Competitions The 2012 AFC Drafting Game: The Premiership Table at the end of the Minor Round

[FAITH]

Faith, lets be honest.... How would that midfield go vs yours? Sandliland vs Maric for starters?

His biggest weakness is his ruck sure.
But my defence would have little chance against any combination of his forwards.

 

[crowsarethebest]

I like FootyPie's forward line but it isn't standout for me. Sure it's a team loaded with potential but none of the players have really put it together consistently. Footypie's midfield was very weak IMO, probably the weakest in the comp. Not 1 elite midfielder in there. I didn't really rate the defense either. Firrito-solid, but undersized. Silvagni is another who is undersized and struggles against the big men. Hurley is good at the moment, potentially elite. Burgoyne, Doughty and Clarke are ok, Burgoyne is living off reputation though and hasn't lived up to what Hawks gave up for him. Doughty is... lets be honest, an honest player. Clarke will struggle to break into the Pies 22, fringe player.

The midfield is a real worry for mine. Cassisi and Jones as rovers? Do not rate. Danger, is an enigma. Hasn't put it together. Wellingham is ok but was in danger of being dropped. Go to the Collingwood board and most will say he's probably one who's in danger of losing his spot in the 22. Woj is a HBF, not a midfielder. Ruck is an obvious weakness. I think the midfield really struggles. When you look at the bench there's not many options either. A good team needs inside midfielders. If you look at Geelong, Collingwood etc, they don't really have any flashy running outside midfielders, it's filled with inside mids like Swan, Pendlebury, Selwood, Ball, Bartel etc.

 

[Mego Red]

You dont think Brad Ottens was worth more to geelong then 5% or Jolly to Collingwood?
What about if the crows had Sandles or Cox would that improve our side by only 5%?

Then put it this way.

Midfielders are 30pts. You would have 9+ in your team.
Tall forwards and defenders are 10 pts. You would have three or four of them in your team.
Rucks are 5 pts. You probably have 1 1/2 of them in your side.

The math is why it makes sense.

 

[Mego Red]

Start Danger/Welling/Burgoyne/Cassisi/Jones/Rioli

Burgoyne is a defender. Rioli is a forward. Wellingham is good but doesn't get much time in the midfield and probably isn't first 18.

Further to that ...

S. Burgoyne, M. Hurley, S. Johnson, C. Rioli are class.

But ...

J. Porplyzia - may not have shoulders that allow him to play the game
J. Butcher - may play more like he did in two years at Port magpies that he did in three games at Port Power
J. Darling - is not a centre half forward, he's too short
D. Wojcinski - is a half back flanker
M. Clarke, M. Firrito, A. Silvagni, M. Doughty - are all only mediocre players
I. Maric, D. Cassisi, C. Jones - if this is your first ruck, you're playing for priority picks
J. Patton - will barely play this year
M. Daw - may never play a game of AFL

 

[Freddy Bassett]

Then put it this way.

Midfielders are 30pts. You would have 9+ in your team.
Tall forwards and defenders are 10 pts. You would have three or four of them in your team.
Rucks are 5 pts. You probably have 1 1/2 of them in your side.

The math is why it makes sense.

A good ruckman can make an average midfielder look good. Watch the Melbourne vs Adelaide this year, Moloney looked a star thanks to Jamar......

 

[Bacon8]

A good ruckman can make an average midfielder look good. Watch the Melbourne vs Adelaide this year, Moloney looked a star thanks to Jamar......

And a star midfield can make an average midfield look poor.

Watch Geelong v Melbourne 2011

 

[Freddy Bassett]

And a star midfield can make an average midfield look poor.

Watch Geelong v Melbourne 2011

And a poor defender can make a good forward look amazing. Check out West Coast vs Bulldogs game. We can play this all day

 

[Mego Red]

A good ruckman can make an average midfielder look good. Watch the Melbourne vs Adelaide this year, Moloney looked a star thanks to Jamar......

