How Crow Can You Go? An Adelaide Football Club Saga

[DangerSloane]

Until people realise the end game...meaning the actual player / players u get rather than some number allocated to a pick ..it means nothing.
Eg. Maybe crows pick turns into a watts (#1), schache (#2)
ours turns into a Chris grant (#105), hird (#79), fevola (#38), Robbie Gray (#55)
You never know...& we got Stocker already.

So then who cares what pick you have?
Trade us your first 3 rounds of picks for picks in the 90s and see how it works out?

The odds are you get a better player earlier in the draft. Full stop end of story.

Yes there are outliers, but not nearly as many as you're making out.

 

[Robertio]

Agree, future trading is always going to include an element of risk. I think both clubs made the right call. If Stocker fails it’s a talent ID issue not a bad trade issue. Similarly if we pick a spud with a top 4 pick it’s not on Reid. He doesn’t grade talent.

Spot on, but i got a feeling that Stocker wasn't Silvagnis pick either. Think Paul Brody had a bit to do with it.

 

[DangerSloane]

Poor management is not being able to identify talent

And that job is made much easier by having picks earlier in the draft.

I cannot believe people here are arguing that draft pick number is irrelevant...

 

[Arr0w]

And that job is made much easier by having picks earlier in the draft.

I cannot believe people here are arguing that draft pick number is irrelevant...

DS, do me a favour, have a look at the top 10 picks of the last 10 or more drafts, as evidence of how many of those players have underperformed compared to players taken after them

Multiple 1st, 2nd and even 3rd round are important, but only if you identify the right talent

 

[DangerSloane]

DS, do me a favour, have a look at the top 10 picks of the last 10 or more drafts, as evidence of how many of those players have underperformed compared to players taken after them

Multiple 1st, 2nd and even 3rd round are important, but only if you identify the right talent

Compared to the further 50 or 60 players taken after?
Hilarious...

 

[Robertio]

Compared to the further 50 or 60 players taken after?
Hilarious...

So your not going to answer the question then?

 

[Arr0w]

Compared to the further 50 or 60 players taken after?
Hilarious...

Initially thought you were playfully trolling, now I realize you have no idea

 

[DangerSloane]

So your not going to answer the question then?

Initially thought you were playfully trolling, now I realize you have no idea

Am I going to compare the top 10 of each draft to every single player taken after? No.

Then again I don't really need to, as the answer is obvious and statistics compiled by other people.

The top 10 have a better chance of being long serving quality players than those outside the top 10.
Decreasing the further from the start the player is selected.

For every one good player that comes out of the 40s or 50s, there are 9 that barely play a game.

This is honestly something a pre-schooler can understand.

There is a good reason teams wont trade pick 1 for numerous later picks.

I get that your club made a bad decision and now you're trying to justify it any way you can but using the exact opposite logic of what statistics and common sense tells us isn't going to get you far.

Just to humour you I chose three random years: 2010 and 2012 and 2014 just to see the top 10 vs the next 10.

2010 top 10 good players: Swallow, Gaff, Polec, Caddy, Heppell, Prestia
11-20 good players: T Lynch (Rich), Brodie Smith, Isaac Smith

2012 top 10 good players: Whitfield, Stringer, Macrae, Wines, Vlastuin, Daniher
11-20 good players: Grundy

2014 top 10 good players: Petracca, Brayshaw, DeGoey, Moore
11-20 good player: Lever, Heeney

 

[Arr0w]

Am I going to compare the top 10 of each draft to every single player taken after? No.

Then again I don't really need to, as the answer is obvious and statistics compiled by other people.

The top 10 have a better chance of being long serving quality players than those outside the top 10.
Decreasing the further from the start the player is selected.

For every one good player that comes out of the 40s or 50s, there are 9 that barely play a game.

This is honestly something a pre-schooler can understand.

There is a good reason teams wont trade pick 1 for numerous later picks.

Stats? What stats? You just guess, or go on a feel

 

[Robertio]

Am I going to compare the top 10 of each draft to every single player taken after? No.

Then again I don't really need to, as the answer is obvious and statistics compiled by other people.

The top 10 have a better chance of being long serving quality players than those outside the top 10.
Decreasing the further from the start the player is selected.

For every one good player that comes out of the 40s or 50s, there are 9 that barely play a game.

This is honestly something a pre-schooler can understand.

There is a good reason teams wont trade pick 1 for numerous later picks.

We all understand that but you still didn't answer the Question. No use coming on here and mouthing off talking down to people, your just another footy fan on the internet.

 

[DangerSloane]

Stats? What stats? You just guess, or go on a feel

Read the rest of the post now.
Its all there mate.

You 'feel' like some gems are found late in the draft. They are.
But the 'facts' tell us that more are found in the first 10 than the next 10 and the next 10 after that.

 

[DangerSloane]

We all understand that but you still didn't answer the Question. No use coming on here and mouthing off talking down to people, your just another footy fan on the internet.

There is no 'question'
The 'question' was a statement that was incorrect, both logically and statistcally.

Not talking down to you at all.
Saying your posts make no sense isn't talking down to you.

 

[Arr0w]

Read the rest of the post now.
Its all there mate.

