Player Watch Sid Draper

[Rory Walkerfield]

Theres plenty of evidence to suggest he plays the top end kids, which is what Sid is.

The fact he's not doing that with Sid suggests we are taking more of a long term view to get him right.

So at a minimum its agreed that Nicks doesn’t look for opportunities to play young players except if they’re top draft picks?

 

[UcantCme]

Draper looks a long way off AFL ready - we shouldn’t pick him just because he is a top 5 draft pick

He’s spent almost all pre-season in rehab and struggled with his body last year

We need to show patience- let him build his strength and game

 

[Cromulant]

So at a minimum its agreed that Nicks doesn’t look for opportunities to play young players except if they’re top draft picks?

Jake Soligo, Sam Berry, Nick Murray, Jimmy Rowe and I guess it depends on whether you call Max a "top" pick.

 

[jackster83]

Draper looks a long way off AFL ready - we shouldn’t pick him just because he is a top 5 draft pick

He’s spent almost all pre-season in rehab and struggled with his body last year

We need to show patience- let him build his strength and game

The guy was playing regular senior football at SANFL level at 16. It's not like he's a skinny kid who was only playing juniors.

We haven't developed too many midfielders at SANFL level since we've had our own reserves team. Guys like Soligo were playing in the ones from very early on, while the list of busts is longer than Butters' MRP rapsheet.

If he is anywhere close to full fitness he should be in the ones.

 

[cmndstab]

So at a minimum its agreed that Nicks doesn’t look for opportunities to play young players except if they’re top draft picks?

Realistically, with Nicks it's not a case of whether you're young or not.

He decides early in the (pre)season which players are in the "only select in cases of emergency" bucket, and nothing outside of three Brownlow votes is going to shake him from that belief.

As others have noted, there are plenty of young players he's backed in from day one. And there are others who can't seem to get games regardless of form.

In terms of Draper, I'm not concerned about him as long as we continue playing him in the centre. He looked very comfortable when he came in early last year and played midfield. Then we tried to play him elsewhere and he looked lost. If we keep him in the middle and let him build back from a horror preseason, he will get back to his quality form again. Then we'll see which bucket Nicks has him in.

 

[GreyCrow]

Draper looks a long way off AFL ready - we shouldn’t pick him just because he is a top 5 draft pick

He’s spent almost all pre-season in rehab and struggled with his body last year

We need to show patience- let him build his strength and game

Chicken or egg?

Understand his injuries have curtailed his appearances but how do you then judge '' AFL ready '' - its a throwaway phrase that really means nothing

I'm not convinced 2-3 years in the SANFL is the way to make players '' AFL ready ''

Having a philosophy of waiting then being played out of position and yo-yo-ing in and out of the side doesn't work either

If we cant take the hit that 1 player will generate or not - then what are we even doing

 

[JennyTalia]

My concern is not with Sid. He has some great attributes. It is with our lack of evidence for developing midfielders via the SANFL.

I'd be inclined to throw him in and let him also learn from his peers and opposition.

 

[GameofSloanes]

Drapers 9 possessions in the SANFL on Friday hardly screams pick me. People want accountability in our selection, picking someone on vibes is the opposite. If he even had 2 20+ possession games in a row then sure maybe give him a go.
Pedlar or Taylor the most obvious ones to leave out. Be good if Sid could get a few CBAs too, maybe near the start of quarters when he's fresher.
Hope he can put it together, performances at AFL and SANFL level to date do not look like what a top 5 pick should be, and lag significantly compared to others picked near him.

 

[Cromulant]

Drapers 9 possessions in the SANFL on Friday hardly screams pick me. People want accountability in our selection, picking someone on vibes is the opposite. If he even had 2 20+ possession games in a row then sure maybe give him a go.
Pedlar or Taylor the most obvious ones to leave out. Be good if Sid could get a few CBAs too, maybe near the start of quarters when he's fresher.
Hope he can put it together, performances at AFL and SANFL level to date do not look like what a top 5 pick should be, and lag significantly compared to others picked near him.

13 actually.

His perfornances at SANFL level this year, Friday aside, have been good.

 

[Golumless]

Draper looks a long way off AFL ready - we shouldn’t pick him just because he is a top 5 draft pick

He’s spent almost all pre-season in rehab and struggled with his body last year

We need to show patience- let him build his strength and game

He can build his strength and game at AFL level. Half forward and wing are almost made for these kind of developmental roles.

From what I've seen, which admittedly, was everything prior to the last fortnight, I would have no issue with us selecting Draper there next week. He doesn't need to be a midfielder at this point, just a learning campaign on the fringes where he can have one or two moments with his pace will do.

Admittedly, one worry I have with how we've treated Draper is we have tended to be waayyy too tunneled visioned on him being an inside midfielder.

 

[Golumless]

My concern is not with Sid. He has some great attributes. It is with our lack of evidence for developing midfielders via the SANFL.

I'd be inclined to throw him in and let him also learn from his peers and opposition.

For good reason. Midifeld is a primary a talent/state of a person game (unless you have some niche role like Berry which do exist), and if you're talented enough to be seen as a future midfielder, you're talented enough to play half forward, wing or half back to a solid click today.

Potential midfielders who are in the SANFL long-term are the rejects.

