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

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

It's hardly analytics. It's what most people have a running tally in their head about. All clubs get it, most supporters get, except a few stragglers like you who you have to show the data.... and you still don't get it.

There’s a difference between understanding analytics, and thinking it’s infallible and has to be followed at all costs.

We’ve had a few goes at pointing this out. Fans of the Browns and the Rockets probably have tried as well.

 

[dewcefault]

It's the mindset of giving the best chance of building a flag side. 1x A+ grader is more valuable that 2x A-graders.

I disagree. Your analysis only looked at each individual player discretely. What you should be looking it is how have different flag (and generally successful) sides have been built and whether a quantum of A- players would offset not having the 2 A+.
Winning a flag has a combination of talent and luck.

It's also hard to look at whether a player was an A+ before his team rose up the rankings or whether he's the reason. Players generally look better in a good team so the bias will be towards a premiership team having more high quality players

 

[Chump Change]

There’s a difference between understanding analytics, and thinking it’s infallible and has to be followed at all costs.

We’ve had a few goes at pointing this out. Fans of the Browns and the Rockets probably have tried as well.

I have never said nor implied it's infallible. No need to misrepresent people Kathy.

 

[Chump Change]

I disagree. Your analysis only looked at each individual player discretely. What you should be looking it is how have different flag (and generally successful) sides been built and whether a quantum of A- players would offset not having the 2 A+.
Winning a flag has a combination of talent and luck.

It's also hard to look at whether a player was an A+ before his team rose up the rankings or whether he's the reason. Players generally look better in a good team so the bias will be towards a premiership team having more high quality players

Show me the money.

Show me a side in the last 6 years who don't. You could probably argue West Coast. That's 1/6. Not good odds.


A+ are A+ because their a superstar no matter what the team. That's why Tim Kelly is not an A+ and Lachie Neale and Patrick Cripps are. Players in general look better in flag sides (I've said that many times here). But all those players who look better - aren't A+ and generally you can't win a flag if they are the best players. You pretty much have to have A+'ers.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

I’ve never said or implied it’s infallible.

I’m just saying we should absolutely do what the analytics tell us to do no matter the circumstances, and won’t countenance any other argument, and anyone who thinks otherwise clearly is suffering from a delusion that they’re smarter than they actually are.

Don’t put words in my mouth.

 

[dewcefault]

Show me the money.

Show me a side in the last 6 years who don't. You could probably argue West Coast. That's 1/6. Not good odds.

West Coast
I'd argue Richmond. Martin being the only A+ makes it 4/6.

 

[Obeanie1]

I think everyone would like 2 for the price of 1.

Isn't the issue that nobody is likely to trade down from the top 5 where all the best talent is?

The issue is that the top 5 at this point dont look as talented as previous drafts.

The only standout is Ashcroft and he is likely heading to Brisbane.

Now that doesnt mean clubs wont be keen to land their player by trading down.

 

[Chump Change]

I’ve never said or implied it’s infallible.

I’m just saying we should absolutely do what the analytics tell us to do no matter the circumstances, and won’t countenance any other argument, and anyone who thinks otherwise clearly is suffering from a delusion that they’re smarter than they actually are.

Don’t put words in my mouth.

No, you said I think the historical data is infallible. That's just not true. Unsure why you're making stuff up?

 

[Chump Change]

West Coast
I'd argue Richmond. Martin being the only A+ makes it 4/6.

Cotchin. Reiwoldt. 700 goals and 23rd on the all time goal kickers list. How's he not an A+? Rance is pretty close too. He'd be in the top 10 full backs of all time. The only knock on him is he's not a mid or KPF.

 

[Chump Change]

The issue is that the top 5 at this point dont look as talented as previous drafts.

The only standout is Ashcroft and he is likely heading to Brisbane.

Now that doesnt mean clubs wont be keen to land their player by trading down.

Many have Warlord above Ashcroft. Others say the top end is strong.

We don't know who to believe just yet.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

No, you said I think the historical data is infallible. That's just not true. Unsure why you're making stuff up?

You’re saying we should follow it no matter what the circumstances. That’s what you’re saying, yes? Regardless of how this draft class looks in October, we shouldn’t trade a top two pick because the historical data says that’s our best chance of getting an “A+“ player?

 

[bh90210fan]

Cotchin. Reiwoldt. 700 goals and 23rd on the all time goal kickers list. How's he not an A+? Rance is pretty close too. He'd be in the top 10 full backs of all time. The only knock on him is he's not a mid or KPF.

By these standards every single team in the comp has at least 2 A+ players in them.

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

You think I'm the only one?

Show me how many times a club has traded their top 2 draft pick in recent years? It happens less and less because clubs understand where the talent most likely is.

You think you're arguing against a nobody on the internet, but 18 clubs say you don't know what you're talking about.

So you think all 18 clubs have had recent pick 1 or 2? In the period 2007 to 2019, GWS have had 7 top 2 picks, Suns 5, Melbourne 4, Carlton 3 and Brisbane 2. No other club has had multiple top 2 picks. Of the 26 players selected in the top 2, 9 of those players were traded/delisted then picked up by by/to another club. I guess your maths is pretty good and I don't need to tell you that is just over a third.

