Jump to content

AFL Age Ladder

Demonland
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

 
1 minute ago, daisycutter said:

i gather that is the whole list and not best 22

Must be or Geelong's average would be over 30

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1
     

    Surprised that we are the 4th eldest @ 25.08.

    Geelong not that far ahead @ 25.48 courtesy of all those 1st round local lads that returned home.  Even so it is misleading as they have a lot of players over 30 mostly in their best 22.  Game day age profiles will be quite different.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1

    4 hours ago, Demonland said:

    Time to make Gosch’s walker friendly. 

    image.png

    I'll get some handrails put in.

  • Quote

    That ladder goes to show: there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. We all know that Geelong has numerous players who are right at the end of their careers, and a whole pile of young players who may not turn out to be any good. On the other hand, we have many players in the 23 to 27 bracket. The average is arrived at completely differently.  

  • Quote
    • Like 2
     

    Conversely, look at Hawthorn, Adelaide, Essendon, North (and North's ave has probably been inflated by the Ex Hawthorn players that would otherwise be retired).

    Was a time I remember Melbourne stiiting where those teams are now in terms of both average age and ladder position.  Thought at the time how all those early draft picks would translate into excellence one day - alot of them didn't and it was a long, long climb back to where we are now.  I only hope that it's the same story for those four teams.

  • Quote

    This stat shows that all clubs have a similar average age, 23-25. Average age of top 10 in B&F would be more relevant and I think would show where Father Time might be watching on closely….

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    Fitting graphic: Zach Tuohy, 4 days short of his 33rd birthday 👨🏾‍🦯

  • Quote

    Averages are meaningless in his context.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    19 hours ago, Sydee said:

    Must be or Geelong's average would be over 30

    I just did a quick calculation on a Geelong best 22 named at some point earlier this year:  Average age 28.72 

    FB: Jack Henry(24), Mark Blicavs (31), Jed Bews (28)
    HB: Zach Tuohy (33), Tom Stewart (29), Mark O'Connor (25)
    C: Sam Menegola (30), Cameron Guthrie (30), Isaac Smith (33)
    HF: Mitch Duncan (31), Jeremy Cameron (29), Gary Rohan (31)
    FF: Bradley Close (24), Tom Hawkins (34), Gryan Miers (23)
    FO: Rhys Stanley (32), Joel Selwood (34), Patrick Dangerfield (32)
    I/C: Tyson Stengle (24), Esava Ratugolea (24), Tom Atkins (27), Brandan Parfitt (24)
  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Thanks 2

    Our Semi Final team average age 26.09 yrs

    [27] Jayden Hunt,[30] Steven May,[23] Harrison Petty
    [32] Michael Hibberd,[26] Jake Lever,[27] Christian Salem
    [27] James Harmes,[25] Clayton Oliver,[26] Ed Langdon
    [21] Kysaiah Pickett,[26] Christian Petracca,[26] Alex Neal-Bullen
    [26] Bayley Fritsch,[30] Ben Brown,[21] Luke Jackson
    [30] Max Gawn,[28] Jack Viney,[26] Angus Brayshaw
    [23] Charlie Spargo,[31] Jake Melksham,[21] Trent Rivers,[22] Tom Sparrow
     

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

    I agree with other posters. Average age is very limited metric, especially as it covers the whole list, rather than best 22. Including average games played improves things because it's a better indication of quality of the list, assuming similar average games. Having said that it's easier to get a game at a poorer club which inflates the average games for players at those poorer clubs.

  • Quote
    10 minutes ago, Sydney_Demon said:

    I agree with other posters. Average age is very limited metric, especially as it covers the whole list, rather than best 22. Including average games played improves things because it's a better indication of quality of the list, assuming similar average games. Having said that it's easier to get a game at a poorer club which inflates the average games for players at those poorer clubs.

    In 2021 and 2022 the number of players was increased to 23 and even if the 23rd player did not play he was rewarded with a game played in the AFL which can skew the games played statistic.

    The age/games statistic should be applied to the team on the day not the whole list since recruites picked in the draft are usually 18 and have played zero games.

    As a team ages like Geelong's best 22 in 2022 with 11 players over 30 and several who did not play over 30 the age demographics is meaningless.

    Retirements have brought the age demographics of the list down but still the core are very old.

  • Quote

    The cats average age dropped three years with selwood's retirement given he is 47.

  • Quote
    • Like 1
    • Haha 1

    It shows that you go very quickly from having the core of your side "in the window" to being in a Hawthorn situation where you are dumping players to find draft picks.

    We're not there yet, but couple recruiting 28 year olds with taking only 2-3 national draft picks each year, and we look pretty old very quickly. 

    We'll start next year with 19 players aged 27 and above, 15 of whom are arguably in our best side. That is more than Geelong have on their list. It's a big effort to find that number of best 22 players over the next five years or so, even if Petracca and Oliver can play on to age 40.

  • Quote

    People forget that we have removed 2 players over 30 in Daw and Brown and brought in 10 players who are 18 or 19 in the last 2 years admittedly we recruited 2 players in the late 20's and a 25 year old.

    Retention of Hibberd and Melksham was basically to allow our younger players time to grow into the players we hope they will become.

    The fact we have 19 players 27 and above means we have 14 players in the range 20-26 and we have won the 2021 premiership where the average age was between 24-25.

    We have lost only 1 player from that premiership side.

    Edited by durango

  • Quote

    I'm comfortable with our age mix. A number of the older players have successors and even credible improvements coming through already, and the 2xfirst and 2xsecond round picks in next year's allegedly strong draft will allow for some targeted decisions.

    Clearly our age pothole is at the very tall end of our team. Except for untested young guys, our rucks and key forwards are all past or near 30. 

    That's my only real concern and why I was keen on a Barnett/Keeler collection this draft. But I'm not at panic stations.

     

  • Quote

    The age demographic is skewed when ruckmen/tall fowards reach their prime later and usually play well beyond 30, Martin, Salmon and Sandilands retired at 36 actually Gawn missed 3 years at the start of his career most ruckmen go to about 34 usually the taller ones last longer due to the fact they don't have to jump as high as the shorter ones.

  • Quote
    4 hours ago, poita said:

    It shows that you go very quickly from having the core of your side "in the window" to being in a Hawthorn situation where you are dumping players to find draft picks.

    We're not there yet, but couple recruiting 28 year olds with taking only 2-3 national draft picks each year, and we look pretty old very quickly. 

    We'll start next year with 19 players aged 27 and above, 15 of whom are arguably in our best side. That is more than Geelong have on their list. It's a big effort to find that number of best 22 players over the next five years or so, even if Petracca and Oliver can play on to age 40.

    We'll have 5 30+yo best 22 players at the start of the the 2023 season plus 3 who are 28yo and 7 who are 27yo.

    Geelong will have 12 30+yo best 22 players at the start of the 2023 season, plus 1 who is 29yo and 2 who are 27yo.

    Both teams have 15 best 22 who are  27+yo but there's a big difference in the detail with 10 of ours under 30 compared with only 3 of theirs.

  • Quote
    •  

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • NON-MFC: Round 13

      Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

        • Thanks
      • 122 replies
      Demonland

    • PREVIEW: Collingwood

      Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

        • Thanks
      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Sydney

      The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

        • Thanks
        • Like
      • 1 reply
      Demonland

    • REPORT: St. Kilda

      Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
      This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

        • Thanks
      • 4 replies
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Collingwood

      After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

        • Thanks
      • 380 replies
      Demonland

    • PODCAST: St. Kilda

      The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
      Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
      Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

        • Thanks
      • 47 replies
      Demonland
    View All