Rookie List

[macca23]

Was just trying to remember who has been training with the Crows in order to be taken in the pre-season draft (if we have a pick).

Off memory it was

Aiden Parker (WA)
Adam Fisher (Vic)

with the local boys being

Tim Nicholas (Norwood)
James McEntee (North Adelaide)
Haydn Skipworth (Eagles)
Joel Patful(Norwood)
Jason Porplyzia (West Adelaide)
Adrian Wilson (Central Districts)

with Wilson having been listed at one stage as quitting and then later still being listed as training.

Like the national draft, the rookie selections can come from any player nominating for that draft, not just the ones training with you. But presuming they were to come from those training with the Crows, my guesses are:

Pre-season: Aiden Parker

Rookie List: Adam Fisher, Tim Nicholas, Haydn Skipworth and Joel Patful.

If Wilson is still training with the club, then I'll go for him in lieu of Patful.

Any body got any info or thoughts in this area?

 

[DaveW]

Why did you overlook McEntee who is a ruckman?

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by DaveW
Why did you overlook McEntee who is a ruckman?

Only because he is listed at 195 cms Dave, which IMO at AFL level is just too short.

 

[napsyd]

Originally posted by macca23
Was just trying to remember who has been training with the Crows in order to be taken in the pre-season draft (if we have a pick).

Off memory it was

Aiden Parker (WA)
Adam Fisher (Vic)

with the local boys being

Tim Nicholas (Norwood)
James McEntee (North Adelaide)
Haydn Skipworth (Eagles)
Joel Patful(Norwood)
Jason Porplyzia (West Adelaide)
Adrian Wilson (Central Districts)

with Wilson having been listed at one stage as quitting and then later still being listed as training.

Like the national draft, the rookie selections can come from any player nominating for that draft, not just the ones training with you. But presuming they were to come from those training with the Crows, my guesses are:

Pre-season: Aiden Parker

Rookie List: Adam Fisher, Tim Nicholas, Haydn Skipworth and Joel Patful.

If Wilson is still training with the club, then I'll go for him in lieu of Patful.

Any body got any info or thoughts in this area?

What's the eligability for the rookie list? I would have thought Skipworth would not be eligible??

 

[macca23]

Re: Re: Rookie List

Originally posted by napsyd
What's the eligability for the rookie list? I would have thought Skipworth would not be eligible??

It's something along the lines of under 23 and played less than a certain number of games. Whatever the precise requirements are, Skipworth definitely qualifies.

 

[napsyd]

Re: Re: Re: Rookie List

Originally posted by macca23
It's something along the lines of under 23 and played less than a certain number of games. Whatever the precise requirements are, Skipworth definitely qualifies.

OK, that's good. A friend of mine knows his family quite well. Apparantly he's a good kid so I hope he gets another go if he's good enough.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Re: Re: Re: Rookie List

Originally posted by macca23
It's something along the lines of under 23 and played less than a certain number of games. Whatever the precise requirements are, Skipworth definitely qualifies.

Yeah, this is correct. Reckon Skipworth finally started showing some decent SANFL form last year & still being young would probably worth having on the rookie list for another year.

 

[macca23]

Channel 10 news tonight showed Alan Stewart skulking in the bushes watching the Crows train today, with his eyes firmly fixed on the would be rookies training with the Crows.

After last year's abysmal record with rookies - 0 from 4 promoted to the senior list or retained, as opposed to 3 from 4 promoted for the Crows, they obviously value our judgement better than theirs, as they were the only 1 of the 16 teams not to have any potential rookies doing a pre-season with them.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by macca23
Channel 10 news tonight showed Alan Stewart skulking in the bushes watching the Crows train today, with his eyes firmly fixed on the would be rookies training with the Crows.

After last year's abysmal record with rookies - 0 from 4 promoted to the senior list or retained, as opposed to 3 from 4 promoted for the Crows, they obviously value our judgement better than theirs, as they were the only 1 of the 16 teams not to have any potential rookies doing a pre-season with them.

As I mentioned before this is a good reason not to talk up any of the players until we have them on our list. ie. We shouldn't be encouraging other teams to pinch them ... unless your name is Angwin.

