I'm no statistician, but I do have a high school level grasp on probability.

GWS traded the rights for Jaegermeister for pick 4. Meaning pick 1,2,3,4,5,7,9. I.e 7/10 first picks.

Is there not a factor of diminishing returns at play here. Even if this is a ripper draft, there's really no precedent to say 2 or three of these picks won't be duds, and even more unlikely that they get more than 2 excellent players.

I don't understand why, given the opportunity, they didn't bank on some under 22 yr olds from other clubs, or the more logical play, try and trade for 2013 picks (I believe this was possible, please correct me if I'm wrong) from teams that are likely to be bad next year. IMO They should have hedged their bets. No problem running out young kids, but it's just not that likely that there are many kids of exactly the same age that are that good.

They'd want to hope this is a ripper draft!

I don't feel as intimidated about GWS than I do about GC.

I have a feeling once all the kiddies have the opportunity to GTFO of Blacktown they will take with no hesitation. This club-this experiment will be nothing but fail.

I understand why the AFL want GWS, but that doesn't mean I can't laugh and applaud their demise.

I'm no statistician, but I do have a high school level grasp on probability.

GWS traded the rights for Jaegermeister for pick 4. Meaning pick 1,2,3,4,5,7,9. I.e 7/10 first picks.

Is there not a factor of diminishing returns at play here. Even if this is a ripper draft, there's really no precedent to say 2 or three of these picks won't be duds, and even more unlikely that they get more than 2 excellent players.

I don't understand why, given the opportunity, they didn't bank on some under 22 yr olds from other clubs, or the more logical play, try and trade for 2013 picks (I believe this was possible, please correct me if I'm wrong) from teams that are likely to be bad next year. IMO They should have hedged their bets. No problem running out young kids, but it's just not that likely that there are many kids of exactly the same age that are that good.

They have made some appalling decisions so far and have populated their list with overpaid kids who are not necessarily going to be A grade players. This is a big ego trip by Sheedy and the AFL have made a big mistake letting this clown control the show.

When some of the kids start to outperform "you know who" they will be starting to question why he's getting what he's getting and why they aren't on the same.

Correct me if I am wrong but GWS appear to have ended up with picks 4 and 10 this year and a compo next year for both players after giving GC pick 14 to Crows. This years draft being a heavily compromised one with many of the best players already taken is poor compared to what is being touted as a super draft next year. Wouldn't GWS have been better off with say 10 and 12 this year and 2 compo picks next year which they would have got from Crows and us or even 4 , 12 and 14 this year and 1 compo next year and giving back say pick 25 to us this year as the deals from GC and us. Am I missing something here?

GWS's obsession with youth is beyond extreme. It makes the Demon's radicaly rebuild look like a half-measure.

They will get routinely pounded and I'm not sure there really is an upside, given the salary expectations as kids come out of their initial contracts will be all over the shop because of the huge deals offered to other players only marginally older and no more talented.

Plus, players are gonna expect a premium salary if they will be getting belted week in week out, year in year out.

The way things are going, GWS won't even be competitive by 2015, never mind premiers. Not a lot of players are actual (as opposed to poential) champions by 22/23 years old.

Any that are... well, the mean part of me hopes we've quietly set aside the 'Scully-Munny' as a war chest to cut into the Gold Coast and GWS kids as they start coming out of contract.

GWS's obsession with youth is beyond extreme. It makes the Demon's radicaly rebuild look like a half-measure.

They will get routinely pounded and I'm not sure there really is an upside, given the salary expectations as kids come out of their initial contracts will be all over the shop because of the huge deals offered to other players only marginally older and no more talented.

Plus, players are gonna expect a premium salary if they will be getting belted week in week out, year in year out.

The way things are going, GWS won't even be competitive by 2015, never mind premiers. Not a lot of players are actual (as opposed to poential) champions by 22/23 years old.

Any that are... well, the mean part of me hopes we've quietly set aside the 'Scully-Munny' as a war chest to cut into the Gold Coast and GWS kids as they start coming out of contract.

It could be brutal if GWS comes up against the Cats or Pies late in season 2012!

