List Mgmt. Contracts, trades, draft - 2022 superstar edition

[Keys]

Link to contract status of all players -

The Contracts Thread

2024 List Changes : Retired- Gaff Delisted - Jones, Trew, Baker Requested Trades - Barrass, Darling Current contract status (Updated 18/9/24) : Total 41 Players (Pending Trades) - Main List (35) Rookie List (4) Cat B (2) Contracted to 2028 (2) : Liam Duggan (11/12/96) - Signed a 4 year...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

The problem is you are using the names of unknowns. You're throwing up scenarios using names that we don't know where they rank immediately prior to the draft.

I like Bruhn. I think he can be a A-grader. Do I think he'll be an A+? No.

So let's remove the names and call it pick 2. We don't know if Warlord is the best player yet. Could be someone else.

What is almost certain is you have to have a couple of A+ players to win a flag, and at least one has to be a midfielder. The best chance of finding such a player is with a top two pick. We're only going to have a limited amount of top 2 picks, where as the opportunity for a Bruhn happens every year. We got Yeo with a second rounder.

If you have a top 2 pick and there is a stand out, you have to take them.

So you seem to like the percentages. Good, then let us look at the last 15 years.

I am using the yardstick of an A+ plus player as someone who has been an All Australian and/or have won a premiership medallion.

So I have taken the top 12 picks of each draft for the last 15 years and highlight in green those that have a premiership medal or have been selected in the AA Team. Why 12? That is the level I am talking about being prepared to deal that would entail a sliding back to max 12 .

Buckle in.

With a 40% success rate, pick 9 is the clear winner
With a 33% success rate, picks 7 and 11 are the bridesmaids
With a 27% success rate, picks 2 and 3 are still holding their heads high
With a 20% rate of success, picks 1, 4, 5, 10 and 12 are next in line.



Each draft year has a story. Each year we have players not make it because of injury or hard luck stories, but your statement of needing a top 2 pick does not add up. It makes sense on draft night but down the track it means sod all.

So statistically speaking, we should be very happy taking pick 8 from the Suns and a bunch of points that we can get to buy the Lions first rounder as 8 will become that triumphant pick 9 after the Ashcroft bid.

There is of course another school of thought for those more open minded that the premiership lists come from teams that have the best strength in positions 15 to 25 in the team. In other words, only as strong as your weakest link. That plays hard into the hands of at least looking at splitting a pick.

You seem to have got on your high horse about my post saying that we should look at offers. There is no singular way to recruit and you seem to be like a broken record saying there is only 1 thing to do if you have pick 1 or 2.

 

[paran]

Think about it..... A true superstar who is one of the best few players in the AFL is also likely to be one of the best in his own age group through the years leading up to the draft. Some players are just the best (or thereabouts) no matter what pool they are in. Those players live at the very pointy end of the draft.

Though the years leading up to the draft is specific. If you think about the absolute studs of the game, does this apply?

Petracca - No. Late bloomer that showed in the champs and last season.
Bont - No, late year private school game leapt him into the top 5.
Danger - no.
Dusty - yes, but was really only the final year I believe.
Oliver - No, didn't even rep state. late TAC form.
Walsh - Yes
Wines - yes
Fyfe - No
NicNat - Yes? Never really dominated, physical freak.
Gawn - no
Mills - yes
Josh Kelly - yes
Cripps - no
Franklin - yes
Neale - no


Even for us in the last 20 years, this is not really applicable:
Judd- yes
Cousins - no
Kerr - no
JK - yes?
Shuey - no
Glass - no
Cox - No
McGovern - no
Priddis - no
Gaff - yes
NicNat - yes?

 

[bh90210fan]

Masten - yes

 

[paran]

Marsden

 

[Chump Change]

Though the years leading up to the draft is specific. If you think about the absolute studs of the game, does this apply?