Goldstein, Jamar, Leuenberger, McEvoy - weren't many wins in that lot. Hell, if you look at the top eight, there isn't a ruckman that is more than mediocre except for the Eagles and the Swans, and the Eagles were coming off three absolutely disgracefully bad years.

Ruckmen are the most overrated things in the comp and hit outs to advantage are a meaningless stat until they start to be higher than a handful every game. You need a big body that can negate any advantage your opposition has.

That being said, I rated ruckmen as five pts because of the number of them you have in a balanced squad, not because I don't rate them.

 

[Hank93]

I really would be interested to see David Noble analyse who had the best team.

 

[Mego Red]

Oh,I wonder if we emailed him or Rendell, we'd get their opinion? Maybe not now, but at the grand final stage?

 

[Footypie32]

Wow! Nearly a whole page dedicated to my team... Im flattered!
I definitely think I have the most polarising team in the comp. And I see both sides of the coin. My team has so much X-factor and potential, I really think it can only be judged at seasons end. For whats its worth, I do think Faith overrated my team. However I think its a pretty even team. Some of your teams would be ****ed if you get an injury to your star player. Where as I think my team could cover that better. Im also putting the house on Wood that he has a breakout year. Not happy with my rucks at all.

 

[Stripple]

My rankings

Lawrst - 81
Kristoff - 80
CrowsaretheBest - 79
Freddy Bassett -78
Blackbird - 77
Hendo888 - 77
roo2macca - 75
Buzzasto DaSilva - 74
Mad Fan of AFL -73
BACCS - 73
Ringo200 - 72
Spackler - 71
hdecure - 71
FAITH - 71
Footypie 32 - 70
Adelaide Fan 14 - 67
Bacon8 - 65

These are my short write ups for all the teams. I'm obviously not the best at ranking these teams as I seem to have some way of where the finished in the overall voting. So take my criticism with a grain of salt.

[FONT=&quot]Hdecure – 71​

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Towards the low end of my rankings. Scored ok to well in most categories, 7’s. Tall forwards hurt you both in their categories as well as the structure category. Essentially as has been said if A.Walker is your key forward it’s going to cost you a bit. If day does come on then I think you would probably jump up by about 3-4 points (which is a huge jump in my rankings).[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Buzzato – 74[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Mid table ranking. Scored well to great in Mids, and good in Small fwds and Defense 8’s. Forward line talls hurt another team that could be much stronger come round 23. As with most of my rankings if your tall forwards or tall defenders lacked your structure score also took a hit.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Hendo888 – 77[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Top 6. Consitent scoring team, lost a bit on your talls up front and down back and lacking a bit of X-factor in my opinion. Definitely went with the more dependable types.[/FONT]

Freddy Bassett – 78


Top 4. Scored well in most areas. Top marks for Tall forwards. Lost out a little in defense think certain teams would be hard to stop with your set up. Structure scored high due to the strong forward set up.

