Analysis History of our draft picks # 40 and higher

[Freak Dodgeball Accident]

Danny Morton. Was he the one who went for a massive hanger and landed on his head/neck? I'm a bit fuzzy on the player, but I can still picture that. Was absolutely sickening =(

 

[Visenfest]

Danny Morton. Was he the one who went for a massive hanger and landed on his head/neck? I'm a bit fuzzy on the player, but I can still picture that. Was absolutely sickening =(

Yep that was him. Went into teaching after that - I had him as a student teacher for a bit in primary school. He explained the injury and treatment to us - nasty stuff.

 

[philthy05]

Danny Morton. Was he the one who went for a massive hanger and landed on his head/neck? I'm a bit fuzzy on the player, but I can still picture that. Was absolutely sickening =(

Yeah I reckon. Was truly horrifying.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I don't have the numbers off the top of my head (and youre our numbers guru) but pre 2000 the draft was pretty horrible.

I don't know what numbers you are talking about. There were plenty of 100 gamers, 200 gamers, 300 gamers across all teams. This isn't 100% accurate but its bloody close. You can go thru year by year at this page
https://www.draftguru.com.au/years

and club by club at
https://www.draftguru.com.au/clubs

Yes some clubs were bloody s**t, but not all, in fact i'd say the majority weren't.

As I said teams just didn't do the same work pre draft or after draft. We've come miles even in the last half decade. Someone like mish would prob know more but I suspect recruiting was semi professional and didnt really expand their scope of factors into what makes a player. How much would ports recruiting development and player welfare programmes expanded and refined?

The industry wasn't fulltime until 2000 for players so it was cheaper to have lots of recruiters is another way to look at it. Of course it was less professional than today but you make it sound like bugger all work was done back then, and then magically in 2000 we had people who could judge footballers according to you. That is rubbish.

We had a Melbourne Office from day 1 of the 1997 season and we had Chris Pelchen based in there for almost 8 years doing recruiting stuff with a small team as well as other footy stuff.

I would rather have a chance at a 2017 3rd rounder with nows programs then a top 15 pick with talent identification and programmes from pre-2000

They were allowed to draft 16 and 17 year olds
Here is the top 15 from 1997. A 300 gamer, 6 200 gamers and 5 100 gamers out of 15
https://www.draftguru.com.au/years/1997


Here is the top 15 from 1993 the first year I reckon the draft can be taken seriously
2 x 200 gamers, 4 x 200 gamers and 4 x 100 gamers.
https://www.draftguru.com.au/years/1993

 

[philthy05]

I don't know what numbers you are talking about. There were plenty of 100 gamers, 200 gamers, 300 gamers across all teams. This isn't 100% accurate but its bloody close. You can go thru year by year at this page
https://www.draftguru.com.au/years

and club by club at
https://www.draftguru.com.au/clubs

Yes some clubs were bloody s**t, but not all, in fact i'd say the majority weren't.



The industry wasn't fulltime until 2000 for players so it was cheaper to have lots of recruiters is another way to look at it. Of course it was less professional than today but you make it sound like bugger all work was done back then, and then magically in 2000 we had people who could judge footballers according to you. That is rubbish.

We had a Melbourne Office from day 1 of the 1997 season and we had Chris Pelchen based in there for almost 8 years doing recruiting stuff with a small team as well as other footy stuff.




They were allowed to draft 16 and 17 year olds
Here is the top 15 from 1997. A 300 gamer, 6 200 gamers and 5 100 gamers out of 15
https://www.draftguru.com.au/years/1997
View attachment 436041

Here is the top 15 from 1993 the first year I reckon the draft can be taken seriously
2 x 200 gamers, 4 x 200 gamers and 4 x 100 gamers.
https://www.draftguru.com.au/years/1993
View attachment 436042

You've done a calculation that we have had x - amount of picks and x amount of success rate , when that is skewed by

a) the bulk of it includes years when the league was less professional at recruiting and developing
B) including years when our organisation was less professional at recruiting and developing
C) excluding years (and I can see why you would) when we appear at an early stage to have done well from picks that would affect this


Just think that needs to be factored into your maths.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

You've done a calculation that we have had x - amount of picks and x amount of success rate , when that is skewed by

a) the bulk of it includes years when the league was less professional at recruiting and developing
B) including years when our organisation was less professional at recruiting and developing
C) excluding years (and I can see why you would) when we appear at an early stage to have done well from picks that would affect this


Just think that needs to be factored into your maths.

What calculation have I made? I said if we get 1 x 100 gamer we are doing well and 2 x 100 gamer is brilliant. You just have to look at my list, no calculation is needed.

There is no skewing. The whole industry is all relative. Everyone has spent more resources on recruiting, but that doesn't mean everyone will improve because the draft pool is the draft pool every year. There's a fallacy of composition in your argument. The whole industry struggles to find stars from pick 40 onwards.

Our organisation had been recruiting people for decades. We planned for entry into the AFL for 2 years and we had to prepare before we moved into the AFL. We had Chris Pelchen sitting there in Melbourne watching U/18 kids every week since 1997 for 8 seasons. You can't say * we were brilliant in 2000, but we were s**t in 1999 because we had so little resources the year before. That's rubbish.