You 'feel' like some gems are found late in the draft. They are.
But the 'facts' tell us that more are found in the first 10 than the next 10 and the next 10 after that.

Do the comparison, then get back to me

 

[DangerSloane]

Do the comparison, then get back to me

I did 3 years of it right there mate.
You're wrong.

Honestly your opinion is akin to saying that the sun rises in the west.
Its wrong and has been proven so many years ago and many times since.

 

[1981]

At this stage it's looking very good for Adelaide however I think Stocker looks a great prospect so I'm happy with that and we still get a first rounder this year albeit it'll be a roll of the dice pick. But really Stocker looks very good. Strong, good kick, and is holding his own early in his first year which is an excellent sign. Not many kids can do this.

 

[Arr0w]

Am I going to compare the top 10 of each draft to every single player taken after? No.

Then again I don't really need to, as the answer is obvious and statistics compiled by other people.

The top 10 have a better chance of being long serving quality players than those outside the top 10.
Decreasing the further from the start the player is selected.

For every one good player that comes out of the 40s or 50s, there are 9 that barely play a game.

This is honestly something a pre-schooler can understand.

There is a good reason teams wont trade pick 1 for numerous later picks.

I get that your club made a bad decision and now you're trying to justify it any way you can but using the exact opposite logic of what statistics and common sense tells us isn't going to get you far.

Just to humour you I chose three random years: 2010 and 2012 and 2014 just to see the top 10 vs the next 10.

2010 top 10 good players: Swallow, Gaff, Polec, Caddy, Heppell, Prestia
11-20 good players: T Lynch (Rich), Brodie Smith, Isaac Smith

2012 top 10 good players: Whitfield, Stringer, Macrae, Wines, Vlastuin, Daniher
11-20 good players: Grundy

2014 top 10 good players: Petracca, Brayshaw, DeGoey, Moore
11-20 good player: Lever, Heeney

Stop cherry picking, lay out all the selections

 

[Aphrodite]

Stop cherry picking, lay out all the selections

Why bother!

 

[jezzajay]

We all understand that but you still didn't answer the Question. No use coming on here and mouthing off talking down to people, your just another footy fan on the internet.

Hence why I have this individual on ignore.

 

[DangerSloane]

Stop cherry picking, lay out all the selections

I chose 3 random years.

Layout every single draft selection for the history of drafting?
Do you want to pick some for me?

You're just being stupid now.

 

[Aphrodite]

I chose 3 random years.

Do you want to pick some for me?

You're just being stupid now.

Bye!

 

[BLUEALLTHRU]

Bye!

At least it wasn't me...

 

[70lethal]

Basket case clubs are basket cases for a reason and often talent ID and development are diabolical and the top talent often goes to the worst developers screwing the statistical data of top 10 picks.

GWS best midfielder has come from their highest picked midfielder
2011 pick 2 Coniglio
2012 pick 1 Whitfield
2013 pick 2 Kelly
2015 pick 7 Hopper
2016 Pick 2 Taranto

The Bulldogs have nailed every top 10 pick in the last 10 years Smith, Naughton, Bontempelli, Stringer, Macrae.

Hawthorn haven't had a top 10 pick in the last decade

Crows Dangerfield and Davis at pick 10, followed by Talia, Smith, BCrouch, Lever, Gallucci, Fogarty, Jones as 1st rounders.

Sydney's rookie picks have been better than most clubs 2nd and 3rd rounders.

Success of picks is more club dependent than pick number. One only has to look at Nth and Saints.

 

[Robertio]

There is no 'question'
The 'question' was a statement that was incorrect, both logically and statistcally.

Not talking down to you at all.
Saying your posts make no sense isn't talking down to you.

No sense? I just wanted to hear the answer, if you had one.

 

[Robertio]

Basket case clubs are basket cases for a reason and often talent ID and development are diabolical and the top talent often goes to the worst developers screwing the statistical data of top 10 picks.

GWS best midfielder has come from their highest picked midfielder
2011 pick 2 Coniglio
2012 pick 1 Whitfield
2013 pick 2 Kelly
2015 pick 7 Hopper
2016 Pick 2 Taranto

The Bulldogs have nailed every top 10 pick in the last 10 years Smith, Naughton, Bontempelli, Stringer, Macrae.

Hawthorn haven't had a top 10 pick in the last decade

Crows Dangerfield and Davis at pick 10, followed by Talia, Smith, BCrouch, Lever, Gallucci, Fogarty, Jones as 1st rounders.

Sydney's rookie picks have been better than most clubs 2nd and 3rd rounders.

Success of picks is more club dependent than pick number. One only has to look at Nth and Saints.

Here's Mr Google, so tell us what 1st rnd picks we've drafted since 2015 wont make it. No spin no bull

 

[70lethal]

Here's Mr Google, so tell us what 1st rnd picks we've drafted since 2015 wont make it. No spin no bull

I left that out deliberately so the post could be seen as objective and not accused of bias.
Which part of it do you disagree with?

I think your 2017 are your weakest based on Dow's kicking at the moment
Our 2016 will be our poorest return and this stage.

The fact you say from 2015 onwards suggests you agree with me. Cheers