Rookie Draft- 5 Years Without Success

[Mismatched]

I totally agree with Drum on this.

Why are we happy to accept that if other clubs are not doing well at this then it's OK for us to not do well? Is it wrong that we should aspire to be better than WCE or any other club for that matter. If we accept mediocrity then we will be mediocre.

It's up to the recruiters and the coaches to identify talent that can play, and then the coaches to prepare them to play. Some of our past Rookies have disappeared into football obscurity.

Whilst i do agree that we need to aspire to be the best, if many other clubs are having trouble, that means that the chances of doing really well out of it are slim. We havn't done totally bad either, Griffen was rookie listed looks to be a good player, as did Hinge look good in his match before getting injured, probably would have got another, although sometimes you may wonder, Mcintyre impressed the footy club this year and Gallman has probably done enough to warrent another shot. Anyway, some of those names from the west coast rookie list are from around the same time or earlier as the likes of Rutten, Bock, Mattner and Doughty, not to mention that Aiden Parker and Mathew Smith were also considered pretty good prospects just didn't recieve a shot. Whilst I can see some improvement could be made, I don't think we are doing as bad as is being made out.

 

[GlaCial]

Not bad, but could do better.

 

[Mismatched]

5 years without success is just plain wrong though, I would call Griffen and Hinge pretty successful and its just too early to tell no Mcintyre and perhaps Gallman.

Bit of an aside, but could we have rookie listed Obst this year after giving him only one year on our main list and should we consider perhaps giving him another shot next year, seems to be doing alright in the SANFL now.

 

[GlaCial]

Obst looked OK to me. Not why we delisted him so soon. Anyone know?

 

[Mismatched]

Obst looked OK to me. Not why we delisted him so soon. Anyone know?

Super draft last year. We wanted more picks and he was the one who made way, it would have been him or Jericho I would have thought.

 

[Crows88]

Obst looked OK to me. Not why we delisted him so soon. Anyone know?

I was very disspointed when i went and watched centrals and roosters last week, he looked really dangerous and had a great presence, wouldn't be surprised if he got re-drafted this year!! Gave Mcintyre a bath aswell!

 

[GlaCial]

Then I'm surprised we didn't put him on the Rookie list, or is that not possible since he was senior listed......I'm so confused.

 

[NikkiNoo]

Can the negative nellies please list all AFL clubs rookie drafts for the same period as ours that was listed?

Only then can we make a value judgement on what constitutes success or not.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Can the negative nellies please list all AFL clubs rookie drafts for the same period as ours that was listed?

Only then can we make a value judgement on what constitutes success or not.

Why do you have to be a party pooper?!

What you get via rookie draft is largly dependant on the depth of the National Draft. IMHO, in terms of rookie list and PSD, West Coast and Adelaide have done very well. WC better than us but we are hardly battlers in this regard.

Players that were either on Rookie list or picked up via a PSD that are currently on our list are

Jonathon Griffin (RD)
Michael Doughty (RD)
Ben Rutten (RD)
Trent Hentschel (PSD)
John Hinge (RD)
Martin Mattner (RD)
Jason Porplyzia (PSD)
Nathan Bock (RD)

7 of those are arguably in our best 22. Hardly something that we should be questioned about.

I think some questions can be asked about this year's rookie list because the depth of the draft last year was apparently as good as there has been. McIntyre looked really good early on in the year but has been deplorable since coming back from that nasty ankle injury. Gallman has showed a bit but he has played as a Key defender where in reality he is a flanker type. Turner has also showed glimpses but not sure he has shown enough to even be considered for being a 2nd year rookie.

The other draft have had questionable depth and as such, that is reflected in the lack of promoted rookies. If you checked our list against other clubs, our promoted rookies stack up really well. In fact it would arguably be in top 3 in terms of number and quality of promoted rookies.