It could be brutal if GWS comes up against the Cats or Pies late in season 2012!

Brutally hilarious, maybe.

It could be brutal if GWS comes up against the Cats or Pies late in season 2012!

Like 186 brutal.

Like 186 brutal.

Hopefully more like 286 brutal.

I hate this mob nearly as much as Carlton and hope they're a bigger failure than University.

Sorry to get off topic a bit (not new post worthy), I noticed GWS has already 11188 members, about 1000 more than GC Suns had at the start of the season. Is that figure for GWS a true representation or are they handing out free/cheap memberships to get the ball rolling. Well done to thier sales team if it's a true representation.

Hopefully more like 286 brutal.

I hate this mob nearly as much as Carlton and hope they're a bigger failure than University.

Go easy on University.

They weren't much chop but they got seriously sorted by World War One.

Sorry to get off topic a bit (not new post worthy), I noticed GWS has already 11188 members, about 1000 more than GC Suns had at the start of the season. Is that figure for GWS a true representation or are they handing out free/cheap memberships to get the ball rolling. Well done to thier sales team if it's a true representation.

Got more than 5k of that in Canberra, I believe.

Make of that what you will.

Hey, don't forget they have listed players from season 2011. There are about 6 or so that are aged between 22-25, plus the couple of 30+ blokes they have picked up.

I'm not saying that they will win games in 2012, I sincerely hope they lose every game, but they haven't put all their eggs in the one basket with this years draft. In 3-4 years, they will have a very balanced list (age-wise).

SOS on trade week radio said they will not be trading any of their first round picks, that being the case I am wondering what strategy they will take in the national draft.

Having 11 picks in the first 15, I hope their first 4-5 picks will be best available then will move towards needs. As they already have Scully, Ward and Palmer in the midfield what are the chances a highly rated midfielder slipping to Melbourne at pick 12.

Need to also considerer who Brisbane and Port will be targeting with picks 6 & 8. Phantom Drafts have Port snatching Hoskin-Elliot and Brisdane Kavanagh. This leaves 7 highly rated midfielders available, assuming that GWS snatch up Coniglio, Wingard and Tyson. I am hoping that one of Adams, Kavanagh, Sumner or Greene slip to us.

Below are the predicted top 15 by position

Forward - Patton, Paine

Midfield - Coniglio, Tyson, Wingard, Hoskin-Elliot, Adams, Kavanagh, Sumner, Sumner, Greene

Ruck - Longer, Bolger

Defence - Buntine, Ellis

Edited October 13, 201114 yr by mattDEEmon

I don't agree with the argument that GWS will have problems with the way that they've recruited.

As much as I hate them, I think they've gone about it quite well. They've got lots of draft picks and the players who they have recruited are all young.

They'll be crap for the first couple of years but then will become a good side. It's just a pity that there won't be anyone attending any of their games to see it.

As for the idea of diminishing returns, that concept isn't that relevant. Each additional kid will add to their future success if the kids are reasonable quality but there is always a chance that one or two of the draft picks will be duds. However, that's the case regardless of the number of picks that you have. In fact, the more picks you have, the better because you can diversify and reduce the risk of your major draft picks being duds.

Whilst I agree that it'd be better to have picks over a number of years, that wasn't an option. I think the two things that GWS could have done better is recruit a couple of average players but good leaders and recruit more from out of contract players, as they effectively cost nothing as the AFL awards ADDITIONAL compensation. That's the worst thing about the way GWS and GCS have come in and taken some quality players whilst the AFL gives up the compensation and all clubs suffer.

It'd be better to give GWS more draft picks and make them trade them for Scully etc.

I don't agree with the argument that GWS will have problems with the way that they've recruited.

As much as I hate them, I think they've gone about it quite well. They've got lots of draft picks and the players who they have recruited are all young.

They'll be crap for the first couple of years but then will become a good side. It's just a pity that there won't be anyone attending any of their games to see it.