 

[relapse]

At what stage do you feel we have chayce jonesed him

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who thinks we over coached Jones and likely destroyed him as a player.

I'm not saying he would have been a great, but I'm pretty confident that if we allowed him to play to his natural strengths rather than coach it out of him that he would have ended up a far better player than what we've turned him into.

 

[Golumless]

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who thinks we over coached Jones and likely destroyed him as a player.

I'm not saying he would have been a great, but I'm pretty confident that if we allowed him to play to his natural strengths rather than coach it out of him that he would have ended up a far better player than what we've turned him into.

I think it's a pretty desperate thought to shift blame, and also undersells what Jones managed to achieve in his career. This is a player who fought his way back from the brink for a period, after all. Whilst I think we made a mistake by being too eager to use Jones as an inside midfielder and that set him back a year or so, Chayce still ended up recovering and playing a year or so of good football. In the end of the day, it's simply because he wasn't good enough to overcome a team's development. Not the first player to be unable to be dislodged on a shift, won't be the last, however it does indicate Chayce wasn't a strong enough problem solver nor was his game in a good enough place to wear it.

Only your best players are allowed to "play to their strengths", the rest must survive and learn to thrive around those strengths. If they can't do that, they do not deserve the luxury of being "played to their strengths" because they've shown they're not capable of being high-impact enough to justify it.

 

[Cromulant]

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who thinks we over coached Jones and potentially damaged his ability as a player.

I'm not saying he would have been a great, but I'm pretty confident that if we allowed him to play to his natural strengths rather than coach it out of him that he would have ended up a far better player than what we've turned him into.

Its not necessarily over-coaching, its more that a coaching style doesnt suit everyone.

We had a lot of failings through that period of time and not all of them would be poor drafting.

Im staggered Godden is still in a reasonably high position at the club, especially given we removed him from other roles.

 

[MrBarry]

Draper looks a long way off AFL ready - we shouldn’t pick him just because he is a top 5 draft pick

He’s spent almost all pre-season in rehab and struggled with his body last year

We need to show patience- let him build his strength and game

You get experience playing at afl level by playing at afl level. He needs to be given a block of games this year.

 

[119others]

Ok, for those that constantly say Nicks does play the kids, what people like me are saying is that Nicks does not look for opportunities to play the kids over marginal older players.

Nicks is the most risk averse coach in the AFL and this is another example of that risk averse nature shining through.

Once you understand this point then understanding Nicks’ decisions / game plan etc becomes a lot simpler.

for clarity who are the older marginal players you are referring to? our weakest links (imo) are taylor, bond, peds (none old) and cumming (on this years form). t murray showed enough last game to persist with

genuinely interested in what players below you are referring to

 

[GreyCrow]

for clarity who are the older marginal players you are referring to? our weakest links (imo) are taylor, bond, peds (none old) and cumming (on this years form). t murray showed enough last game to persist with

genuinely interested in what players below you are referring to

View attachment 2603469


View attachment 2603471

Now do 2026 numbers not one game

 

[119others]

Now do 2026 numbers not one game

why dont we start with last game and then work back

 

[119others]

Now do 2026 numbers not one game

but being an agreeable bloke here is the previous game (its irrelevant early season when we had 8 first team players out so last 2 weeks are clearly most appropriate to analyse imo). i am just genuinely totally unsure who Rory Walkerfield is referring to re playing older players this week and last

 

[Golumless]

Ok, for those that constantly say Nicks does play the kids, what people like me are saying is that Nicks does not look for opportunities to play the kids over marginal older players.

Nicks is the most risk averse coach in the AFL and this is another example of that risk averse nature shining through.

Once you understand this point then understanding Nicks’ decisions / game plan etc becomes a lot simpler.

You're on the right track, but came to the wrong conclusion. This isn't Nicks being risk adverse, this is league wide trend at play. One that is going to get a whole lot worse in the next decade as well, seeing how well both Geelong and Collingwood have done in extending their windows.



Since 2012, this is the median (of an average because I don't know how to scrape data like Wheelo, but want this to get rid of extreme outliers like expansion sides, or Collingwood last year) experience any team selects on any given gameday that year (black, stats are for this) and for Adelaide (Adelaide colours). Same deal for age below.



One thing to note with these numbers is they grow as the season progresses. In about 3 months, it's not unlikely that 2026 is the record by a considerable distance.

Adelaide aren't playing kids over marginal older players because the league isn't playing kids over the marginal older players. If a kids is not actively solving problems in a lineup, they're not being selected. After all, both age and experience do not pull a statistically significant increasing trend over a 15 year period if there hasn't been a prioritization of playing older players when possible, which we've also seen with drafts becoming shorter in recent years, indicating how little desire there is to explore risky options that will likely result in low payoff. Winning today is just more important than whatever could happen tomorrow.

 

[FR0GGY]

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who thinks we over coached Jones and likely destroyed him as a player.

I'm not saying he would have been a great, but I'm pretty confident that if we allowed him to play to his natural strengths rather than coach it out of him that he would have ended up a far better player than what we've turned him into.

If he felt that way he should have left 2 years ago.
A new start would have been the best thing for him instead of getting delisted and never seen again.

Trouble was he looked lost from pretty much d1 so I don’t think we can pin it on the coaches.