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
As I mentioned before this is a good reason not to talk up any of the players until we have them on our list. ie. We shouldn't be encouraging other teams to pinch them ... unless your name is Angwin.

The problem we have is that by having these lads train with us it draws the attention of other clubs to them, eg Jamar last year.

On the reverse side of the coin, having them train up close gives us a real insight into their abilities as witnessed by the success of our rookie list program in the last 12 months.

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by macca23
After last year's abysmal record with rookies - 0 from 4 promoted to the senior list or retained, as opposed to 3 from 4 promoted for the Crows, they obviously value our judgement better than theirs, as they were the only 1 of the 16 teams not to have any potential rookies doing a pre-season with them.

Its harder to get a spot on Port's list than it is on Adelaide's. Its harder to keep a spot on Adelaide's list than on Port's.

As for valuing your judgement better, what the? How exactly does watching some players train give any insight into Crows' recruiting judgement? It just shows how good those players are - players that all clubs have been watching all year. Blokes like Adam Fisher, Jason Porplyzia and Adrian Wilson aren't exactly unknowns.

And for what its worth, of last years Port rookies, 3 of them were at Collingwood preseason training. You don't need them at your club to assess them. Chris Hall wasn't at Port's preseason training either before we listed him.

 

[noddy]

Originally posted by Porthos
Its harder to get a spot on Port's list than it is on Adelaide's. Its harder to keep a spot on Adelaide's list than on Port's.

I'm sure you have thought long & hard before making this statement Porthos & i look forward to your clarification of it,

I don't really care to much if Stewart or anyone else is spying on the young kids trying out with the Crows for the rookie list,
if it means some youngster can gain a spot on an AFL list good luck to him even if he does end up at Pap land,

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by noddy
I'm sure you have thought long & hard before making this statement Porthos & i look forward to your clarification of it,

OK.

Port are the club that goes for the high draft picks most years. When they get young blokes on the list, they want them to show a fair bit of promise beforehand - however once they're on the list, they get a fair bit of time to show that promise - Thurstans, Morgan, M. Stevens, Koulouriotis and Hall are good examples of this. They haven't got a top side berth, but Port have kept them on to develop.

The Crows' almost always draft late. As such, they tend to take in a whole bunch of draftees that haven't shown so much, but so as to make room for the next lot of late draftees in two years time, they have to create a lot more draftee turnover to maximise their chances of picking up on some more hidden potential...they get around two years to show it, and then they're usually out.

These two trends are best abbreviated in the statement I made before. Rutten, Bock and Mattner are just a part of the latest Crows intake of turnover draftees (ie. they only have a couple of years to make a mark) - not a lot is expected of them. For a player to do the same at Port is rarer/harder, because Port will give more time, and have less spots available on a yearly basis to be filled.

 

[napsyd]

Originally posted by Porthos
OK.

Port are the club that goes for the high draft picks most years. When they get young blokes on the list, they want them to show a fair bit of promise beforehand - however once they're on the list, they get a fair bit of time to show that promise - Thurstans, Morgan, M. Stevens, Koulouriotis and Hall are good examples of this. They haven't got a top side berth, but Port have kept them on to develop.

The Crows' almost always draft late. As such, they tend to take in a whole bunch of draftees that haven't shown so much, but so as to make room for the next lot of late draftees in two years time, they have to create a lot more draftee turnover to maximise their chances of picking up on some more hidden potential...they get around two years to show it, and then they're usually out.

These two trends are best abbreviated in the statement I made before. Rutten, Bock and Mattner are just a part of the latest Crows intake of turnover draftees (ie. they only have a couple of years to make a mark) - not a lot is expected of them. For a player to do the same at Port is rarer/harder, because Port will give more time, and have less spots available on a yearly basis to be filled.

I generally get where you are coming from, but it's a big call to say that not a lot is expected from Rutten, Bock and Mattner. I'd say a hell of a lot is expected from them, particularly Rutten and Mattner. Perhaps this was not the case when they were first rookie listed, is that what you mean?

Anyway, surely two years is plenty of time to sort diamonds and turds. Late developers are truly rare. Do Port clutch at turds?

