The Draft is Overrated

[Rusty Brookes]

Bit harsh on Rick Ladson. No world beater by any stretch but a very solid contributor to a premiership that I thought might never come again at the time. My view on the draft is if a player contributes to a flag then they've done their job. If they give you more or contribute to multiple flags, then you've got a bonus. Obviously this criteria doesn't work for non-premiership players and is by no means the only way to judge the success of a pick - just thought Ladson was far from a bust. Let me put it this way - I think we did much better with Rick Ladson (125 games, a premiership including the goal that sealed the game) at pick 16 than we did with Mitch Thorpe at pick 6. Now that was a bust.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

There is too much value put into draft picks and each year, teams get criticised for trading them away. The more I look at it though, the more I think it is a smart move to trade away draft picks for established players where you know what you’re going to get...

I’ve determined that 1 out of 2 first round picks lives up to expectations (I know this is a vague statement as expectation levels can differ depending on opinion), 1 out of 3 second round picks lives up to expectations then 1 out of every 4 or even 5 third round picks and beyond live up to expectations.

Clubs, and those of us paying attention, already know all this: that's why Chris Judd cost Carlton two top picks. If you could reliably trade a single top 3 pick for a player who has met top 3 expectations everyone would be doing it.

 

[RedVest4]

2002 Draft:

1 Brendon Goddard
2 Daniel Wells
3 Jarred Brennan
4 Tim Walsh
5 Jarrad McVeigh
6 Steven Salopek
7 Andrew Mackie
8 Luke Brennan
9 Hamish McIntosh
10 Jason Laycock
11 Jason Winderlich
12 Jay Schulz
13 Byron Schammer
14 Daniel Bell
15 Nicholas Smith

5 out of 15, so 1 in 3 lives up to expectations in this case...

 

[Sterge]

Geelong 07 - 11 proves my point really... I’m saying that the draft is basically a lottery. A lot of Geelongs good players from that era were taken with very late picks - hence the whole thing is overrated.

It helps when you load up with father sons for low draft picks take Abblett and Scarlett out of the Geelong teams and how well do you do

Also
Selwood pick 7
Bartel pick 8
Corey pick 8
Kelly pick 17
Mackie pick 7
Taylor 17
Varcoe 15

plenty of early picks all played in at least 2 flags

I probably should have been clearer - trading away early draft picks...

Plus the game is so different these days with free agency, that Geelong list will be the last ever successful list that had barely any recruits from other teams.

Mooney Ottens Harley all from other clubs you still had plenty over the journey

 

[KissKiss]

The Hawks brains trust agree with the OP i think. Most of our team on the weekend was made up of players who started their careers elsewhere. And most of the Hawk draftees in the team were either old players or late draft picks.

We have traded most of our first round picks since 2007... our last selection was Schoenmakers or Issac Smith (we also picked Burton at 19, for a traded in pick).

I personally think Geelong excel at picks in the second round or early third (and late first round picks). I think those picks can be underrated if you get enough of them, and have an excellent recruiter.

Very interested too see what the Hawks do with their first round pick this year.

I'd say there was a period of time where draft picks were way undervalued and some clubs took a lot of advantage. Hawks trading for pick 1 is a fair example. Then I reckon there was a time when clubs started to over value youth and were trading away everything for high picks. Again the hawks took great advantage of this to keep topping up their list and that helped them stay on top.

I'd say that as the league has got more professional clubs have been slowly working out how to value a pick that might work out but in reality will still take 3-5 years before they generally start to really impact games.

Either way its clear that success can come from anywhere from Pick 1 to way back in the Pre-season draft, but the chance of success are much higher in the top 10 than they are for most rookies

 

[RedVest4]

It helps when you load up with father sons for low draft picks take Abblett and Scarlett out of the Geelong teams and how well do you do

Also
Selwood pick 7
Bartel pick 8
Corey pick 8
Kelly pick 17
Mackie pick 7
Taylor 17
Varcoe 15

plenty of early picks all played in at least 2 flags



Mooney Ottens Harley all from other clubs you still had plenty over the journey

You’ve named 7 players out of a list of probably 30 that were successful, Ablett and Scarlett would not have been taken in the first round anyway.

The draft is overrated and a lottery - you may as well take players later on as opposed to going hard early - then get established players you know what you’ll get with - safer option.

