- Mar 14, 2014
- 39,391
- 72,491
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
- Other Teams
- Las Vegas Bears
Good to see Ginnivan up there, local boy for me. Does his size and frame translate to the AFL as a mid? Feel like he will be a tweener forward/mid atm
Draft Watcher Knightmare 2020 Draft Almanac
- Thread starter Knightmare
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Knightmare
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 22, 2010
- 19,533
- 19,542
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #277
Smallish at 180cm. Hopefully he grows a little more between now and the draft.
Size and frame isn't the be all end all. All different shapes and sizes have had AFL success, so he's one with continued improvement who as a rotational fwd/mid who has the scope to become a piece.
He is 183cm now
- Mar 14, 2014
- 39,391
- 72,491
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
- Other Teams
- Las Vegas Bears
Thats good, his old man is a midget so its good to see Jack still growing
- May 23, 2019
- 11,345
- 27,164
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
What height would a player be considered medium rather than small, out of interest?
- Oct 3, 2003
- 26,916
- 30,910
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Soft spot for Brisbane
188cm, perhaps?
Depends on position.
Medium forwards or backs are usually around the six foot two inch height.
Six foot or shorter is considered short for a mid these days. Six foot four inches are your tall mids.
Knightmare
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 22, 2010
- 19,533
- 19,542
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #283
Depends on who is talking.
I look at height from a role perspective. If you're sub 183cm, you're generally a ground level player. 188cm+ you're generally more a big bodied ball winning mid where you can rely on them to be high end ball winners. 184cm-187cm is more your medium sizers where they should be able to do a bit of everything.
Last edited:
AFL midfielders:
185 cm is average, 181 and 189 are each one standard deviation away from the mean.
KissKiss
Norm Smith Medallist
- Nov 26, 2012
- 7,754
- 8,791
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
Just curious who is the 195?
- May 23, 2019
- 11,345
- 27,164
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Cripps, I'd assume.
KM, regarding your Fremantle list assessment I noticed you have placed Serong forward and also mention that we have yet to find a Neale replacement. Surely Serong is the most like for like Neale replacement. His midfield impact predraft was top end, and both his ball hunting and tackling abilities terrific.
Last edited:
- Aug 16, 2010
- 10,060
- 6,944
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
It seems more than likely there could be a Lottery for this years draft so depending what clubs needs are the bottom 6 teams the top 6 players would change depending on the order of the draft
Knightmare
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 22, 2010
- 19,533
- 19,542
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #291
I don't have a set order after my top-20, but when I take the time to go through those others
I might do that a month from now to keep things interesting on here and keep some discussion going.
Serong I view as being just as capable as a forward or midfielder. I feel good general forwards can be harder to find, so I'd lean towards playing Serong more as a forward/mid than a mid/forward, but that's one for personal preference. I don't view Serong as a Neale level mid, I'm seeing him as a shorter Heeney if I'm to liken him to anyone.
For Fremantle I'd be focusing in on not only Brayshaw as a midfielder, but Cerra I'd like to see used more as a mid who rests forward (he's good off half-back with his ball use but I think he can be even better up the field and his ball winning capabilities and potential for scoreboard impact aren't being realised), Blakey and Acres I want to see given their midfield minutes then Valente I'd be pumping games into. Tucker possible another. So I'm seeing some numbers through there that can allow Serong to be more a fwd/mid.
All players recruiters will consider.
Cox is a nice athlete. Freak endurance runner for someone his height. Good leaper and good mark. I'd see scope to develop as a key defender.
Reid's a good kick, decent defender and can intercept here/there. Not dominant as a Baldwin or Callow is.
Treacy is the more physically advanced of those others. Strong body and marking threat i50 but on that shorter side and probably needs to start pushing up the ground more.
Cox for mine is the pick of those three. He'd be in the fringe of that top-30, the others probably outside my 40 without having put together a list.
Baldwin and Callow are the most advanced and dominant of those. McDonald I see as more advanced than Cox with more performances on the board and greater versatility having shown he can play key forward or key back.
Great question. Depends if we get any footy at the back end of the year. eg. it's been considered that Nov/Dec if required there could be some kind of games. Nothing is known at this stage.
If there are no games, which definitely could be the case, then there are a lot of different approaches that could be considered. Go off 2019 ladder order? Lottery? Lottery based on 2019 ladder?
There will be a draft, so how the ordering will be done, your guess is as good as mine.
- Oct 3, 2003
- 26,916
- 30,910
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Soft spot for Brisbane
I think a small forward is around 181cm. A midsized forward is around 188cm. A tall forward is 195cm.
- Oct 3, 2003
- 26,916
- 30,910
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Soft spot for Brisbane
Flatten the curve.
Knightmare
IF we to delay the draft by a year and combine this years and next years kids.... Would it be such a super draft, that you think clubs would hoard all the early picks; OR would it be the case of 3|4 round picks being more valuable than normal?
A delay could also allow the draft age to be raised by a year. Your thoughts on that?
IF we to delay the draft by a year and combine this years and next years kids.... Would it be such a super draft, that you think clubs would hoard all the early picks; OR would it be the case of 3|4 round picks being more valuable than normal?
A delay could also allow the draft age to be raised by a year. Your thoughts on that?
Knightmare
Brownlow Medallist
- Sep 22, 2010
- 19,533
- 19,542
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Chicago Bulls
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #295
The classifications are somewhat ambiguous.
You can have a Jamie Elliott who is 178cm and plays like he's 188cm. Or you can have Buddy at 197cm and moves like someone of 187cm.
With forwards and defenders I'd say something like 183cm or less is small, 184cm-193cm is medium and 194cm+ is tall. And that's based on how guys at those respective heights tend to play for the most part. Go back 15 years and 190cm was a KPP and they played like KPPs.
I don't see it happening that way, but add any two drafts together and you're getting double the quality, so it could well compare favourably to any draft we've seen. Likely both on top end quality and depth. Both drafts would need to be among those most historically bad to not when combined create a super draft.
I can't say I know anything about the 2021 prospects outside of a small handful who have played NAB League so I don't have any feel for the quality at this stage. The 2020 draft I view as average-below average with the academy/f.s prospects what will make this a challenging draft for a lot of clubs with so many of those among the better players in this draft.
I think height is possibly the single most overrated metric for a midfielder. It's the old moneyball scout analogy that the player has to have a certain "look". The only thing that matters is performance. Sure, taller midfielders have an advantage when it comes to contested marking but those built lower to the ground have an advantage for ground ball gets. Cripps will beat Neale in a marking contest but Neale will extract the ground ball more often than not in that situation.
It's performance that matters. Happy to hear counter arguments though.
It's performance that matters. Happy to hear counter arguments though.
the shorter equals better ground game is not backed up by any statistic or viewing. Ever.
height is always a positive. But it’s only height and ability matters more.
players like Neale are the exception, not the norm.
if a player is short, I’m marking them down but not writing them off.
Ever? There is a reason why shorter players are crumbing at the feet of tall forwards.It's because they are better equipped at picking up the ground ball. I agree that height helps in certain situations but I think it is overrated.
Who do you take:
Player A: 179cm averages 25 disposals at 70% accuracy
Player B: 187cm averages 21 disposals at 70% accuracy
I know it is a very rudimentary example with lots of other factors but with all other things being equal, I'm tipping that Player B gets drafted much higher than Player A.
You were previously comparing mids before while referencing ground ball gets, not talking about small forwards roving at contests in the forward line.
you claimed shorter equals better at collecting ground balls. I don’t think that is true nor is there any evidence to prove so.
- Status
