negotiations ... That the Crows have Walker on about $1 million a year, with Jenkins, Sloane, Eddie Betts, Daniel Talia, and Sam Jacobs reportedly on more than $600,000 each, means ... [Jon Pierik, The Age, 12 July 2017, 2:37pm]
Josh Jenkins (2016)
Josh Jenkins signs $550,000, five-year deal with Adelaide Crows ... Adelaide’s board — as predicted by The Advertiser — today signed off on a mega, $550,000-a-year deal locking in Jenkins, 27, until 2022, making it likely he will be a Crow for life. [Richard Earle, The Advertiser, July 21, 2016]
Jenkins inks new five-year deal with Crows ... AFL.com.au understands his new contract is in the region of $550,000 per season. ...
Tom Lynch (2018)
Star Crow inks new deal ... AFL.com.au understands Lynch could have commanded more than $750,000 per season on the open market with Carlton, North Melbourne, Collingwood and his former club St Kilda among the clubs who enquired about his services.
Between $550K/yr and $650K/yr.
David Mackay (2014)
Dashing wingman David Mackay commits his future to Adelaide Crows ... Mackay on Wednesday left Bulldog Shaun Higgins as the only restricted free agent on the market by signing a lucrative four-year deal worth about $1.6 million. ... [Andrew Capel, The Advertiser, July 30, 2014 9:00pm]
Mitch McGovern (2017)
McGovern 'always wanted to stay' ... new deal with the Crows that will see him stay at West Lakes until 2020. [unspecified $value] ... [www.afl.com.au].
Mitch McGovern turns down Dockers, signs new Crows deal ... with Fremantle offering what was believed to be a five-year deal worth up to $750,000 a year. ... [thewest.com.au]
Wayne Milera (2017)
How heartache turned to joy for emerging Crows star Wayne Milera ... signing a three-year contract extension worth more that $1 million that ties him to the Crows ... [Andrew Capel, The Advertiser, April 14, 2017 2:00pm]
Rory Sloane
Mark Bickley questions Adelaide Crows on Jake Lever contract negotiations ... That the Crows have Walker on about $1 million a year, with Jenkins, Sloane, Eddie Betts, Daniel Talia, and Sam Jacobs reportedly on more than $600,000 each, means ... [Jon Pierik, The Age, 12 July 2017, 2:37pm]
Daniel Talia
Mark Bickley questions Adelaide Crows on Jake Lever contract negotiations ... That the Crows have Walker on about $1 million a year, with Jenkins, Sloane, Eddie Betts, Daniel Talia, and Sam Jacobs reportedly on more than $600,000 each, means ... [Jon Pierik, The Age, 12 July 2017, 2:37pm]
Taylor Walker
Mark Bickley questions Adelaide Crows on Jake Lever contract negotiations ... That the Crows have Walker on about $1 million a year, with Jenkins, Sloane, Eddie Betts, Daniel Talia, and Sam Jacobs reportedly on more than $600,000 each, means ... [Jon Pierik, The Age, 12 July 2017, 2:37pm]
Bigfooty Guesstimates
Richard Douglas
He'd be on $400k easily, probably closer to $500k ...
Jordan Dawson
“The Adelaide proposal is $650,000 a year for five years, but this isn’t really about money - it’s about his family, his partner going home, him wanting to live in South Australia and wanting to build something from the ground up at the Crows.” [foxsports 20210922]
Eddie Betts
Mark Bickley questions Adelaide Crows on Jake Lever contract negotiations ... That the Crows have Walker on about $1 million a year, with Jenkins, Sloane, Eddie Betts, Daniel Talia, and Sam Jacobs reportedly on more than $600,000 each, means ... [Jon Pierik, The Age, 12 July 2017, 2:37pm]
Brad Crouch (2016)
Brad Crouch rejects rival interest to stay at Crows ... The deal is believed to be worth up to $2.4 million over the four years. ... [www.afl.com.au].
Sam Jacobs
Mark Bickley questions Adelaide Crows on Jake Lever contract negotiations ... That the Crows have Walker on about $1 million a year, with Jenkins, Sloane, Eddie Betts, Daniel Talia, and Sam Jacobs reportedly on more than $600,000 each, means ... [Jon Pierik, The Age, 12 July 2017, 2:37pm]
Josh Jenkins (2016)
Josh Jenkins signs $550,000, five-year deal with Adelaide Crows ... Adelaide’s board — as predicted by The Advertiser — today signed off on a mega, $550,000-a-year deal locking in Jenkins, 27, until 2022, making it likely he will be a Crow for life. [Richard Earle, The Advertiser, July 21, 2016]
Jenkins inks new five-year deal with Crows ... AFL.com.au understands his new contract is in the region of $550,000 per season. ...
Tom Lynch (2018)
Star Crow inks new deal ... AFL.com.au understands Lynch could have commanded more than $750,000 per season on the open market with Carlton, North Melbourne, Collingwood and his former club St Kilda among the clubs who enquired about his services.
Between $550K/yr and $650K/yr.David Mackay (2014)
Dashing wingman David Mackay commits his future to Adelaide Crows ... Mackay on Wednesday left Bulldog Shaun Higgins as the only restricted free agent on the market by signing a lucrative four-year deal worth about $1.6 million. ... [Andrew Capel, The Advertiser, July 30, 2014 9:00pm]
Mitch McGovern (2017)
McGovern 'always wanted to stay' ... new deal with the Crows that will see him stay at West Lakes until 2020. [unspecified $value] ... [www.afl.com.au].
Mitch McGovern turns down Dockers, signs new Crows deal ... with Fremantle offering what was believed to be a five-year deal worth up to $750,000 a year. ... [thewest.com.au]
Wayne Milera (2017)
How heartache turned to joy for emerging Crows star Wayne Milera ... signing a three-year contract extension worth more that $1 million that ties him to the Crows ... [Andrew Capel, The Advertiser, April 14, 2017 2:00pm]
Rory Sloane
Mark Bickley questions Adelaide Crows on Jake Lever contract negotiations ... That the Crows have Walker on about $1 million a year, with Jenkins, Sloane, Eddie Betts, Daniel Talia, and Sam Jacobs reportedly on more than $600,000 each, means ... [Jon Pierik, The Age, 12 July 2017, 2:37pm]
Daniel Talia
Mark Bickley questions Adelaide Crows on Jake Lever contract negotiations ... That the Crows have Walker on about $1 million a year, with Jenkins, Sloane, Eddie Betts, Daniel Talia, and Sam Jacobs reportedly on more than $600,000 each, means ... [Jon Pierik, The Age, 12 July 2017, 2:37pm]
Taylor Walker
Mark Bickley questions Adelaide Crows on Jake Lever contract negotiations ... That the Crows have Walker on about $1 million a year, with Jenkins, Sloane, Eddie Betts, Daniel Talia, and Sam Jacobs reportedly on more than $600,000 each, means ... [Jon Pierik, The Age, 12 July 2017, 2:37pm]
Bigfooty Guesstimates
Richard Douglas
He'd be on $400k easily, probably closer to $500k ...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Secondhand News About The Crows
Interesting rumours, opinions about the AFC from BF members ...