 

[Luv_our_club]

I'd say there was a period of time where draft picks were way undervalued and some clubs took a lot of advantage. Hawks trading for pick 1 is a fair example. Then I reckon there was a time when clubs started to over value youth and were trading away everything for high picks. Again the hawks took great advantage of this to keep topping up their list and that helped them stay on top.

I'd say that as the league has got more professional clubs have been slowly working out how to value a pick that might work out but in reality will still take 3-5 years before they generally start to really impact games.

Either way its clear that success can come from anywhere from Pick 1 to way back in the Pre-season draft, but the chance of success are much higher in the top 10 than they are for most rookies

Martin Ferguson, who i respect a lot, has written about club recruiters believing that the quality of the kids available has been decreasing over the last decade.

It might be that perceptions of value have changed, as you say, combined a little with the actual reality of the available talent dropping.

 

[Magma]

only as good as the club develops you too.

 

[Sterge]

You’ve named 7 players out of a list of probably 30 that were successful, Ablett and Scarlett would not have been taken in the first round anyway.

The draft is overrated and a lottery - you may as well take players later on as opposed to going hard early - then get established players you know what you’ll get with - safer option.

Name me any successful club that has had a ton of first round draft picks

 

[RedVest4]

Name me any successful club that has had a ton of first round draft picks

None, that’s my point...

 

[greatwhiteshark]

I think the part that is overrated and overstated are the expectations for the first part of a players career.

Footballers and athletes generally hit their prime in their mid-to-late 20s. Often though, draftees have been spat out the system long to this, for "failing to live up to their potential".

Because we're drafting blokes so young and so far away from their athletic prime, we need to look more long-term at what they could become, and be patient and allow them the necessary time to develop, and not assume the draft is a "quick fix". A player shouldn't be peaking at age 20-21. It's great that some do, but they're the exception, not the rule.

Using this year's draft as an example, we should make our assessments on these terms:

2018 (Age 18, born 2000) - Draft Year
2019-2024 (Ages 19-24) - Seasons 1-6, Developing
2025-2029 (Ages 25-29) - Seasons 7-11, Prime
2030-2033 (Ages 30-33) - Seasons 12-15, Past their prime
2034-onwards (Ages 34+) - Bonus!

The AFL is a best of the best comp or supposed to be anyway, not a colts comp.
Let them develop against men in the second tier and play when they are ready without excuses.

If you want to watch the colts then turn up at 10am to see them, not in the AFL.

 

[SloppyJoe]

Easy to say "we should just trade our picks for established B22 players, as we know what we are getting". But the reality is there are very few of these types of players available each year. Offering up high picks does little to change that.

 

[PowerForGood]

Have done this analysis before.

1-10 draft picks are approx 2x successful as a 10-30 pick, which are approx 2x successful as a 30-50 pick.

So yes it is a lottery, but you have more chances to win the earlier you pick.

 

[Baird]

2002 Draft:

1 Brendon Goddard
2 Daniel Wells
3 Jarred Brennan
4 Tim Walsh
5 Jarrad McVeigh
6 Steven Salopek
7 Andrew Mackie
8 Luke Brennan
9 Hamish McIntosh
10 Jason Laycock
11 Jason Winderlich
12 Jay Schulz
13 Byron Schammer
14 Daniel Bell
15 Nicholas Smith

5 out of 15, so 1 in 3 lives up to expectations in this case...

You've put xs next to 5 100 game players. What criteria do these players need to meet to get a tick in your opinion?

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

What about Hawthorn, the Bulldogs and Richmond?

hawthorn 1st rounders: franklin, roughead, hodge, Mitchell, lewis, rioli,
bullodgs 1st rounders: macrae, stringer, bontempelli, tom boyd as well as hunter, liberatore and wallis as father sons.
richmond 1st rounders: rance, riewoldt, dusty, cotchin,
collingwood 1st rounders: didak, pendlebury, thomas, ben reid, sidebottom as well as shaw and cloke father sons.

I guess sydney in 2012 would be an exception, but the core of most premiership sides is built from the draft and having a few good father sons helps a lot too. There aren't too many examples of sides building success from low draft picks and free agents.

 

[Baird]

Name me any successful club that has had a ton of first round draft picks

Hawthorn went alright between 2013-2015.

