Analysis Ranking the clubs by current National Draft Points

[Mordecai]

Some interesting results:

 

[flipper83]

Some interesting results:

View attachment 1185551

View attachment 1185552

Not sure I understand the 2 graphs.

I'm assuming the 2nd is the sum of the value of the pick that each player on each list was selected at and the second is that value divided by the number of players on each list but then, considering that all lists are the same size, the two graphs should be identical.

Is the second the sum of all picks received inclusive of delisted or traded players? If so over what period?

 

[Lore]

Not sure I understand the 2 graphs.

I'm assuming the 2nd is the sum of the value of the pick that each player on each list was selected at and the second is that value divided by the number of players on each list but then, considering that all lists are the same size, the two graphs should be identical.

Is the second the sum of all picks received inclusive of delisted or traded players? If so over what period?

It's points. Each pick has an assigned points value, pick 1 is 3000 points and then they go down in value until pick 73, which is worth 9 points. Everything after that is worth 0.

So if you have 40 players all taken with pick 1, you'd have 40*3000. If they were all pick 18, it'd be 40*985.

A lot of players at Geelong came from the rookie list, while Carlton has had lots of first round picks recently, so they are respectively first and last on this metric, as you'd expect.

 

[briztoon]

Not sure I understand the 2 graphs.

I'm assuming the 2nd is the sum of the value of the pick that each player on each list was selected at and the second is that value divided by the number of players on each list but then, considering that all lists are the same size, the two graphs should be identical.

Is the second the sum of all picks received inclusive of delisted or traded players? If so over what period?

And to add to that, not all lists are the same size.

Gold Coast has more listed players than any other team. Not sure if any team is running with a shortened list, but under current rules, teams are allowed to run with a minimum of 38 players and a maximum of 44. Gold Coast has 5 extra rookie spots.

 

[flipper83]

And to add to that, not all lists are the same size.

Gold Coast has more listed players than any other team. Not sure if any team is running with a shortened list, but under current rules, teams are allowed to run with a minimum of 38 players and a maximum of 44. Gold Coast has 5 extra rookie spots.

I realise Gold coast has more but everyone else is the same. It doesn't explain the difference in the 2 graphs. For instance Sydney is 2nd last in total but 5th in average so they must be comparing something different.

 

[flipper83]

It's points. Each pick has an assigned points value, pick 1 is 3000 points and then they go down in value until pick 73, which is worth 9 points. Everything after that is worth 0.

So if you have 40 players all taken with pick 1, you'd have 40*3000. If they were all pick 18, it'd be 40*985.

A lot of players at Geelong came from the rookie list, while Carlton has had lots of first round picks recently, so they are respectively first and last on this metric, as you'd expect.

Thanks Lore I understand all that I just don't understand the difference between the 2 graphs

 

[Lore]

Thanks Lore I understand all that I just don't understand the difference between the 2 graphs

Per Briztoon, clubs vary in the number of players they have. Freo and Port have 43, Gold Coast has 50. Most others have 44, 45 or 46. Makes it more comparable.

If those last two add 1000 points each over 46 players it makes a difference of fifty points to the average for the entire team.. which is massive on the scale in the averages graph.

 

[Davo-27]

Those graphs just give you the access those clubs have had over a dozen or so years

It doesnt show you anything about talent ID which is at different levels at each club, basically some recruiters are better than others.

It also doesnt show development and club culture advantages or disadvantages as well as leadership qualities which helps youth intergrate into clubs quicker etc.

So from my PoV it is a small bit of information in a complex formula.

The information is generally the worst teams have access to the best talent, but do they have good talent identification? Do they develop these guys properly? Do they have a good culture? Do they surround these guys with leaders or mercenaries who only care about their paycheque and success is just a secondary priority?

 

[briztoon]

I realise Gold coast has more but everyone else is the same. It doesn't explain the difference in the 2 graphs. For instance Sydney is 2nd last in total but 5th in average so they must be comparing something different.

Sydney has a lot of players either drafted high, or in the rookie draft.

Those graphs just give you the access those clubs have had over a dozen or so years

It doesnt show you anything about talent ID which is at different levels at each club, basically some recruiters are better than others.

It also doesnt show development and club culture advantages or disadvantages as well as leadership qualities which helps youth intergrate into clubs quicker etc.

So from my PoV it is a small bit of information in a complex formula.

The information is generally the worst teams have access to the best talent, but do they have good talent identification? Do they develop these guys properly? Do they have a good culture? Do they surround these guys with leaders or mercenaries who only care about their paycheque and success is just a secondary priority?

I’m assuming they include every player on a teams list, regardless if they were drafted or traded in.

So it’s not just about talent i.d. from recruiters.

 

[HairyO]

Does Jeremy Cameron

5

Jeremy Cameron

Age

31

Ht

196cm

Wt

94kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.5

3star

K

9.0

3star

HB

3.4

3star

M

5.4

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

2.6

5star

D

10.0

3star

K

7.1

3star

HB

2.9

2star

M

4.6

4star

T

2.0

3star

G

1.9

5star

D

8.2

2star

K

5.0

2star

HB

3.2

3star

M

4.6

5star

T

2.4

4star

G

2.0

5star

count as the 1st round pick he was, or the 3 x 1st round picks Geelong paid for him ?

 

[PMBangers]

Does Jeremy Cameron count as the 1st round pick he was, or the 3 x 1st round picks Geelong paid for him ?

He wasn't even a draft pick

 

[HairyO]

He wasn't even a draft pick

So the OPs stats dont mean much at all.

 

[PMBangers]

So the OPs stats dont mean much at all.

What makes you say that?

 

[RedmanWasHere]

Does Jeremy Cameron count as the 1st round pick he was, or the 3 x 1st round picks Geelong paid for him ?

He wasn't a first round pick.

He was a GWS prelisting in 2010 which allowed them 12 names born between January 1-April 30 1993.

 

[HairyO]

What makes you say that?

Because there are players with no values. Not 0. But none.

 

[Davo-27]

Sydney has a lot of players either drafted high, or in the rookie draft.

I’m assuming they include every player on a teams list, regardless if they were drafted or traded in.

So it’s not just about talent i.d. from recruiters.

But even trading in players you need competent player ID, there are plenty of examples of bad trades.

 

[PMBangers]

Because there are players with no values. Not 0. But none.

Like there's always been, players taken past pick 72, rookies, pre-season draftees, mini draftees, doesn't make an analysis like this mean any less

 

[HairyO]

Like there's always been, players taken past pick 72, rookies, pre-season draftees, mini draftees, doesn't make an analysis like this mean any less

So what does the analysis say?

Geelong are the best or the worst? Did their 3 x 1st round picks for Cameron get included? Hawkins was a 3rd round pick because F/S but anyone 2 or 3 years younger than him wont be 3rd round unless that is where he was actually drafted.

 

[PMBangers]

So what does the analysis say?

Geelong are the best or the worst? Did their 3 x 1st round picks for Cameron get included? Hawkins was a 3rd round pick because F/S but anyone 2 or 3 years younger than him wont be 3rd round unless that is where he was actually drafted.

I dont really know tbh, just looked and thought "Nice"

 

[HairyO]

I dont really know tbh, just looked and thought "Nice"

Fair enough. More "aaah" research than "oooh" research.