New Club Member Facilities
.
Interesting rumours, opinions about the AFC from BF members ...
New Club Member Facilities
.
Last edited:
THREADMARK No.2
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Victorian Media Bias
Media Numpties
Sam Maclure
.
Can you come up with any examples of when the Victorian media has had bias in a similar manner? I have seen comments similar to this a fair bit but nobody every substantiates it with some evidence where the Victorian media is biased against a different state. ...
Advocating Dangerfield going to Geelong [adelaidecrows]
AFC breaking covid related preseason training rules [jo172]
AFC camp vs Bumbers drugs saga [Scorpus]
Post grand final speeches [CrowsB4hoes]
Advocating Dangerfield going to Geelong [adelaidecrows]
AFC breaking covid related preseason training rules [jo172]
AFC camp vs Bumbers drugs saga [Scorpus]
Post grand final speeches [CrowsB4hoes]
Media Numpties
Sam Maclure
Back when Campbell Brown first joined the TF panel - they introduced everyone as usual, "five time All-Australian.." etc, and "Award-winning journalist Sam McClure".
So, Brown (being the new kid on the block) asked the question that had been in my mind for some time: "hang on, what awards has he won?"
Embarrassed silence ensued.
They haven't used the "award winning" intro since.
.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Swampland happenings
2009 Internal Disunity & Captaincy
Wazza 1 vote
.
2009 Internal Disunity & Captaincy
Wazza 1 vote
It's because Rucci keeps it all hidden, it's like "Wazza 1 vote" story that was only reported in Melbourne because Rucci kept it out of the press here.
When Montgomery was sacked and returned to the Bulldogs he started leaking stories about Port to the media, one of which was that not many players apparently liked Tredrea. After being acting captain in the premiership in 2004 Tredrea decided that he would challenge Primus for the captaincy in 05, but unfortunately for Tredders when the final vote was revealed it was discovered that there was only 1 vote for Tredrea and the rest for were Primus (I've always assumed the 1 vote he received was his own
Rucci never reported on it, but I do remember Rucci writing a hit piece directed at Montgomery alluding to the fact that he was spreading rumours.
Jesus Christ Crows fans view the attached gif interchange 'he's' with Port and you've got reality move on ffs
Port are shit
we've underachieved for 4 years in a row
the chief architect is signed for fat coin for the next 3
odds are your wish will come true and we're done so please until that day just **** off...
.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Propa English:
Should have vs Should of
MISTAKES + DIFFICULTIES
Should have vs Should of
The phrase should have indicates a missed obligation or opportunity in the past. In informal speech, it is contracted to should’ve, not "should of."
Should have should never be written "should of." However, the latter does exist: when should is followed by an expression that begins with of.
The Bottom Line
The erroneous phrase "should of" likely came about from the very similar pronunciation of should’ve. Perhaps I should’ve mentioned this sooner.
Would Have or Would of?
Would Have or Would of?
Marko Ticak
BASICS
When spoken aloud, would of and its fellows should of and could of sound exactly like would’ve, could’ve and should’ve. But even if no one can tell the difference when you’re speaking, the mistake becomes obvious as soon as you write it down.
The Right Way to Spell Would of, Should of, and Could of
When people write would of, should of, could of, will of or might of, they are usually confusing the verb have with the preposition of. So would of is would have, could of is could have, should of is should have, will of is will have, and might of is might have:
I would of come earlier, but I got stuck at work.
He would have stayed if he’d known you were coming.
You should of called yesterday.
You should have finished your homework by now.
This common mistake is likely caused by the similar pronunciation of the words ofand have, especially when have is contracted, as in should’ve. This mistake also happens with the negations of modal verbs:
Stella couldn’t of known she was going to win the lottery.
John couldn’t have come any earlier.
![[w.grammarly.com] its-couldve [e].jpg](data:image/svg+xml;charset=utf-8,%3Csvg xmlns%3D'http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2000%2Fsvg' width='500' height='263' viewBox%3D'0 0 500 263'%2F%3E "[w.grammarly.com] its-couldve [e].jpg")
Should have vs Should of
MISTAKES + DIFFICULTIES
Should have vs Should of
The phrase should have indicates a missed obligation or opportunity in the past. In informal speech, it is contracted to should’ve, not "should of."
You should have (should’ve) called me!
You should of called me!
I should have (should’ve) known you were lying.
I should of known you were lying.
Tom and Pauline are so selfish, they should have (should’ve) been there for you.
Tom and Pauline are so selfish, they should of been there for you.
I should have (should’ve) known you were lying.
Tom and Pauline are so selfish, they should have (should’ve) been there for you.
Should have should never be written "should of." However, the latter does exist: when should is followed by an expression that begins with of.
You should, of course, compare prices.
Past: You should, of course, have compared prices.
He should, of his own will, do the right thing.
Past: He should, of his own will, have done the right thing.
Past: You should, of course, have compared prices.
He should, of his own will, do the right thing.
Past: He should, of his own will, have done the right thing.
The Bottom Line
The erroneous phrase "should of" likely came about from the very similar pronunciation of should’ve. Perhaps I should’ve mentioned this sooner.
Would Have or Would of?
Would Have or Would of?
Marko TicakBASICS
When spoken aloud, would of and its fellows should of and could of sound exactly like would’ve, could’ve and should’ve. But even if no one can tell the difference when you’re speaking, the mistake becomes obvious as soon as you write it down.
The Right Way to Spell Would of, Should of, and Could of
When people write would of, should of, could of, will of or might of, they are usually confusing the verb have with the preposition of. So would of is would have, could of is could have, should of is should have, will of is will have, and might of is might have:
I would of come earlier, but I got stuck at work.
He would have stayed if he’d known you were coming.
You should of called yesterday.
You should have finished your homework by now.
This common mistake is likely caused by the similar pronunciation of the words ofand have, especially when have is contracted, as in should’ve. This mistake also happens with the negations of modal verbs:
Stella couldn’t of known she was going to win the lottery.
John couldn’t have come any earlier.
![[w.grammarly.com] its-couldve [e].jpg](https://www.bigfootycontent.com/attachments/559/559969-2e12e1292af81e5e2e8483a41d78459a.jpg?hash=LhLhKSr4Hl "[w.grammarly.com] its-couldve [e].jpg")
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Some Crows Defining Events
.
MacGregor v Pavlich
Tyson Edwards
May I ask, can someone please give me a condensed version of the general argument between the Crows and the Edwards family that caused the fall out?