 

[melbournemartin]

https://m.imgur.com/r/nba/oi2irGK

This is a graph i just saw on Expected Win Shares per draft position in the NBA. (From 1990-2000... now that 99% have retired).
Although there are outliers, there is a clear curve.

It would be interesting to see a similar breakdown for AFL players and I would guess that the curve would be similar.
I'm just not sure what stat you would use - ive never seen any advanced stats used in footy (Win Share, Value Over Replacement etc) because they would be very hard to apply to our game. I think someone had previously done it for Games Played. (Which is a good broad stat, but doesnt differentiate quality 200-gamers to elite 200-gamers).

NBA players are older when drafted and have a more rigorous college experience compared to the under 18s that our players play in. There is also much more publicised and advanced scouting. The consequence of this is that there is less guess work in the draft.

So whilst the AFL draft positions would have a similar trend, I doubt it would be as strong. However, I would be very curious to see the data.

 

[Roooooos]

Plot the current top 200 players with their draft pick numbers on a graph and we will be able to see the correlation between draft picks vs quality.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

It helps when you load up with father sons for low draft picks take Abblett and Scarlett out of the Geelong teams and how well do you do

Also
Selwood pick 7
Bartel pick 8
Corey pick 8
Kelly pick 17
Mackie pick 7
Taylor 17
Varcoe 15

plenty of early picks all played in at least 2 flags



Mooney Ottens Harley all from other clubs you still had plenty over the journey

Scarlett was never going to be a high pick so F/S or not we didn't get lucky there. He was nearly delisted early on.

 

[Baird]

hawthorn 1st rounders: franklin, roughead, hodge, Mitchell, lewis, rioli,
bullodgs 1st rounders: macrae, stringer, bontempelli, tom boyd as well as hunter, liberatore and wallis as father sons.
richmond 1st rounders: rance, riewoldt, dusty, cotchin,
collingwood 1st rounders: didak, pendlebury, thomas, ben reid, sidebottom as well as shaw and cloke father sons.

I guess sydney in 2012 would be an exception, but the core of most premiership sides is built from the draft and having a few good father sons helps a lot too. There aren't too many examples of sides building success from low draft picks and free agents.

Birchall and burgoyne for hawthorn too. Sam Mitchell wasn't a first if you're referring to him, Tom was though

 

[mehow2g]

Every team right now can make the 8 it doesnt matter about the list, 12-8 can win the flag.

The most important thing is teamwork confidence and synergy.

Take eagles for example, they have a worse list than last year, it doesn't matter who gets injured anyone who comes in pulls their weight, why? Team confidence, team confidence gives you faster ball movement, more speed, ability to break tackles and higher skill.

The problem is how do you get this premiership Confidence I don't know.

Look at collingwood and bulldogs for example in their premiership years, both really young sides could of been dynasties given their age. They both didn't maintain their spark and confidence which I believe equals skill, speed and talent when that's gone what do you do? The draft "better" talent, kick the footy more?

Sometimes working on these things can just burn a team out.

Yeah drafts are overrated however having a jet come out of your draft makes life easier and pulls slack when the team is down.

 

[RedVest4]

You've put xs next to 5 100 game players. What criteria do these players need to meet to get a tick in your opinion?

I think for a first round pick, you’d want more than 100 average games from that player...

 

[Sweet Jesus]

The draft is overrated and a lottery - you may as well take players later on as opposed to going hard early - then get established players you know what you’ll get with - safer option.

You keep saying that but none of it stands up to scrutiny.

The draft remains the most reliable, most important way to build a successful side. In that sense, it is not overrated at all. You haven't addressed this at all.

But if the draft is indeed a lottery, would you be willing to trade Geelong's first-rounder this season for an established ruckman? You've said draft picks are not so valuable, so presumably you'd trade it in a heartbeat.

Back up your argument or concede that it's broken.

None, that’s my point...

You can't just say "that's my point" every time you are challenged.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Have done this analysis before.

1-10 draft picks are approx 2x successful as a 10-30 pick, which are approx 2x successful as a 30-50 pick.

So yes it is a lottery, but you have more chances to win the earlier you pick.

That's not a lottery.

 

[Malifice]

For what it's worth, geelong was the only team experience real success without using top end draft picks..

Hawthorn's recent three peat and dominance of the comp was largely the result of some handy top end picks in Hodge, Rioli, Roughead, Franklin and Mitchell (the only non-first round pick in that lot).