Draft Expert Knightmare's 2021 Draft Almanac

chopflop · Nov 4, 2021

Knightmare said:
A lot of the players you're bringing up were delisted and immediately re-drafted. I class them as recycled players. When I'm talking mature agers, in the context I am, I include overagers, and those who haven't been AFL listed.

Tyson Stengle would be about as inbetween those two categories as there could be, but given most of his season was in the SANFL, as his delisting occurred before round 1 if I remember correctly, he's another I'd include in that mature age bracket, given his season wasn't played as part of an AFL list.

So to take Biggy Nyuon as an example, he's someone while I'm a fan, if he was re-drafted or taken as a DFA, he would be in recycled player camp and fit into the broader category of opposition talent ID if taken by another team.

And in that recycled component, there is with good talent ID occasionally a good one, and there were more good ones delisted last year because of the list size squeeze. But normally I would on average view it as a lower % recruiting route that probably not as much recently, but certainly 10-15 years ago was overused, with the balance around the mark now for mine.

So to look at mature agers as a category. There are lots of different ways to chop things up. Along the lines of your thinking, and you could look at them in % terms of % of mature agers v % of u18 prospects that are hits/misses. And it could be a quantitative look or a more subjective look. And then you can look at by ranges in the draft and get granular on that level and break down that success rate of again mature agers v u18s.

If I get the time over the offseason, I may if there is the interest take the time to really go deep into that analysis.

I can tell you having looked through the drafts the numbers are not just slightly, but very heavily favourable to the mature agers, whatever your measure. But as with a lot of things, giving the statistical evidence and adding additional quantitative analysis should further put things in context and speak to the exact extent and determine that mature agers picked in x range are providing comperable value to prospects out of the u18s taken in x range from the years 2001-2020, or 1999-2018, or whatever number of years, over a good sample period.
*And the disclaimer, and this was made earlier and rightly by eDPS that there is now the MSD and PSP, and I can even add the DFA period for those delisted who have formerly been part of the AFL system which limits the number of mature agers available in the national draft. Though perhaps on the other side of the argument, it may speak further to the importance of mature age recruitment given the opportunities to improve your list with mature agers during each of those periods, even aside from the National/Pre-Season/Rookie drafts.

I will do 2009 for you today as a gift.

I will follow your outlined methodology.

Top 15 players probably won't work so if in doubt I'll go games played min 50 and give a a subjective categorisation

3 good player
2 ok player
1 list clogger

You happy with that? Unfortunately I only have time to do one draft. You know work etc.

Knightmare · Nov 4, 2021

Chief said:
You will or won’t?

I will with 50 likes on the post. To clarify.

The only condition on that being, if there are people in this thread suggesting to do so would be disrespectful/in bad taste, I won't.

SunshineHawkCal said:
Knightmare do you think Freo would consider taking Gibcus or Hobbs at pick 6?

Gibcus, no. They don't seem to want another key defender and he's no good as a key forward. Hobbs, genuine chance if there.

Knightmare · Nov 4, 2021

chopflop said:
I will do 2009 for you today as a gift.

I will follow your outlined methodology.

Top 15 players probably won't work so if in doubt I'll go games played min 50 and give a a subjective categorisation

3 good player
2 ok player
1 list clogger

You happy with that? Unfortunately I only have time to do one draft. You know work etc.

Happy for you to contribute and complete any analysis you like and happy to provide a response accordingly.

I can very quickly tell you from 2009 just top of mind, there aren't any top-10 in draft level mature agers and it's a year a greater number than normal were taken, with still a good number of capable mature agers coming out of that draft.

Knightmare · Nov 4, 2021

The secret to avoiding AFL Draft traps. The key ingredient needed in each position for draft success and to avoid the avoidable mistakes made every year:

Teaser: With midfielders, and Champion Data have rightly written about the success of midfielders with contested ball winning capabilities for those AFL Prospectus readers of the past. That's a point I agree with them on and one where I draw the same conclusion, with that contested ball winning being that essential component with midfielders which can be seen through looking at those best midfielders in the competition past/present and looking at draft success rates. I've created my own checklist of essential components for all the other positions.

Point of discussion: Any positions people have different takes on what that one essential required component is?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjvkCZcdTVA

chopflop · Nov 4, 2021

Knightmare said:
Happy for you to contribute and complete any analysis you like and happy to provide a response accordingly.

I can very quickly tell you from 2009 just top of mind, there aren't any top-10 in draft level mature agers and it's a year a greater number than normal were taken, with still a good number of capable mature agers coming out of that draft.

Hey KM,

Here is a summary of the 2009 draft after Pick 40 of the ND.

	Junior	Mature	Recycle
3 (Very Good Player)	2%	10%	0%
2 (Average player)	17%	17%	16%
1 (List clogger)	80%	72%	84%

According to your suggested methodology, in this draft (which is not yet demonstrative of all drafting - you would need more analysis i.e., more drafts),

* Five times more likely to draft a very good player with mature age after Pick 40.
* Just as likely to draft an average player.
* Less list clogging and never made it players from the mature age pool.

------
A few points -
* for this draft you are spot on. There was value in mature age prospects after 40 relatively speaking when compared to Juniors.
* The pick 40 number is really important because if you took this to pick 30 and after, you would have included these players

			Junior	Mature	Recycle
2	30	Luke Ball			3
2	31	Jason Tutt	1
2	32	Nicholas Winmar	1
2	33	Anthony Long	1
3	34	Max Gawn	3
3	35	David Astbury	3
3	36	Joel Houghton	1
3	37	Jamie MacMillan	2
3	38	Sam Reid	2
3	39	Sam Grimley	1

This would have had an impact on the outcome and made the juniors relatively much stronger.
* I think you may well be onto something, but I don't think you have the evidence to yet to suggest round 2 should feature significantly more matuer age talent.
* To draw any meaningful conclusions about patterns in the history of the draft, you would probably need a sample of at about 6 drafts (preferably when most careers are over so you can give a proper grading to the player)
* While this result supports your theory, five more analyses of different drafts might say the opposite.

Feel free to use any info but credit

"The BIG CHOP from the Hawthorn board on BigFooty" :drunk:

Here is the raw data and my rankings (3,2,1)