Faith – 71


Lower scorer equal with a few others. Outside Mids and Tall forwards hurt your score and as such the structure score as well. Wasn’t as hard as others have been with the tall forwards but still didn’t mark them too strongly.
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Ringo – 72[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Just out of the 8. Lack of real strong inside mids hurt. Also your tall forwards are a bit unreliable if Tex has a breakout season this will increase your score by a large percentage. Tall defenders were also a little underwhelming but solid enough. Like your small defenders and your outside mids however. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Footy Pie – 70[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Towards the bottom. Tall forwards could be great at end of year but hurt you at the moment. Ruck was definitely weak, love Maric’s heart but he certainly needs to improve to play with the big boys. Your mids while decent lacked that stand out elite player which cost you overall. Also in regards to marking I was marking for where a player was named to avoid double up scoring hence why Riloi and Johnson didn’t add to your mid score. Smalls in the back line and fwd line scored well and was definitely your teams strength.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Kristof – 80[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Second by a point. Lowest score was ruck and X-fasctor otherwise you scored well throughout. Inside Mids and tall Fwds the big scorers. This also boosted up your structure score. Very good team.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Roo2Macca – 75[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Inside the 8. Tall defenders top score for your team. Inside mids also very high. Tall forwards hurt you a little due to Jarrahs inconsistency, that and being unsure of Johnston will play forward. Ruck was also a low point.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Crowsarethebest - 79[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Top 4. Inside mids and your forward line as a whole were your big scorers. Lacked a little run and carry in my opinion that could have pushed you further up the ladder. Ruck was also a little weak.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Blackbird – 77[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Outside the 4. Inside mids and your ruck where the big scorers. Tall forwards and outside mids hurt. Don’t rate Roughead so that probably doesn’t help. Like the look of the team overall and think could be the dark horse come the end of season 2012 as some of the youth you have could definitely improve your overall score. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Madfan – 73[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Out of the 8. Just. X factor and small forward the big scorers. Your tall forwards are half way to beuing great but Kosi killed you there in my view. Outside mids also a little light on Hill being the exception. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]BACCS – 73[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Also just out of the 8. Like your midfield good mix and strong throughout probably need one more classy outsider to get full marks IMO. Your forward line hurt you most with it also impacting your structure score. Waite and Green I would not be putting money on to do any real damage, especially if Waite can’t make it out onto the park. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Spackler – 71[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Same as other 71’ers. Your forward line and ruck hurt you. Think Hille has one foot in the grave. Vardy is an exciting prospect but still not proven and think Kennedy plays better when there is a gorilla in the forward line with him. Mids scored high as did your tall defenders. But then again how can you not score high in the Mids with GAblett.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Adelaide Fan – 67[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Second last, sorry. This team could be great if all the youngins come on. Nat and Vickery while very promising needed a senior head about to score higher. Your defence scored well but you struggled elsewhere. If there was score category for potential think you would have maxed that out. Would love to re rank your team in round 23. [/FONT]

Bacon - 65


Last. Sorry mate. Tall forwards and tall defenders were low scorers this in turn really hurt the structure score. Dawes I don’t rate and Reid while pretty good last year still needs more time I think. Like your inside mids and small forwards. Think if you had one or two changes to the team it really could fly up my rankings but was just missing bits here and there.


[FONT=&quot]Lawrst – 81[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Number 1. Liked your team a lot. Good structure and decent scoring all over the park. Got there by consistency in your scoring. Small forwards being the lowest scoring (mainly due to Thomas penchant for a point). Whilst others have you beat in most categories (I don’t think you where the highest scorer in any of the categories for me) you managed to get a good balance all over.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]​

[/FONT]

 

[Stripple]

Sorry about the formatting above tried to change it but no luck.

 

[Freddy Bassett]

Goldstein, Jamar, Leuenberger, McEvoy - weren't many wins in that lot. Hell, if you look at the top eight, there isn't a ruckman that is more than mediocre except for the Eagles and the Swans, and the Eagles were coming off three absolutely disgracefully bad years.

Ruckmen are the most overrated things in the comp and hit outs to advantage are a meaningless stat until they start to be higher than a handful every game. You need a big body that can negate any advantage your opposition has.

That being said, I rated ruckmen as five pts because of the number of them you have in a balanced squad, not because I don't rate them.

What was the difference between 95,96,97,98,99? Shaun Rehn by memory!

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

A good ruckman can make an average midfielder look good. Watch the Melbourne vs Adelaide this year, Moloney looked a star thanks to Jamar......

Don't underestimate the role Reilly played

 

[Mego Red]

Yes, that was the single difference.

EDIT: I do t want to get into this and derail this thread, soaybe take the question out onto the board if you want to discuss it more?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Seems that one of the big differences in score allocations was based on the different application of potential.

Some people seemed prepared to give out points based on the predicted improvement in talented youngsters. Others weren't so kind and judged teams more on what their players have proven so far.

As an example, one team had Luke Shuey in their on ball brigade. He could be an absolute jet and we've seen with some mids recently (Selwood, Redden) that they can make a fairly swift leap to being a consistent, quality performer. He could also get the "Daniel Rich Blues" and stagnate for a year or two before progressing when they mature.