What years did I exclude? I listed all of Port's drafts and I said in my argument that for me 1993 was the first year that counts, and I listed all the reasons why and I said 1997 was arguably a super draft year despite the industry not calling it that at the time, so that's why I put up those 2 years. I wasn't going to put up all 7 drafts from 1993-1999. That's why I gave you the links. 1994 and 1996 are compromised drafts and don't really provide much by way of comparison unless you line up 1994 and 1996 with 2010 and 2011 compromised drafts.

 

[philthy05]

What calculation have I made? I said if we get 1 x 100 gamer we are doing well and 2 x 100 gamer is brilliant.

There is no skewing. The whole industry is all relative. Everyone has spent more resources on recruiting but that doesn't mean everyone will improve because the draft pool is the draft pool every year. There a fallacy of composition in your argument. The whole industry struggles to find stars from pick 40 onwards.

Our organisation had been recruiting people for decades. We planned for entry into the AFL for 2 years and we had to prepare before we moved into the AFL. We had Chris Pelchen sitting there in Melbourne watching U/18 kids every week since 1997. You can't say **** we were brilliant in 2000 but we were s**t in 1999 because we had so little resources the year before. that's rubbish.

What years did I exclude? I listed all of Port's drafts and I said in my argument that for me 1993 was the first year that counts, and I listed all the reasons why and I said 1997 was s super draft year despite the industry not calling it that at the time that's why i put up those 2 years. I wasn't going to put up all 7 drafts from 1993-1999. That's why I gave you the links. 1994 and 1996 are compromised drafts and don't really provide much by way of comparison unless you line up 1994 and 1996 with 2010 and 2011 compromise drafts.

I don't think you counted Dougal did you?


I dunno REH , I'm not disagreeing with your assessments of how many 100 game + players we should get out of this draft I'm simply talking about your using drafts from a past when Ive said , and I don't think this is a outlandish statement , that we as in the afl , and we the club have progressed in those areas I spoke about talent Id and development. I honestly thought this was pretty widely accepted.


To me going picks x from year x = this many games , then this year picks x played this many games and so on won't be a true measure any more than a medium of house prices across the last ten years will give you an expected price to pay for a house today. Maybe you allowed for this then in your we should get this amount of games statement but that's not clear.

I also disagree that the talent pool is x and the clubs all fight to win the divvy of players from that.

I don't think there is a set amount of players , like 30 afl future players. It's what the teams develop. Ie there could be 20 future afl player or 40 future afl players depending on how well you develop them.

 

[Powerage]

I don't think there is a set amount of players , like 30 afl future players. It's what the teams develop. Ie there could be 20 future afl player or 40 future afl players depending on how well you develop them.

Oh nature vs nurture. The scope of the argument deepens considerably

I still remember that Danny Morton attempt at mark. Lucky to be walking after that.

97 is a hell of a draft. Goodes, Black, Power, Scarlett, Ottens etc and the day the music died for Graham when his eldest son got drafted to Port

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I don't think you counted Dougal did you?.

Why would I count Dougal in anything. He has only played 10 games? I based my comment purely on the list of 1996 to 2016. Look at the list, there is only 1 year where we had 2 or more 100 gamers from that draft and there is only 4 years where we had 1. I didn't make any calculation.

 

[Steve Dore]

Thank god somebody spotted Robbie Gray in 2006. Surely one of the best 50+ picks for any team ever (not including Rookies such as Dean Cox). My footy viewing would have been much poorer if he had had been missed in that draft and was still working as a meat packer in Vic. ..

Dane Swan was taken at pick 58 in 2001. He and Gray would have to be the standouts of the 50+ picks in the modern draft.

... Much the same could be said for Chris Grant for the WB I suppose. God knows how he slipped to pick 105. I can only assume the draft process was less thorough in 1989 than it is now. ...

A good mate of mine was drafted about 50 places ahead of Grant in that draft yet never played a senior game. The draft in those days was very different to the modern draft.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Ahhhhhh Damon White - he coulda, shoulda, woulda... had the tools to play a lot more AFL footy.

Guys like Chris Grant and James Hird would be top 20 picks in this era.

Chris Grant was born in December 1972 and was taken in the 1988 draft on the eve of his 16th birthday. That's why he was taken as a speculative 105 pick. Where do you reckon he would have gone in the 1990 draft on the eve of his 18th birthday? Further reason why I tend to ignore drafts pre 1993.

Matthew Pavlich as a 17 year old was ignored by all 16 clubs in the 1998 draft when everyone was allowed to take one player 17 years of age.

 

[FrankDrebin]

Danny Morton. Was he the one who went for a massive hanger and landed on his head/neck? I'm a bit fuzzy on the player, but I can still picture that. Was absolutely sickening =(

That was also the first game at Footy Park with a video replay board IIRC. So it was shown about 25 times at the ground. Think it was also the game Tredders returned from the knee injury he sustained against Carlton when he took 17 grabs and kicked 8.