Round	Pick R and ND	Player	Club	League	AFL	AFL	Games	Junior	Mature	Recycle
3	46	Ben Stratton	East Perth	WAFL	Hawthorn		202	0	3	0
5	69	Taylor Duryea	Murray Bushrangers	TAC Cup	Hawthorn		159	3	0	0
2	33	Matthew Wright	North Adelaide	SANFL		Adelaide	159	0	2	0
3	44	Levi Casboult	Dandenong Stingrays	TAC Cup		Carlton	153	2	0	0
1	8	Michael Barlow	Werribee	VFL		Fremantle	141	0	3	0
3	40	Allen Christensen	Geelong Falcons	TAC Cup	Geelong		133	2	0	0
3	49	Dylan Roberton	Dandenong Stingrays	TAC Cup	Fremantle		129	2	0	0
2	30	Ben Howlett	Peel Thunder	WAFL		Essendon	124	0	2	0
5	75	Josh Thomas	Redland	QAFL	Collingwood		123	2	0	0
1	20	Mark Hutchings	East Perth	WAFL		St Kilda	120	2	0	0
3	50	James Podsiadly	Geelong VFL	VFL	Mature age rookie	Geelong	104	0	2	0
3	43	Stewart Crameri	Bendigo Bombers	VFL		Essendon	103	0	3	0
4	56	Simon White	Subiaco	WAFL		Carlton	87	0	2	0
1	5	Danny Stanley	Collingwood	AFL		Gold Coast	83	0	0	2
3	47	Ryan Harwood	Glenorchy	TSL	Brisbane Lions		81	2	0	0
3	42	Nathan Vardy	Gippsland Power	TAC Cup	Geelong		77	2	0	0
3	46	Matthew Jaensch	Sturt	SANFL		Adelaide	74	0	1	0
7	91	Matt Maguire	St Kilda	AFL	Brisbane Lions		71	0	0	2
3	44	Matthew Dea	North Ballarat Rebels	TAC Cup	Richmond		70	2	0	0
2	19	Benjamin Griffiths	Eastern Ranges	TAC Cup	Richmond		63	2	0	0
4	62	Ben Sinclair	Oakleigh Chargers	TAC Cup	Collingwood		63	1	0	0
2	24	Alex Silvagni	Casey Scorpions	VFL	Mature age rookie	Fremantle	60	0	2	0
1	16	Mitchell Golby	Gippsland Power	TAC Cup		Brisbane Lions	56	1	0	0
1	9	Majak Daw	Western Jets	TAC Cup		North Melbourne	54	1	0	0
2	18	Luke Tapscott	North Adelaide	SANFL	Melbourne		48	1	0	0
3	40	Ashton Hams	South Fremantle	WAFL		West Coast	39	0	1	0
1	12	Cameron Hitchcock	Glenelg	SANFL		Port Adelaide	29	1	0	0
4	63	Lukas Markovic	Box Hill Hawks	VFL	Western Bulldogs		29	0	1	0
1	6	Michael Newton	Melbourne	AFL	Mature age rookie	Melbourne	28	0	1	0
4	55	Trent Dennis-Lane	Subiaco	WAFL	Sydney		28	0	1	0
6	85	Simon Buckley	Melbourne	AFL	Collingwood		26	0	0	1
4	50	Jack Fitzpatrick	Western Jets	TAC Cup	Melbourne		26	1	0	0
1	3	Sam Iles	Box Hill Hawks	TAC Cup		Gold Coast	26	0	1	0
3	45	Sam Shaw	Oakleigh Chargers	TAC Cup	Adelaide		24	1	0	0
5	71	Ben Nason	Central District	SANFL	Richmond		23	0	1	0
1	17	Luke Thompson	Geelong Falcons	TAC Cup		Adelaide	20	1	0	0
4	61	Jesse Stringer	Port Adelaide Magpies	SANFL		Geelong	19	1	0	0
3	48	Jesse Crichton	North Launceston	TSL	Fremantle		18	1	0	0
3	43	Marcus Davies	North Hobart	TSL	Carlton		17	1	0	0
5	73	Jesse O'Brien	North Adelaide	SANFL	Brisbane Lions		17	1	0	0
1	19	Brodie Moles	Geelong	AFL	Mature age rookie	Western Bulldogs	17	0	1	0
1	10	Henry Playfair	Sydney Swans	AFL	Mature age rookie	Sydney Swans	16	0	0	1
4	56	Josh Cowan	North Ballarat Rebels	TAC Cup	Geelong		16	1	0	0
5	67	Jeromey Webberley	Clarence	TSL	Richmond		16	0	1	0
1	13	Wayde Skipper	Western Bulldogs	AFL	Mature age rookie	Hawthorn	15	0	0	1
1	15	Jaryd Cachia	Northern Knights	TAC Cup		Carlton	14	1	0	0
2	27	Andrew Strijk	West Perth	WAFL		West Coast	13	0	1	0
1	1	Daniel Harris	North Melbourne	AFL	Mature age rookie	Gold Coast	11	0	0	1
6	84	Bryce Retzlaff	Labrador	QAFL	Brisbane Lions		11	1	0	0
2	35	Andrew Hooper	North Ballarat Rebels	TAC Cup		Western Bulldogs	7	1	0	0
4	58	Rhan Hooper	Brisbane Lions	AFL	Hawthorn		6	0	0	1
1	2	Michael Coad	Sturt	SANFL	Mature age rookie	Gold Coast	6	0	1	0
4	64	Adam Pattison	Richmond	AFL	St Kilda		5	0	0	1
2	22	John Meesen	Melbourne	AFL	Mature age rookie	Melbourne	4	0	0	1
4	51	Troy Taylor	South Alice Springs	CAFL	Richmond		4	1	0	0
4	52	Justin Bollenhagen	South Adelaide	SANFL	Fremantle		4	1	0	0
1	7	Robert Hicks	Calder Cannons	TAC Cup		Richmond	3	1	0	0
2	29	Jarrod Kayler-Thomson	Perth	WAFL	Mature age rookie	Hawthorn	3	0	1	0
3	38	Relton Roberts	Wanderers	NTFL	Mature age rookie	Richmond	2	0	1	0
4	55	Marcus Marigliani	Frankston	VFL	Mature age rookie	Essendon	2	0	1	0
3	41	Cameron Cloke	Carlton	AFL	Mature age rookie	Port Adelaide	1	0	0	1
2	32	Josh Dyson	Eastern Ranges	TAC Cup		Brisbane Lions	1	1	0	0
2	36	Daniel Archer	Clarence	TSL		St Kilda	1	1	0	0
4	54	Byron Sumner	Woodville-West Torrens	SANFL	Sydney		1	1	0	0
5	65	John Williams	Essendon	AFL		Essendon	1	0	1	0
5	77	Will Johnson	Sandringham	VFL	St Kilda		1	0	1	0
4	60	Jesse W. Smith	North Melbourne	AFL	St Kilda		0	0	1	1
4	53	Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls	Richmond	AFL	Mature age rookie	West Coast	0	0	0	1
1	4	Roland Ah Chee	Norwood	SANFL		Gold Coast	0	1	0	0
1	11	Lewis Broome	Claremont	WAFL		West Coast	0	1	0	0
1	14	Taite Silverlock	West Adelaide	SANFL		Essendon	0	1	0	0
1	21	Jack Weston	Gippsland Power	TAC Cup		Geelong	0	1	0	0
2	23	Pat Contin	Glenelg	SANFL		Richmond	0	1	0	0
2	25	Matthew Scott	Eastern Ranges	TAC Cup		North Melbourne	0	1	0	0
2	31	Joe Dare	Geelong Falcons	TAC Cup		Carlton	0	1	0	0
2	34	Jack Carter	West Adelaide	SANFL		Collingwood	0	1	0	0
3	41	Ayden Kennedy	Eastern Ranges	TAC Cup	North Melbourne		0	1	0	0
3	48	Matthew Panos	Norwood	SANFL		Western Bulldogs	0	1	0	0
4	51	Nicholas Westhoff	West Adelaide	SANFL		Richmond	0	1	0	0
4	53	Brayden Norris	Murray Bushrangers	TAC Cup	North Melbourne		0	1	0	0
4	54	Glenn Dawson	Port Adelaide	AFL		Port Adelaide	0	1	0	0
4	57	Jordan Williams	Bendigo Pioneers	TAC Cup	Hawthorn		0	1	0	0
4	59	Eddie Prato	Maryborough	BFL		Western Bulldogs	0	1	0	0
4	59	Rohan Kerr	Dandenong Stingrays	TAC Cup	Carlton		0	1	0	0
4	61	James Craig	North Adelaide	SANFL	Adelaide		0	1	0	0
5	66	Joshua Donaldson	West Perth	WAFL		Carlton	0	1	0	0
1	18	Tom Hunter	Calder Cannons	TAC Cup		Collingwood	0	1	0	0
2	28	Daniel Webb	West Adelaide	SANFL		Port Adelaide	0	0	1	0
2	37	Ben Johnson	Geelong	VFL		Geelong	0	0	1	0
5	68	Patrick Rose	Williamstown	VFL		Western Bulldogs	0	0	1	0
5	76	Shane Thorne	Wanderers	NTFL	Western Bulldogs		0	0	1	0
3	39	Pass				Sydney Swans	0	0	0	0
3	42	Michael Johnston	East Coast Eagles	Sydney AFL	NSW AFL scholarship elevation	Hawthorn	0	0	0	0
3	45	Pass				Brisbane Lions	0	0	0	0
3	47	Seamus McNamara	Milwaukee	USA	International selection	Collingwood	0	0	0	0
3	49	Jarryd Allen	St Kilda	AFL		St Kilda	0	0	0	0
4	52	Pass				Sydney Swans	0	0	0	0
4	57	Pass				Brisbane Lions	0	0	0	0
4	58	Aidan Riley	Wollongong Lions	Sydney AFL	NSW AFL scholarship elevation	Adelaide	0	0	0	0
4	60	Leigh Fisher	St Kilda	AFL		St Kilda	0	0	0	0
5	62	Graham Polak	Richmond	AFL	Mature age rookie	Richmond	0	0	0	0
5	63	Chrissy McKaigue	Derry	GAA	International selection	Sydney Swans	0	0	0	0
5	64	Daniel Bass	non-registered		3-year non-registered selection	Port Adelaide	0	0	0	0
4	65	Jeremy Laidler	(Promoted rookie)		Geelong		0	0	0	0
5	66	Pass			Melbourne		0	0	0	0
5	67	Niall McKeever	Antrim	GAA	International selection	Brisbane Lions	0	0	0	0
5	68	Pass			Fremantle		0	0	0	0
5	69	Tommy Walsh	Kerry	GAA	International selection	St Kilda	0	0	0	0
5	70	Matt Suckling	(Promoted rookie)		Hawthorn		0	0	0	0
6	70	Jamie O'Reilly	Down	GAA	International selection	Richmond	0	0	0	0
6	71	Nathan Gordon	East Coast Eagles	Sydney AFL	NSW AFL scholarship elevation	Sydney Swans	0	0	0	0
5	72	Sam Jacobs	(Promoted rookie)		Carlton		0	0	0	0
6	72	Jordon Johns	South Broken Hill	BHFL	NSW AFL scholarship elevation	Port Adelaide	0	0	0	0
6	73	Zach Tuohy	Laois	GAA	International selection	Carlton	0	0	0	0
5	74	Brodie Martin	(Promoted rookie)		Adelaide		0	0	0	0
6	74	Sean Yoshuira	Mt Gravatt	QAFL	QLD pre-selection	Brisbane Lions	0	0	0	0
7	75	Dylan McNeil	Murray Bushrangers	TAC Cup	NSW pre-selection	Sydney Swans	0	0	0	0
7	76	Claye Beams	Labrador	QAFL	QLD pre-selection	Brisbane Lions	0	0	0	0
8	77	Pass			NSW pre-selection	Sydney Swans	0	0	0	0
6	78	Pass			Richmond		0	0	0	0
8	78	Broc McCauley	Southport	QAFL	QLD pre-selection	Brisbane Lions	0	0	0	0
6	79	Greg Broughton	(Promoted rookie)		Fremantle		0	0	0	0
6	80	Cruize Garlett	(Promoted rookie)		North Melbourne		0	0	0	0
6	81	Pass			Sydney		0	0	0	0
6	82	Daniel Stewart	(Promoted rookie)		Port Adelaide		0	0	0	0
6	83	Aaron Joseph	(Promoted rookie)		Carlton		0	0	0	0
6	86	Liam Picken	(Promoted rookie)		Western Bulldogs		0	0	0	0
6	87	Zac Dawson	(Promoted rookie)		St Kilda		0	0	0	0
6	88	Wade Thompson	(Promoted rookie)		Port Adelaide		0	0	0	0
7	89	Robin Nahas	(Promoted rookie)		Richmond		0	0	0	0
7	90	Kristin Thornton	(Promoted rookie)		Sydney		0	0	0	0
7	92	James Mulligan	(Promoted rookie)		Western Bulldogs		0	0	0	0
7	93	Luke Miles	(Promoted rookie)		St Kilda		0	0	0	0
8	94	Andrew Browne	(Promoted rookie)		Richmond		0	0	0	0
8	95	Pearce Hanley	(Promoted rookie)		Brisbane Lions		0	0	0	0

The Kings Ransom · Nov 4, 2021

Knightmare said:
That's certainly the way I'd be approaching it in terms of categories.

And we've seen with Gold Coast going heavy on bottom of opposition list opposition talent, I don't think too many will be arguing in favour of those kinds of talents, as ultimately, they're nowhere near best-22, so it's excluding the obvious concept of adding talent with a view towards improving your best-22.

In terms of delisted talent, and that's another subject/category entirely, I see the opportunity mostly as being those older established players who are delisted. Often times, they're delisted prematurely (or sometimes available for trade as players who would be planned for delisted) and still offer role player value for teams, and can bring on top of that veteran leadership which helps youth development. Brent Harvey? Luke Hodge? Sam Mitchell? Steve Johnson? Paul Chapman? They're the kinds of opportunities where it's looking a gift horse in the mouth and opportunities that really shouldn't happen.

