- Oct 2, 2022
- 6,824
- 9,268
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
We're consistently the second youngest team in the league.
Analysis Rebuild comparison (Crows, North & Hawks)
- Thread starter Bazz_27
- Start date
- Tagged users None
The key difference is having a coach who trusts his system (and ability to teach it) and not the individual talent.
Clarko and Mitchell have no issue playing younger guys because of this.
Nicks doesn't. His treatment of Curtin and comments around him as sub this week proves this.
On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
Clarko and Mitchell have no issue playing younger guys because of this.
Nicks doesn't. His treatment of Curtin and comments around him as sub this week proves this.
On SM-A325F using BigFooty.com mobile app
The Hawks are flying for sure but I also think they're a couple of key injuries away from having that momentum fall flat. They're only Blanck (up and comer) and Mitchell (always injured) away from their best team and they're hardly loaded with depth if you take a look at Box Hill's line up. They are of course, superbly coached, which helps a great deal but hugely reliant on Will Day and Sicily. If they lost both of those guys, think they lose most weeks. On the right path though, brought in some excellent players recently and a professional well run club that will never be down for too long.
North are more competitive now but I'm not convinced they can become a great team, despite all their early draft picks. I get you take best player early on but when you have that many picks at the pointy end, think it smart to be more targeted. Instead they keep drafting mids with questionable kicking - Sheezel aside - and their lack of talls is criminal for the amount of opportunity they've had to draft them. Their rebuild feels very haphazard. Should've been relocated to Tassie.
Ours is pretty easy. Miss after miss after miss of the important picks at the draft. The high draft picks from the past 10 years that should be the mainstays driving the club's success, instead are largely peripheral figures or gone. Our best players - recruits, rookies and later picks. Hit half of those top 30 picks instead of 1 in 10 and we're challenging for a flag. A coaching team that seems to have been assembled without thought doesn't help. We need someone who's actually played midfield at a high level, someone who's been a senior coach and someone who's only a couple of year's retired - and all of them need to have experienced premiership success in some way. Someone with an idea of strategy as we're getting out coached in the box regularly. If it was up to me, I'd sweep the broom this year - you can't finish bottom 4 this far into a rebuild and just keep on the same path.
North are more competitive now but I'm not convinced they can become a great team, despite all their early draft picks. I get you take best player early on but when you have that many picks at the pointy end, think it smart to be more targeted. Instead they keep drafting mids with questionable kicking - Sheezel aside - and their lack of talls is criminal for the amount of opportunity they've had to draft them. Their rebuild feels very haphazard. Should've been relocated to Tassie.
Ours is pretty easy. Miss after miss after miss of the important picks at the draft. The high draft picks from the past 10 years that should be the mainstays driving the club's success, instead are largely peripheral figures or gone. Our best players - recruits, rookies and later picks. Hit half of those top 30 picks instead of 1 in 10 and we're challenging for a flag. A coaching team that seems to have been assembled without thought doesn't help. We need someone who's actually played midfield at a high level, someone who's been a senior coach and someone who's only a couple of year's retired - and all of them need to have experienced premiership success in some way. Someone with an idea of strategy as we're getting out coached in the box regularly. If it was up to me, I'd sweep the broom this year - you can't finish bottom 4 this far into a rebuild and just keep on the same path.
- Thread starter
- #29
If you look at drafting since 2017 we have overall given more games to players drafted than the hawks. In total, 400 more. Where we fall down IMO is we are relying on our older players too much and they have brought in experienced AFL players and given them nearly double the games we have.
Some things to note of the team ratings - Our performance this year is similar to theirs (on an average basis) and we were far better last year, whilst we have copped plenty of injuries to best 23 players with questionable squad depth (as mentioned by Captain Furious above. The guys that didn't play on the weekend that were in our best team at round 1 :
The weekend was a terrible result, there are some mitigating factors to be considered (not accepted)
We should also welcome bringing in some role players that have a few years experience in the system, we should not see this as a threat to the young players & we should move on some of our older players (maybe even Tex)
| Drafted | Trades (inc DFA) | |||
| Hawks | Crows | Hawks | Crows | |
2017 | 282 | 239 | 116 | 42 |
2018 | 100 | 358 | 203 | 64 |
2019 | 137 | 224 | 93 | 21 |
2020 | 154 | 291 | 48 | 58 |
2021 | 161 | 134 | 8 | 63 |
2022 | 78 | 72 | 71 | 33 |
| Totals | 912 | 1318 | 539 | 281 |
Some things to note of the team ratings - Our performance this year is similar to theirs (on an average basis) and we were far better last year, whilst we have copped plenty of injuries to best 23 players with questionable squad depth (as mentioned by Captain Furious above. The guys that didn't play on the weekend that were in our best team at round 1 :
| Player | Games Played | Games Missed |
| Milera | 99 | 16 |
| Pedlar | 30 | 15 |
| Worrell | 26 | 10 |
| Crouch | 154 | 8 |
| Dawson | 127 | 1 |
| Rankine | 81 | 6 |
| Smith | 262 | 4 |
| Butts | 75 | 4 |
| Murray | 51 | 14 |
The weekend was a terrible result, there are some mitigating factors to be considered (not accepted)
We should also welcome bringing in some role players that have a few years experience in the system, we should not see this as a threat to the young players & we should move on some of our older players (maybe even Tex)
- Thread starter
- #30
This is the use of 1st round picks since 2017 :
We focus on Day over MCAsey which is a big win but they used pick 6 on DGB who can't get a game vs Thilthorpe & I don't watch them enough but Ward & Mackenzie are hardly elite are they?
| 1st round picks | Hakws | Crows |
2017 | Didn't have one? | Traded for Gibbs |
2018 | Used to trade in Wingard | Jones |
2019 | Day | McAsey |
2020 | DGB | Thilthorpe |
2021 | Ward | Rachele |
2022 | Mackenzie | Traded for Rankine |
We focus on Day over MCAsey which is a big win but they used pick 6 on DGB who can't get a game vs Thilthorpe & I don't watch them enough but Ward & Mackenzie are hardly elite are they?