 

[Waspy79]

How are our 2018 draft picks looking? Makes our splurge on third rounders look a bit pointless.

 

[simmo_bc]

Chris Grant was born in December 1972 and was taken in the 1988 draft on the eve of his 16th birthday. That's why he was taken as a speculative 105 pick. Where do you reckon he would have gone in the 1990 draft on the eve of his 18th birthday? Further reason why I tend to ignore drafts pre 1993.

Matthew Pavlich as a 17 year old was ignored by all 16 clubs in the 1998 draft when everyone was allowed to take one player 17 years of age.

I'd like to think that in 2018, Chris Grant would be a top 20 pick as an 18 year old based on all the work and testing that recruiters do.

But then again, if Billy Frampton turns into an AFL footballer, he was the 3rd player taken in the 2014 AFL draft which shows that there are still surprises!

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

But then again, if Billy Frampton turns into an AFL footballer, he was the 3rd player taken in the 2014 AFL draft which shows that there are still surprises!

What does that mean?? Pick 84, Port's 4th player drafted in 2014.

 

[simmo_bc]

What does that mean?? Pick 84, Port's 4th player drafted in 2014.

Sorry meant 3rd last player taken in the draft

 

[GremioPower]

Thank you for the research, RussellEbertHandball .

This is who we have drafted in the national draft using pick 40 or higher. This ignores the pre season draft and rookie drafts as they are their own drafts and just because we got a good one in the rookie draft that we missed in the main draft doesn't really mean much. I have ignored rookie elevation pick numbers that were allocated in the national draft, after they became a thing for the AFL in 2009.


1996-200 drafts - The early years
1996 nil
1997 41 Danny Morton 20 games, 57 Darren Fraser 0 games
1998 54 Derek Murray 23 games
1999 57 Steve Brosnan 1 game
2000 50 Dom Cassisi 228 games

2001-2005 drafts - The wasted years - but pretty good trading. ( we wasted picks 1-39)
2001 62 Damon White 55 games, 76 Jarred Poulton redrafted and played further 54 games (1st super draft)
2002 42 Brett Ebert 166 games Father-Son selection, 57 Wade Champion 0 games
2003 46 Michael Pettigrew 103 games
2004 51 Ben Eckermann 4 games
2005 44 Alipate Carlile 167 games, 58 Hugh Minson 0 games, 70 Jonathan Giles 0 games for Port but 63 games for GWS+Ess+WCE


2006-2011 drafts - The bland years
2006 55 Robbie Gray 178 games, 71 Justin Westhoff 226 games he was 20 not 18, 83 Ryan Williams 2 games, 86 David Rodan 111 games after had played 65 for Richmond (2nd super draft)

2007 49 Mitch Farmer 3 games then traded to Richmond and played 28 for them
2008 42 Mitch Banner 19 games, 54 Jarrad Redden 16 games, 66 Glenn "The cougar" Dawson 0 games, 78 Jason Davenport 28 games - was 24 and had spent 2 years at Geelong (the 3rd superdraft)
2009 none
2010 52 Cam O'Shea 81 games
2011 45 Brendon Ah Chee 27 games, 51 Nathan Blee 6 games


2012-2016 drafts - The more resources years
2012 nil
2013 45 Mitch Harvey 0 games, 52 Darcy Byrne-Jones 43 games, 68 Karl Amon 38 games
2014 56 Dougal Howard 10 games, 69 Logan Austin 13 games, 78 Jesse Palmer 3 games, 84 Billy Frampton 0 games
2015 45 Aidyn Johnson 5 games
2016 nil


So history tells us if we get one x 100 gamer out of the 4,5 or 6 picks we use this year after pick 40, we have done well. If we get two x 100 gamers we have done brilliantly. It will be interesting to watch Logan Austin's career and see how far he goes. He will be compared to Howard given Howard changing from a CHF/Ruck to a CHB saw him decide to leave and ask for a trade to get more opportunities.

Of the players drafted since 2012 and still on the list, DBJ and Howard look the most likely to me to get to 100 games.

For reference's sake, how well have we picked from between #1 and #39?

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Thank you for the research, RussellEbertHandball .



For reference's sake, how well have we picked from between #1 and #39?

Better, but we have still had some classic failures. Our trading has saved us over some of the years. You can check the specific numbers - draft selections, games played etc here;
https://www.draftguru.com.au/clubs/port-adelaide

In 2013 I took some comments made by Portia at the end of the 2011 re our poor drafting in 2001-05 and to a less extent 2006-2010 by the first 3 rounds of the draft that was a driver for us only winning 3 game in 2011, and updated it for 2011 and 2012 drafts. This is in the 9 year ongoing thread I started in 2008, Making the Top 4 and building to a flag. This post has more info on who failed and who succeed from those drafts since 2001.

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/making-the-top-4-and-building-to-a-flag.489103/#post-30159847

You will see I started that post where I look at where the premiers of a certain year have achieved 7 seasons later as well as what the grand finalist's have achieved, which reflects the cycle of being at the top and impact of a draft(s) have down the track.

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/thre...uilding-to-a-flag.489103/page-8#post-42485669