May I ask, can someone please give me a condensed version of the general argument between the Crows and the Edwards family that caused the fall out?
.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
The Chapman Legacy
.
The Tipp
Actually it was that attention to detail that got him strife in the first place.
Balfours wanted a meeting re their sponsorship of showdowns. Phil met them for lunch. They tell him they don’t think they’re getting bang for their buck anymore with the showdown and they’d prefer to sponsor an individual player instead of the whole club. They said they wanted to sponsor Tippett. Of course we are not to organise 3rd party deals. But this is what Balfours wanted. So Phil, in his eagerness to dot t’s and cross i’s.... sent them an email confirming the changes THEY had requested. He felt, as they’d requested it, there was no need to advise the AFL. It was this email that sunk him.
...
ah look, every village has them and a couple of ours have obviously escaped
Tippett himself isn’t a very sympathetic character, but this isn’t his doing.
he wanted to go to Gold Coast under their original concessions where he could pre-sign a year out. We begged him not to, and threw a crazy (rule breaking) deal at him.
that moment the die was cast. It was our idea, it was stupid and worst of all it stitched our fortunes to a player (and his representatives) of less than the highest probity. What could go wrong?!?
that contract gave him the right to be the first virtual free agent before free agency came in. It gave him the option to shop himself not just to Gold Coast, but anyone. So he did
we were stupid to give anyone that sort of option, let alone him, and he was incentivised to screw us. So of course he did.
we believed he wouldn’t want to leave what we were building, and we believed that by ignoring the law of unintended consequences and because we didn’t understand how powerful that option we gave him was. He did.
so of course he went to market
and you guys bit.
not your fault, you didn’t do the deal.
BUT you did try and take advantage. Perhaps fairly too, I might argue you almost had a fiduciary duty to your club and supporters to drive a bus right through that window of opportunity. But anyway
however by this stage rumours were wildfire throughout the league, about this clause and all the OTHER shenanigans our polluted administration pulled with this deal.
so you need to appear innocent whilst also trying to maximise this unique advantage presented to you by him choosing you. If anyone believes the Tippett camp didn’t consider other teams you crazy, but you guys won his signature.
so to put people off the scent you offered much more than the clause specified, and much less than he was worth. It was a fine line, because if the clause is discovered then all bets are off, and you lose this magnificent opportunity. So you have to act like you don’t know about it, whilst holding back enough to benefit from it
your offer is so obviously below value, but suspiciously more than the rumoured clause that it makes no sense. Your offer attracts the attention of AFL House, and they step in and say they will not approve it. It fails the smell test
so yeah, your offer brought the house down. By that time though, nothing you could have done would have worked. There was no path through
the only way through, which wasn’t an option, was to pay Tippett his kings ransom and full market value. BUT what is your incentive to do that? Why would you pay twice?
in modern terms you were being asked to pay a full unrestricted FA salary, and a full trade value to acquire him. The only reason you had interest in him, at the contract price you offered, was the unprecedented opportunity to get him cheap.
you were not innocent but there was a reason the league chose to punish everyone else but you guys
you did try to take advantage, you did twist the knife, you did know all about it - what’s not clear is whether you really did all that much wrong.
So yeah of course our gurning idiots would like to strike back, but the blame is ours
and as for Tippett himself, caveat emptor!!!!!
Burton Sacking
coachwoodford Instagram post
Look up the name “Brett burton” on the internet you would find words
.
“Jobs for the boys”
.
“Incompetent”
.
“Self preservation”
.
“Liar”
.
I still can’t understand;
.
1. He was hired as the “high performance manager” of the Brisbane lions immediately after he retired! I mean it’s not like it’s a big deal managing HP department staff or structure of entire physical preparation program for the entire year ..makes total sense to hire him
.
2. Even after his poor performance (injuries) at the lions the fact that Adelaide hired him as their high performance manager and sacked a man who is actually good at his job (now at GWS) makes little sense. They literally fired a man who was actually competent and had vast experience for a guy who was a scrub with minimal experience
.
3. Adelaide then “promote” Brett burton to the head of football ...they promoted him to a job he has no experience at and by all accounts communicates poorly and only cares about power/controlThis is after how Adelaide literally had half their list with strained hamstrings ✔ Yet they keep a man who was the individual who was the main driver behind the program and the one who brings in another coach who he worked with in Brisbane (yes man) to take his old role as HPM! Taking the head of football gives greater job security than the role of the HPM which they can be blamed for everything
.
4. Brett still keeps his job after that camp that no one wants to take responsibility for lol in what world would that be a good idea ? The fact that after all these issues the man kept his job is incredible
.
I love how it just shows if you think that professional sport hires the best person/individual for jobs in HP you are kidding yourself. Literally - this man was incompetent and some how via his ability to self preservate and more than likely blame others for their downfall kept his job and his well paid salary. Just shows jobs for the boys mentality
.
I am glad Brett helped our our industry by showing everyone that being a HPM is about really putting in the time & paying your dues (NOT)
.
Well done Adelaide for getting some balls & Brett **** you for taking the piss out of something I love
.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Selecting the best available talent
What does it take to draft and successfully developing Elite footballers?
Interesting threads
Why its harder for us to retain players
. oooooooo oowoo ooo oo .._.. o
Return on investment
Adelaide > Grundy Free Agent 2020
Adelaide > 2019 Draft - now with poll!
Adelaide > Grundy Free Agent 2020
Adelaide > 2019 Draft - now with poll!
What does it take to draft and successfully developing Elite footballers?
Crows' Approach
Related threads/posts:
* Drafting SA kids as a priority
* Why we haven't won a men's flag since 1998 [#47] [#50] [#65]
* Crows V Weagles 21 Feb [#1490]
Related threads/posts:
* Drafting SA kids as a priority
* Why we haven't won a men's flag since 1998 [#47] [#50] [#65]
* Crows V Weagles 21 Feb [#1490]
Talent Identification
Identifying players who have the greatest ceiling
- players who have already matured/reached their maximum growth in their draft year may not have much more potential to improve
Having the best draft pick could make it easy to take the easy path and draft the best performing player in their draft year (especially if a club does not have adequate talent identification resources (scouts, skilled evaluators) - but do they also have the potential to develop further?
Identifying players who have the greatest ceiling
- players who have already matured/reached their maximum growth in their draft year may not have much more potential to improve
Having the best draft pick could make it easy to take the easy path and draft the best performing player in their draft year (especially if a club does not have adequate talent identification resources (scouts, skilled evaluators) - but do they also have the potential to develop further?
Player Development
Midfielder Types
Scorpus' Statistical Analysis
Seeing as though you are interested in whether having higher picks is better than lower picks, here is the evidence, using a much harsher (although arbitrary) metric of elite. Period of data is from 2000-2014.
