Prediction Pick 24

[The Unforgiven]

He's an absolute gun. He'll be high on the radar of a few clubs I'd imagine.

Freo should forget about Hogan and throw big biscuits at Lobb. Should be easy to prize out of Western Sydney and back to WA with GWS' salary cap pegged back to parity and some of their players about to command big offers.

 

[The Unforgiven]

Re-signed to 2019.

GWS did well there. He's going to tear teams apart along with Patton and Cameron all in the same forward line. Scary.

 

[thegerman]

And the defender that rides Battle Cat all day shall be referred to as He-Man?

Lol. Yeah.

 

[Pivo]

I've not seen them play so, to those who have seen them, who do Kerr and Battle remind people of?

 

[OzeSparky]

I'll go Josh Rotham.

 

[GHS33]

I've not seen them play so, to those who have seen them, who do Kerr and Battle remind people of?

In one of the better Phantoms their comparisons were Jesse White and Jack Darling respectively.

 

[nananana catman]

Does Rory Lobb constitute a KPF? Because he was picked up at pick #29. To think GWS had so much talent to pick from and they even managed to unearth a gem at 29 as well!

Certainly an exception to the rule. But one of the few.

 

[Jeff76]

In one of the better Phantoms their comparisons were Jesse White and Jack Darling respectively.

Oh god, really?

 

[The Unforgiven]

Certainly an exception to the rule. But one of the few.

Agreed that he's one of the exceptions to the rule, but since your statement was absolute I thought it was valid to mention him.

 

[GHS33]

Oh god, really?

Really. That's why I think we're better off just picking best available player at our pick. No point going needs-based and picking a KPF that will only ever be an average player.

 

[Jeff76]

Really. That's why I think we're better off just picking best available player at our pick. No point going needs-based and picking a KPF that will only ever be an average player.

Agree

 

[ChookNorris]

Really. That's why I think we're better off just picking best available player at our pick. No point going needs-based and picking a KPF that will only ever be an average player.

Watched an interview with Dalrymple from the Dogs last year, bloke has build a fair list. He said in the advent of free agency clubs now always go best available as you can fill needs through FA much easier than you could even 5 years ago. I wouldn't expect a KPP this year, especially since next years crop is so highly touted. Can't wait to pick one in the first rou..... oh..

 

[Pure_Ownage]

Watched an interview with Dalrymple from the Dogs last year, bloke has build a fair list. He said in the advent of free agency clubs now always go best available as you can fill needs through FA much easier than you could even 5 years ago. I wouldn't expect a KPP this year, especially since next years crop is so highly touted. Can't wait to pick one in the first rou..... oh..

Key forwards are the exception to that rule as they cost so much to get in-look at boyd cost him pick 6 + griffen + paying part of griffens wage. Unless we are prepared to pay that sort of price to trade one in we better draft one.

 

[Lager]

Key forwards are the exception to that rule as they cost so much to get in-look at boyd cost him pick 6 + griffen + paying part of griffens wage. Unless we are prepared to pay that sort of price to trade one in we better draft one.

They are also very hit and miss - even at the top of the draft (Gumbleton and Thorpe as an example). It just makes sense to pay a premium price for a KPP, that is more of a known quantity, through a trade once a critical need arises. Picking a KPP with our pick 24 is a waste IMO because at that point in the draft they become much more speculative (almost as much chance of having success with a KPP in the 3rd/4th rounds). For that reason I think we'll go best available mid/hbf with our first 2 picks.

 

[gocats88]

They are also very hit and miss - even at the top of the draft (Gumbleton and Thorpe as an example). It just makes sense to pay a premium price for a KPP, that is more of a known quantity, through a trade once a critical need arises. Picking a KPP with our pick 24 is a waste IMO because at that point in the draft they become much more speculative (almost as much chance of having success with a KPP in the 3rd/4th rounds). For that reason I think we'll go best available mid/hbf with our first 2 picks.

Harry Taylor went number 17, 7 spots before number 24. Rance went number 18 also. Might as well draft a talented tall man than pick a project tall. Geelong already have one in buzza anyway. We really need a tall than any other position.

 

[Lager]

Harry Taylor went number 17, 7 spots before number 24. Rance went number 18 also. Might as well draft a talented tall man than pick a project tall. Geelong already have one in buzza anyway. We really need a tall than any other position.