It's incredible as an NBA fan looking at how contrasting roster construction is and how those good teams load up on veterans. They get how they help towards winning and don't waste time on speculative youth for the most part, and you'll get radically older rosters as a result than from other teams. They put that value premium on those good veterans, and the bonus is they're generally going to be your smaller contract players where you're getting all the performance and leadership value without the price tag - be it in what is given up or contractually.

Perhaps not acknowledged, that a number of these AFL veterans are only going to want to move for certain situations.

Suns been very open that they tried to get Burgoyne and/or JJK for the 2021 season.
Apparently JJK was all but on the plane before pulling out last moment.
Guess that's why we've had to sign the cut priced options - Townsend, George Horlin-Smith etc..

NBA quite different in that the veterans can come on and play for 10 minutes or less and be a contributor.
Also seems a number of these NBA veterans continue to keep getting gigs based on reputation and off court morale more so than on court product.

Knightmare · Nov 4, 2021

chopflop said:
Hey KM,

Here is a summary of the 2009 draft after Pick 40 of the ND.

Junior Mature Recycle
3 (Very Good Player) 2% 10% 0%
2 (Average player) 17% 17% 16%
1 (List clogger) 80% 72% 84%

According to your suggested methodology, in this draft (which is not yet demonstrative of all drafting - you would need more analysis i.e., more drafts),

* Five times more likely to draft a very good player with mature age after Pick 40.
* Just as likely to draft an average player.
* Less list clogging and never made it players from the mature age pool.

------
A few points -
* for this draft you are spot on. There was value in mature age prospects after 40 relatively speaking when compared to Juniors.
* The pick 40 number is really important because if you took this to pick 30 and after, you would have included these players

Junior Mature Recycle
2 30 Luke Ball 3
2 31 Jason Tutt 1
2 32 Nicholas Winmar 1
2 33 Anthony Long 1
3 34 Max Gawn 3
3 35 David Astbury 3
3 36 Joel Houghton 1
3 37 Jamie MacMillan 2
3 38 Sam Reid 2
3 39 Sam Grimley 1

This would have had an impact on the outcome and made the juniors relatively much stronger.
* I think you may well be onto something, but I don't think you have the evidence to yet to suggest round 2 should feature significantly more matuer age talent.
* To draw any meaningful conclusions about patterns in the history of the draft, you would probably need a sample of at about 6 drafts (preferably when most careers are over so you can give a proper grading to the player)
* While this result supports your theory, five more analyses of different drafts might say the opposite.

Feel free to use any info but credit

"The BIG CHOP from the Hawthorn board on BigFooty"

Here is the raw data and my rankings (3,2,1)

Round Pick R and ND Player Club League AFL AFL Games Junior Mature Recycle
3
46
Ben Stratton East Perth WAFL Hawthorn
202
0
3
0
5
69
Taylor Duryea Murray Bushrangers TAC Cup Hawthorn
159
3
0
0
2
33
Matthew Wright North Adelaide SANFL Adelaide
159
0
2
0
3
44
Levi Casboult Dandenong Stingrays TAC Cup Carlton
153
2
0
0
1
8
Michael Barlow Werribee VFL Fremantle
141
0
3
0
3
40
Allen Christensen Geelong Falcons TAC Cup Geelong
133
2
0
0
3
49
Dylan Roberton Dandenong Stingrays TAC Cup Fremantle
129
2
0
0
2
30
Ben Howlett Peel Thunder WAFL Essendon
124
0
2
0
5
75
Josh Thomas Redland QAFL Collingwood
123
2
0
0
1
20
Mark Hutchings East Perth WAFL St Kilda
120
2
0
0
3
50
James Podsiadly Geelong VFL VFL Mature age rookie Geelong
104
0
2
0
3
43
Stewart Crameri Bendigo Bombers VFL Essendon
103
0
3
0
4
56
Simon White Subiaco WAFL Carlton
87
0
2
0
1
5
Danny Stanley Collingwood AFL Gold Coast
83
0
0
2
3
47
Ryan Harwood Glenorchy TSL Brisbane Lions
81
2
0
0
3
42
Nathan Vardy Gippsland Power TAC Cup Geelong
77
2
0
0
3
46
Matthew Jaensch Sturt SANFL Adelaide
74
0
1
0
7
91
Matt Maguire St Kilda AFL Brisbane Lions
71
0
0
2
3
44
Matthew Dea North Ballarat Rebels TAC Cup Richmond
70
2
0
0
2
19
Benjamin Griffiths Eastern Ranges TAC Cup Richmond
63
2
0
0
4
62
Ben Sinclair Oakleigh Chargers TAC Cup Collingwood
63
1
0
0
2
24
Alex Silvagni Casey Scorpions VFL Mature age rookie Fremantle
60
0
2
0
1
16
Mitchell Golby Gippsland Power TAC Cup Brisbane Lions
56
1
0
0
1
9
Majak Daw Western Jets TAC Cup North Melbourne
54
1
0
0
2
18
Luke Tapscott North Adelaide SANFL Melbourne
48
1
0
0
3
40
Ashton Hams South Fremantle WAFL West Coast
39
0
1
0
1
12
Cameron Hitchcock Glenelg SANFL Port Adelaide
29
1
0
0
4
63
Lukas Markovic Box Hill Hawks VFL Western Bulldogs
29
0
1
0
1
6
Michael Newton Melbourne AFL Mature age rookie Melbourne
28
0
1
0
4
55
Trent Dennis-Lane Subiaco WAFL Sydney
28
0
1
0
6
85
Simon Buckley Melbourne AFL Collingwood
26
0
0
1
4
50
Jack Fitzpatrick Western Jets TAC Cup Melbourne
26
1
0
0
1
3
Sam Iles Box Hill Hawks TAC Cup Gold Coast
26
0
1
0
3
45
Sam Shaw Oakleigh Chargers TAC Cup Adelaide
24
1
0
0
5
71
Ben Nason Central District SANFL Richmond
23
0
1
0
1
17 Luke Thompson Geelong Falcons TAC Cup Adelaide
20
1
0
0
4
61
Jesse Stringer Port Adelaide Magpies SANFL Geelong
19
1
0
0
3
48
Jesse Crichton North Launceston TSL Fremantle
18
1
0
0
3
43
Marcus Davies North Hobart TSL Carlton
17
1
0
0
5
73
Jesse O'Brien North Adelaide SANFL Brisbane Lions
17
1
0
0
1
19
Brodie Moles Geelong AFL Mature age rookie Western Bulldogs
17
0
1
0
1
10
Henry Playfair Sydney Swans AFL Mature age rookie Sydney Swans
16
0
0
1
4
56
Josh Cowan North Ballarat Rebels TAC Cup Geelong
16
1
0
0
5
67
Jeromey Webberley Clarence TSL Richmond
16
0
1
0
1
13
Wayde Skipper Western Bulldogs AFL Mature age rookie Hawthorn
15
0
0
1
1
15
Jaryd Cachia Northern Knights TAC Cup Carlton
14
1
0
0
2
27
Andrew Strijk West Perth WAFL West Coast
13
0
1
0
1
1
Daniel Harris North Melbourne AFL Mature age rookie Gold Coast
11
0
0
1
6
84
Bryce Retzlaff Labrador QAFL Brisbane Lions
11
1
0
0
2
35
Andrew Hooper North Ballarat Rebels TAC Cup Western Bulldogs
7
1
0
0
4
58
Rhan Hooper Brisbane Lions AFL Hawthorn
6
0
0
1
1
2
Michael Coad Sturt SANFL Mature age rookie Gold Coast
6
0
1
0
4
64
Adam Pattison Richmond AFL St Kilda
5
0
0
1
2
22
John Meesen Melbourne AFL Mature age rookie Melbourne
4
0
0
1
4
51
Troy Taylor South Alice Springs CAFL Richmond
4
1
0
0
4
52
Justin Bollenhagen South Adelaide SANFL Fremantle
4
1
0
0
1
7
Robert Hicks Calder Cannons TAC Cup Richmond
3
1
0
0
2
29
Jarrod Kayler-Thomson Perth WAFL Mature age rookie Hawthorn
3
0
1
0
3
38
Relton Roberts Wanderers NTFL Mature age rookie Richmond
2
0
1
0
4
55
Marcus Marigliani Frankston VFL Mature age rookie Essendon
2
0
1
0
3
41
Cameron Cloke Carlton AFL Mature age rookie Port Adelaide
1
0
0
1
2
32
Josh Dyson Eastern Ranges TAC Cup Brisbane Lions
1
1
0
0
2
36
Daniel Archer Clarence TSL St Kilda
1
1
0
0
4
54
Byron Sumner Woodville-West Torrens SANFL Sydney
1
1
0
0
5
65
John Williams Essendon AFL Essendon
1
0
1
0
5
77
Will Johnson Sandringham VFL St Kilda
1
0
1
0
4
60
Jesse W. Smith North Melbourne AFL St Kilda
0
0
1
1
4
53
Jarrad Oakley-Nicholls Richmond AFL Mature age rookie West Coast
0
0
0
1
1
4
Roland Ah Chee Norwood SANFL Gold Coast
0
1
0
0
1
11
Lewis Broome Claremont WAFL West Coast
0
1
0
0
1
14
Taite Silverlock West Adelaide SANFL Essendon
0
1
0
0
1
21
Jack Weston Gippsland Power TAC Cup Geelong
0
1
0
0
2
23
Pat Contin Glenelg SANFL Richmond
0
1
0
0
2
25
Matthew Scott Eastern Ranges TAC Cup North Melbourne
0
1
0
0
2
31
Joe Dare Geelong Falcons TAC Cup Carlton
0
1
0
0
2
34
Jack Carter West Adelaide SANFL Collingwood
0
1
0
0
3
41
Ayden Kennedy Eastern Ranges TAC Cup North Melbourne
0
1
0
0
3
48
Matthew Panos Norwood SANFL Western Bulldogs
0
1
0
0
4
51
Nicholas Westhoff West Adelaide SANFL Richmond
0
1
0
0
4
53
Brayden Norris Murray Bushrangers TAC Cup North Melbourne
0
1
0
0
4
54
Glenn Dawson Port Adelaide AFL Port Adelaide
0
1
0
0
4
57
Jordan Williams Bendigo Pioneers TAC Cup Hawthorn
0
1
0
0
4
59
Eddie Prato Maryborough BFL Western Bulldogs
0
1
0
0
4
59
Rohan Kerr Dandenong Stingrays TAC Cup Carlton
0
1
0
0
4
61
James Craig North Adelaide SANFL Adelaide
0
1
0
0
5
66
Joshua Donaldson West Perth WAFL Carlton
0
1
0
0
1
18 Tom Hunter Calder Cannons TAC Cup Collingwood
0
1
0
0
2
28
Daniel Webb West Adelaide SANFL Port Adelaide
0
0
1
0
2
37
Ben Johnson Geelong VFL Geelong
0
0
1
0
5
68
Patrick Rose Williamstown VFL Western Bulldogs
0
0
1
0
5
76
Shane Thorne Wanderers NTFL Western Bulldogs
0
0
1
0
3
39
Pass Sydney Swans
0
0
0
0
3
42
Michael Johnston East Coast Eagles Sydney AFL NSW AFL scholarship elevation Hawthorn
0
0
0
0
3
45
Pass Brisbane Lions
0
0
0
0
3
47
Seamus McNamara Milwaukee USA International selection Collingwood
0
0
0
0
3
49
Jarryd Allen St Kilda AFL St Kilda
0
0
0
0
4
52
Pass Sydney Swans
0
0
0
0
4
57
Pass Brisbane Lions
0
0
0
0
4
58
Aidan Riley Wollongong Lions Sydney AFL NSW AFL scholarship elevation Adelaide
0
0
0
0
4
60
Leigh Fisher St Kilda AFL St Kilda
0
0
0
0
5
62
Graham Polak Richmond AFL Mature age rookie Richmond
0
0
0
0
5
63
Chrissy McKaigue Derry GAA International selection Sydney Swans
0
0
0
0
5
64
Daniel Bass non-registered 3-year non-registered selection Port Adelaide
0
0
0
0
4
65
Jeremy Laidler (Promoted rookie) Geelong
0
0
0
0
5
66
Pass Melbourne
0
0
0
0
5
67
Niall McKeever Antrim GAA International selection Brisbane Lions
0
0
0
0
5
68
Pass Fremantle
0
0
0
0
5
69
Tommy Walsh Kerry GAA International selection St Kilda
0
0
0
0
5
70
Matt Suckling (Promoted rookie) Hawthorn
0
0
0
0
6
70
Jamie O'Reilly Down GAA International selection Richmond
0
0
0
0
6
71
Nathan Gordon East Coast Eagles Sydney AFL NSW AFL scholarship elevation Sydney Swans
0
0
0
0
5
72
Sam Jacobs (Promoted rookie) Carlton
0
0
0
0
6
72
Jordon Johns South Broken Hill BHFL NSW AFL scholarship elevation Port Adelaide
0
0
0
0
6
73
Zach Tuohy Laois GAA International selection Carlton
0
0
0
0
5
74
Brodie Martin (Promoted rookie) Adelaide
0
0
0
0
6
74
Sean Yoshuira Mt Gravatt QAFL QLD pre-selection Brisbane Lions
0
0
0
0
7
75
Dylan McNeil Murray Bushrangers TAC Cup NSW pre-selection Sydney Swans
0
0
0
0
7
76
Claye Beams Labrador QAFL QLD pre-selection Brisbane Lions
0
0
0
0
8
77
Pass NSW pre-selection Sydney Swans
0
0
0
0
6
78
Pass Richmond
0
0
0
0
8
78
Broc McCauley Southport QAFL QLD pre-selection Brisbane Lions
0
0
0
0
6
79
Greg Broughton (Promoted rookie) Fremantle
0
0
0
0
6
80
Cruize Garlett (Promoted rookie) North Melbourne
0
0
0
0
6
81
Pass Sydney
0
0
0
0
6
82
Daniel Stewart (Promoted rookie) Port Adelaide
0
0
0
0
6
83
Aaron Joseph (Promoted rookie) Carlton
0
0
0
0
6
86
Liam Picken (Promoted rookie) Western Bulldogs
0
0
0
0
6
87
Zac Dawson (Promoted rookie) St Kilda
0
0
0
0
6
88
Wade Thompson (Promoted rookie) Port Adelaide
0
0
0
0
7
89
Robin Nahas (Promoted rookie) Richmond
0
0
0
0
7
90
Kristin Thornton (Promoted rookie) Sydney
0
0
0
0
7
92
James Mulligan (Promoted rookie) Western Bulldogs
0
0
0
0
7
93
Luke Miles (Promoted rookie) St Kilda
0
0
0
0
8
94
Andrew Browne (Promoted rookie) Richmond
0
0
0
0
8
95
Pearce Hanley (Promoted rookie) Brisbane Lions
0
0
0
0

