Resource 2024 AFL Draft discussion thread (Wed Nov 20 to Fri Nov 22)

[Mutineer]

Jeffcrowe I know you say Clubs take "best available" ......something I disagree with given, how do you rate a KPP, Mid small, and taller mid ....you can't

It always comes back to the club's needs .....in our case the midfield mix ....and I always said "speed would trump Langford"

Our needs will always be the determining factor in player differentiation, given there's rarely a big gap between players .....Harley Reid, and Daicos of course being the exceptions

Interesting that we still have an interest in a small FWD

Where's the link to that piece of an article you posted?

 

[Vader]

Are these your next two "failures" Vader?

I notice you have mentioned them both in a few of your posts recently ...

Just checking - because I really like what Berry is becoming and think Cook is just getting his feet, but has serious potential to make a leap really quickly.

Berry is OK... but nothing more than that, and I don't see him ever becoming more than that. The problem with him is that we then traded for Peatling, who plays the same role - only better. Given the limited number of players we had coming out of contract, and the decision to trade for a Berry upgrade, retaining Berry himself didn't make a whole lot of sense.

Cook is highly skilled, but just doesn't know how to get his hands on the pill. He makes a decent impact with his few rare possessions, but those possessions are too few to justify his position in the team. Cook was out of contract this year, and I haven't seen any improvement in his game in the 4 years he's been on our list. On that basis, it is very hard to see him making it.

You can mark me down as calling Cook a failure. Berry isn't a failure - he's an OK player, but he'll never be a good player - he was just rendered surplus to requirements when we landed Peatling.

 

[Mutineer]

So you're saying the stats as relayed by experts are wrong, and you're right .....OK

So there was no way you'd have drafted your Mac Andrew on that basis using your suggested method given he has a December birthday? Think it's time you and your experts moved on from this flawed analogy.

 

[baldandbroke]

Berry is OK... but nothing more than that, and I don't see him ever becoming more than that. The problem with him is that we then traded for Peatling, who plays the same role - only better. Given the limited number of players we had coming out of contract, and the decision to trade for a Berry upgrade, retaining Berry himself didn't make a whole lot of sense.

Cook is highly skilled, but just doesn't know how to get his hands on the pill. He makes a decent impact with his few rare possessions, but those possessions are too few to justify his position in the team. Cook was out of contract this year, and I haven't seen any improvement in his game in the 4 years he's been on our list. On that basis, it is very hard to see him making it.

You can mark me down as calling Cook a failure. Berry isn't a failure - he's an OK player, but he'll never be a good player - he was just rendered surplus to requirements when we landed Peatling.

Ok - I don't think Peatling and Berry play the same role at all. Could be wrong. I reckon Peatling is pace out of the stoppage, Berry is grunt and force. I think Berry plays the game pretty hard, he tackles hard and competes hard. I like his base.

Cook has played 27 games in his 4 years on the Crow's list, including 15 last year. Not writing him off just yet - not everyone can be inside getting it. Hope he clicks a bit better again this year - another year of improvement and he'll be fine.

 

[Big Dub]

These experts are ?

AFL players with December birthdays...some pretty handy players on that list

All AFL Players Born in December - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

AFL players with November birthdays

All AFL Players Born in November - Draftguru

www.draftguru.com.au

Pretty rough way of measuring, but I split the list 2023 players with games played into early (33%), middle (34%) and late (33%) birthdays and used Wheelo Ratings averages.

Early and mid birthday players averaged 8.0 rating points, whereas late birthdays averaged 7.8 ratings points. This was across 220 early birthday players, 243 (but with an extra %, so lets say 236) mid birthday players and 198 late birthday players. It surprisingly became more pronounced (8.6, 8.4, 8.2) when players aged 19 to 21 were removed. Of the top 10 players in the league, 5 were early birthday, 3 mid and 2 late.

But it could be impacted by the following:

Why Athletes’ Birthdays Affect Who Goes Pro — And Who Becomes A Star

If you want to be a professional athlete in most sports, it helps to be born at the right time of year. In basketball, baseball and ice hockey, players born in …

fivethirtyeight.com

But this impact is all supposed to have happened before their draft year. So if a kid looks just as good and has a late birthday, they may have more upside than the older kid. And maybe greater resilience and drive, having already bucked the odds.

 

[Danger in Texas]

Ok - I don't think Peatling and Berry play the same role at all. Could be wrong. I reckon Peatling is pace out of the stoppage, Berry is grunt and force. I think Berry plays the game pretty hard, he tackles hard and competes hard. I like his base.