 

[jarmanagic]

2003:

Michael Bratton- 0 games
Aidan Parker- 0
Jason Porplyzia- 26*
Hayden Skipworth- 44

2004:

Rowan Andrews- 0
Brad Debrowski- 0
Aidan Parker- 0
Matthew Smith- 0
Tim Hazel- 0

2005:

Rowan Andrews- 0
Jonathon Griffin- 16*
John Hinge- 1*
Ryan Nye- 0

2006:

Adrian Bonaddio- 0
Sam Elliot- 0
Tom Redden- 0
Brad Sugars- 0

2007:

Rhys Archard- 0
Greg Gallman- 0*
Andrew McIntyre- 0*
James Turner- 0*

*= denotes current player

We had great success from the Rookie draft in 2002 but since then it’s pretty much been a disaster. While you don’t expect many rookie listed players to make it at AFL level, our lack of success should be looked into.

Over the past 5 years Jason Porplyzia’s 26 games is the biggest output from anyone drafted. Skipworth played 44 games but he wasn’t initially a rookie selection so he’s a different story.

In 2003 we drafted Porplyzia who was released but managed to work his way back onto the list with a few consistent years with West Adelaide. No one drafted in 2004 managed to play a single game, not one. We did well in 2005 with Griffin and Hinge both appearing to be solid enough prospects, but there’s an outside chance Hinge could be delisted.

The 2006 selections all proved to be flops, with none even regular players in the SANFL. Sugars and Elliot are now showing some signs, but all in all it was a terrible crop.

As for the latest group of selections, I have very little faith that any will develop into AFL players. Acrhard’s already gone, and after a promising start McIntyre looks to be in danger of being cut. Turner needs to locate and send a Macca’s store broke, and Gallman has potential but he should be looking to play more on the wing.

Our rookie drafting needs to be assessed because while it’s a hit and miss process, we shouldn’t be having to accept so many failures…

This is rubbish, having a crack for the sake of it. Include the 2002 draft and that leaves 5 good players in last 5 years (Bock, Mattner, Rutten, Porps and Griffen) from the rookie draft. Includes an All Australian and probably our most important player. Maybe West Coast have done better from the rookie draft in that time but they'd be the only club that has.

Add Hentschel (pre season) and Johncock/Knights/Huddo taken after pick 50 in that time and the hit rate from late in the draft/pre season/rookie has been OUTSTANDING over that time.

Remember the rookie draft is for blokes not drafted, thus picks 90 and beyond. Wont be many great players in that group. Criticism is badly misplaced and frankly rubbish. Stiffy18 is absolutely correct

 

[Drummond]

Can the negative nellies please list all AFL clubs rookie drafts for the same period as ours that was listed?

Only then can we make a value judgement on what constitutes success or not.

Sorry NN, but as someone else pointed out, just because other clubs might fail that doesn’t make it acceptable for us to fail too.

What you get via rookie draft is largly dependant on the depth of the National Draft. IMHO, in terms of rookie list and PSD, West Coast and Adelaide have done very well. WC better than us but we are hardly battlers in this regard.

Players that were either on Rookie list or picked up via a PSD that are currently on our list are

Jonathon Griffin (RD)
Michael Doughty (RD)
Ben Rutten (RD)
Trent Hentschel (PSD)
John Hinge (RD)
Martin Mattner (RD)
Jason Porplyzia (PSD)
Nathan Bock (RD)

7 of those are arguably in our best 22. Hardly something that we should be questioned about.

I think some questions can be asked about this year's rookie list because the depth of the draft last year was apparently as good as there has been. McIntyre looked really good early on in the year but has been deplorable since coming back from that nasty ankle injury. Gallman has showed a bit but he has played as a Key defender where in reality he is a flanker type. Turner has also showed glimpses but not sure he has shown enough to even be considered for being a 2nd year rookie.

The other draft have had questionable depth and as such, that is reflected in the lack of promoted rookies. If you checked our list against other clubs, our promoted rookies stack up really well. In fact it would arguably be in top 3 in terms of number and quality of promoted rookies.