Sound and fair analysis.

Thanks for your contribution.

Additional notes, to add additional thoughts and context more broadly speaking to your own very capable analysis.

2009 in terms of junior talent is one of the very deepest. I've made this comment before about 2009, but 20-40, it's the best I've seen in that range for junior talent. So if I was to extend this comparison out to more drafts, and one draft does not allow for meaningful conclusions to be drawn into the viability of mature age prospects, as more drafts means greater accuracy (I'd actually like to use a block of 20 years), I think you'll find that number more years than not will show it's most like that 30 mark for mature agers where they start having the kind of payoff you're describing outside the top-40 from 2009, as the good junior talent other than in some of the better drafts doesn't tend to extend past 30, and sometimes it's a struggle past 20 to find those guys who are genuinely capable AFL footballers.

I get the sense through doing the analysis you're starting to stumble upon the very same things I have.

In my piece on ESPN, in listing off those top-15 in draft calibre mature agers (inclusive of overagers - and 2009 actually was one of two years that were weak in this regard, with 2008 the other), I really wanted to show the level of really high end mature age players including overagers who have been drafted over the years and have far exceeded their draft position.

In the past I was of the viewpoint and I'm sure I'll most years have quotes along these lines 'mature agers are a great option late/rookie draft to fill list needs and an underutilised opportunity to secure capable AFL talent.'

I've made the jump from there to gaining the following realisations as quoted from my piece today:

There is a perception in AFL circles that players who are older when they're drafted possess less upside than under-18s prospects. Similarly, there is a generally held view that mature age prospects could plug a hole and play a role, but little more.

These views fit into the myth category, with the historical examples of mature age success suggesting there is more upside with mature age recruitment than is generally believed.

It's possible for mature age prospects to improve more than their younger counterparts because often if they're identified later, they're late developers, either due to growing later, or having no or little exposure to the junior talent pathways.

On top of this, to receive an AFL opportunity as a mature ager, most of the time a strong work ethic and a high level of resilience and professionalism has played a part, given the talent bias AFL clubs have towards under-18s. Mature agers often tend to show a greater urgency knowing they must perform from season to season to have a successful AFL career and their contracts extended.

And looking through a good numbers of the names I've listed, you can really see it. It's changed fundamentally the way I view mature age talent, as my expectation was in the past they have to be round 1, year 1 ready, and to, too great of an extent, I was taking that upside component out of the equation when the history shows, unless you're more than 5 years older than the draft pool you're hoping to get picked in, that shouldn't be a major subtraction and in a lot of cases, shouldn't be a subtraction at all.

That's what has me coming out of the woodwork this year with what probably will be seen by many as having a Leek Alleer as a top-10 talent on my board when others might say 'he's a top 20-50 talent.' Particularly when combining that with my values around what makes great key defenders.

And for those same sorts of reasons, there are a lot of other mature agers who based on the way I assessed mature age talent in the past wouldn't have made my board. But having that look back and understanding the past on a deeper level as to what works and what doesn't, and what those nuances around them are, I'm using that to help guide me in my draft thoughts and rankings, to give the underlying context behind why I'm saying a lot of the things I am.

briztoon · Nov 4, 2021

The Kings Ransom said:
Perhaps not acknowledged, that a number of these AFL veterans are only going to want to move for certain situations.

Suns been very open that they tried to get Burgoyne and/or JJK for the 2021 season.
Apparently JJK was all but on the plane before pulling out last moment.
Guess that's why we've had to sign the cut priced options - Townsend, George Horlin-Smith etc..

NBA quite different in that the veterans can come on and play for 10 minutes or less and be a contributor.
Also seems a number of these NBA veterans continue to keep getting gigs based on reputation and off court morale more so than on court product.

NBA vet minimum salary is something like US$1.5 million. Not bad if you get traded, you can still afford rent and have a decent wedge left in your pocket.

Knightmare · Nov 4, 2021

The Kings Ransom said:
Perhaps not acknowledged, that a number of these AFL veterans are only going to want to move for certain situations.

Suns been very open that they tried to get Burgoyne and/or JJK for the 2021 season.
Apparently JJK was all but on the plane before pulling out last moment.
Guess that's why we've had to sign the cut priced options - Townsend, George Horlin-Smith etc..

NBA quite different in that the veterans can come on and play for 10 minutes or less and be a contributor.
Also seems a number of these NBA veterans continue to keep getting gigs based on reputation and off court morale more so than on court product.

You're absolutely right about players having been generally reluctant to join the Suns from opposition teams. The same has been the case with Brisbane and GWS for the most part also, though Gold Coast to a greater extent as there hasn't been the team success or success developing talent from high draft picks for players to necessarily at any point feel that draw to join the Suns from other situations. For that reason, the Suns remain a recruiting ground of talent - with players often wanting out, but few good ones wanting in.

I can't say I keep track of those who say no, or follow those rumour mills of who the Suns have expressed interest in at various times, but the key is when looking for good opposition talent is having a list of good options who can add to your best-22. If they're not projecting to be best-22 and improve that best-22, then looking to the draft is the only way to build a list, with those depth types conceptually to be avoided. And that might mean a greater mature age focus to bring in those readier options.