As for the idea of diminishing returns, that concept isn't that relevant. Each additional kid will add to their future success if the kids are reasonable quality but there is always a chance that one or two of the draft picks will be duds. However, that's the case regardless of the number of picks that you have. In fact, the more picks you have, the better because you can diversify and reduce the risk of your major draft picks being duds.

Whilst I agree that it'd be better to have picks over a number of years, that wasn't an option. I think the two things that GWS could have done better is recruit a couple of average players but good leaders and recruit more from out of contract players, as they effectively cost nothing as the AFL awards ADDITIONAL compensation. That's the worst thing about the way GWS and GCS have come in and taken some quality players whilst the AFL gives up the compensation and all clubs suffer.

It'd be better to give GWS more draft picks and make them trade them for Scully etc.

If the quality of the draft this year is poor and GW$ are building their list around it then they will indeed have problems. In each year there are only so many players that turn out to be good and they aren't always in the top ten drafted so they would need to be very fortunate to pick all the the good ones.

They have drafted a couple of kids and they may or may not turn out to be A graders; with the length of their copntracts and the amount they are paying them, they would want to be. There will also be the go home factor, unlike the Gold Coast GW$ is not a fun place to be.

Is there not a factor of diminishing returns at play here. Even if this is a ripper draft, there's really no precedent to say 2 or three of these picks won't be duds, and even more unlikely that they get more than 2 excellent players.

[...]

No problem running out young kids, but it's just not that likely that there are many kids of exactly the same age that are that good.

The more picks you have the more chance you actually pick up the couple of excellent players...

Sorry to get off topic a bit (not new post worthy), I noticed GWS has already 11188 members, about 1000 more than GC Suns had at the start of the season. Is that figure for GWS a true representation or are they handing out free/cheap memberships to get the ball rolling. Well done to thier sales team if it's a true representation.

They offered foundation memberships for I think $20, as my mate bought one for his son as a bit of a joke. So yeah they aren't real memberships as such.

The more picks you have the more chance you actually pick up the couple of excellent players...

Yes, but they had the opportunity to spread their bounty over two years. 11 of the top 15 in one draft rarely if ever pan out to be decent footballers. I don't really think the "throw it all up against the wall and see what sticks" strategy is logical.

J selwood went 7th in 2006. This is a comprimised draft and so is next years. There simply cannot be enough quality taken in simply one year

If the quality of the draft this year is poor and GW$ are building their list around it then they will indeed have problems. In each year there are only so many players that turn out to be good and they aren't always in the top ten drafted so they would need to be very fortunate to pick all the the good ones.

They have drafted a couple of kids and they may or may not turn out to be A graders; with the length of their copntracts and the amount they are paying them, they would want to be. There will also be the go home factor, unlike the Gold Coast GW$ is not a fun place to be.

Let' hope the 2011 draft rivals 2003 in quality.

Just looking at the picks GWS have in the draft, it would seem they have more picks than they can use. They already have 36 players listed on their site. How many are they allowed to have on their list, and is their a minimum number they have to take in the draft?

Just looking at the picks GWS have in the draft, it would seem they have more picks than they can use. They already have 36 players listed on their site. How many are they allowed to have on their list, and is their a minimum number they have to take in the draft?

I thought they were allowed 50-55 and then start delisting from next year so that same as rest in about 5 years. Anyway, I've found the rule:-

Expanded list and increased salary cap:

GWS Giants will also have an expanded list size and TPP allowance in the club’s initial time in the competition, through to 2019, as follows:

2012 - 44-50 senior list, nine rookies with $640,000 - $1m TPP extra allowance;

2013 - 44-50 senior list, nine rookies with $640,000 - $1m TPP extra allowance;

2014 - 44-50 senior list, nine rookies with $640,000 - $1m TPP extra allowance;

2015 - 44-48 senior list, nine rookies with $640k - $880k TPP extra allowance;

2016 - 42-46 senior list, nine rookies with $520k - $760k TPP extra allowance;

2017 - 40-44 senior list, nine rookies with $400k - $640k TPP extra allowance;

2018 - 38-42 senior list, nine rookies with $200k - $520k TPP extra allowance;

2019 - 38 senior list, nine rookies in line with other AFL clubs.