I found these players the hardest to judge and was probably a little cautious dishing out points. Improvement is rarely a straight line - there are steep inclines, flat spots, regresses, break out games... the unknown factor was one of the reasons I marked some teams low.

 

[crowsarethebest]

Seems that one of the big differences in score allocations was based on the different application of potential.

Some people seemed prepared to give out points based on the predicted improvement in talented youngsters. Others weren't so kind and judged teams more on what their players have proven so far.

As an example, one team had Luke Shuey in their on ball brigade. He could be an absolute jet and we've seen with some mids recently (Selwood, Redden) that they can make a fairly swift leap to being a consistent, quality performer. He could also get the "Daniel Rich Blues" and stagnate for a year or two before progressing when they mature.

I found these players the hardest to judge and was probably a little cautious dishing out points. Improvement is rarely a straight line - there are steep inclines, flat spots, regresses, break out games... the unknown factor was one of the reasons I marked some teams low.

Yep. Potential is a dangerous word, potential can really go both ways... I prefer the proven quality as you know they will deliver. However at the end of the day it is a team for 2012, we will not know how teams will go til the end of the season. There will be surprises, some teams who are highly rated could fall off the radar, while the bottom rated teams could surprise. Who knows; I'm happy with my team though, they are well placed to have a good 2012.

 

[hendo8888]

I'm a terrible judge of potential.
Hence my team is so loaded up with older players who have proven what they can do.
Some kids It's obvious there's something there, others that get pumped up, I struggle to see what the fuss is about. Shuey and Gaff are prime examples. Supposedly the second coming, I haven't seen much to be hugely excited about yet.
Zaharakis is another.

 

[Mego Red]

We should probably get into the finals series, but I'm a bit too crook to run it. Anyone else willing?

We do an OP with both sides - just the names, formatted the same, really simple. We let both coaches post ONE paragraph about why they would beat the opposition side, then any one who wants to votes on who they think would win. Keep it running for 24 hours, then declare a winner of that game. Hopefully we might get some upsets, depending on matchups.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Is it the same finals format as AFL? 5v8, 6v7 knockout etc?

 

[Freddy Bassett]

I'm a terrible judge of potential.
Hence my team is so loaded up with older players who have proven what they can do.
Some kids It's obvious there's something there, others that get pumped up, I struggle to see what the fuss is about. Shuey and Gaff are prime examples. Supposedly the second coming, I haven't seen much to be hugely excited about yet.
Zaharakis is another.

Won Essendons Best and Fairest in a finals year. Can play

 

[Freddy Bassett]

Yes, that was the single difference.

EDIT: I do t want to get into this and derail this thread, soaybe take the question out onto the board if you want to discuss it more?

Cmon Kristof, dont shy away from the debate....

Would of the Crows won in 97-98 with Aaron Keating leading the ruck if Shaun Rehn wasn't playing?

 

[Mego Red]

So, you're basing your entire argument on an example from a decade and a half ago, when we had different ruck rules, and different interchange rules.

Besides that, it is a foolish point. Are you discussing a world in which Rehn doesn't exist? Then I have to assume we'd have drafted a relatively reasonable replacement, but it's hard to know because it's a completely fictional world. Are you discussing a world in which he gets a late injury - kind of like when Mark Ricciuto was injured and it completely derailed our 2006 finals campaign?

In any event - we would have replaced Rehn with Pittman, and we would have won the flag. Rehn was tremendous throughout the season, but we would have found his grand final performances form someone else.

But you're changing the argument to suit your purposes. Which is fine, except it is a different argument. My point was that ruckmen are completely overrated in the modern game. Make the argument that I'm wrong. And don't try the "they gave your midfield first go at the ball", when we watch game after game of sides roving off opposition ruckmen, and maybe 20% of hitouts actually going to advantage. If I had an 80% failure rate in my job, I'd be sacked.

 

[Mego Red]

Is it the same finals format as AFL? 5v8, 6v7 knockout etc?

I think it is easier to do 1v8, 2v7, 3v6, 4v5.

Winner of 1v8 and 4v5 play each other, as do 2v7 and 3v6.