I've spoken about this component of mature age selections before, but there are guys running around in the state leagues, and this has always been the case, and over time it has been different names, who are AFL standard and can walk into a best-22. And in some cases they've been that quality for 4+ years and just never get a shot. - The Haiden Schloithe's and Jye Bolton's of the world. Angus Baker is another I've liked for a few years now who also keeps getting overlooked.

On NBA veterans and how they compare to AFL veterans. You're right about their roles not needing to be as significant. Some of them are relegated to being cheerleaders on the bench, the further you go down the bench. And in the AFL, you're playing more minutes and covering a lot of ground. So the difference will be as a result, in the NBA you can have 35-40 year olds as your veterans v in the AFL, 33 is closer to that retirement age of those better footballers, with only the really good ones making it to 35 if they're lucky enough to still be healthy enough to. Translating the veterans idea to the AFL, you'll have a lot of guys around the age of 30 who get let go of, or just over. Tom Lynch, Jared Polec, Levi Casboult, David Zaharakis, Hamish Hartlett, Daniel Talia and Josh Jenkins. They're all guys I'd be very comfortable adding onto an AFL list if they play positions/roles/styles of game of need that can complement my existing best-22. They're still guys where fundamentally I look at them and still see them as capable AFL footballers of a best-22 standard. If I'm a Gold Coast looking to fill out a last spot or two and add some veteran leadership, I'd much rather any of those guys at this age/stage by contrast to the Horlin-Smith's or Townsend's of the world who I knew before joining Gold Coast weren't AFL best-22 material.

The Kings Ransom · Nov 5, 2021

Knightmare said:
You're absolutely right about players having been generally reluctant to join the Suns from opposition teams. The same has been the case with Brisbane and GWS for the most part also, though Gold Coast to a greater extent as there hasn't been the team success or success developing talent from high draft picks for players to necessarily at any point feel that draw to join the Suns from other situations. For that reason, the Suns remain a recruiting ground of talent - with players often wanting out, but few good ones wanting in.

I can't say I keep track of those who say no, or follow those rumour mills of who the Suns have expressed interest in at various times, but the key is when looking for good opposition talent is having a list of good options who can add to your best-22. If they're not projecting to be best-22 and improve that best-22, then looking to the draft is the only way to build a list, with those depth types conceptually to be avoided. And that might mean a greater mature age focus to bring in those readier options.

I've spoken about this component of mature age selections before, but there are guys running around in the state leagues, and this has always been the case, and over time it has been different names, who are AFL standard and can walk into a best-22. And in some cases they've been that quality for 4+ years and just never get a shot. - The Haiden Schloithe's and Jye Bolton's of the world. Angus Baker is another I've liked for a few years now who also keeps getting overlooked.

On NBA veterans and how they compare to AFL veterans. You're right about their roles not needing to be as significant. Some of them are relegated to being cheerleaders on the bench, the further you go down the bench. And in the AFL, you're playing more minutes and covering a lot of ground. So the difference will be as a result, in the NBA you can have 35-40 year olds as your veterans v in the AFL, 33 is closer to that retirement age of those better footballers, with only the really good ones making it to 35 if they're lucky enough to still be healthy enough to. Translating the veterans idea to the AFL, you'll have a lot of guys around the age of 30 who get let go of, or just over. Tom Lynch, Jared Polec, Levi Casboult, David Zaharakis, Hamish Hartlett, Daniel Talia and Josh Jenkins. They're all guys I'd be very comfortable adding onto an AFL list if they play positions/roles/styles of game of need that can complement my existing best-22. They're still guys where fundamentally I look at them and still see them as capable AFL footballers of a best-22 standard. If I'm a Gold Coast looking to fill out a last spot or two and add some veteran leadership, I'd much rather any of those guys at this age/stage by contrast to the Horlin-Smith's or Townsend's of the world who I knew before joining Gold Coast weren't AFL best-22 material.

We’ll you get your wish with casboult joining the Suns.

SunshineHawkCal · Nov 5, 2021

Knightmare who's the better kick out of Ward & Hobbs?

Also can you see a team pulling the trigger early on Zac Taylor?

Knightmare · Nov 5, 2021

The Kings Ransom said:
We’ll you get your wish with casboult joining the Suns.

Casboult I'm fine with on the basis that he slots straight into the best-22. Even if it's short term.

In a Gold Coast context, Casboult I actually view favourably to Sam Day.

SunshineHawkCal said:
Knightmare who's the better kick out of Ward & Hobbs?

Also can you see a team pulling the trigger early on Zac Taylor?

Ward is the better kick compared to Hobbs. More reliable and the better kick both to targets around the ground and i50.

It's possible someone goes earlier on Taylor. It can't be discounted that he could go late first round. He's a late first - second rounder to give a feel for his range.

Happy Mastenator · Nov 5, 2021

Knightmare said:
Casboult I'm fine with on the basis that he slots straight into the best-22. Even if it's short term.

In a Gold Coast context, Casboult I actually view favourably to Sam Day.

The casboult types are low risk. It’s avoiding signing the mediocre retreads to long term contracts that’s important. They hamstring the club moving forward

Knightmare · Nov 5, 2021

Happy Mastenator said:
The casboult types are low risk. It’s avoiding signing the mediocre retreads to long term contracts that’s important. They hamstring the club moving forward

I'm finding broadly speaking, some of the lengths of contracts are getting out of hand. It only takes one really bad injury (think the Dane Swan career ending injury), and if it's a 4-5 year deal and that injury is happening early on, that's not going to end well. Or if they do a Jordan De Goey off the field.

If someone isn't looking like a clear-cut best-22 player or projecting to become one, they shouldn't be getting multi-year deals. That's when as with those too long contracts, you can get into the trap of still paying someone, delisting them, but really needing to redraft as a rookie because you're going to have to pay them anyway. If you have someone in that camp wanting that contract and not accepting a one year deal, they should be a trade chip for someone you fundamentally believe by securing can be right away or become that best-22 player, or otherwise trade it for picks.

Having this mindset towards contracts, it only makes me like the veterans aged 28+ who can still be plug and play best-22 players because they're not going to need to be paid much per year, they're not going to be able to get all that many years, and if you're trading for them, they're coming cheap.

For me, conceptually, I don't feel like every last list spot is appropriately valued. By that I mean, with every list spot, there either needs to be projected best-22 players or someone who is considered over the long term likely to fill that role. It's a waste of a list spot otherwise.

You'll never hear anyone speaking out more strongly against drafting/trading for depth as a concept. When you've got the right focus on improving the best-22, that depth will develop naturally.

One additional thought with long term deals is, if the salary cap was year on year expanding, it would make signing players to longer term deals relatively more attractive and reasonable, and it does give that tiny bit more give when it comes to giving the better players longer deals, but unless that dynamic is in play, even stricter adherence to the concept is required.

Enviable Tradition · Nov 5, 2021

Given your penchant for recycled players where would you have had Skinner in the open draft KM?

SunshineHawkCal · Nov 5, 2021

Knightmare have you got a write up on Connor MacDonald?

Dr Tigris · Nov 5, 2021

Knightmare said:
I'm finding broadly speaking, some of the lengths of contracts are getting out of hand. It only takes one really bad injury (think the Dane Swan career ending injury), and if it's a 4-5 year deal and that injury is happening early on, that's not going to end well. Or if they do a Jordan De Goey off the field.

If someone isn't looking like a clear-cut best-22 player or projecting to become one, they shouldn't be getting multi-year deals. That's when as with those too long contracts, you can get into the trap of still paying someone, delisting them, but really needing to redraft as a rookie because you're going to have to pay them anyway. If you have someone in that camp wanting that contract and not accepting a one year deal, they should be a trade chip for someone you fundamentally believe by securing can be right away or become that best-22 player, or otherwise trade it for picks.

Having this mindset towards contracts, it only makes me like the veterans aged 28+ who can still be plug and play best-22 players because they're not going to need to be paid much per year, they're not going to be able to get all that many years, and if you're trading for them, they're coming cheap.

For me, conceptually, I don't feel like every last list spot is appropriately valued. By that I mean, with every list spot, there either needs to be projected best-22 players or someone who is considered over the long term likely to fill that role. It's a waste of a list spot otherwise.

You'll never hear anyone speaking out more strongly against drafting/trading for depth as a concept. When you've got the right focus on improving the best-22, that depth will develop naturally.

One additional thought with long term deals is, if the salary cap was year on year expanding, it would make signing players to longer term deals relatively more attractive and reasonable, and it does give that tiny bit more give when it comes to giving the better players longer deals, but unless that dynamic is in play, even stricter adherence to the concept is required.

The major issue I have with your logic is simply that of getting it right. Geelong has done it very well. But many clubs pick up mature players who are cheap and available, but flawed in some way. They then end up with mature players not really helping them and blocking out younger players from developing. If young guys don't get games they eventually leave or stagnate (general comment).

So if you pick up cheap mature players that can come in and do a role to a high standard then you can win.

But it can easily become a game of robbing Peter (your future) to pay Paul (current mediocrity or even just making finals).

I look at the Tigers picking up Tarrant as what you are talking about. I'd have loved a cheap B grade inside mid. Didn't happen.

I suspect that the AFL, clubs and players, haven't got their heads around how this can work as yet. Done well using older players to extend a window or accelerate the development of a younger team is a great idea. But, done poorly it just leads to a broken list that needs drastic work to 'fix' it.

And re drafting mature players. Some people take longer to mature. In the US they generally pick up more mature College players, but still face same issues of not knowing if they will transition to the pros. So I agree that looking beyond the kids is worthwhile, and often great value for money. But it's still a roll of the dice, although with better info than playing against kids.

dee64 · Nov 5, 2021

Knightmare said:
I'm finding broadly speaking, some of the lengths of contracts are getting out of hand. It only takes one really bad injury (think the Dane Swan career ending injury), and if it's a 4-5 year deal and that injury is happening early on, that's not going to end well. Or if they do a Jordan De Goey off the field.

