Worst list in the AFL at present?

[flyinghi64]

That’s why you have the worst list though. Every team gets a first rounder every year and you’ve blown or traded yours for 5-6 years before the last few where it is too early to tell.

Geelong have had less access to high picks than WC yet seem to have survived.

But have they? Really?
Lets go back to 2017 when we last had a decent draft hall and compare up until 2021. I stopped at pick 50 which is a crap shoot anyway.
2017 - WC 13,21,26,32,38
Gee 22,24,36

2018 - WC 28,31,35,39
Gee 15,48

2019 - WC 49
Gee 18,19,41

2020- WC nothing inside 50
Gee 20,33

2021 - WC 14,31,37
Gee 24,25,32

So unless I was reading the draft history page incorrectly I would say Geelong probably come out better there.
3x picks inside top 20 apposed the WC having 2
8x picks inside the top 30 apposed to WC having 5.

Years 19/20 where players would be entering their 3rd and 4th year on the list WC had pick 49 as the only one inside 50 and Gee had 18,19,41 and 20,33.
Yes WC traded away lots of picks for those years but that doesn't mean they still had access to them.

 

[Purple Suit]

But have they? Really?
Lets go back to 2017 when we last had a decent draft hall and compare up until 2021. I stopped at pick 50 which is a crap shoot anyway.
2017 - WC 13,21,26,32,38
Gee 22,24,36

2018 - WC 28,31,35,39
Gee 15,48

2019 - WC 49
Gee 18,19,41

2020- WC nothing inside 50
Gee 20,33

2021 - WC 14,31,37
Gee 24,25,32

So unless I was reading the draft history page incorrectly I would say Geelong probably come out better there.
3x picks inside top 20 apposed the WC having 2
8x picks inside the top 30 apposed to WC having 5.

Years 19/20 where players would be entering their 3rd and 4th year on the list WC had pick 49 as the only one inside 50 and Gee had 18,19,41 and 20,33.
Yes WC traded away lots of picks for those years but that doesn't mean they still had access to them.

I have covered this in other posts but I'm referring what you did with your picks. Every club gets a first rounder every year, these are the most likely to provide high talent and a high number of AFL games. Not guaranteed but the higher the more chance from a percentage point of view across the league.

WC 1st Rounders for the past 8 years
2015 - Traded, I think Redden and now retired.
2016 - Venables - Bust
2017 - Brander - Bust
2018 - Traded for more picks in the 20's
2019 - Traded for Tim Kelly
2020 - Traded for Tim Kelly
2021 - Chesser (too early to tell, traded down again)
2022 - Pick 2 traded down for Ginbey & Hewett (too early to tell).

That is a terrible outcome for the future. It happen to Freo from around 2009-2015 when our first pick was usually a bust. Even with some diamonds plucked out of nowhere, it cost us in 2016 when we fell off a cliff. This same outcome is now happening to WC but they went further and topped up too hard on the downturn plus have failed to really discover many rookie or late picks during this period. The picks in the 20's have produced but not really inline with the talent required and it's coming home to roost now.

Geelong over this period finished higher than WC so would have had access to less picks yet have managed to stay up. They are the unicorn in the league though so every rebuilding team looks bad compared to them.

 

[Tas]

I actually disagree with this tbh.

One thing you can say about North or Hawthorn is that they know exactly where they are. They accepted their previous lists weren't going to cut it, and are going the rebuild with youth.

In a way, having a mediocre list where you can keep kidding yourself that "just one or two more top up players and we're a chance!" is worse than that. It keeps you trapped in that cycle of finishing 7th-10th: not good enough to challenge but not bad enough to force you to face up to your problems.

I think Saints are were we were under Scott, competitive mid-table team and we made back to back PFs, just didn't have the talent to go further, tried to get some marquee players that might have made a difference, failed, and then went to the draft instead. I think every club has talented players, the difference between a good list and a bad list is having enough quality. We never did and I don't think Saints have who are young enough to have a good run at it.

