A stat showing our rebuild has a long way to go..

[bergholt]

Just ranked the players who had (at the start of the season) played < 50 games

That measure is biased against the current state of our list.

For us at the moment that includes Roberton, Maister, Stanley, Simpkin, Dennis-Lane, Siposs, Saad, Milera, Hickey, Newnes, Ledger, Dunell, Ross and all the guys who were on zero games at the start of the year.

This year only one of those guys moved over 50 games - Roberton. Next year, Maister and Stanley might join him, but most likely that's all. So in fact at the start of 2015 we'll still have a big bunch of players under 50 games. If you did the same measure at this time in two years then I reckon our guys would look a lot better, because they would have got to that 30+ game sweet spot - at least Newnes, Hickey, Ross, Webster, Dunell, Wright, Saunders, Lee and Murdoch should all be between 30 and 50 games.

Just because they're not stars at 10 games doesn't mean they won't improve massively in the next two years.

[Cairnsman]

Lenny was pick 11

Armo was pick 9
Jobe Watson was pick 40
Dane Swan was pick 58
Simon Black was pick 31
Adam Goodes was pick 43
Jimmy Bartel was pick 8

What we don't know yet is if Armo will step another gear in the next couple of seasons and for the life of me I can't work out why players such as Newness, Saunders,Wright, Murdoch, Webster, and Ross --that have only started their careers in the past two seasons -- can't become elite or better than GOP. How can we say none of these players can't become elite.

Dont think anyone has. maybe they have and I missed it. The chances of more than one or two making it are huge though. Can you name a club that has had more than 2 picks after pick 20 become A graders in consecutive drafts.

I'd like to answer your question because it's a good one which may require some research but before I do can you provide an object measure or qualification for players that are labelled A graders. That's a serious question by the way.

[saint66au]

Just ranked the players who had (at the start of the season) played < 50 games

In disposal order. Jack Newnes is our highest ranked player...at #116. Seb Ross next at #118

In fantasy points order. Jack Newnes is again our leader...but at #150

Yes stats can lie and no this is not definative by any means..but does kinda show our kids are OK without being the sort of elite that you build your next dynasty around. Maybe an early call and Ill happiy eat my words of need be, but I really dont think the next Roo, Dal or Lenny will come from the class of 2011/12. MIght get the next Geary, or even Armo but that wont get you back into the Top 4 unaided

Does without question indicate though that our next draft picks have to do better..much better than this IMO

Can we just clear this stat up -

Are you saying that of all the players in the AFL with under 50 games to their name - I am guessing there are around 20*18 = 360 (but many would be on zero)

Our best are over 100th ranked.

Thats pretty bad

That means (on average) each team has 5 'kids' better than our 'kids'?

Is that what we are saying here?

It's a ranking of kids who had played less than 50 Games at the start of the season...but minimum 5 games ..

And yes...every club has a kid in the top 50...except us..our best is Jack Newnes at #115

[dragit]

Not sure about this metric…

We have 2 new teams… with about 30 players under 50 games going through the midfield… compared to us who would have at least 7 "mature" players in front for midfield posi's… so our young guys disposals average is certainly going to be below the new teams at the very least…

Outside of the 2 new teams, who are the players in this top 50?

I'm guessing mainly high draft picks…

[kosifantutti]

Just ranked the players who had (at the start of the season) played < 50 games

In disposal order. Jack Newnes is our highest ranked player...at #116. Seb Ross next at #118

In fantasy points order. Jack Newnes is again our leader...but at #150

Yes stats can lie and no this is not definative by any means..but does kinda show our kids are OK without being the sort of elite that you build your next dynasty around. Maybe an early call and Ill happiy eat my words of need be, but I really dont think the next Roo, Dal or Lenny will come from the class of 2011/12. MIght get the next Geary, or even Armo but that wont get you back into the Top 4 unaided

Does without question indicate though that our next draft picks have to do better..much better than this IMO

Can we just clear this stat up -

Are you saying that of all the players in the AFL with under 50 games to their name - I am guessing there are around 20*18 = 360 (but many would be on zero)

Our best are over 100th ranked.

Thats pretty bad

That means (on average) each team has 5 'kids' better than our 'kids'?

Is that what we are saying here?

It's a ranking of kids who had played less than 50 Games at the start of the season...but minimum 5 games ..

And yes...every club has a kid in the top 50...except us..our best is Jack Newnes at #115

Can you provide a link?
Looks like a highly contrived stat. And Newnes would be a long way behind Roberton who had less than 50 games at the start of the season.

[saint66au]

It's at www.finalsiren.com. Go to the "rising star" link under the players menu.

[skeptic]

How many games has Seb Ross played this season?

[bergholt]

It's at http://www.finalsiren.com. Go to the "rising star" link under the players menu.

The top player on that list is Michael Barlow. At the start of the season he'd played 47 games. I'm not sure it's fair to compare him with Nathan Wright who at the start of the season had played 0.

[Mr Magic]

It's at http://www.finalsiren.com. Go to the "rising star" link under the players menu.

The top player on that list is Michael Barlow. At the start of the season he'd played 47 games. I'm not sure it's fair to compare him with Nathan Wright who at the start of the season had played 0.

Mark Hutchings is at #3 in front of Jaegar O'Meara.
Isn't this the same Mark Hutchngs who was on our rookie list and discarded?

Looking at the list it would seem to me that the rankings are 'skewed' and another reason to remember that statistics can be made to give you any result you are looking for.

Surely to get a better/fairer comparison one should look at lists showing results after
10 games
20 games
30 games

[maverick]

The list has little credence for mine.
Players like Ed Curnow, Matt Jones, Dean Terlich on the list, but players like Wingard and Cameron not.
Which would you take?

[Kickit]

In 2002 we played promising young player Xavier Clarke in as many games as we could get him in. I'm not sure it was the best method. He got more disposals in his second year than he did in any other year in his career.

[Teflon]

Don't like the list.
Haven't seen it min you, but I don't like it
Why?
It's not giving me the future security I crave right now

[plugger66]

Don't like the list.
Haven't seen it min you, but I don't like it
Why?
It's not giving me the future security I crave right now

Look at it upside down.