Petracca - No. Late bloomer that showed in the champs and last season.
Bont - No, late year private school game leapt him into the top 5.
Danger - no.
Dusty - yes, but was really only the final year I believe.
Oliver - No, didn't even rep state. late TAC form.
Walsh - Yes
Wines - yes
Fyfe - No
NicNat - Yes? Never really dominated, physical freak.
Gawn - no
Mills - yes
Josh Kelly - yes
Cripps - no
Franklin - yes
Neale - no


Even for us in the last 20 years, this is not really applicable:
Judd- yes
Cousins - no
Kerr - no
JK - yes?
Shuey - no
Glass - no
Cox - No
McGovern - no
Priddis - no
Gaff - yes
NicNat - yes?

Cousins is a yes.

Priddis. Lol. Why is he on this list?

 

[Chump Change]

I am using the yardstick of an A+ plus player as someone who has been an All Australian and/or have won a premiership medallion.

That's a problem right there.

A+ players don't have to win flags. There are lots of AA players who aren't A+.

A+ = Dusty, Bont, Fyfe, Petracca, Oliver, Wines, Buddy, King, Cameron

Most of the mid A+ are bulls. The ones who aren't bulls are the Pendelbury/Walsh types. Then there's the KPFs.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

And once again, we run up against the problem of assigning purely subjective grades and acting like it’s an objective measure.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

And once again, we run up against the problem of assigning purely subjective grades and acting like it’s an objective measure.

Spoken like a true C-

 

[Chump Change]

So you seem to like the percentages. Good, then let us look at the last 15 years.

I am using the yardstick of an A+ plus player as someone who has been an All Australian and/or have won a premiership medallion.

So I have taken the top 12 picks of each draft for the last 15 years and highlight in green those that have a premiership medal or have been selected in the AA Team. Why 12? That is the level I am talking about being prepared to deal that would entail a sliding back to max 12 .

Buckle in.

With a 40% success rate, pick 9 is the clear winner
With a 33% success rate, picks 7 and 11 are the bridesmaids
With a 27% success rate, picks 2 and 3 are still holding their heads high
With a 20% rate of success, picks 1, 4, 5, 10 and 12 are next in line.

View attachment 1429252

Each draft year has a story. Each year we have players not make it because of injury or hard luck stories, but your statement of needing a top 2 pick does not add up. It makes sense on draft night but down the track it means sod all.

So statistically speaking, we should be very happy taking pick 8 from the Suns and a bunch of points that we can get to buy the Lions first rounder as 8 will become that triumphant pick 9 after the Ashcroft bid.

There is of course another school of thought for those more open minded that the premiership lists come from teams that have the best strength in positions 15 to 25 in the team. In other words, only as strong as your weakest link. That plays hard into the hands of at least looking at splitting a pick.

You seem to have got on your high horse about my post saying that we should look at offers. There is no singular way to recruit and you seem to be like a broken record saying there is only 1 thing to do if you have pick 1 or 2.

A+

Cotchin
Danger
Cyril
NicNat
Martin
Greene
Whitfield
MacRae
Wines
Kelly
Bont
Tracc
De Goey (questionable)
Mills
Oliver
McKay
Taranto
McLuggage


Then its too early to tell. We know Walsh, Daicos, Jackson etc are already thereabouts but there's other players who haven't been given enough time.

So some of them above can be debated but you can take a McLuggage out and put a Stringer in.

Go have a look at all those drafts and count how many A+ come after pick 12. There's very few and it's pot luck.

 

[Chump Change]

And once again, we run up against the problem of assigning purely subjective grades and acting like it’s an objective measure.

I'm pretty sure there's a consensus on who in those drafts is an A+ and who isn't. The biggest question would be as to where the line is drawn between A and A+.

 

[Chump Change]

Though the years leading up to the draft is specific. If you think about the absolute studs of the game, does this apply?

Petracca - No. Late bloomer that showed in the champs and last season.

What do you mean? He was a #2 pick and is now a superstar of the game...... follows exactly what I said.

 

[WCE_phil]

Not sure I agree with all of this. If we rate Phillipou as A+ talent, we don’t take any chances and just grab him.

Id only trade down in a scenario which the A+ talent doesn’t work for us for whatever reason and only trade down so far as we can’t miss out on the next best crop. So if we rated Hewett, Phillipou and Clark roughly the same, be willing to trade with whoever gives us the best deal from the bottom 6/7 clubs so we still end up with atleast one of them.