Cook has played 27 games in his 4 years on the Crow's list, including 15 last year. Not writing him off just yet - not everyone can be inside getting it. Hope he clicks a bit better again this year - another year of improvement and he'll be fine.

Don’t mistake Peatling being more dynamic than Berry as them not playing the same role. Peatling is just as good a clearance player, but is also more athletic and composed, he’s an upgrade on the role Berry played in the back half of last season

 

[GreyCrow]

Pretty rough way of measuring, but I split the list 2023 players with games played into early (33%), middle (34%) and late (33%) birthdays and used Wheelo Ratings averages.

Early and mid birthday players averaged 8.0 rating points, whereas late birthdays averaged 7.8 ratings points. This was across 220 early birthday players, 243 (but with an extra %, so lets say 236) mid birthday players and 198 late birthday players. It surprisingly became more pronounced (8.6, 8.4, 8.2) when players aged 19 to 21 were removed. Of the top 10 players in the league, 5 were early birthday, 3 mid and 2 late.

But it could be impacted by the following:

Why Athletes’ Birthdays Affect Who Goes Pro — And Who Becomes A Star

If you want to be a professional athlete in most sports, it helps to be born at the right time of year. In basketball, baseball and ice hockey, players born in …

fivethirtyeight.com

But this impact is all supposed to have happened before their draft year. So if a kid looks just as good and has a late birthday, they may have more upside than the older kid. And maybe greater resilience and drive, having already bucked the odds.

Fantastic link.

2 things : my immediate thought on the NZ Junior Rugby clause was the Lomu effect. Having kids play against a bigger Lomu would have disheartened most of them and you may lose them early when persistence will find a diamond

The American study on how younger players develop against more mature ones is echoed in the eye test we used to use a long time ago

''played against men '' was a standard trope and in some cases is apt. There have been many under age champions who have been found out - time and time again - when they are faced with the better bodies and smarter thinkers in the over age group

While I would never delve too much into when a kid was born I can see why some people would

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Jeffcrowe I know you say Clubs take "best available" ......something I disagree with given, how do you rate a KPP, Mid small, and taller mid ....you can't

It always comes back to the club's needs .....in our case the midfield mix ....and I always said "speed would trump Langford"

Our needs will always be the determining factor in player differentiation, given there's rarely a big gap between players .....Harley Reid, and Daicos of course being the exceptions

Interesting that we still have an interest in a small FWD

It’s like you didn’t watch the draft this year Wayne

Melbourne need a key forward and took a mid and then an outside mid

Saints needed mids and took half back and tall back

Most of the key position and ruck talent drifted massively despite clubs needing key position and rucks

And the reason is because the players they took had more talent

This is not the draft to be expousing this theory of needs over talent order , especially early in this years draft

Was quite the opposite , you’ve just own goaled

 

[WaynesWorld19]

It’s like you didn’t watch the draft this year Wayne

Melbourne need a key forward and took a mid and then an outside mid

Saints needed mids and took half back and tall back

Most of the key position and ruck talent drifted massively despite clubs needing key position and rucks

And the reason is because the players they took had more talent

This is not the draft to be expousing this theory of needs over talent order , especially early in this years draft

Was quite the opposite , you’ve just own goaled

Says who ? .....you and supporters ?

Lots of uncertainty over Oliver and Petracca's future .....so far Olivers well conditioned girth hasn't changed .....TWT
Viney 30 YO and plays a combative game

I didn't say "reach" for players of need .....I said needs would dictate Clubs selections
There wasn't a tall in MELB's wheelhouse ....and most Clubs avoided the talls ...except RICH who wanted balance in their list, taking KPF and KPD

You look at every selection, it was all needs based ....to try and spin this BS of taking the best player, is Club spin that is waved at supporters every year

As for St Kilda ....they just lost Battle ....so who do they select Tauru ...coincidence that, hey

As for Saints Midfielders, you said they didn't take:

St Kilda has been aggressively pursuing big-name midfielders across the past few years and believe Travaglia can develop into a permanent midfielder after being named at half-back in the Marsh Under-18 All-Australian team and the Coates Talent League Team of the Year.

"It definitely is (where I want to play)

Oh, and that's right ....

 

[Chances Are]

Berry is OK... but nothing more than that, and I don't see him ever becoming more than that. The problem with him is that we then traded for Peatling, who plays the same role - only better. Given the limited number of players we had coming out of contract, and the decision to trade for a Berry upgrade, retaining Berry himself didn't make a whole lot of sense.

