Official GIANTS draft & PSD/Rookie Draft thread

[Mountain Giant]

Didn't you hear? Two in the bush is worth way more than one in the hand. Its two! Two is twice as much as one!

And anyway. We have heaps of top 5 picks to trade for a player we could have had at 14.

 

[IanW]

Why develop your own ruckman? Why not just pillage a developed one with a second round pick/trade like most of the successful clubs do?

Because if you pick your rucks in the rookie draft, you develop them for 3-4 years and then you collect a 2nd for a rookie draft pick.

On the other hand, you can spend a high draft pick and do the same thing ...

 

[captainMyCaptain]

Its no surprise that teams are gun shy in using picks in the first round for rucks especially when you consider that Cox, Mumford, Jamar, Sandilands, Jolly and Jacobs have all came through the rookie draft. Then you have the likes of Goldstein (pick 37), Bellchalmbers (psd), Maric (pick 40), Giles (pick 70 with port then as a rookie with us). Then that leaves the likes of Naitanui (pick 2), Kreuzer (pick 1), Lauenberger (pick 4), McEvoy (pick 9), Minson (pick 20) as high picks. So it does seem that the success rate is higher with late picks or the rookie draft for rucks, but time will tell if Grundy is the exception to this rule.

 

[dlanod]

Its no surprise that teams are gun shy in using picks in the first round for rucks especially when you consider that Cox, Mumford, Jamar, Sandilands, Jolly and Jacobs have all came through the rookie draft. Then you have the likes of Goldstein (pick 37), Bellchalmbers (psd), Maric (pick 40), Giles (pick 70 with port then as a rookie with us). Then that leaves the likes of Naitanui (pick 2), Kreuzer (pick 1), Lauenberger (pick 4), McEvoy (pick 9), Minson (pick 20) as high picks. So it does seem that the success rate is higher with late picks or the rookie draft for rucks, but time will tell if Grundy is the exception to this rule.

I think you're looking at it the wrong way.

The early picks have a far higher chance of success. If you look at the rucks drafted in the first 20 or so picks, they have a much higher strike rate than those taken later. However, since teams both have more lower picks (including rookie picks) and can take bigger gambles with them, the numbers of rucks drafted late are larger than those taken early. So you can find gold later, but you might have to take out a number of lottery tickets to do so. If you've got a 75% chance of success with an early ruck and a 25% chance with one taken later, but five times as many rucks are taken later the league will slowly be dominated by those taken later.

 

[captainMyCaptain]

I think you're looking at it the wrong way.

The early picks have a far higher chance of success. If you look at the rucks drafted in the first 20 or so picks, they have a much higher strike rate than those taken later. However, since teams both have more lower picks (including rookie picks) and can take bigger gambles with them, the numbers of rucks drafted late are larger than those taken early. So you can find gold later, but you might have to take out a number of lottery tickets to do so. If you've got a 75% chance of success with an early ruck and a 25% chance with one taken later, but five times as many rucks are taken later the league will slowly be dominated by those taken later.

Well wouldn't completely disagree on where your coming from I would however question that stat of top draft pick for rucks having a success rate of 75%. There have been enough rucks who have been high draft picks and have been a bust for teams to think there better off going with late picks for rucks which as you said is resulting in rucks sliding so more gems are likely to be found late and with the changes to the interchange can't see this situation changing for the time being.

 

[dlanod]

That stat was just pulled off the top of my head as an example, so you're right to question it. Since drafting has become more of a science (last 10 years or so), the strike rate would definitely be above 50% for those first 20 picks, even with players like Wood and Meesen failing.

 

[captainMyCaptain]

And in the ruck department we now have a NSW kid training with us in Dean Robertson(199cm/90kg) who we may rookie, along with Joe Redfern (utility), Zac Williams (mid). So nice to see 3 NSW kids get a possible chance

 

[captainMyCaptain]

Just confirmed that we will rookie NSW kids Zac Williams & Joe Redfern today
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...homegrown-talent/story-e6frexx0-1226534021516

So it looks like PSD - Thornton & Brogan, Rookie - Williams, Redfern and another 2 rookie choices

 

[Scully2Folau]

Great news that we're adding another two NSW boys, as mentioned in the article all of the rookies got their shot in 2012 so there's opportunity for this pair.

It'll be interesting to see how the PSD plays out, might we pick up a recycled player and then rookie Brogan?

 

[captainMyCaptain]

To rookie Brogan would make more sense - wouldn't mind Thornton and Bate through the psd

 

[Scully2Folau]

I'm intrigued by KPF Khan Haretuku as a rookie prospect. Just turned 23 years old, NZ born via Sydney (albeit the other side), he went to St Kilda as a rookie through the NSW scholarships, delisted after just one year but then went to Frankston and got himself in the 2012 team of the year in his 3rd year of VFL footy.

 

[Scully2Folau]

Thornton to GWS at #1 in the PSD.

 

[captainMyCaptain]

Bret Thornton - Welcome aboard psd pick 1
Should be a very good add

 

[Chrono]

Not a fan of Thornton's at all but should be good for short term depth.

 

[captainMyCaptain]

And Brogan is now back on board

 

[Scully2Folau]

Brogan is back via #12 in the PSD.

 

[Scully2Folau]

Must say I'm surprised by this. Why not stack up some NEAFL depth at the very least? I guess resources are stretched with 50 players already.

 

[captainMyCaptain]

And we pass with pick 1 in the rookie draft so just picking up a couple of nsw kids as rookies

 

[Scully2Folau]

So the final list size will be 52 (50 main, 2 rookies) compared to 49 last year (45 main, 4 rookies).

 

[dlanod]

Must say I'm surprised by this. Why not stack up some NEAFL depth at the very least? I guess resources are stretched with 50 players already.

Same as last year. So many people coming in each year requires a certain amount of overhead for every player. I think we're at a stage where passing on rookie selections isn't a huge deal because the costs potentially outweigh the benefits with an already expanded list.

I know the Lions have, in previous years, stated that they've passed on rookie picks because they have a view of a minimum amount of time needed to be spent for each draftee (including rookies)., so there's a limit on the number of new draftees they can support in a way that lets them get the best out of them.

 

[Scully2Folau]

Same as last year. So many people coming in each year requires a certain amount of overhead for every player. I think we're at a stage where passing on rookie selections isn't a huge deal because the costs potentially outweigh the benefits with an already expanded list.

I know the Lions have, in previous years, stated that they've passed on rookie picks because they have a view of a minimum amount of time needed to be spent for each draftee (including rookies)., so there's a limit on the number of new draftees they can support in a way that lets them get the best out of them.

Very true. We've already got 8 brand new players coming in plus Gilham and Thornton, along with (roughly) 31 players entering their second year of AFL football. That's a lot of work when you look at it.

 

[captainMyCaptain]

Zac Williams now officially on board - well done!

 

[juzzo]

wtf Redfern?????????

 

[dlanod]

wtf Redfern?????????

Wondering that myself. Is it an AFL.com.au ****-up?

 

[captainMyCaptain]

Unless there is some mistake no sign of us picking up Redfern