 

[ok.crows]

Originally posted by Porthos
Its harder to get a spot on Port's list than it is on Adelaide's. Its harder to keep a spot on Adelaide's list than on Port's.

Flow of youth keeps Adelaide's future needs on track
By DAVID BURTENSHAW
17dec02
...
Surprisingly, Port Adelaide has more players in the 26 and over category.

But the Power drags down its average age by listing 13 players who are aged 21 or under.

Hey, anyone else spot the apparent disconnect here with Porthos' claim and the comparison provided by Burtenshaw of actual numbers of older and younger players on Ports list compared with Crows?

If it was indeed harder to keep a spot on Adelaide's list - how come the fewer players in the mid-range of age (22-25) on Port's list?

IMO it happens like this-

The Crows tend to approach recruiting from both ends (in favour of the middle) - they try to obtain experienced ready-made players through trades, and also they try to select promising but very young players via the rookie list, selecting them early so that other clubs don't get to them first. The Crows have not had good experience with low draft picks, and tend to avoid them by trading them away.

Port OTOH have tried to obtain low draft picks through trades (more so than the Crows), backing their judgement (& luck) in the draft lottery.

Despite this differing approach to recruiting it is Port that have somehow ended up with the larger gap in the midlle age & experience range of its list.

This tends to go against the latter part of Porthos' theory - that it is harder to stay on Crows list.

I am undecided about the part of the theory that it is harder to get onto Ports list - although I agree it would seem that you would have to "rate" higher in draft camp type terms.

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by napsyd
Anyway, surely two years is plenty of time to sort diamonds and turds.

It obviously wasn't with Biglands. Two years on the Power list, still needed another year of SANFL before he was worth picking up. Its some cases its not a matter of determining whether they're diamonds or turds, but whether the flaws in the diamonds are too big to conceal.

Late developers are truly rare.

Unfortunately, players with badly timed injuries aren't rare. Morgan, Koulouriotis, Lockwood and Hall all fit into this category.

ok.crows, I'll debunk your post later.

 

[napsyd]

Biglands is a single case, he is not the rule. I agree that a player recruited at 18 will not show his best by 20. But 9 times out of ten, he'll be showing something of his potential.

Injury certainly can't be helped. Looking at John**** last year, you can be pretty confident he would have played in 2001 if fit.

None of this changes my original proposition though. Barring the rare odd case and injury, 2 years is plenty of time to sort diamonds and turds.

So either Port have a heap of young diamonds or are full of ...

 

[napsyd]

Hey, while we're at it, using your logic, shouldn't Biglands still be on your list Porthos?

 

[koulagirl22]

Originally posted by napsyd
I generally get where you are coming from, but it's a big call to say that not a lot is expected from Rutten, Bock and Mattner. I'd say a hell of a lot is expected from them, particularly Rutten and Mattner. Perhaps this was not the case when they were first rookie listed, is that what you mean?

Anyway, surely two years is plenty of time to sort diamonds and turds. Late developers are truly rare. Do Port clutch at turds?

For your sake, I hope you didn't just call Paul Koulouriotis a ****...

 

[napsyd]

Originally posted by koulagirl22
For your sake, I hope you didn't just call Paul Koulouriotis a ****...

I wouldn't know Paul Koulouriotis if I stepped in a pile of him whilst walking down the street.

Since I know nothing about him, the answer to your question is no.

 

[napsyd]

Originally posted by koulagirl22
For your sake, I hope you didn't just call Paul Koulouriotis a ****...

I have now examined the website in your sig and am far more educated on the subject of Paul Koulouriotis.

Since he clearly is your favourite player and because I am a nice bloke, I will give him the benefit of the doubt. I'm sure he's more diamond than ****.

 

[DaveW]

I see something has been recently added to the swear filter. IS the following word really so offensive?

t u r d

 

[napsyd]

Originally posted by DaveW
I see something has been recently added to the swear filter. IS the following word really so offensive?

t u r d

Someone must find it ****ing offensive mate!

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by napsyd
I wouldn't know Paul Koulouriotis if I stepped in a pile of him whilst walking down the street.

Pure Gold napsyd!!! Pure Gold!!