Cook is highly skilled, but just doesn't know how to get his hands on the pill. He makes a decent impact with his few rare possessions, but those possessions are too few to justify his position in the team. Cook was out of contract this year, and I haven't seen any improvement in his game in the 4 years he's been on our list. On that basis, it is very hard to see him making it.

You can mark me down as calling Cook a failure. Berry isn't a failure - he's an OK player, but he'll never be a good player - he was just rendered surplus to requirements when we landed Peatling.

I've spent considerable time watching Cook closely, and he hasn't progressed as much as people were expecting him to. Sure he has talent but as Vader says he can't find enough of the ball and that is a HUGE problem. Failure is correct given his draft position.
Berry on the other hand, fumbles way too much for mine. He's at his ceiling and is strictly depth IMO.
These two unless they somehow show massive improvement are quick and easy delistings once OOC.

 

[Golumless]

Ok - I don't think Peatling and Berry play the same role at all. Could be wrong. I reckon Peatling is pace out of the stoppage, Berry is grunt and force. I think Berry plays the game pretty hard, he tackles hard and competes hard. I like his base.

Cook has played 27 games in his 4 years on the Crow's list, including 15 last year. Not writing him off just yet - not everyone can be inside getting it. Hope he clicks a bit better again this year - another year of improvement and he'll be fine.

Berry has a fair bit of explosiveness as well. That said, they are going to be fighting for the same role, a defensive shitwrecking third/fourth choice midfielder. I don't begrudge the signing of Berry, that's just a classic shit happens kind of deal.

Cook on the other hand is just sunk cost fallacy. Kid showed this year it was time to delist as he was four years in and couldn't lock down a best 22 slot. The only positive is I guess is the 2nd-3rd rounds looked kind of dire for Adelaide to sort out needs in?

 

[Mostyn]

I've spent considerable time watching Cook closely, and he hasn't progressed as much as people were expecting him to. Sure he has talent but as Vader says he can't find enough of the ball and that is a HUGE problem. Failure is correct given his draft position.
Berry on the other hand, fumbles way too much for mine. He's at his ceiling and is strictly depth IMO.
These two unless they somehow show massive improvement are quick and easy delistings once OOC.

Regarding Cook's draft position - have you checlked how terrible that draft was? Honestly, pick 25 in a draft with maybe six good players doesn't really guarantee you a winner.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Cook on the other hand is just sunk cost fallacy. Kid showed this year it was time to delist as he was four years in and couldn't lock down a best 22 slot. The only positive is I guess is the 2nd-3rd rounds looked kind of dire for Adelaide to sort out needs in?

Oh I don't know if you can say that .....Cook had more games played this year than the other 3 years combined ....I'd like to see his distances travelled, as to my eye, the laziness of previous years was replaced with a harder working Cook

15 out of 24 games, for a 27 game player ....isn't exactly failing to lock down a spot in the side ....and you don't get those games if aspects of your game, that saw you failing to get picked in previous years, haven't improved

 

[Thrillthorpe7]

Twomey confirmed what I had been told straight after the SA draft combine, that Draper was very high on their draft board. Would’ve taken him if Richmond went with FOS.

 

[GreyCrow]

Twomey confirmed what I had been told straight after the SA draft combine, that Draper was very high on their draft board. Would’ve taken him if Richmond went with FOS.

Who?

 

[Vader]

Oh I don't know if you can say that .....Cook had more games played this year than the other 3 years combined ....I'd like to see his distances travelled, as to my eye, the laziness of previous years was replaced with a harder working Cook

15 out of 24 games, for a 27 game player ....isn't exactly failing to lock down a spot in the side ....and you don't get those games if aspects of your game, that saw you failing to get picked in previous years, haven't improved

View attachment 2177424

Cook was re-signed to a 2-year contract, which was announced on 16th July 2024.
https://www.afc.com.au/news/1602927/crows-duo-re-sign#:~:text=Adelaide has secured two highly,to the end of 2026.

He played his last AFL game, being dropped back to the SANFL for the rest of the season, after picking up just 8 disposals against Hawthorn on 28th July 2024.

Yes, Cook played 15 games this year. He averaged just under 9 disposals per game. Unlike Fogarty, who was at least kicking 3-4 goals when he had 9 touches, Cook kicked just 0.6 goals per game. Eventually the selectors' patience wore thin, and he was dropped back to the magoos, only 2 weeks after his shiny new contract was announced.

The decision to give him a contract was a clear case of the left-hand not knowing what the right-hand was doing. He should never have been given another contract, let alone 2 more years. Cook represents a shocking case of buyer's regret.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Says who ? .....you and supporters ?