I would suggest Hewett is easily the most talented of those 3 and it's only been his time out of the midfield that has kept him down on the bigfooty radar and potentially the draft radar.

Phillipou has some elite traits but needs to put it all together to climb into that bracket. I also feel and maybe some of the clubs do too in regards to top tier SA midfield talent and their performances once drafted going back quite a long way. This is potentially due to the size of the state and population. In regards to even participation rates it has less people involved than in either QLD & the combined NSW+ACT. As an aside in comparison to people playing and i'm taking data from 2017 here before the women's numbers really started to skyrocket. It shows the WAFC had 112k active participants in competitions whilst SA had 61k. I think this is important as it shows two traditional footy states and the numbers playing in competition. On top of that WA has the highest community programs and participation run of any state. The WCE program participants alone would likely outnumber the total participation program numbers from SA. Yes there are more AFL listed players at AFL level now than NSW+ACT & QLD numbers of time don't lie. The more people you get involved both in competition and participation programs the more players that come through. It might not show for 10-15 years but it will. There will always be outliers but I would feel a lot of clubs have been burnt by supposed top tier SA Midfielders. I can run a list of names but it's not been pretty for a long time.

Clark is definitely below that. Has very good game sense but has limitations. Forget where he was drafted for a second and think more along the lines of Mitch Duncan or at an absolute best a Luke Parker. Will be interesting to see how he goes in the champs because in close from what I have seen his kicking becomes suspect when under pressure even though he seems to possess a very high footy IQ. He is someone I would like on our list but to me he's more a pick 10-20.

Essendon desperately need a Key tall (in particular a defender) in the draft so I would now be linking their draft pick to Busslinger. That means that if someone like GC who are desperate for a developing top tier key defender they would need to jump in front of Essendon.

It's why I'm happy to drop down in this draft at this stage. There are a lot of good players but every one of them comes with at least one major development * next to their name right now bar maybe Ashcroft.

Also take into account nigh on every single year the next years draft crop is talked about as being a superdraft or better than the one before. Now we can look back historically even if it's just say to 2013 and know that's not the case. There are stronger drafts and there are weaker drafts. I look out past pick 25 in this draft and pretty much all the juniors have more asterisks than draftable traits and the general weakness is skills. This could be Covid related this year, but I am still very firm in the belief that if a player doesn't at least have by afl level average or better skills by the time they are drafted almost none ever get them.

If you want to talk about talent levels overall to my mind there is one generational talent in this draft and as myself and others have pointed out he's a major tease and needs to put a lot together to have a shot at reaching his ceiling and that is Keeler.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

On that analysis we should be giving ourselves as many picks inside 12 as we can.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Spoken like a true C-

I’ll take a passing grade, definitely.

 

[Chump Change]

On that analysis we should be giving ourselves as many picks inside 12 as we can.

13 is actually a clear cut off point. After pick 13, pickings are usually slim.

 

[daddy_4_eyes]

A+

Cotchin
Danger
Cyril
NicNat
Martin
Greene
Whitfield
MacRae
Wines
Kelly
Bont
Tracc
De Goey (questionable)
Mills
Oliver
McKay
Taranto
McLuggage


Then its too early to tell. We know Walsh, Daicos, Jackson etc are already thereabouts but there's other players who haven't been given enough time.

So some of them above can be debated but you can take a McLuggage out and put a Stringer in.

Go have a look at all those drafts and count how many A+ come after pick 12. There's very few and it's pot luck.

On your grading standard, how many A+ come from top 2 picks? Does it outweight how many A+ come from the next 2 picks? Or the 2 picks after that?


Genuine question, I haven't gone through past drafts to make my own determination, but curious if you have to back up your strong opinion.

P.S. You haven't offended me.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

13 is actually a clear cut off point. After pick 13, pickings are usually slim.

So we should split pick 2 and get two picks inside 13, double our chances of getting a star.

 

[Chump Change]

Not every draft is the same. Just because pick 1 and pick 2 might produce a A+ grader (to bow to your obsession with assigning subjective grades to players) more often than pick ~8 doesn’t mean that’s true of the 2021 draft class.