If someone isn't looking like a clear-cut best-22 player or projecting to become one, they shouldn't be getting multi-year deals. That's when as with those too long contracts, you can get into the trap of still paying someone, delisting them, but really needing to redraft as a rookie because you're going to have to pay them anyway. If you have someone in that camp wanting that contract and not accepting a one year deal, they should be a trade chip for someone you fundamentally believe by securing can be right away or become that best-22 player, or otherwise trade it for picks.

Having this mindset towards contracts, it only makes me like the veterans aged 28+ who can still be plug and play best-22 players because they're not going to need to be paid much per year, they're not going to be able to get all that many years, and if you're trading for them, they're coming cheap.

For me, conceptually, I don't feel like every last list spot is appropriately valued. By that I mean, with every list spot, there either needs to be projected best-22 players or someone who is considered over the long term likely to fill that role. It's a waste of a list spot otherwise.

You'll never hear anyone speaking out more strongly against drafting/trading for depth as a concept. When you've got the right focus on improving the best-22, that depth will develop naturally.

One additional thought with long term deals is, if the salary cap was year on year expanding, it would make signing players to longer term deals relatively more attractive and reasonable, and it does give that tiny bit more give when it comes to giving the better players longer deals, but unless that dynamic is in play, even stricter adherence to the concept is required.

That's all well and good in theory, but there are numerous factors at play.

Clubs are more likely to sign players to lengthy contracts because they want to overlap the players' free agency year. And clubs can often get a haircut on the contract by offering additional years. And lengthy contracts are often required to lure a player in free agency, or even an uncontracted player. Clubs aren't going to concern themselves with a potential long term injury to a player when it comes to player retention or acquisition for fear of losing that player. If you were Melbourne's list manager, would you sign Petracca for life, or give him a contract till he becomes an UFA?

Your concept of best 22 is assuming players don't lose form or players don't have breakout seasons. Based on your concept, Tom McDonald and Alex Neal-Bullen were wasted list spots at the start of 2021. Both players were contracted and told to explore their options elsewhere. Fortunately for Melbourne, they had no suitors, and both players improved their games to become best 22. Conversely. Sam Weidemann went from being considered best 22, to unplayable. Based on your concept, he should have been delisted. But Melbourne have re-signed him to a club friendly 2 year deal, and have confidence in their coaching department that he can get back to his best.

And finally, uncontracted players have almost become free agents. A contracted depth player has almost more currency than an uncontracted best 22. Just look at the Jordan Dawson and Jordan Clark trades. Dawson finished 3rd in the BnF, and Clark wasn't considered in the Cats best 26 come finals. And yet they had equal trade currency.

theGav56 · Nov 6, 2021

Knightmare said:
I will with 50 likes on the post. To clarify.

The only condition on that being, if there are people in this thread suggesting to do so would be disrespectful/in bad taste, I won't.

Gibcus, no. They don't seem to want another key defender and he's no good as a key forward. Hobbs, genuine chance if there.

Hobbs looks fantastic. I'm not certain we need another pure inside mid, and in an ideal world a mid with some forward capacity is available. That's part of the Erasmus appeal.

Turbocat · Nov 6, 2021

Knightmare ... just read your take on the mature recruiting approach of Geelong.

I give you credit for going against the grain. Id say that Geelong has assessed the price of kids who have done little bar play well against lower levels, mostly against their own age groups and said the price is too high. Im sure when it is all said and done, we will see plenty of promising kids fail again this year, just like every year.

To me, the 'success' rate of the mature approach is debatable... plenty on our board agree with your rationale, and others are not happy with it. I maintain that almost no club wins a flag without a single figure draft pick that they have drafted and developed. Ideally multiples of them. Melb is just the latest example of this... and soon Geelongs last single figure player will be gone..and statistically so will our chance for real success till we do ..what Collingwood and North and others have done. Take a step backwards, play kids etc and eventually be in a position to have a chance for ultimate success.

Guarantee success? No. Plenty have failed... I just have not seen any clubs win flags without paying the cost of dropping and gathering early picks.

Having said that , Geelong have managed to avoid finishing below 12th. Never have. Success?

Is it a success finishing in that 3rd to 10th range or is it just treading water?

It gets down to how you define success. As a business Geelong has been very successful, never coca-cola but they have been a good Pepsi. Not McDonalds but a good Hungry Jacks. You can have a success as a business without being number 1. Does that work in sport? Have Geelong succeeded by not bottoming out or have they succeeded in just becoming a tease, a side like some sort of TV evangelist offering false hope while asking for donations while flying around on jet planes.

Anyway ..I thinking Hocking is reseting our approach to a degree but for the right price , Im sure they will still look at value mature talent. I think that the approach works best when you are adding to talent already accumulated, rather than trying to stay above water by continually adding older guys.

Do you have a list of the best mature talent available? How do you see players like Bailey Rogers and Greg Clark. Who do you think will get drafted first out of the two of them.

Knightmare · Nov 6, 2021

Enviable Tradition said:
Given your penchant for recycled players where would you have had Skinner in the open draft KM?

It's not so much recycled players I'm a fan of, but mature agers from state leagues when they're good. And sometimes they are former AFL listed players.

In my extended power rankings, Skinner is top-40 if I'm to include him.

SunshineHawkCal said:
Knightmare have you got a write up on Connor MacDonald?

In my 7/7/2021 weekly wrap I cover MacDonald. That's worth a look if after a more detailed write up.

Dr Tigris said:
The major issue I have with your logic is simply that of getting it right. Geelong has done it very well. But many clubs pick up mature players who are cheap and available, but flawed in some way. They then end up with mature players not really helping them and blocking out younger players from developing. If young guys don't get games they eventually leave or stagnate (general comment).

So if you pick up cheap mature players that can come in and do a role to a high standard then you can win.

But it can easily become a game of robbing Peter (your future) to pay Paul (current mediocrity or even just making finals).

I look at the Tigers picking up Tarrant as what you are talking about. I'd have loved a cheap B grade inside mid. Didn't happen.

I suspect that the AFL, clubs and players, haven't got their heads around how this can work as yet. Done well using older players to extend a window or accelerate the development of a younger team is a great idea. But, done poorly it just leads to a broken list that needs drastic work to 'fix' it.

And re drafting mature players. Some people take longer to mature. In the US they generally pick up more mature College players, but still face same issues of not knowing if they will transition to the pros. So I agree that looking beyond the kids is worthwhile, and often great value for money. But it's still a roll of the dice, although with better info than playing against kids.

This isn't a thesis I agree with for the following reasons.

And it depends firstly where you're coming from when talking mature players. If you're talking about the depth and nowhere near best-22 calibre types Gold Coast keep identifying and adding from rival lists, then I'd agree completely with that. It's wasting list spots and not properly understanding the value every list position represents by bringing in players of suitable quality to fill those spots.

If it's a mature age talent on the other hand, unless you're picking inside the first round, and in some drafts you could argue top-30 or top-40, the mature ager will give you the better career outcome. And I'm not just talking average games played, or attaining a higher baseline level on average, but I'd also add on top of that having higher ceilings a lot of the time which is the component I've started to recognise the more I've gone through drafts past and seen as per in my article on ESPN some of the really high end players to be picked while being those years older - on the back of whether it's later development, joining the development pathways later, injuries at the wrong times in years past or just putting in the work and hustling until they get to that level off the back of a higher level of commitment to the game.

With younger players, sometimes pumping games into them is the play, sometimes it's making them earn a spot in the best-22. It depends on the individual, and depends on the support structure from the other senior players. If you have a Brent Harvey on your list lets say, you don't move that quality of player on no matter how old he is. Play him until he's done and he knows he's done, because even in his final year, there wasn't anyone in the competition who was ahead of him in both disposals and goals. And we're still talking about someone who was a weapon with his ball use and covering the ground exceptionally well. Further to this, if you're not a good team, generally the youth you might be looking to bring in is so awful, that frankly they don't deserve games, and you're not going to be able to find that next generation replacement, as getting junior talent right through the draft is not easy.

In Richmond's situation, I personally love the addition of Tarrant. It's not paying a lot, it's the use of a list position for a year or two to play the role to a capable standard, bring in veteran leadership to help solidify the defence and help with youth development. Biggy Nyuon as an example, he's not ready yet, and really hasn't had the VFL opportunities to be able to develop. But you have a Tarrant there, and that's going to help that kind of talent develop.

On Richmond's midfield, I completely agree a midfield boost is required. A Luke Dunstan would have been perfect for Richmond in my view. But through the draft, there is nothing stopping you securing a Bailey Rogers as that ready-made midfielder who is good enough as a Dunstan would be to be a round 1 starter for the Tigers, adding value both as a midfielder, but also when rotating forward.

Even for lists that aren't well positioned. And typically those that will seem in the worst position are those lists that might be one of the 2-3 oldest, yet are one of the 1-3 worst teams in the comp. Even in those seemly dire list situations, I wouldn't be shifting off every veteran or established player for picks and to start again. Time and time again, whether you look at those tanking Blues teams, or the tanking Demons teams of the past. We've seen that isn't conducive to building a competitive list. If I'm that bad team, absolutely I'd bring in good youth and take those early picks, but what I'd be doing differently is I'd be looking at the same time to bring in the underutilised players from rival lists who can improve the best-22, I'd be bringing in the veteran leaders, and I'd be bringing in the mature agers as well to complement the talented early draft youth.
Why?
That's the list dynamics that allow youth development to be maximised, and it means you're not forcing the youth in too early when a lot of the time they don't deserve to be, nor benefit from playing too soon, for too many games. Only the really good ones should be playing early and be those regulars, some may be at a stage where a month stretch of games may help them before they go back to the state leagues and step things up there and find another level before they then later push for regular senior selection based off of performance. And there are others where they need to remain in the state leagues until their play is of a level where senior action is suitable.