I see no point in answering your question on how many have traded out. Why. If you look at the success rate of holding onto picks 1 and 2, there is a 30.7% success rate that I would assign to their selections. I have taken just picks 1 and 2 since your are so obsessed by them and work out which of these two would you pick again in these positions. Hell, we all here year after year that you should just take best available. What this fails to take into account is that best is sooooo subjective.

Now Mr Analytics, I am looking at 2019 back to 2007 (2020 and 2021 are too early to tell) and it appears that of the 26 picks, I would only rate the first 2 players taken as standing up to the title of the best 2 players in the draft. That is a success rate of 30.7%. Would your treasure so highly something that has such a poor return? oh and no need to play the hindsight trader - this is using history to test your theory and I might be old fashioned and believe you learn a lot from what has happened before.

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

There is a strong correlation in your figuring that the higher up the order you go, the better the player. You have 1/3 of the player A+ who were pick at #4 or higher......

So one of my scenarios was to slide back from 2 to 4.

Your posts have stated never trade pick 1 or 2 because that is where A+ comes from. Are you now extending that to 3 and 4?

 

[Schtinker]

The best players are at the pointy end of the draft. You can't win a flag without these players. Yet, you want to trade down?

So you think the gulf between a Wardlaw at Pick 1 and a Phillipou at pick 5 would be too huge too trade down to?

 

[Obeanie1]

Many have Warlord above Ashcroft. Others say the top end is strong.

We don't know who to believe just yet.

The standout is Ashcroft

Was Wardlaw but now others are challenging him.

Plenty on here happy use use pick 1 or 2 on him. Maybe we dont have to and still get him. Or another highly rated mid like Clarke, Hewett or Phillipou.

 

[JackOutback]

Cotchin. Reiwoldt. 700 goals and 23rd on the all time goal kickers list. How's he not an A+? Rance is pretty close too. He'd be in the top 10 full backs of all time. The only knock on him is he's not a mid or KPF.

Cotchin's not A+. Reiwoldt, maybe. But then West Coast have two A+ in Kennedy and McGovern (taken as a rookie, as well). This is the danger in arbitrary assessments of A+ talent etc.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

By these standards every single team in the comp has at least 2 A+ players in them.

Cotchin’s single AA/Brownlow season in 2012 makes him a lock for A+ status.

Apparently.

 

[bh90210fan]

At this stage I wouldn’t pass up the opportunity to get Wardlaw or Ashcroft. If we don’t have access to them anything else is fair game.

 

[Chump Change]

By these standards every single team in the comp has at least 2 A+ players in them.

Not quite, but that's not the point.....

The point is marrying this to draft picks. Pretty much all the flag sides in the last 6 years have had 2x A+ players they got with top 5 draft picks.

So the point is, when you get those top 5 or top 2 or whatever, this is the best opportunity to get 2x A+.

Have a look at Sydney. Bud is no longer A+. Parker sort of is but soon to be on the way down. Mills is sort of there. Heeney sort of.

I think this side they have now will fall short. Time will tell.

I'd also argue Essendon. Parish for me is not really there. Stinger Bell is fat and insonsistent. McGrath, Shiel, etc not A+. They're going to need to find someone in the draft. What they have on their list won't go all the way.

 

[Chump Change]

Cotchin’s single AA/Brownlow season in 2012 makes him a lock for A+ status.

Apparently.

Apparently? Who said that? Oh, that's right, you're being a dick again.

 

[Chump Change]

So one of my scenarios was to slide back from 2 to 4.

Your posts have stated never trade pick 1 or 2 because that is where A+ comes from. Are you now extending that to 3 and 4?

That narrows it down to dealing with 2 teams, if they make us an offer. And if they make us an offer, it means there has to be a gap between the player at 2 and the player at 4. So we should just take the player at 2.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Apparently? Who said that? Oh, that's right, you're being a dick again.

What’s your justification for including Cotchin then?

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

Not quite, but that's not the point.....

The point is marrying this to draft picks. Pretty much all the flag sides in the last 6 years have had 2x A+ players they got with top 5 draft picks.

So the point is, when you get those top 5 or top 2 or whatever, this is the best opportunity to get 2x A+.

Have a look at Sydney. Bud is no longer A+. Parker sort of is but soon to be on the way down. Mills is sort of there. Heeney sort of.

I think this side they have now will fall short. Time will tell.

I'd also argue Essendon. Parish for me is not really there. Stinger Bell is fat and insonsistent. McGrath, Shiel, etc not A+. They're going to need to find someone in the draft. What they have on their list won't go all the way.

Sorry but I feel the need to correct you, again. Statistically speaking in the last 15 years, your best chances of an A+ player is from picks 7, 9 and 11 closely followed by picks 2 and 3. Pick 1 only has a 3 in 15 chance of being A+.


One thing to note - you don't let facts get in the way of your story. Got to love that never say die spirit.

 

[Chump Change]

What’s your justification for including Cotchin then?

He was a gun. But whatever, if you don't rate him as A+ in his prime, whatever. It doesn't really change anything.