 

[Malibu#27]

Originally posted by ok.crows
Hey, anyone else spot the apparent disconnect here with Porthos' claim and the comparison provided by Burtenshaw of actual numbers of older and younger players on Ports list compared with Crows?

If it was indeed harder to keep a spot on Adelaide's list - how come the fewer players in the mid-range of age (22-25) on Port's list?

IMO it happens like this-

The Crows tend to approach recruiting from both ends (in favour of the middle) - they try to obtain experienced ready-made players through trades, and also they try to select promising but very young players via the rookie list, selecting them early so that other clubs don't get to them first. The Crows have not had good experience with low draft picks, and tend to avoid them by trading them away.

Port OTOH have tried to obtain low draft picks through trades (more so than the Crows), backing their judgement (& luck) in the draft lottery.

Despite this differing approach to recruiting it is Port that have somehow ended up with the larger gap in the midlle age & experience range of its list.

This tends to go against the latter part of Porthos' theory - that it is harder to stay on Crows list.

I am undecided about the part of the theory that it is harder to get onto Ports list - although I agree it would seem that you would have to "rate" higher in draft camp type terms.

You see - thats the problem with reading an article and blindly treating it as fact without context.


Lets first look at the category of players 17 -21
===================================
Its generally a fair assessment to say the majority of these players have been picked up as first time pickups in the pre-season draft ..... it can also be seen that port has an additional 4 ... i.e and extra 1 per year for the past 4 years.

This does not contradict Porthos's claim that Port generally draft an extra youngster or two and hang on to them a bit longer.

I'll leave it to you guys to look at how long each of these draftees has been on respective lists, but of this category of players I would suggest Ports would on average have been on their lists a bit longer.

Now for the 22 - 25 Category
====================-
I had a bit of a squizz through the Crows list and of the players I found that fitted this category .... I only found 16 of them, I found it quite interesting that 7 .... or just under half were mature age recruits ..... I.e. they were players who had been drafted for or picked up from other clubs in trades at ages of around 20 or older.

This seems to suggest that Adelaide like trying to pick up ready made players or players just needing a change of environment to supplement their list ..... in fact of the players in this category for Adelaide, I could see 4 players Doughty, McGregor, Stenglein, and
Crowell, who seem to be regular contributors to the team that are also players drafted by the Crows as kids. With Shirley as an exception to the rule having been redrafted.

MY basic point here is that a lot of Adelaides 22 - 25 year old talent is in fact recycled players from elsewhere.

eg: Begley, Biglands, Bode, Ladhams, Massie, Torney, Welsh, Shcell.

Whereas if you look at Ports list, 7 were drafted initially by Port and are now regular contributors, .... and in fact are also constant performers in Peter Burgoyne, Josh Carr, Chad Cornes, Stuart Dew, Nick Stevens, Warren Tredrea.

A further 2 in Pickett and Cochran are mature age recruit, 1 of which will be a guaranteed starter next season, while the other 2 in Thurstans and Brogan were initially drafted by Port.

Hence this again supports porthos argument that Port hangs on to more of its youngsters.

I'm also pretty comfortable as a Port suppoorter with our group of 22 - 25 year olds when stacked up against the Crows equivalents.



Finally looking at the 26 - 29 category
===========================
This is where Port seems to have quire a few players drafted from elsewhere ...... I didnt look at the crows and will leave that as a task for others ... but it seems to suggest that ports initial squad generally consisted of a lot of younger (U20) year old talents wioth not a lot of early 20's aged players, Port has recruited to fill this age gap, with 5 players that I could find brought to the club from elsewhere ..... once again this seems to be quite a reasonable thing to do to fill out a rookie squad.




All of this supports porthos arguments made above to some degree, and does not in any way contradict anything porthos has claimed.


MY assessment would be that Port goes after high end draft picks of kids in the draft and gives them time to develop, while the crows aren't quite as desperate to do this, instead being content to pick up middle of the draft players, and trading for 20 - 23 year olds from other cluns looking for opportunities.

Port generally saeems to trade for more experienced players looking to fill specific roles.


And after all that ... I am more than content with the make up and age breakdown of our squad.