Picks 1 to 7: 12 elite players
Picks 8 to 21: 12 elite players
If you had pick 1: 24/315 players you'd reasonably select to pick are elite, so 7.6% of the pool
At pick 4 you're down to 16/270 or 5.9%
If you had pick 8 and 13. At pick 8, we're looking at 12/210, pick 13 7/135. So at pick 8, 5.7% of the players in the remaining pool are elite, and at pick 13 we're down to 5.2%.
Of course at pick 1, 8 and 13 you are able to take any player selected after pick 21 as well.
I've stated in the past there is very little difference in quality between pick 3 and all the picks up to 14 (using the above analysis). At pick 15 there is a decline in quality and it becomes a shitshow after that point.
Using a logarithmic trendline there.
So picks 1 and 2 are very high chances (>40%). At pick 5 you're down to a 30% chance on the trendline but that only drops to 20% by pick 14 or so.
Of course this data only accounts for how a player turned out, so after development, not how good a player was at the time they were drafted.
In fact there are some indicators that the better developers of talent tend to have lower/worse picks because they are naturally better run, more successful clubs. These better run clubs more often make the finals, hence their worse draft picks. Whereas teams that languish at the bottom of the ladder consume a large number of single digit picks
Picks 10 through 14 (generally these picks were made by teams that made the finals) has an average very good strike rate of 31%, compared to just 23% for picks 4 through 9 (teams that generally failed to make finals)
Interesting threads
Why its harder for us to retain players
. oooooooo oowoo ooo oo .._.. o
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Crows & SANFL
2019 Rules for the Crows & PAFC
2022 SANFL Rule Changes [sanfl.com.au 20211027]
SANFL adjusts lists rules for AFL clubs [sanfl.com.au 20221027]
.....for 2023
.
2019 Rules for the Crows & PAFC
2022 SANFL Rule Changes [sanfl.com.au 20211027]
SANFL adjusts lists rules for AFL clubs [sanfl.com.au 20221027]
.....for 2023
.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Crows-Carlton 2019 Pick Swap
AFC Trades/Draft 2015-2018
Gibbs
AFC Trades/Draft 2015-2018
Gibbs
Last edited:
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Pardon me while I get a bit greedy grabbing some more reserved posts. 
From
He created those off the back of some pretty handy concessions (namely the ridiculously Victorian-biased Father-Son rules the AFL had in place), and quite a few 1st and 2nd rounders in some really deep draft pools.
If you're referring to 2007 onwards, in that time we've lost six A-graders, before losing another potential A-grader this year in McGovern.
Name me one other club who has lost that many A-graders over such a short period of time and still won a flag? Please, indulge me.
Jack Gunston alone went on to win three flags (as many as Geelong in their period of gift-wrapped dominance) almost immediately after crossing to Hawthorn. He went on to lead Hawthorn's goalkicking in two successive years (including their last Premiership year). Gunston is an All Australian. Left us for pittance and played a key role in the Hawks side who defeated an undermanned Adelaide outift by less than a kick in the 2012 Prelim Final.
Kurt Tippett went on to play in a GF for Sydney and was twice the leading goalicker (once for us, and once for Sydney in the year they made the GF). Left us for pittance.
We were then left with a young Taylor Walker to spearhead our attack - who then did his ACL that same year. We were then left with the virtually untried Josh Jenkins and Tom Lynch as our KPF stocks.
Phil Davis went on to co-captain his club to three successive Prelim finals. He is regarded as one of the best Key Defenders in the AFL. We received a compensatory 1st round pick, while being left with an ageing Ben Rutten, and a 21 yr old Rising Star winner Daniel Talia to carry our entire backline on his young shoulders...
Nathan Bock was a B&F winner and All Australian CHB. Left us for pittance, left Ben Rutten to carry the entire defence as Andy Otten was on the comeback from his first ACL and Scott Stevens was a battler at best.
Otten would subsequently play as one of two underdone KPD's (Luke Thompson being the other) against Hawthorn in that 2012 Prelim, after Talia broke his arm.
Patrick Dangerfield is a Crows B&F winner, a two-time Geelong B&F winner, a SIX time All Australian and Vice Captain AA, a Leigh Matthews Trophy Winner, an AFLCA Player of the year and won a Brownlow Medal the year after leaving us for, you guessed it, pittance.
Do I really need to go into detail as to how much losing a player of Dangerfield's quality would hurt any club in the AFL? It cannot even be overstated.
We were also sanctioned during that time and subsequently stripped of two years worth of 1st and 2nd round picks for doing something Victorian clubs have been doing for decades and still do to this very day, yet STILL nailed our late picks those two years, bounced back and played in finals three straight years culminating in a GF appearance only four years after the ridiculous sanctions (only two years after our head coach was murdered, and one of our finest administrators in Dean Bailey passed away, in case you've forgotten).
What we have achieved as a club is nothing short of a miracle, given what we've been up against in the last decade alone (the first decade almost pales in comparison, but that in itself was hellish).
I am proud of our ability to identify and develop talent, I would obviously just like to see more of that elite talent stick around and actually achieve the highest possible success, together.
You said "has made finals 13/14 seasons without high draft picks" - Ok so define "high draft picks" because Adelaide have only had TWO "high draft picks" (inside the top 8 picks) throughout our entire existence... 28 years.... just think about that for a second.
If we're being reasonable here, let's use 1st and 2nd rounders as a qualifier, because to any Adelaide supporter - those are what we would generally define as "high" draft picks.
1997:
Rd 1
Pick 15 - Joel McKay
Rd 2
Pick 29 - Mark Woolnough (F/S)
Rd 3
Pick 38 - James Rahilly
Pick 40 - Matthew Scarlett (F/S)
Pick 54 - James Wood
Pick 61 - Tim Finocchiaro
TWO Father-Son picks on the cheap in a single year, like c'mon
1998:
Rd 2
Pick 17 - Peter Street
Pick 21 - David Clarke (F/S)
Pick 24 - David Wojcinski
Three 2nd rounders is hardly anything to complain about
1999:
Rd 1
Pick 8 - Joel Corey
Pick 15 - David Spriggs
Pick 17 - Ezra Bray
Rd 2
Pick 23 - Daniel Foster
Pick 31 - Paul Chapman
Rd 3
Pick 38 - Cameron Ling
Pick 47 - Corey Enright
Three picks inside the 1st round and FIVE picks inside the first two rounds
2000: All late picks (which included Josh Hunt at pick 44) and Max Rooke at Pick 41 in the Rookie Draft.
2001:
Rd 1
Pick 8 - Jimmy Bartel
Pick 17 - James Kelly
Rd 2
Pick 23 - Charlie Gardiner
Pick 24 - Steve Johnson
Rd 3
Pick 40 - Gary Ablett Jnr (F/S) - do I even need to say it?