Bock, Rutten and Mattner were taken in the 2002 rookie draft, Hentschel in the 2002 PSD. So 4 of that list were taken in the same draft, almost half a dozen years ago. So yes Stiffy we did exceptionally well that year, no one is disputing that, but otherwise what exactly have we got from the draft? Over the past 5 years we’ve only had 3 players play AFL footy, Porplyzia is a first 22 player, Griffin could be, and Hinge should be but isn’t without a chance of being delisted.

So on the whole we probably haven’t done too badly, but just because we did very well from one particular draft does that mean we should tolerate 5 years of constant failures? We had a great year but that doesn’t mean we should sit back and be contempt with what we achieved.

This is rubbish, having a crack for the sake of it. Include the 2002 draft and that leaves 5 good players in last 5 years (Bock, Mattner, Rutten, Porps and Griffen) from the rookie draft. Includes an All Australian and probably our most important player. Maybe West Coast have done better from the rookie draft in that time but they'd be the only club that has.

Add Hentschel (pre season) and Johncock/Knights/Huddo taken after pick 50 in that time and the hit rate from late in the draft/pre season/rookie has been OUTSTANDING over that time.

Remember the rookie draft is for blokes not drafted, thus picks 90 and beyond. Wont be many great players in that group. Criticism is badly misplaced and frankly rubbish. Stiffy18 is absolutely correct

Why are you going on about late picks? Start a new thread because that’s not what I’m here to discuss.

 

[Mismatched]

Griffen and Hinge arn't failures yet, nor are Gallman and Mcintyre, they will take a while though.

Other clubs records do matter in this respect as there are probably only so many really good players in the draft and your chances of finding them decrease as the draft process moves on. The clubs do their best with the rookie draft to try and find someone special, but sometimes at this stage they just don't exist.

We want to see other clubs records so that it can be determined whether or not there is talent that we are missing or not, in reality you are trying to find a needle in a haystack, sometimes you get lucky. I would be more worried by our inability to utilise our first round draft picks to any great effect, a place which is ripe with talent.

 

[Crow-mo]

Remember the rookie draft is for blokes not drafted, thus picks 90 and beyond. Wont be many great players in that group. Criticism is badly misplaced and frankly rubbish. Stiffy18 is absolutely correct

that's not quite accurate. it is true, that they are people who didn't get drafted - it is not true, that they represent the lowest talent or potential. 17/18 yr olds have a great deal of risk and uncertainty about them. some players because of the size, age, weight, type etc. are very hard to predict. and with list spots being at a premium, some players are hard to justify the punt. this doesn't make them low talent or potential - sometimes quite the opposite. take ruckman for a start, there are some great ruckman types from the rookie draft, because their type is very hard to pick first up.

look at griffen as a prime example, he is not what you'd call a cast off talent wise. the rookie draft should be used for more high risk/high reward types, and less for mature top ups imo.

 

[jarmanagic]

that's not quite accurate. it is true, that they are people who didn't get drafted - it is not true, that they represent the lowest talent or potential. 17/18 yr olds have a great deal of risk and uncertainty about them. some players because of the size, age, weight, type etc. are very hard to predict. and with list spots being at a premium, some players are hard to justify the punt. this doesn't make them low talent or potential - sometimes quite the opposite. take ruckman for a start, there are some great ruckman types from the rookie draft, because their type is very hard to pick first up.

look at griffen as a prime example, he is not what you'd call a cast off talent wise. the rookie draft should be used for more high risk/high reward types, and less for mature top ups imo.

i agree with you that more mature players overlooked by others can be gold. Priddis and Porps two recent examples, but generally rookies are not elite talent and you are going to have more rookies fail than succeed (of course the nature of being a rookie means that some never get a chance)

And to Drummond, my point was that the Crows in later picks/PSD and rookie draft have done well. Anyone (well actually maybe not us , your mate Meesen another failure) can find a top 10 draft pick that can play. Finding them later, Crows have been outstanding at

 

[ok.crows]

Obst looked OK to me. Not why we delisted him so soon. Anyone know?