Scorpus
Moderator
- Apr 16, 2014
- 62,199
- 166,216
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Moderator
- #31
Most of this discrepancy comes down to these factors
1) We "drafted" Ben Keays in 2019 who has played 102 games, but he was effectively a DFA
2) We had five top 50 picks in 2018, whereas Hawthorn had 0 because they weren't rebuilding and traded their picks for Wingard
3) We took twice as many top 30 picks in 2020, because we started our rebuild a year before Hawthorn
By my count, for new to AFL drafted players that weren't already established in the side and were top 30 picks
Nicks - 27% of all allocated AFL games across 16 players
Mitchell - 23% across 11 players
And for later draft picks
Nicks - 20% across 24 players
Mitchell - 19% across 28 players
- Thread starter
- #32
I did consider dividing total games by players picked but decided not to because it shows that we are playing the kids despite what everyone seems to think (Keays is an exception).
Fwiw you can mitigate any stats, you're just explaining the reasons why they are different. I'm trying to show that we are giving games to kids we draft despite popular opnion
- Thread starter
- #33
Not sure I understand this stat? What does it show and what is the criteria?
Scorpus
Moderator
- Apr 16, 2014
- 62,199
- 166,216
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Moderator
- #34
It's the percentage of all AFL games Nicks and Mitchell can hand out to players. For example Nicks has to award 2352* games to players across his career, and 1472 for Mitchell
If he gives 635 games to top 30 picks who played less than 20 prior games, that's 27% of the total amount of games allocated to those players
So it shows how often each coach is choosing to use his resource (giving out games) to that group of players. Both coaches have used around 45% of that resource on developing draftees (Nicks slightly more than Mitchell, while also having more top drafted players in the squad).
I chose a threshold of "not established" because it means both Nicks and Mitchell have had to specifically choose to bring those players into the 22, changing up the previous best 22, as opposed to continuing to use the side already provided to them
*103 matches x 22 or 23 players depending on the year
Last edited:
Scorpus
Moderator
- Apr 16, 2014
- 62,199
- 166,216
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Moderator
- #35
What's blatantly obvious though comparing Hawthorn to Adelaide is that:
- Adelaide have taken more top draft picks than Hawthorn
- Adelaide have traded in better top tier players
- Adelaide have spent a similar amount of games on draftees as Hawthorn
- Matthew Nicks has had more time to rebuild than Sam Mitchell
- Hawthorn more aggressively cut senior players to give development opportunities to draftees in key roles?
- Hawthorn drafted better players from fewer attempts?
- Hawthorn managed their list better cutting duds and adding useful role players?
- The senior players Hawthorn had access to before rebuilding were better?
- Sam Mitchell is a much better coach than Matthew Nicks?
- Hawthorn are a better run club off the field?
Rabish Binney
Left out overnight
Imagine for one minute that we drafted Harley Reid (or Butters / Rozee for that matter).
Can anyone honestly say that if we did draft them, would they be players they are now under Nick's coaching?
I don't think so.
We took a big step backward this year because of what Nicks did in the first 4 weeks where he eventually even admitted was a mistake and then double down with his selection. We've been competitive in a majority of games since then despite carrying these 4-5 players and then replacement of them with young players but too little too late.
I'm expecting a smashing in the last 4 games as the young players tire (provide Nicks doesn't bring in the senior players which I think he would do) with probably the exception of the Showdown as there's something to play.
I'm expecting a smashing in the last 4 games as the young players tire (provide Nicks doesn't bring in the senior players which I think he would do) with probably the exception of the Showdown as there's something to play.
- Thread starter
- #38
Their list build is better as they have more players in the 100+ range than us and have surrounded their youth with experience & maturity well.
Definitely 1,3 & 6 as well
Mitchell is definitely a better coach than Nicks, not sure many will argue that fact
- Oct 2, 2022
- 6,824
- 9,268
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
Ten weeks ago the jury probably would have ruled that Adelaide was more advanced.
I think this off season will mean a lot. Scorpus has made some good points.
I think this off season will mean a lot. Scorpus has made some good points.
Drugs Are Bad Mackay?
Moderator
- May 24, 2006
- 80,294
- 163,110
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Redbacks, Sturt, Liverpool, Arizona
- Moderator
- #40
The reason we're so young is partly because Nicks has backed in players who weren't good enough and have since been delisted (or now in reserves) or weren't going to be part of our next contending team and have since retired.
Each time realisation dawns we have to start over with a rookie.
And years later the young-ish guys have fewer games than they should because of the above.
We're stuck in a perennial rebuild. We'll be very young/inexperienced again next season. Potentially have Smith, Walker finish up.
Laird?
ROB replaced by a traded in young ruckman?
Each time realisation dawns we have to start over with a rookie.
And years later the young-ish guys have fewer games than they should because of the above.
We're stuck in a perennial rebuild. We'll be very young/inexperienced again next season. Potentially have Smith, Walker finish up.
Laird?
ROB replaced by a traded in young ruckman?
- Aug 30, 2021
- 19,209
- 37,957
- AFL Club
- Adelaide
And we were in the same Final contention situation as the Hawks and Fremantle last year despite carrying 3-4 players all season. Fremantle has taken a big step this year and their senior and experience players are performing, I don't see them or the Hawks carrying this many players each week.