I really like Phillipou, i pumped his tyres all year last year and wish we had a pick in that vicinity. King is also class, has some kicking issues but I would expect him to work through that. Clark and Coffield have talent but they have a lot of battlers, they have a mature, big bodied midfield and they have been around midtable, but if you looked at their list, like how many of their players would you say want to give a first round pick for, because my club didn't thik Clark was worth a first round pick or even downgrading a first round pick and I don't think they had anyone else want to take that risk on even though the back end of the first round last year wasn't rated very highly and clubs were willing to trade those picks.

I think last year I mentioned that they started to get some talent then went up the ladder too quickly then got stuck mid table, they traded too many picks and I think Lyon is either going to go back to a very defensive focused gameplan or he is going to have to turn the lost over a fair bit so I agree they haven't even made the call yet that they need to go backwards before they can go forwards.

I still think they will go okay this year on-field, maybe for a while, but a big problem we had on Scott's exit and getting people like Shaw in, we didn't face reality until it was too late and then the transition became even harder.

 

[Footy Smarts]

Just not feeling it with Essendon, going to be a long season.

There's no way Essendon have the worst list. In fact I'd say of the teams who missed finals they're among the best positioned to be a real threat in 2-3 years. That's assuming the board and off field side of the club don't find a way to burn it all down.

 

[lewdogs]

I think Saints are were we were under Scott, competitive mid-table team and we made back to back PFs, just didn't have the talent to go further, tried to get some marquee players that might have made a difference, failed, and then went to the draft instead. I think every club has talented players, the difference between a good list and a bad list is having enough quality. We never did and I don't think Saints have who are young enough to have a good run at it.

I really like Phillipou, i pumped his tyres all year last year and wish we had a pick in that vicinity. King is also class, has some kicking issues but I would expect him to work through that. Clark and Coffield have talent but they have a lot of battlers, they have a mature, big bodied midfield and they have been around midtable, but if you looked at their list, like how many of their players would you say want to give a first round pick for, because my club didn't thik Clark was worth a first round pick or even downgrading a first round pick and I don't think they had anyone else want to take that risk on even though the back end of the first round last year wasn't rated very highly and clubs were willing to trade those picks.

I think last year I mentioned that they started to get some talent then went up the ladder too quickly then got stuck mid table, they traded too many picks and I think Lyon is either going to go back to a very defensive focused gameplan or he is going to have to turn the lost over a fair bit so I agree they haven't even made the call yet that they need to go backwards before they can go forwards.

I still think they will go okay this year on-field, maybe for a while, but a big problem we had on Scott's exit and getting people like Shaw in, we didn't face reality until it was too late and then the transition became even harder.

I saw Ben Cunnington speak recently and he talked about how awesome it was making prelims and that they should have won one of them and played in a grand final.

It's funny how often we hear this story of North under Scott, good enough to make prelims but not good enough to go any further. Sounds like the players felt differently about it.

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

2 years ago I would not have had much argument against those who said hawthorn.

I remember watching games towards the end of 2020 with great fears. We were old and getting worse without much talent coming through.

But boy oh boy the last 3 off seasons have sorted that s**t out.

Oozing high end talent now.

I'm a bit worried about the bombers and the Eagles look at for some short term pain.

Sent from my SM-G990E using Tapatalk

 

[MickG88]

but if you looked at their list, like how many of their players would you say want to give a first round pick for,

Windhagen, Owens, NWM, Philipou, Battle, King are all under 24 years of age.
I would give up a late first round for any of them and two firsts for King.
Guys over 24 who I would give a first rounder to would be Steele, Sinclair and Wilkie.

Can you say the same about North?

 

[Tas]

Windhagen, Owens, NWM, Philipou, Battle, King are all under 24 years of age.
I would give up a late first round for any of them and two firsts for King.
Guys over 24 who I would give a first rounder to would be Steele, Sinclair and Wilkie.

Can you say the same about North?

Hehe, outside of recent first round picks I don't think you would, that was the issue with Clark, nobody would give a first round pick.

This thread isn't about my club, feel free to raise your interest in that one.