There is a ban on Bigfooty talking about problems like Obst's.

 

[CrowHop]

the rookie draft should be used for more high risk/high reward types, and less for mature top ups imo.

Exactly.

Intersting we can snare a big man like Griffen from the rookie list, but Gilligan, Watts, Angwin and Meesen (all interstate big guys that were first rounders) are all flops. Taking chances on big guys in the rookie draft is a good strategy. Big guys take longer to develop and thus the variables involved make the mere selection of big guys more of a risk.

How long will it take for them to put on 20kgs ?
How much more will they grow ?
Will they be a stock standard ruck man or a top tier ruckman?

 

[Southerntakeover]

Sorry NN, but as someone else pointed out, just because other clubs might fail that doesn’t make it acceptable for us to fail too.

What a bumbling logic that is.

Can you put forward what exactly a 'success rate' is then?

If our percentage of players rookie drafted, who play AFL football, compares favourably to every other club, then id suggest we arent failing at all.

 

[Drummond]

What a bumbling logic that is.

Can you put forward what exactly a 'success rate' is then?

If our percentage of players rookie drafted, who play AFL football, compares favourably to every other club, then id suggest we arent failing at all.

So others failing means no questions should be asked as to why we fail? Anyway here are the results from the 2005 rookie draft with the number of players who have gone on to play senior football.

Adelaide: 0
Brisbane: 2
Carlton: 1
Collingwood: 4
Essendon: 1
Fremantle: 1
Geelong: 2
Hawthorn: 2
Kangaroos: 2
Melbourne: 1
Port: 2
Richmond: 2
St.Kilda: 0
Sydney: 3
West Coast: 2
Western Bulldogs: 0 (1 pick)

 

[Southerntakeover]

So others failing means no questions should be asked as to why we fail? Anyway here are the results from the 2005 rookie draft with the number of players who have gone on to play senior football.

Adelaide: 0
Brisbane: 2
Carlton: 1
Collingwood: 4
Essendon: 1
Fremantle: 1
Geelong: 2
Hawthorn: 2
Kangaroos: 2
Melbourne: 1
Port: 2
Richmond: 2
St.Kilda: 0
Sydney: 3
West Coast: 2
Western Bulldogs: 0 (1 pick)

Far too short a term of reference for it to be credible. Come on, dont be half assed.

Again you repeat the 'fail' crap, the point is, without proper comparison to show our success rate against the success rate of the entire draft, you cant say we've failed. You need a bigger scope to start making these huge claims.

 

[Drummond]

Far too short a term of reference for it to be credible. Come on, dont be half assed.

Again you repeat the 'fail' crap, the point is, without proper comparison to show our success rate against the success rate of the entire draft, you cant say we've failed. You need a bigger scope to start making these huge claims.

Yeh, maybe if it wasn’t 11pm I would do a more comprehensive list. I plan to, but right now that will do. It shows the last draft that we can analyse, and to me it looks as though we don't stack up too well. Apart from the Saints and the Dogs who combined for 3 picks, we were the only team who failed to have at least 1 player who remained on the list for a second year.

 

[Southerntakeover]

Yeh, maybe if it wasn’t 11pm I would do a more comprehensive list. I plan to, but right now that will do. It shows the last draft that we can analyse, and to me it looks as though we don't stack up too well. Apart from the Saints and the Dogs who combined for 3 picks, we were the only team who failed to have at least 1 player who remained on the list for a second year.

The threads about a long term trend, im not sure that one year is enough to base any sort of analysis on.

When you do compile a more comprehensive list, ill come back and have a look at it.

 

[Asgardian]

What are other clubs records over this time?