Right, so you seem to be saying "it doesn't work like that 100% of the time so all bets are off and we should ignore the data".

That's the sort of backwards stuff I expect from you.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Right, so you seem to be saying "it doesn't work like that 100% of the time so all bets are off and we should ignore the data".

That's the sort of backwards stuff I expect from you.

Not at all what I’m saying.

Treat the draft on its merits, is what I’m saying.

There’s a midpoint between blindly following the data and ignoring the data.

 

[shooshka]

A+

Cotchin
Danger
Cyril
NicNat
Martin
Greene
Whitfield
MacRae
Wines
Kelly
Bont
Tracc
De Goey (questionable)
Mills
Oliver
McKay
Taranto
McLuggage


Then its too early to tell. We know Walsh, Daicos, Jackson etc are already thereabouts but there's other players who haven't been given enough time.

So some of them above can be debated but you can take a McLuggage out and put a Stringer in.

Go have a look at all those drafts and count how many A+ come after pick 12. There's very few and it's pot luck.

That is some sort of abbreviated list.

If you include Danger (who hasn't been great for a couple of years) then at the very least we have Gov and JK in there from West Coast during the same period.

No Gawn... No Hawkins, No Reiwoldt or Lynch, Cripps (Carlton version obviously), Franklin, Pendlebury (not now, but a few years ago similar to Danger), Neale (where was he drafted again?), Touk Miller, Zach Merrett, Boak, Walsh.

The A+ list (in my opinion) is actually a bit longer than many think.

 

[shooshka]

Not at all what I’m saying.

Treat the draft on its merits, is what I’m saying.

There’s a midpoint between blindly following the data and ignoring the data.

Exactly, treat the draft on its merits, and treat any potential trade on it's merits.

Consider all options (draft and trade) then select what is best at the time once the information is known.

Likely - we take #2 pick in the draft (or #3 after bids).

Possible - everything else, until it is ruled out as not a good option.

 

[Chump Change]

On your grading standard, how many A+ come from top 2 picks? Does it outweight how many A+ come from the next 2 picks? Or the 2 picks after that?


Genuine question, I haven't gone through past drafts to make my own determination, but curious if you have to back up your strong opinion.

P.S. You haven't offended me.

18 players

1 is #1
5 are #2
3 are #3
2 are #4
1 is #5
1 is #6
1 is #7
2 are #10
1 is #11
1 is #12

More than half of the players are top 4. One third are top 2. Generally speaking, there is linear relationship between draft position and realised talent. I'm not telling you anything you shouldn't know already. AFL clubs and supporters think high picks are gold.

When you go have a look past #13, there's the occasional A+ (because after the draft they bloomed and it's impossible to see which players will do that), a handful of solid long term players, and not much else. All these kids are the best in their age group - they then go into a system where they're competing against the best players from 17 age groups. It's not a surprise that only a few make it, and the one that do are usually the best players at 18.

How do you interpret that data?

 

[Happy Mastenator]

Don't care what pick we get, we just need to ensure we end up with one of the top 2-3 mids in this draft. Nothing else matters.

 

[Chump Change]

That is some sort of abbreviated list.

If you include Danger (who hasn't been great for a couple of years) then at the very least we have Gov and JK in there from West Coast during the same period.

No Gawn... No Hawkins, No Reiwoldt or Lynch, Cripps (Carlton version obviously), Franklin, Pendlebury (not now, but a few years ago similar to Danger), Neale (where was he drafted again?), Touk Miller, Zach Merrett, Boak, Walsh.

The A+ list (in my opinion) is actually a bit longer than many think.

What?

1. Danger has been a superstar
2. He actually weakens my point (but I'm not here to fudge numbers to prove a point)

ps I took those name from the spreadsheet that was posted...... I may have missed one or two, but anything before 2007 and after pick 12 is not included. We're pretty much exclusively talking about top 12 or 13 draft picks. I didn't choose the parameters.

 

[Chump Change]

Not at all what I’m saying.

Treat the draft on its merits, is what I’m saying.

Which is the same as what I said you said......