Pick 41 - Henry Playfair
Rd 6
Pick 69 - Matthew McCarthy
Rd 7
Pick 81 - David Johnson
So FOUR picks inside the top 24 of a SUPERDRAFT, plus Ablett for a bag of crisps, as I've mentioned previously due to the draconian Vic-centric Father-Son rules in place at the time.
2002:
Rd 1
Pick 7 - Andrew Mackie
Rd 2
Pick 23- Tom Lonergan
Rd 3
Pick 36 - Tim Callan (F/S)
Pick 42 - Matthew Spencer
Rookie Pick 40 - Shannon Byrnes
Two high picks with your 2nd rounder being early, and yet another Father-Son.
2003:
Rd 1
Pick 7 - Kane Tenace
Rd 2
Pick 22 - Cameron Thurley
Rd 3
Pick 38 - Mark Blake (F/S)
Oh look another Father-Son late pick who went on to be a Premiership player!
2004:
Rd 2
Pick 32 - Brent Prismall
Rd 3
Pick 48 - Nathan Ablett (F/S)
And another one...
2005:
Rd 1
Pick 15 - Travis Varcoe
Rd 2
Pick 31 - Trent West
Pick 35 - Stephen Owen
Rd 3
Pick 47 - Ryan Gamble
Rd 4
Pick 61 - Matthew Stokes
Another three picks inside the first two rounds for Wells.
2006:
Rd 1
Pick 7 - Joel Selwood
Rd 2
Pick 25 - Nathan Djerrkura
Rd 3
Pick 41 - Tom Hawkins (F/S)
Wouldn't you know it, yet ANOTHER cheap Father-Son who went on to play a key role in Geelong's flags...
So that's 22 Premiership players bolded of which:
7 came from the 1st round
4 came from the 2nd round (not including F/S picks)
3 came from the 3rd round (not including F/S picks)
1 came from the 4th round
2 came from the Rookie Draft
5 came from Father-Son picks who cost no more than a 3rd round pick - almost a quarter of the 22 listed...
That's without mentioning Harry Taylor, another 1st round pick to add to the seven previously mentioned Premiership stars taken in that round.
I did omit Darren Milburn, who Wells deserves great credit for taking late, in his first draft in charge no less
But all in all, it's hardly "anything to boast about" as to the quality of recruitment. Without being disrespectful (as I do have respect for his body of work), he did have those F/S selections handed to him on a platter.
I also found it slightly ironic that you chose to use the time period 2007 onwards in your whinge regarding not having any high picks to work with, given the AFL had to revamp the F-S rules that year in light of Geelong already having benefitted more from the previous archaic F/S system than any other club in the history of the AFL.
I think it's important to take in the whole picture when attempting to sling mud from afar. I've given you an in depth look at both sides of the coin - perhaps you'll think differently when you look at Adelaide's achievements to date, perhaps not.
As a supporter who has learned to never take for granted our past successes, or present failures in the face of great adversity, I think as a Geelong supporter you're about to begin to very much assimilate with that train of thought over the coming years - this is when Mr Wells will truly earn his money.
.
He created those off the back of some pretty handy concessions (namely the ridiculously Victorian-biased Father-Son rules the AFL had in place), and quite a few 1st and 2nd rounders in some really deep draft pools.
If you're referring to 2007 onwards, in that time we've lost six A-graders, before losing another potential A-grader this year in McGovern.
Name me one other club who has lost that many A-graders over such a short period of time and still won a flag? Please, indulge me.
Jack Gunston alone went on to win three flags (as many as Geelong in their period of gift-wrapped dominance) almost immediately after crossing to Hawthorn. He went on to lead Hawthorn's goalkicking in two successive years (including their last Premiership year). Gunston is an All Australian. Left us for pittance and played a key role in the Hawks side who defeated an undermanned Adelaide outift by less than a kick in the 2012 Prelim Final.
Kurt Tippett went on to play in a GF for Sydney and was twice the leading goalicker (once for us, and once for Sydney in the year they made the GF). Left us for pittance.
We were then left with a young Taylor Walker to spearhead our attack - who then did his ACL that same year. We were then left with the virtually untried Josh Jenkins and Tom Lynch as our KPF stocks.
Phil Davis went on to co-captain his club to three successive Prelim finals. He is regarded as one of the best Key Defenders in the AFL. We received a compensatory 1st round pick, while being left with an ageing Ben Rutten, and a 21 yr old Rising Star winner Daniel Talia to carry our entire backline on his young shoulders...
Nathan Bock was a B&F winner and All Australian CHB. Left us for pittance, left Ben Rutten to carry the entire defence as Andy Otten was on the comeback from his first ACL and Scott Stevens was a battler at best.
Otten would subsequently play as one of two underdone KPD's (Luke Thompson being the other) against Hawthorn in that 2012 Prelim, after Talia broke his arm.
Patrick Dangerfield is a Crows B&F winner, a two-time Geelong B&F winner, a SIX time All Australian and Vice Captain AA, a Leigh Matthews Trophy Winner, an AFLCA Player of the year and won a Brownlow Medal the year after leaving us for, you guessed it, pittance.
Do I really need to go into detail as to how much losing a player of Dangerfield's quality would hurt any club in the AFL? It cannot even be overstated.
We were also sanctioned during that time and subsequently stripped of two years worth of 1st and 2nd round picks for doing something Victorian clubs have been doing for decades and still do to this very day, yet STILL nailed our late picks those two years, bounced back and played in finals three straight years culminating in a GF appearance only four years after the ridiculous sanctions (only two years after our head coach was murdered, and one of our finest administrators in Dean Bailey passed away, in case you've forgotten).
What we have achieved as a club is nothing short of a miracle, given what we've been up against in the last decade alone (the first decade almost pales in comparison, but that in itself was hellish).
I am proud of our ability to identify and develop talent, I would obviously just like to see more of that elite talent stick around and actually achieve the highest possible success, together.
You said "has made finals 13/14 seasons without high draft picks" - Ok so define "high draft picks" because Adelaide have only had TWO "high draft picks" (inside the top 8 picks) throughout our entire existence... 28 years.... just think about that for a second.
If we're being reasonable here, let's use 1st and 2nd rounders as a qualifier, because to any Adelaide supporter - those are what we would generally define as "high" draft picks.