In the NBA, as with the AFL, the conversion of those more experienced college players far exceeds the averages based off of where they're picked by comparison to the one and done players. International players as with those more experienced college players also on average tend to outperform the one and done's. So based off that information, while of course just as you wouldn't ignore the u18 ranks, for the same reason, you wouldn't ignore those one and done's either, but on average, I would be suggesting over a period of say 10 years, if you're picking more international and those more seasoned college prospects at a greater ratio than those one and done by comparison to other teams, you'll outperform the averaged. And you could get those outsized returns as we've seen with those great Bulls and Warrior's teams.

dee64 said:
That's all well and good in theory, but there are numerous factors at play.

Clubs are more likely to sign players to lengthy contracts because they want to overlap the players' free agency year. And clubs can often get a haircut on the contract by offering additional years. And lengthy contracts are often required to lure a player in free agency, or even an uncontracted player. Clubs aren't going to concern themselves with a potential long term injury to a player when it comes to player retention or acquisition for fear of losing that player. If you were Melbourne's list manager, would you sign Petracca for life, or give him a contract till he becomes an UFA?

Your concept of best 22 is assuming players don't lose form or players don't have breakout seasons. Based on your concept, Tom McDonald and Alex Neal-Bullen were wasted list spots at the start of 2021. Both players were contracted and told to explore their options elsewhere. Fortunately for Melbourne, they had no suitors, and both players improved their games to become best 22. Conversely. Sam Weidemann went from being considered best 22, to unplayable. Based on your concept, he should have been delisted. But Melbourne have re-signed him to a club friendly 2 year deal, and have confidence in their coaching department that he can get back to his best.

And finally, uncontracted players have almost become free agents. A contracted depth player has almost more currency than an uncontracted best 22. Just look at the Jordan Dawson and Jordan Clark trades. Dawson finished 3rd in the BnF, and Clark wasn't considered in the Cats best 26 come finals. And yet they had equal trade currency.

I do realise all this, and that's the risk/reward you're playing. And by playing that game and offering less years, you're generally as per your thinking going to be paying guys more per years by doing so, and you're going to be losing a lot more players to opposition sides. And some clubs have less give in this sense. So to take Gold Coast as an example, because they're not a destination team, and the furthest thing from, they will have to give longer deals to their players to retain them, as they're not going to be able to bring in the opposition talent.

What if you're a big market, destination team? That's when I'd be at my most aggressive in approaching contracts this way. Take a Collingwood. Would they be wise signing De Goey to a big money, long term deal? What about Darcy Moore? Understanding that durability is the best ability, and De Goey comes with the off-field question marks. There is the case to be made that Collingwood could let go of both, and then be in a salary cap situation where they have the flexibility to target opposition talent, get more high draft picks, and really restructure the list.
A lot of people won't realise with Darcy Moore, he has averaged less than 15 games per year. He has only had one season where he has played 20 games or more. Great footballer when healthy, and same with De Goey when he is healthy and engaged, but if they're asking for too many years and too much on a per year basis, I would be willing to move them both on and start moving aggressively to improve the list. Get those moneyball trade targets. Bring in the right mature age talent. It's not the conventional way of building a list, but when you look at the opportunity cost with each decision, and what can be achieved with good opposition talent ID and good state league talent ID, and it's very possible to bring in a lot more talent than would be lost with the exits of both Moore and De Goey.

To go through the examples you're bringing up. Would I sign Petracca long-term? I would, and only because he ticks both of these boxes.
1. He's in the best in the competition basket and he can be your best player on a premiership team. So when you're talking about that level of greatness, there is no way you want to let them go. Same with a Bont on the Dogs. And I can bring up other franchise player level examples for other teams.
2. He has the durability. As per my earlier Moore example. If he wants big money and lots of years, I'd be very hesitant in meeting his contract demands. And he may be the best key defender in the competition and is an absolute weapon. But with durability being that best ability, you have to weigh up the opportunity cost and look at what the return would be, and based on that return, what's the best you can get back if that return is flipped and how much salary cap space it opens up to allow for other additions and how much that helps improve the best-22 when compared directly to the retention of Moore.

On McDonald and Neal-Bullen. Are they two players I would have moved on in 2020? I wouldn't have, surprising as it may sound based upon the fundamentals I regard as most important.
Why?
McDonald I still rate and if you look back at my moneyball trade targets video on YouTube last year, I was talking about McDonald and Aliir as the two best key position trade targets last year as two players where they weren't receiving the respect based off of what they can do as they should be and as two who I was saying then with a high probability should get back to playing really good footy and being not just clear-cut best-22 players, but difference makers at their positions. *The only surprise for me with McDonald is that he remained forward having his success, with my thinking being he should switch back and then he'd be looking good again. *Why was I so strong on McDonald as a key defender? There was a point where he was one of the competition's best key defenders, and it was only his move forward where he showed inconsistency and struggled when used as that #1 option being where things unraveled for him.
On Neal-Bullen, I've rated him for a long time and never seen him as being that fringe player either. Going back to 2018, he was an elite pressure player and elite endurance athlete, so as with a McDonald, I was surprised in those inbetween years he went out of favour. Champion Data also regarded him as elite that year.

Sam Weideman is one I've been saying for a few years now, he doesn't tick the boxes and isn't someone I would retain. He's someone I would have traded, as clubs love their former first round key forwards. When is the identifiable point in time with Weideman where it was obvious he's not a best-22 quality key forward? For me after that fourth year, not seeing that performance. That's the point I would have said 'trade him.' And we're not six years into his career, and he's still there, and Melbourne haven't traded out someone who really as should have been obvious at the time of the draft shouldn't have been a top-10 pick, let alone a first rounder, as another of those draft examples where it's a Victorian key forward going too early.

Your point on uncontracted players being gettable for cheap though is a good point and as per your thinking, does speak to the value of signing good players to longer term deals. And that's a concept I agree with to the extent where, if it's one of your better players, and they're durable, by all means, lock them away long term and give them their money as Sydney should have done with Dawson. It's when you get your Jordan Clark scenarios where they're not quite best-22, they're the ones to be placing on the trade market, and when you can get a good return for them as Geelong did, incredible win.

theGav56 said:
Hobbs looks fantastic. I'm not certain we need another pure inside mid, and in an ideal world a mid with some forward capacity is available. That's part of the Erasmus appeal.

Erasmus I agree with the better choice for the Dockers. I think both as a midfielder and forward that Erasmus, maybe not in year one, but long term should be the better footballer. He'd be a great get for the Dockers and can on my end, not that it will matter to the Dockers, but it's a pick I'd endorse.

Turbocat said:
Knightmare ... just read your take on the mature recruiting approach of Geelong.

I give you credit for going against the grain. Id say that Geelong has assessed the price of kids who have done little bar play well against lower levels, mostly against their own age groups and said the price is too high. Im sure when it is all said and done, we will see plenty of promising kids fail again this year, just like every year.

To me, the 'success' rate of the mature approach is debatable... plenty on our board agree with your rationale, and others are not happy with it. I maintain that almost no club wins a flag without a single figure draft pick that they have drafted and developed. Ideally multiples of them. Melb is just the latest example of this... and soon Geelongs last single figure player will be gone..and statistically so will our chance for real success till we do ..what Collingwood and North and others have done. Take a step backwards, play kids etc and eventually be in a position to have a chance for ultimate success.

Guarantee success? No. Plenty have failed... I just have not seen any clubs win flags without paying the cost of dropping and gathering early picks.

Having said that , Geelong have managed to avoid finishing below 12th. Never have. Success?

Is it a success finishing in that 3rd to 10th range or is it just treading water?

It gets down to how you define success. As a business Geelong has been very successful, never coca-cola but they have been a good Pepsi. Not McDonalds but a good Hungry Jacks. You can have a success as a business without being number 1. Does that work in sport? Have Geelong succeeded by not bottoming out or have they succeeded in just becoming a tease, a side like some sort of TV evangelist offering false hope while asking for donations while flying around on jet planes.

Anyway ..I thinking Hocking is reseting our approach to a degree but for the right price , Im sure they will still look at value mature talent. I think that the approach works best when you are adding to talent already accumulated, rather than trying to stay above water by continually adding older guys.

Do you have a list of the best mature talent available? How do you see players like Bailey Rogers and Greg Clark. Who do you think will get drafted first out of the two of them.

What wins recently tends to be a widely followed model of what everyone else needs to do, but I don't believe a team 'must have' even one single figure early draft pick to win a flag.

The observation I make that differs slightly from this is what we're seeing from the great teams is midfield star power and on those premier teams, at least one top 1-5 midfielder in the competition, and the higher the better. Why I class it a little differently is if you look back at those Hawks teams, it was Sam Mitchell, drafted as an overager mid-draft who was that star midfielder for them. The relative exceptions to this rule though even are West Coast in 2018 (won without Gaff) and Sydney in 2012. So even that concept isn't an absolute must, but certainly incredibly helpful and really helps greatly towards putting you in position to have a shot.

And when looking back at past winners, I wouldn't if creating a rule along these lines just look back at the last few, but I'd look back going back over 20 years to really determine if an idea along these lines really stacks up. And Port and Sydney from 2004/2005 are other teams where they probably don't quite fit this category either if we go back 20 years.

In looking at Geelong, really until this year, Dangerfield was that guy, but it's not looking like he will be anymore. And in Geelong's situation, bottoming out isn't practical when you've still got a list that can go top-4 again and be thereabouts again. So if you can't get those uber top end guys, keep improving that best-22 and make those other parts strong, and maybe with a healthy list at the right time of the year, Geelong could well get over the hump and surprise people, a bit like West Coast did, albeit not with the healthy list part in 2018, with finals being one game knockouts, leading to some surprising results sometimes.

In terms of the draft model I propose in going heavier into mature agers. I would still propose early draft retaining and using those picks, and often even adding to, but more-so from the second round, and maybe even outside the top-15 where appropriate, it really depends on the draft, but having that greater focus on mature agers and taking them not with every pick, but where appropriate and placing a higher weighing on them relative to other clubs with those other picks. So a bit like Geelong's current mature age focus, it's not that all in model, but certainly having a greater emphasis on it than other clubs. And I could argue even Geelong could go slightly more aggressively in that direction even than they have been when looking at the results and the players secured by going that route.