 

[lewdogs]

Hehe, outside of recent first round picks I don't think you would, that was the issue with Clark, nobody would give a first round pick.

This thread isn't about my club, feel free to raise your interest in that one.

Judging from the thread title it could definitely be about your club.

 

[Tas]

Judging from the thread title it could definitely be about your club.

lol I thought this was the Saints are in no-mans land thread.

We have won this dubious award for a number of years so I wouldn't be surprised if people have that opinion, I think we have picked up a fair bit of talent, I still think we need the KPPs from this year's draft pool to strengthen our major weaknesses. We will get some more talent over the next few years, helps we have Port's first rounder as well this year, but I think you need a greater concentration of talent than Saints have. It will spread out as a successful mature team but I think you need to be front-loaded with talent to get into that position. I just have never seen a side make the top 4 with a large collection of recycled players that make up a big part of the best 18-25. I've seen a few sides maintain that rage after they became a good side.

Geelong is a rare/only exception, but most sides that have had success have failed hard on their rebuild or flatlined, gone again and in that process managed to accumulate enough marquee talent to push for a flag.

I think it is important to have a fair bit of talent around the same age group if you are going to have a decent run at it. I think artificial rises up the ladder by the Saints didn't give Saints enough of a concentration of talent. I don't think they were good enough to be in Richmond or Geelong's position where they could top up and I think they stunted their rebuild. The question is can enough be done to correct it, can happen if Saints have a lot of success outside of the first round, like Richmond did.

You just don't want to be stuck in the Bermuda Triangle of just outside the top 8, most sides that have success go right through that part of the ladder very quickly.

I think our list needs a lot of work but we have a decent accumulation of talent in the younger age bands plus a few a bit higher but it kind of flats out at around 25. That isn't going to translate into a lot of wins in the present but if we can manage to not * things up from here on end I think we have a potential chance of having enough critical mass in terms of talent. I think Saints will still win plenty of games this year, I just think there is a high risk of getting stuck in that area just outside of the 8 or even sneaking into the lower rungs of the top 8 now and then. Saints have a physically mature side but the caper is all about winning flags, not 10-12ish games a year.

 

[Rich01]

lol I thought this was the Saints are in no-mans land thread.

We have won this dubious award for a number of years so I wouldn't be surprised if people have that opinion, I think we have picked up a fair bit of talent, I still think we need the KPPs from this year's draft pool to strengthen our major weaknesses. We will get some more talent over the next few years, helps we have Port's first rounder as well this year, but I think you need a greater concentration of talent than Saints have. It will spread out as a successful mature team but I think you need to be front-loaded with talent to get into that position. I just have never seen a side make the top 4 with a large collection of recycled players that make up a big part of the best 18-25. I've seen a few sides maintain that rage after they became a good side.

Geelong is a rare/only exception, but most sides that have had success have failed hard on their rebuild or flatlined, gone again and in that process managed to accumulate enough marquee talent to push for a flag.

I think it is important to have a fair bit of talent around the same age group if you are going to have a decent run at it. I think artificial rises up the ladder by the Saints didn't give Saints enough of a concentration of talent. I don't think they were good enough to be in Richmond or Geelong's position where they could top up and I think they stunted their rebuild. The question is can enough be done to correct it, can happen if Saints have a lot of success outside of the first round, like Richmond did.

You just don't want to be stuck in the Bermuda Triangle of just outside the top 8, most sides that have success go right through that part of the ladder very quickly.

I think our list needs a lot of work but we have a decent accumulation of talent in the younger age bands plus a few a bit higher but it kind of flats out at around 25. That isn't going to translate into a lot of wins in the present but if we can manage to not * things up from here on end I think we have a potential chance of having enough critical mass in terms of talent. I think Saints will still win plenty of games this year, I just think there is a high risk of getting stuck in that area just outside of the 8 or even sneaking into the lower rungs of the top 8 now and then. Saints have a physically mature side but the caper is all about winning flags, not 10-12ish games a year.

Agree. Think the Roos have significantly longer short term pain but are really working on building from ground zero.