Lots of uncertainty over Oliver and Petracca's future .....so far Olivers well conditioned girth hasn't changed .....TWT
Viney 30 YO and plays a combative game

I didn't say "reach" for players of need .....I said needs would dictate Clubs selections
There wasn't a tall in MELB's wheelhouse ....and most Clubs avoided the talls ...except RICH who wanted balance in their list, taking KPF and KPD

You look at every selection, it was all needs based ....to try and spin this BS of taking the best player, is Club spin that is waved at supporters every year

As for St Kilda ....they just lost Battle ....so who do they select Tauru ...coincidence that, hey

As for Saints Midfielders, you said they didn't take:


Oh, and that's right ....
View attachment 2177421

The saints have openly said they need game changing midfielders but in the top 10 had to focus on talent over need

 

[rabidcrow]

Probably shouldn't let him take kick ins...

100%. They were embarrassing


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Twomey confirmed what I had been told straight after the SA draft combine, that Draper was very high on their draft board. Would’ve taken him if Richmond went with FOS.

He had a very interesting range , pick 2 if Richmond took FOS and pick 8 if we took Langford

 

[rabidcrow]

This was a very expensive move by CARL .....3 good potential players given up, to get one player ?
How often does this benefit the list ? ....not often IMHO



Mmmm ...wasn't all the narrative about why CARL moved to pick 3 ...was to get FOS ?

Inside the draft: Deals that Tigers rejected, the 'it' player who six clubs chased

Callum Twomey takes a closer look at the wheeling and dealing behind the scenes at the 2024 Telstra AFL Draft

www.afl.com.au

Reading the article Carlton were happy to let the FOS rumour do the rounds as their target was Smith all along


Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Mutineer]

He had a very interesting range , pick 2 if Richmond took FOS and pick 8 if we took Langford

Seems from Twomey's article we had FOS if he was there before Langford?

 

[Mostyn]

Cook was re-signed to a 2-year contract, which was announced on 16th July 2024.
https://www.afc.com.au/news/1602927/crows-duo-re-sign#:~:text=Adelaide has secured two highly,to the end of 2026.

He played his last AFL game, being dropped back to the SANFL for the rest of the season, after picking up just 8 disposals against Hawthorn on 28th July 2024.

Yes, Cook played 15 games this year. He averaged just under 9 disposals per game. Unlike Fogarty, who was at least kicking 3-4 goals when he had 9 touches, Cook kicked just 0.6 goals per game. Eventually the selectors' patience wore thin, and he was dropped back to the magoos, only 2 weeks after his shiny new contract was announced.

The decision to give him a contract was a clear case of the left-hand not knowing what the right-hand was doing. He should never have been given another contract, let alone 2 more years. Cook represents a shocking case of buyer's regret.

To be fair, this idea of "buyer's remorse" is something you've just invented in your mind.

There's no evidence that Nicks' patience with Cook has wore thin. They played him for the majority of the season last year, and he only played three games in the SANFL. Young players get dropped - it doesn't need to mean anything more than that.

He's never going to be an accumulator - he's a high impact per possession style player, who has never had the physique for AFL (and maybe never will).

He's still valuable on our list because our forward depth isn't great.

FORWARDS
FF: Darcy Fogarty - Riley Thilthorpe - Alex Neal Bullen
HF: Josh Rachele - Taylor Walker - Ben Keays

Depth: Luke Pedlar, Dan Curtin, Brayden Cook, Toby Murray, Chris Burgess

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Seems from Twomey's article we had FOS if he was there before Langford?

Yep

Think if we moved to pick 2 it was to take FOS but north would never have done the trade as they wanted him

 

[WaynesWorld19]

The saints have openly said they need game changing midfielders but in the top 10 had to focus on talent over need

You obviously didn't read my post .....SAINT's got their mids ...needs trumped again

Only team IMO that ignored needs was NORTH who took FOS, despite already having a packed midfield contingent

I haven't said needs everytime, just the majority of selections ....."we'll take best available, means we'll take the best MID available ....or the best tall available ...or the best small fwd available ect"

The Devil is in the detail of ambiguous communication by Clubs

 

[Jeffcrowe]

You obviously didn't read my post .....SAINT's got their mids ...needs trumped again

Only team IMO that ignored needs was NORTH who took FOS, despite already having a packed midfield contingent

I haven't said needs everytime, just the majority of selections ....."we'll take best available, means we'll take the best MID available ....or the best tall available ...or the best small fwd available ect"

The Devil is in the detail of ambiguous communication by Clubs

Jack Macrae isn’t their long term game changing mid haha

I read your post but it didn’t mean much