I'll list Port's Rookies for you

2003
Pick 14 - Joel Patfull (Now with Brisbane)
Pick 30 - Scott Borlace (0 games)

2004
Pick 13 - Adam Grocke (0 games)
Pick 29 - Salim Hassan (0 games)
Pick 44 - Dale Ellis (0 games)

2005
Pick 16 - Danyle Pearce (still on Port's list)
Pick 32 - Robert Forster-Knight (0 games for Port)

2006
Pick 11 - Tom Rischbieth (0 games)
Pick 27 - Greg Bentley (still on Port's list)
Pick 40 - Tim Looby (0 games)
Pick 52 - Tom Logan (still on Port's list)

2007
Pick 5 - Alex Lee
Pick 21 - Gavin Grose
Pick 36 - Nathan Batsanis
Pick 49 - Peter Hardy

 

[GlaCial]

I'll list Port's Rookies for you

2003
Pick 14 - Joel Patfull (Now with Brisbane)
Pick 30 - Scott Borlace (0 games)

2004
Pick 13 - Adam Grocke (0 games)
Pick 29 - Salim Hassan (0 games)
Pick 44 - Dale Ellis (0 games)

2005
Pick 16 - Danyle Pearce (still on Port's list)
Pick 32 - Robert Forster-Knight (0 games for Port)

2006
Pick 11 - Tom Rischbieth (0 games)
Pick 27 - Greg Bentley (still on Port's list)
Pick 40 - Tim Looby (0 games)
Pick 52 - Tom Logan (still on Port's list)

2007
Pick 5 - Alex Lee
Pick 21 - Gavin Grose
Pick 36 - Nathan Batsanis
Pick 49 - Peter Hardy

That's just plain pathetic, and equals your effort in the 2007GF.
Just the way we like it.

 

[GlaCial]

2007
Adelaide (0)........Andrew McIntyre (0), James Turner (0), Rhys Archard (0)#, Greg Gallman (0)
Brisbane (6)........Anthony Corrie (2), Scott Clouston (0), Daniel Dzufer (1), Haydyn Kiel (0), Joel Tippet (0), William Hamill (3)
Carlton (11)........Sam Jacobs (0), Michael Jamison (5), Ross Young (6)
Collingwood (12)..Sharrod Wellingham (0), Brent Macaffer (0), Martin Clarke (12)
Essendon (5).......Dean Dick (0), Danny Chartres (0), Adam Ramanauskas! (5)
Fremantle (3)......Chris Smith (0), Andrew Foster (3), Darren Rumble (0), Benet Copping (0)
Geelong (0).........Joel Reynolds (0), Liam Bedford (0), Jason Davenport (0), Tom Lonergan (0)
Hawthorn (0).......Brett Collins (0), Matthew Suckling (0), Sam Gibson (0)
Kangaroos (15)....Leigh Adams (2), Ban Hughes (0), Matt Campbell (13), Timothy Hutchison (0)
Melbourne (0)......Daniel Hayes (0)
Port (0)..............Alex Lee (0), Gavin Grose (0), Nathan Batsanis (0), Peter Hardy (0)
Richmond (19)....Tasman Clingan (0), Jake King (19)
Saints (26).........Clinton Jones (6), Luke Van Rheenen (0), Robert Eddy (0), James Wall (0), Jarryn Geary (0), Jayden Attard (20)
Sydney (5).........Nick Smith (0), Matthew 0'Dwyer (0), Luke Brennan (5), Matthew Davis (0), Earl Shaw (0)
Eagles (6)..........Jamie McNamara (2), Llane Spaanderman (0), Chad Jones (4), Ben Sharp (0), Ashlry Thornton (0), Beau Wilkes (0)
Bulldogs (11)......Gavin Hughes (0), Jarrod Harbrow (11), Martin Pask (0), Michael West (0)

NB:
# delisted
! special consideration

 

[Unwritten_Law]

Only two rookies in the cats premiership side - Rooke and Shannon Byrnes (who is a passenger anyway). Carrazzo was on our rookie list before going to Carlton but we've been pretty ordinary with our rookies overall. Todd Grima is missing from that list above, kicked 50 in the VFL. Should get promoted for next year.