We do need a talented tall, absolutely. But using pick 24 isn't the way to do it. If a KPP is talented enough, they will go earlier than pick 24.

 

[gocats88]

We do need a talented tall, absolutely. But using pick 24 isn't the way to do it. If a KPP is talented enough, they will go earlier than pick 24.

Depends on what other teams needs are really.

 

[GHS33]

Harry Taylor went number 17, 7 spots before number 24. Rance went number 18 also. Might as well draft a talented tall man than pick a project tall. Geelong already have one in buzza anyway. We really need a tall than any other position.

Harry was a mature-age recruit.

 

[gocats88]

Harry was a mature-age recruit.

Yeah still Alex rance wasn't. Then you also have Jared Rivers and Brodie Grundy.

 

[Two Planks]

We do need a talented tall, absolutely. But using pick 24 isn't the way to do it. If a KPP is talented enough, they will go earlier than pick 24.

Tom Barass
Jeremy McGovern
Josh Jenkins
Cameron Mooney
Aliir Aliir
Kurt Tippett
Rory Lobb
Jack Gunston
Brian Lake
Scott Thompson (north)
Ben Brown
Jordan Roughead
Tim Membrey
Fletcher Roberts
Jake Carlisle
Tom Mcdonald

All examples of taller players taken at around pick 24 or later. Its not impossible.

 

[Lager]

Tom Barass
Jeremy McGovern
Josh Jenkins
Cameron Mooney
Aliir Aliir
Kurt Tippett
Rory Lobb
Jack Gunston
Brian Lake
Scott Thompson (north)
Ben Brown
Jordan Roughead
Tim Membrey
Fletcher Roberts
Jake Carlisle
Tom Mcdonald

All examples of taller players taken at around pick 24 or later. Its not impossible.

Not impossible, but that is hardly a ground breaking list, despite the fact that it has been cherry picked.
I suggest you put up a list of failed KPPs taken within that same range for an accurate comparison.

There is no evidence to suggest that it is impossible to pick a good KPP with a mid-20's pick - obviously it could happen. It's just that the chances of a KPP picked within that draft range being a success are low. As I said, highly speculative.
That being said, if we were to pick up a Battle or a Kerr at 24, I would love to eat my words.

 

[Lana]

Not impossible, but that is hardly a ground breaking list, despite the fact that it has been cherry picked.
I suggest you put up a list of failed KPPs taken within that same range for an accurate comparison.

It's all good to compare the number of fails to success but you have to take into consideration the general failure rate of all picks.

If you look at all of the KPFs drafted between picks 20 and 30 and around 35% of them make the grade then it's right on par with other types of players drafted in the same band.

 

[Lager]

It's all good to compare the number of fails to success but you have to take into consideration the general failure rate of all picks.

If you look at all of the KPFs drafted between picks 20 and 30 and around 35% of them make the grade then it's right on par with other types of players drafted in the same band.

Ah, yes. But is the success rate for KPPs 35% within that band (is that the actual number)?
Do you have a comparison of other players taken within that same band with the KPPs removed so as not to bias those numbers (might as well compare apples with oranges, rather than apples with oranges+apples)?
I'm not arguing, I am interested.

 

[Lana]

Ah, yes. But is the success rate for KPPs 35% within that band (is that the actual number)?
Do you have a comparison of other players taken within that same band with the KPPs removed so as not to bias those numbers (might as well compare apples with oranges, rather than apples with oranges+apples)?
I'm not arguing, I am interested.

The 35% is an approximate for all types of players. I give an approximate since it changes depending on where you put the cut off, what drafts you include and what criteria you use for success. (I generally start from 1997 the year with the first rookie draft, at the moment I go until 2004 since most of the players drafted then who will go on to play 200 games have played that much). In those 8 years of guys drafted between 21 and 30, 33.8% played 100 games, 25% played 150 games and 15% player 200 games.

I haven't done the leg work for matching picks with position, something I'll do in the summer (it's going to be fun to track down what position of guys who was drafted back in 1997 with a pick in 70s who played no games at AFL level).

I'm hoping that someone who making the claim that drafting a KPF with a pick in the mid 20s is low percentage effort will do the actual leg work to prove their claim. If they find the pass rate to be significantly less than 35% then they might be on to something.

 

[Ricketz]

I suggest you put up a list of failed KPPs taken within that same range for an accurate comparison.

Wouldn't that be your job to do?