1997:
Rd 1
Pick 15 - Joel McKay
Rd 2
Pick 29 - Mark Woolnough (F/S)
Rd 3
Pick 38 - James Rahilly
Pick 40 - Matthew Scarlett (F/S)
Pick 54 - James Wood
Pick 61 - Tim Finocchiaro
TWO Father-Son picks on the cheap in a single year, like c'mon
1998:
Rd 2
Pick 17 - Peter Street
Pick 21 - David Clarke (F/S)
Pick 24 - David Wojcinski
Three 2nd rounders is hardly anything to complain about
1999:
Rd 1
Pick 8 - Joel Corey
Pick 15 - David Spriggs
Pick 17 - Ezra Bray
Rd 2
Pick 23 - Daniel Foster
Pick 31 - Paul Chapman
Rd 3
Pick 38 - Cameron Ling
Pick 47 - Corey Enright
Three picks inside the 1st round and FIVE picks inside the first two rounds
2000: All late picks (which included Josh Hunt at pick 44) and Max Rooke at Pick 41 in the Rookie Draft.
2001:
Rd 1
Pick 8 - Jimmy Bartel
Pick 17 - James Kelly
Rd 2
Pick 23 - Charlie Gardiner
Pick 24 - Steve Johnson
Rd 3
Pick 40 - Gary Ablett Jnr (F/S) - do I even need to say it?
Pick 41 - Henry Playfair
Rd 6
Pick 69 - Matthew McCarthy
Rd 7
Pick 81 - David Johnson
So FOUR picks inside the top 24 of a SUPERDRAFT, plus Ablett for a bag of crisps, as I've mentioned previously due to the draconian Vic-centric Father-Son rules in place at the time.
2002:
Rd 1
Pick 7 - Andrew Mackie
Rd 2
Pick 23- Tom Lonergan
Rd 3
Pick 36 - Tim Callan (F/S)
Pick 42 - Matthew Spencer
Rookie Pick 40 - Shannon Byrnes
Two high picks with your 2nd rounder being early, and yet another Father-Son.
2003:
Rd 1
Pick 7 - Kane Tenace
Rd 2
Pick 22 - Cameron Thurley
Rd 3
Pick 38 - Mark Blake (F/S)
Oh look another Father-Son late pick who went on to be a Premiership player!
2004:
Rd 2
Pick 32 - Brent Prismall
Rd 3
Pick 48 - Nathan Ablett (F/S)
And another one...
2005:
Rd 1
Pick 15 - Travis Varcoe
Rd 2
Pick 31 - Trent West
Pick 35 - Stephen Owen
Rd 3
Pick 47 - Ryan Gamble
Rd 4
Pick 61 - Matthew Stokes
Another three picks inside the first two rounds for Wells.
2006:
Rd 1
Pick 7 - Joel Selwood
Rd 2
Pick 25 - Nathan Djerrkura
Rd 3
Pick 41 - Tom Hawkins (F/S)
Wouldn't you know it, yet ANOTHER cheap Father-Son who went on to play a key role in Geelong's flags...
So that's 22 Premiership players bolded of which:
7 came from the 1st round
4 came from the 2nd round (not including F/S picks)
3 came from the 3rd round (not including F/S picks)
1 came from the 4th round
2 came from the Rookie Draft
5 came from Father-Son picks who cost no more than a 3rd round pick - almost a quarter of the 22 listed...
That's without mentioning Harry Taylor, another 1st round pick to add to the seven previously mentioned Premiership stars taken in that round.
I did omit Darren Milburn, who Wells deserves great credit for taking late, in his first draft in charge no less
But all in all, it's hardly "anything to boast about" as to the quality of recruitment. Without being disrespectful (as I do have respect for his body of work), he did have those F/S selections handed to him on a platter.
I also found it slightly ironic that you chose to use the time period 2007 onwards in your whinge regarding not having any high picks to work with, given the AFL had to revamp the F-S rules that year in light of Geelong already having benefitted more from the previous archaic F/S system than any other club in the history of the AFL.
I think it's important to take in the whole picture when attempting to sling mud from afar. I've given you an in depth look at both sides of the coin - perhaps you'll think differently when you look at Adelaide's achievements to date, perhaps not.
As a supporter who has learned to never take for granted our past successes, or present failures in the face of great adversity, I think as a Geelong supporter you're about to begin to very much assimilate with that train of thought over the coming years - this is when Mr Wells will truly earn his money.
.
Bicks
AFL 2019: Premiership coach Paul Roos pinpoints the ‘appalling’ statistic hurting Adelaide
The ‘appalling’ statistic which could cause Crows to miss finalswww.foxsports.com.au
Sorry Mrs Crouch...
PS Petes an arseh*le too, he wants both your boys gone
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Member Recollections of Past Trades
GROTTO said:
Ayres screwed us. Taking a cooked Carey over a younger Pav was one of the biggest mistakes we made as a Club, imo cost us a flag.
Pav was definitely ready to come home at the time.
...
I knew his family and friends.
------------------------------
Ayres screwed us. Taking a cooked Carey over a younger Pav was one of the biggest mistakes we made as a Club, imo cost us a flag.
Pav was definitely ready to come home at the time.
...
I knew his family and friends.
------------------------------
James_37 said:
Carey was worth at best a pick in the 20’s. As good as he was, he was coming off a year out of the game, his shoulders were shot and he was into his 30’s.
Pav should have been the number 1 target, not Carey. Get Pav and then grab Carey if the chips still fall that way.
The trade should be judged as pick 4 and not pick 2. Still though, we paid too much for Carey and shouldn’t have ignored Pav, but hey that’s what happens when you have Trigg, Ayres and Reid heading list management...
The other point to make with Carey, is that he was actually coming good in 2014 before the neck injury that ruined his career. Was on track for a 50 goal season and potentially had another year or 2 in him. Sure he wasn’t the Carey of the 90’s, but was still a bloody good forward (go watch the games against Hawthorn and Essendon in 2014 for proof of this).
It wasn’t all Ayres/Triggs/Reid’s fault though... The footy gods did not smile on the Carey trade for us, from the start we were getting screwed over with the draft pick issue and it continued with square posts and then freak neck injuries.
------------------------------
jumboprince said:
> I don't know if Carey would of got on with Craig.
Yeah he would have, Craig played with the Jumboprince himself, he knew what it was like to have a gifted player in the side. In a time Sturt had a ton of great players, they also had Davies, a player that read the way the play was going, ignored instruction and went there to influence play.
Pretty sure the story goes that Jack Oatey barked at the runner to find out why Davies was playing in the F 50 instead of a kick behind play, the runner went out to Davies, ad a chat, ran back and told Oatey on the phone that Davies said he was winning the bloody match for Sturt down there, that's what he was doing ignoring instructions and Oatey laughed and said of course he is, that's why he's a bloody champ.*
*Story may not be 100% word for word but is a legend of Jumboprince. Oatey was like Craig ( except the winning GFs bit), they all have their favourites when they have a dead set champ in the side.
I can understand people saying why did we get Carey but we were a game off the GF with our forward line needing improvement and the greatest CHF of the modern game became available, I just can't blame Ayres for putting all the eggs in one basket, at the time I'd probably have done the same. Sucks we didn't get Pav but that is 20/20 hindsight
------------------------------
This was the big one. We had the chips in Pick 4 to potentially get the deal done, but then decided to pay massive overs for Carey.