Those 'single figure' players, in a scenario such as Geelong's would be more sensibly targeted during the trade period. And again, it doesn't have to be a former early pick, but that's where you can look for that star power, and without necessarily having those young stars, the advantage there is far greater salary cap space and flexibility to go get good opposition talent.

Geelong have been a 2-8 side over the past 6 years, so if that can continue, I'd take that outcome, as again, and this is a point a lot of people miss, if you're in the finals, and if you're top-4 in particular, you've got a shot, and sometimes with just one good game can upset what sometimes is the better side, if they have a few guys who are off or hurt. So I'd much prefer staying there if given the choice, keeping myself in the mix. And maybe there is someone in the future asking for too much money or too many years, and maybe there is an opportunity to trade for an early pick, then gain yet further salary cap flexibility. There are more ways than bottoming out, to achieve the same outcome.
And for me Sydney for a long time were the model, similar really to how Geelong still are, where they had that poor 2008 season, not that it mattered as Rohan never became anything meaningful for them, but 2003-2018, other than 2008, they were that top-8 side. They still won 2 flags during that time. That's an incredibly successful period of years, and more-so the kind of success Geelong should through similar ideas towards opposition talent ID, and more aggressively, mature age ID, can achieve similar results and maybe win another flag with this current group.

Collingwood as a point of contrast are in a position where they don't have a lot of talent. For a few years now, they've basically been a team of 12-15 players. With the rest of the list not best-22 calibre. So when you're in that position, opposition talent and mature age talent can improve that, but unless you're adding that, they need to play the youth. And Collingwood have drafted fairly well, so they may well from last year's draft develop a few if they can develop that harder edge to their game collectively.

With Geelong, I understand the perception around Geelong being that Pepsi or Hungry Jacks, but I feel there is the scope by continuing with the opposition talent ID and mature age recruitment as those heavier components in the recruiting picture compare to other teams as they greatest opportunity to win flags and be the top side. Melbourne are going to be a hard beat for a few years, and same with the Dogs. And there may not be a way to get past either of them for Geelong. But if they are, opposition talent ID and mature age talent ID is the % way, and as per in my piece, the way where you can really find those stars. Could Geelong find that Harry Taylor? Shane Mumford? Another Tom Stewart or Tim Kelly? Those kinds of guys, and none of them needing top-15 picks to secure are better than the vast majority of top-10 picks. And the point as per in my piece that people miss is, with mature agers, they can come in better than the u18s, but they can also often times improve at as high of, or sometimes even a higher rate than a lot of the junior talent.

Geelong have started off well I feel like by adding Stengle. I don't like him for a lot of teams, but for Geelong with Betts, I'm more comfortable with that. Add an Alleer, add a Rogers, maybe an Angus Baker in defence. And you could be improving that best-22 further.

Greg Clark I'm not as high on as others. He's not much of a contested ball winner, and isn't damaging, as more that outside almost defensively geared type.

For a future YouTube clip, maybe next week or the week after, I'll list off my top-10 mature agers and going into why I'm a fan of them all.

GUMBLETRON · Nov 6, 2021

Here's some actual data:

11 years of draft picks (2010-2020), rookie elevations excluded, average games played per year since being drafted. Mature picks do marginally better on average.

Interestingly, if you treat the first year for draft-age picks as a write-off (and hence any games played a bonus), the gap vanishes - which suggests the main advantage of mature age picks is immediate contribution.

Turbocat · Nov 6, 2021

Knightmare said:
What wins recently tends to be a widely followed model of what everyone else needs to do, but I don't believe a team 'must have' even one single figure early draft pick to win a flag.

The observation I make that differs slightly from this is what we're seeing from the great teams is midfield star power and on those premier teams, at least one top 1-5 midfielder in the competition, and the higher the better. Why I class it a little differently is if you look back at those Hawks teams, it was Sam Mitchell, drafted as an overager mid-draft who was that star midfielder for them. The relative exceptions to this rule though even are West Coast in 2018 (won without Gaff) and Sydney in 2012. So even that concept isn't an absolute must, but certainly incredibly helpful and really helps greatly towards putting you in position to have a shot.

And when looking back at past winners, I wouldn't if creating a rule along these lines just look back at the last few, but I'd look back going back over 20 years to really determine if an idea along these lines really stacks up. And Port and Sydney from 2004/2005 are other teams where they probably don't quite fit this category either if we go back 20 years.

In looking at Geelong, really until this year, Dangerfield was that guy, but it's not looking like he will be anymore. And in Geelong's situation, bottoming out isn't practical when you've still got a list that can go top-4 again and be thereabouts again. So if you can't get those uber top end guys, keep improving that best-22 and make those other parts strong, and maybe with a healthy list at the right time of the year, Geelong could well get over the hump and surprise people, a bit like West Coast did, albeit not with the healthy list part in 2018, with finals being one game knockouts, leading to some surprising results sometimes.

In terms of the draft model I propose in going heavier into mature agers. I would still propose early draft retaining and using those picks, and often even adding to, but more-so from the second round, and maybe even outside the top-15 where appropriate, it really depends on the draft, but having that greater focus on mature agers and taking them not with every pick, but where appropriate and placing a higher weighing on them relative to other clubs with those other picks. So a bit like Geelong's current mature age focus, it's not that all in model, but certainly having a greater emphasis on it than other clubs. And I could argue even Geelong could go slightly more aggressively in that direction even than they have been when looking at the results and the players secured by going that route.

Those 'single figure' players, in a scenario such as Geelong's would be more sensibly targeted during the trade period. And again, it doesn't have to be a former early pick, but that's where you can look for that star power, and without necessarily having those young stars, the advantage there is far greater salary cap space and flexibility to go get good opposition talent.

Geelong have been a 2-8 side over the past 6 years, so if that can continue, I'd take that outcome, as again, and this is a point a lot of people miss, if you're in the finals, and if you're top-4 in particular, you've got a shot, and sometimes with just one good game can upset what sometimes is the better side, if they have a few guys who are off or hurt. So I'd much prefer staying there if given the choice, keeping myself in the mix. And maybe there is someone in the future asking for too much money or too many years, and maybe there is an opportunity to trade for an early pick, then gain yet further salary cap flexibility. There are more ways than bottoming out, to achieve the same outcome.
And for me Sydney for a long time were the model, similar really to how Geelong still are, where they had that poor 2008 season, not that it mattered as Rohan never became anything meaningful for them, but 2003-2018, other than 2008, they were that top-8 side. They still won 2 flags during that time. That's an incredibly successful period of years, and more-so the kind of success Geelong should through similar ideas towards opposition talent ID, and more aggressively, mature age ID, can achieve similar results and maybe win another flag with this current group.

Collingwood as a point of contrast are in a position where they don't have a lot of talent. For a few years now, they've basically been a team of 12-15 players. With the rest of the list not best-22 calibre. So when you're in that position, opposition talent and mature age talent can improve that, but unless you're adding that, they need to play the youth. And Collingwood have drafted fairly well, so they may well from last year's draft develop a few if they can develop that harder edge to their game collectively.

With Geelong, I understand the perception around Geelong being that Pepsi or Hungry Jacks, but I feel there is the scope by continuing with the opposition talent ID and mature age recruitment as those heavier components in the recruiting picture compare to other teams as they greatest opportunity to win flags and be the top side. Melbourne are going to be a hard beat for a few years, and same with the Dogs. And there may not be a way to get past either of them for Geelong. But if they are, opposition talent ID and mature age talent ID is the % way, and as per in my piece, the way where you can really find those stars. Could Geelong find that Harry Taylor? Shane Mumford? Another Tom Stewart or Tim Kelly? Those kinds of guys, and none of them needing top-15 picks to secure are better than the vast majority of top-10 picks. And the point as per in my piece that people miss is, with mature agers, they can come in better than the u18s, but they can also often times improve at as high of, or sometimes even a higher rate than a lot of the junior talent.

Geelong have started off well I feel like by adding Stengle. I don't like him for a lot of teams, but for Geelong with Betts, I'm more comfortable with that. Add an Alleer, add a Rogers, maybe an Angus Baker in defence. And you could be improving that best-22 further.

Greg Clark I'm not as high on as others. He's not much of a contested ball winner, and isn't damaging, as more that outside almost defensively geared type.

For a future YouTube clip, maybe next week or the week after, I'll list off my top-10 mature agers and going into why I'm a fan of them all.

Again you credit for the depth of your patience and replies. All I will say is history says..single figure draft picks is required..as no side wins a falg without those single figure draft picks. When someone does it without them ..I will reassess my opinion..but I doubt that will be happening for a while... no team at the top bar Geelong lacks them. Yes I think Syd was an exception. Maybe the only exception in the last 20 plus years... and they had the advanatage of Cola to supplement their side

GUMBLETRON · Nov 6, 2021

While we're at it, let's look at the previous 10 years, 2000-2009, where careers are mostly over so we can assess by total games played.

Given there are still 76 draft-age picks going around who will pull the blue line up a little more, that probably suggests AFL recruiters have the balance about right.

danster168 · Nov 6, 2021

Where abouts do you see Lachie Rankin? I look at him and love everything that I see. He reminds me of a shorter Stevie Johnson type without the tricks. Rankin looks to be an elite ball user who is comfortable to use his left regularly, great poise and balance, a good overhead mark and looks to enjoy the defensive elements. The only knock I can see is that he doesn't find much of the ball. I have him ranked a top 25 prospect but most people have him outside the top 50? What am I missing?

Log In or Create New Account

Ashes: 5th Test: Jan 4-8, SCGDay 4

Draft Expert Knightmare's 2021 Draft Almanac

Premiership Player

Brownlow Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Premiership Player

Premiership Player

Brownlow Medallist

Wannabe Draft Nuffie

Brownlow Medallist

Premiership Player

Team Captain

Brownlow Medallist

Chris Masten's Sock Puppet

Brownlow Medallist

Professional Procrastinator

Team Captain

Brownlow Medallist

Club Legend

Hall of Famer

TheBrownDog

Brownlow Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

TheBrownDog

Brownlow Medallist

Brownlow Medallist

Similar threads

Ashes: 5th Test: Jan 4-8, SCG
Day 4