Priority has to be in getting as many of their kids to 50 games and working through which ones will make it from there.

And signing up McKay to keep him at North for life. A high compo pick will ease the pain if he goes, but he’s more important to them than that.

 

[Korol Mira]

Easily Hawks and Eagles

 

[peetoo]

Hawks team low on experience so yes.

Lowest average games since bulldogs 2015

 

[Tas]

Agree. Think the Roos have significantly longer short term pain but are really working on building from ground zero.

Priority has to be in getting as many of their kids to 50 games and working through which ones will make it from there.

And signing up McKay to keep him at North for life. A high compo pick will ease the pain if he goes, but he’s more important to them than that.

Yeah, he is about at the limit of the higher end talent, in terms of age, that I was referring to. I am guessing he is waiting on the outcome of the Hawthorn investigation to see if Clarkson is going to be around. I guess we will find out soon enough.

 

[smish]

We're the best at polls.

 

[Purple Suit]

The answer is clearly West Coast

 

[Crankyhawk]

Who has the worst list in the AFL?

I think long term Eagles are in the deep deep poo. Aging stars who are appearing more and more uncommitted and unfit (Ryan, McGovern, Yeo) taking up huge space on our salary cap with million dollar contracts. No one decent coming through under 22. Allen is 23 and a prospect but look at his stats - he's not proven anything meaningful yet. The only logical reason i can see them keeping Natanui is to pump out West Australian exclusives about his new baby and to keep selling merch. I liked what they did with splitting pick 2 to get Ginbey and Hewett as long term midfield prospects and taking Barnett which was probably the best ruck get of the recent draft. In 2023, if the keep relatively injury free with our huge home field advantage we might hover around 12th, slight chance of finals. But the drop off is looking like it will be colossal.

Out of all teams to take the field at present, Hawks like like a WAFL team with a shocking forward and midfield devoid of experience but with Newcombe etc coming through at least there is hope. To challenge for a flag by 23 like that cooker Kennett is suggesting though - thats a stretch.

a prescient OP about own club

 

[BigVic]

It has to be West Coast. Worst list by a mile and will struggle in 2023.

Pretty much right on the money here

 

[HairyO]

Its hilarious that nearly as many people said Hawks as Eagles. Shows the general level of cluelessness / wishful thinking of the average BF poster.

 

[Wojcinski]

Its hilarious that nearly as many people said Hawks as Eagles. Shows the general level of cluelessness / wishful thinking of the average BF poster.

before the start of the season things looked really dire for Hawthorn. They're still s**t, but that is because of lack of experience, not talent.

West Coast is Fitzroy in the mid 90's levels of bad. Their list is not fixable and will take a long time to sort out.

 

[Roddy]

Its hilarious that nearly as many people said Hawks as Eagles. Shows the general level of cluelessness / wishful thinking of the average BF poster.

It's not based on any fact or evidence, it's just a case of: "I really, really, badly want it to be the case."

 

[Plugger35]

Its hilarious that nearly as many people said Hawks as Eagles. Shows the general level of cluelessness / wishful thinking of the average BF poster.

Even more hilarious is that more people voted for St Kilda having the worst list than voted for North, those people must be feeling pretty silly right now.

 

[Xtreme]

Eagles
Only because they are hit with injury

I'd rate Geelongs as being bad as well. So many old players, very little chance of going back to back.

 

[Footy Smarts]

Its hilarious that nearly as many people said Hawks as Eagles. Shows the general level of cluelessness / wishful thinking of the average BF poster.

I think you're reading way too much into a game with West Coast missing Hurn, Natanui, Shuey, McGovern, Cripps, Darling, Yeo, Barrass, Ryan, Cole, Petrevski-Seton and Culley. Then Jones went off in the first half.

That's 8 of their best 13 players and 13 of their best 25 or so. Of course they were going to be completely uncompetitive.

Before that Hawthorn were 1-8 with a percentage of 60 while having one of the best injury runs in the competition.

 

[Darksidepoints]

Eagles and its not even close.