Carey was worth at best a pick in the 20’s. As good as he was, he was coming off a year out of the game, his shoulders were shot and he was into his 30’s.
Pav should have been the number 1 target, not Carey. Get Pav and then grab Carey if the chips still fall that way.
It was pick 4 when we traded it. Carlton had the first 2 picks thanks to a PP. There were 2 standouts in that draft, Goddard and Wells, after that there was a fair drop off and history pretty much backs this up. The AFL screwed us, and Richmond for that matter, by waiting till after trade week to relieve Carlton of their picks. If it were pick 2, Richmond were on record as saying they wouldn’t have traded it to us for Johnson either.
The trade should be judged as pick 4 and not pick 2. Still though, we paid too much for Carey and shouldn’t have ignored Pav, but hey that’s what happens when you have Trigg, Ayres and Reid heading list management...
The other point to make with Carey, is that he was actually coming good in 2014 before the neck injury that ruined his career. Was on track for a 50 goal season and potentially had another year or 2 in him. Sure he wasn’t the Carey of the 90’s, but was still a bloody good forward (go watch the games against Hawthorn and Essendon in 2014 for proof of this).
It wasn’t all Ayres/Triggs/Reid’s fault though... The footy gods did not smile on the Carey trade for us, from the start we were getting screwed over with the draft pick issue and it continued with square posts and then freak neck injuries.
------------------------------
jumboprince said:
> I don't know if Carey would of got on with Craig.
Yeah he would have, Craig played with the Jumboprince himself, he knew what it was like to have a gifted player in the side. In a time Sturt had a ton of great players, they also had Davies, a player that read the way the play was going, ignored instruction and went there to influence play.
Pretty sure the story goes that Jack Oatey barked at the runner to find out why Davies was playing in the F 50 instead of a kick behind play, the runner went out to Davies, ad a chat, ran back and told Oatey on the phone that Davies said he was winning the bloody match for Sturt down there, that's what he was doing ignoring instructions and Oatey laughed and said of course he is, that's why he's a bloody champ.*
*Story may not be 100% word for word but is a legend of Jumboprince. Oatey was like Craig ( except the winning GFs bit), they all have their favourites when they have a dead set champ in the side.
I can understand people saying why did we get Carey but we were a game off the GF with our forward line needing improvement and the greatest CHF of the modern game became available, I just can't blame Ayres for putting all the eggs in one basket, at the time I'd probably have done the same. Sucks we didn't get Pav but that is 20/20 hindsight
------------------------------
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Rebuilding Player Lists 101
Knightmare's thoughts on GWS, GCS & Carlton list building
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
Also:
.
St.Kilda Supporter
Also:
.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
On Face Masks Use
Face Mask Type - Respirators (eg. N95) v Surgical masks
*
Surgical/Medical masks
* They vary in thickness and permeability and are not certified to protect users from airborne infection. [1]
* Surgical type does not fully seal against aerosol-ised potentially virus containing liquid droplets from sneezes/coughs [>>]
* Surgical masks are used as a physical barrier to protect the user from hazards, such as splashes of large droplets of blood or body fluids. Surgical masks also protect other people against infection from the person wearing the surgical mask. Such masks trap large particles of body fluids that may contain bacteria or viruses expelled by the wearer. [2]
N95 Respirators
* are specifically designed to protect users from small airborne particles, including aerosols. Strict regulations dictate the filtration efficiency and breathing resistance of N95 respirators, which also require fit-testing to ensure a tight seal around the user’s face. [1]
* Respirators are designed to reduce a worker’s exposure to airborne contaminants. Respirators come in various sizes and must be individually selected to fit the wearer’s face and to provide a tight seal. A proper seal between the user’s face and the respirator forces inhaled air to be pulled through the respirator’s filter material and not through gaps between the face and respirator. [2]
* Respirators offer the best protection for workers who must work closely (either in contact with or within 6 feet) with people who have influenza‑like symptoms. These generally include those workers who work in occupations classified as very high exposure risk or high exposure risk to pandemic influenza. [2]
Applicable Use Of Surgical Type
* Protection against larger hazardous fluids in medical environments (when used together with face/eye protection)
Correct Use
* On removal of face mask, awareness that used face masks are likely to be contaminated with virus so after handling used masks, need to avoid touching mouth/eyes/nose until cleaning/disinfecting procedures carried out on hands
Drawbacks of using masks
* Wearers not wearing eye protection and the same time leaving eyes exposed to possible infection
* Wearers may have false sense security and engage in riskier behaviour
General public use of face masks
* Will people observe correct use procedures and necessary precautions
* Discomfort causing wearer to remove/reach under mask to rub/scratch face.
References
* [1] Effectiveness of Masks and Respirators Against Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
* [2] WEB CACHED: Respiratory infection control= respirators versus surgical mask. OSHA Fact Sheet2009
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2015
- Posts
- 11,401
- Reaction score
- 18,731
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
PICK TRADING BASED POINTS
There is a common view that the points value of draft picks mean nothing outside of Father-Son/Academy bid matching.
However, looking at pick trades that have occurred in recent drafts indicate that club list managers may, in fact, make use of the points value of picks in their trades.
In any trade, either both clubs are equally keen for the trade or one club is keener and needs to pay a premium on what they get in return in order to convince the other club to go ahead with the trade.
Whether the keener club is seeking a pick upgrade or downgrade result will also have an effect on the premium required. Trading multiple later r1 picks for an early r1 pick (upgrade) will require a much bigger premium than seeking to trade an early r1 pick for multiple later r1 picks (downgrade) as there would be more enthusiastic customers for a downgrade.
So the point of this post is to see whether actual pick only trades follow this principle or not.
Usually, one club wants to make a trade and needs to pay some extra i order to convince the other agreeing club(s) to agree to a trade.
How much extra needs to paid by the trade seeking club may depend on: how desperate they need trade to happen, ...
The following looks mostly at:
- pick only trades (and picks from the same draft) as the most clear indicator of pick points worth
and avoiding:
- future picks as estimating what they are likely to be worth is an added complication.
- player trades as their worth in terms of picks points are subjective
Some points
---
[] High picks refer to their points value, not numeric number - pick #1 is highest
[] Generally a trade seeking club's aim is to trade for higher picks using a combination of lower picks (though there have been exceptions)
Some conclusions
* Club wanting to downgrade their pick can do it with a more even points value trade
* Club wanting to upgrade their pick(s) need to pay more points value in trade
There is a common view that the points value of draft picks mean nothing outside of Father-Son/Academy bid matching.
However, looking at pick trades that have occurred in recent drafts indicate that club list managers may, in fact, make use of the points value of picks in their trades.
In any trade, either both clubs are equally keen for the trade or one club is keener and needs to pay a premium on what they get in return in order to convince the other club to go ahead with the trade.
Whether the keener club is seeking a pick upgrade or downgrade result will also have an effect on the premium required. Trading multiple later r1 picks for an early r1 pick (upgrade) will require a much bigger premium than seeking to trade an early r1 pick for multiple later r1 picks (downgrade) as there would be more enthusiastic customers for a downgrade.
So the point of this post is to see whether actual pick only trades follow this principle or not.
Usually, one club wants to make a trade and needs to pay some extra i order to convince the other agreeing club(s) to agree to a trade.
How much extra needs to paid by the trade seeking club may depend on: how desperate they need trade to happen, ...
The following looks mostly at:
- pick only trades (and picks from the same draft) as the most clear indicator of pick points worth
and avoiding:
- future picks as estimating what they are likely to be worth is an added complication.
- player trades as their worth in terms of picks points are subjective
Some points
---
[] High picks refer to their points value, not numeric number - pick #1 is highest
[] Generally a trade seeking club's aim is to trade for higher picks using a combination of lower picks (though there have been exceptions)
Some conclusions
* Club wanting to downgrade their pick can do it with a more even points value trade
* Club wanting to upgrade their pick(s) need to pay more points value in trade
In the following trades, I am pretty much guessing at the motivations of the clubs involved and based on what was traded, come to a conclusion on which club instigated a trade and had to convince the other club to accept their offer.
2016
bris 2,31,51,60 = 3528
for gws 3,16 = 3301
- premium: 7%
- looks like Bris wanting to get another r1 pick by downgrading pick 2
---
From memory we also needed points for our academy kids and pick 16 was going to get chewed up on Perryman and Cumming. (I thiink they were the academy kids that year, but could have been Kennedy and Himmelberg) [->]
---
You had a couple of academy kids that were rated mid first round, and got back a few later picks from us for the points. [->]
---
stk 10,68 = 1454
for haw 23,36,2017r1(15?) = 2429
- premium: 67%
- looks like Hawks desperate to upgrade to a r1 pick
gc 26,80 = 729 [800]
for wb 35,43 = 900
- premium: 23%
- looks like fairly even, maybe WB want 26
gws 31 = 606
for syd 39,52 = 692
- premium: 14%
- looks like Syd wanting to get 8 pick upgrade to 31
port 9,19,49 = 2704
for syd 14,17,31 = 2792
- premium: 3%
- looks like port wanting two close mid r1 picks, both clubs have a small upgrade and a small downgrade of late r1 picks
2017
carl 16,40 = 1496
for wb 28,30,2018r2(28?) = 1983
- premium: 33%
- looks like wb desperate to upgrade for a r1 pick
bris 20,25 = 912+756 = 1668
for rich 15,52 = 1112+246 = 1358
- premium: 23%
- looks like bris wanting upgrade to a r1 pick
2018
bris 24,59,80 = 943 +#80(no points)
for gc 32,41,44,78 = 1358 +#78(no points)
- premium: 44%
- looks like gc wanting 12pick upgrade
port 11,23,30,49 = 3060
for freo 6,2019r3(#45?) = 2098
- premium: 46%
- this looks like port desperate to get pick 6
nor 31 = 606
for freo 47,49,55 = 810
- premium: %
- looks like wanting freo 16pick upgrade
stk 28 = 677
for melb 36,46 = 833
- premium: 23%
- this looks like mel wanting 8pick upgrade
geel 59,60 = 304
for coll 51 = 259
- premium: 17%
- looks like geel wanting 8-pick upgrade to r3
afc 19,2019r1(12?) = 2216
for carl 2019r1(8?) = 1551
- future trade, hard to tell value at the time but carl were keen on Stocker
freo 34,41 = 954
for wb 30,57 = 811
- looks like freo want small upgrade
- premium: 18%
2016
bris 2,31,51,60 = 3528
for gws 3,16 = 3301
- premium: 7%
- looks like Bris wanting to get another r1 pick by downgrading pick 2
---
From memory we also needed points for our academy kids and pick 16 was going to get chewed up on Perryman and Cumming. (I thiink they were the academy kids that year, but could have been Kennedy and Himmelberg) [->]
---
You had a couple of academy kids that were rated mid first round, and got back a few later picks from us for the points. [->]
---
stk 10,68 = 1454
for haw 23,36,2017r1(15?) = 2429
- premium: 67%
- looks like Hawks desperate to upgrade to a r1 pick
gc 26,80 = 729 [800]
for wb 35,43 = 900
- premium: 23%
- looks like fairly even, maybe WB want 26
gws 31 = 606
for syd 39,52 = 692
- premium: 14%
- looks like Syd wanting to get 8 pick upgrade to 31
port 9,19,49 = 2704
for syd 14,17,31 = 2792
- premium: 3%
- looks like port wanting two close mid r1 picks, both clubs have a small upgrade and a small downgrade of late r1 picks
2017
carl 16,40 = 1496
for wb 28,30,2018r2(28?) = 1983
- premium: 33%
- looks like wb desperate to upgrade for a r1 pick
bris 20,25 = 912+756 = 1668
for rich 15,52 = 1112+246 = 1358
- premium: 23%
- looks like bris wanting upgrade to a r1 pick
2018
bris 24,59,80 = 943 +#80(no points)
for gc 32,41,44,78 = 1358 +#78(no points)
- premium: 44%
- looks like gc wanting 12pick upgrade
port 11,23,30,49 = 3060
for freo 6,2019r3(#45?) = 2098
- premium: 46%
- this looks like port desperate to get pick 6
nor 31 = 606
for freo 47,49,55 = 810
- premium: %
- looks like wanting freo 16pick upgrade
stk 28 = 677
for melb 36,46 = 833
- premium: 23%
- this looks like mel wanting 8pick upgrade
geel 59,60 = 304
for coll 51 = 259
- premium: 17%
- looks like geel wanting 8-pick upgrade to r3
afc 19,2019r1(12?) = 2216
for carl 2019r1(8?) = 1551
- future trade, hard to tell value at the time but carl were keen on Stocker
freo 34,41 = 954
for wb 30,57 = 811
- looks like freo want small upgrade
- premium: 18%
Kym Ryder to deaneus.mp3
www.bigfooty.com
Do we trust wikipedia?
According to:
NFL Night Series - Wikipedia
Australian Football Championships night series - Wikipedia
Norwood were involved in/played:
1976 - 3 games
1977 - 4 games
1978 - 2 games
1979 - 4 games
1980 - 1 game (Escort Cup)
1981 - 1 game (Escort Cup)
1982 - 1 game (Escort Cup)
1983 - 2 games
1984 - not involved
1985 - 2 games
1986 - not involved
7 games ... so maybe
Last edited: