Second oldest list in the AFL

[Harry]

yep 6 30+ yr olds all gone in the next couple of yrs. the 25 26 and 27 yr olds we have on the list who will move into the 28 29 30+ bracket are mcmahon, pettifer, king, coughlan, newman, tuck and moore. the first three are duds cogs well who knows and the last three are solid citizens.it doesnt make for pretty reading.

another concern is the succession i can see holes happening down the track with so few in our 18 19 and 21 age group. an example is our 21 yr olds.
they are jon and nahas. in plain speak they are likely to be gone in the short term.
the 19 yr olds look sound cotchin post and rance. but theres just 3 god forbid one of them doesnt make it or gets crippled thru injury it would not take much to wipe out this age group. the 18 yr olds well 2 are rookies browne and gilligan the other is vickery.sheesh.
its likely we will have just 4 players coming thru from 3 age groups.imo we are light on in the top end 30+ yr olds aside and we are light on in the bottom end.
if we have got our rebuild right we should have a decent succession plan in place i dont believe we have. we still make it up as we go. hopefully cc will fix this.

Correct.

This is what happens when you look to trade for the now. Wallace and co have stated on numerous occassions that the reason we went for guys like Bowden, Polak, McMahon, Morton, Thompson, Hislop etc is becasue we had holes in the list in terms of age. Well we are gonna have similar issues in years to come as we have neglected in bringing in quality teenages during the past few years.

As Claw states we have very few 18 and 19 year olds on our list. When these guys turn 22/23 we will be full circle again with a lack of players in this age group.

We do not understand the basics of recruiting, that is to maximise the number of quality kids you bring into the club every year covering all positions. You stick to this basic principle, then assuming you have decent recruiters and scouts on the ground, you will avoid having an unbalanced list.

You never let the coach influence recruiting as recruiting should always look to the long term. The coaches goals are always as long term as his current coaching contract.

 

[the claw]

Correct.

This is what happens when you look to trade for the now. Wallace and co have stated on numerous occassions that the reason we went for guys like Bowden, Polak, McMahon, Morton, Thompson, Hislop etc is becasue we had holes in the list in terms of age. Well we are gonna have similar issues in years to come as we have neglected in bringing in quality teenages during the past few years.

As Claw states we have very few 18 and 19 year olds on our list. When these guys turn 22/23 we will be full circle again with a lack of players in this age group.

We do not understand the basics of recruiting, that is to maximise the number of quality kids you bring into the club every year covering all positions. You stick to this basic principle, then assuming you have decent recruiters and scouts on the ground, you will avoid having an unbalanced list.

You never let the coach influence recruiting as recruiting should always look to the long term. The coaches goals are always as long term as his current coaching contract.

ah harold a voice of common sense as usual.

 

[josey]

If our list development continues as it has for the last few years this problem will be rectified within the next 12 months.

Johnson, Bowden, Pettifer, King and Oakley Nichols will all be gone, maybe even Coughlan. If we are able to trade a couple to the Gold Coast in an influx of up to 8, 18 year olds is possible.

In two years Brown, Simmonds and Rich may be gone as well. This would only leave Cousins. Only the elite play beyond 32.

In this scenario we are still giving ourselves the opportunity to continue with this rebuild. Something that is only half finished.

 

[Lidsand]

7 players between the age of 25 and 29

that is *smile* poor management anyway you look at it

 

[wayne]

The sad thing is our 30 year olds are still amongst our match winners or more important players - Richo, Bowden, Brown, Simmonds and now Cuz.

They wouldn't be on the list if they weren't though.

 

[GoodOne]

thats just a bit of an exaggeration 23 players including rookies are 22 or under.a player turning 22 is usually in his 5th yr hardly inexperienced and should be out of development.we hardly have heaps in the 18, 19, and 21 age bracket.

with an april birth date basically players turning 22 at the start of the season we have.
3 18 yr olds.
3 19 yr olds.
7 20 yr olds
2 21yr olds.
9 22 yr olds
5 23 yr olds
3 24 yr olds
2 25 yr olds
2 26 yr olds
3 27 yr olds
0 28 yr olds
0 29 yr olds
3 30 yr olds
2 31 yr olds
1 34 yr old.

Geez you're pedantic. Ok 2/3rds of our team are 23 or younger. The point was we have many 30yo+ players who lift up the average whereas the reality is in terms of numbers we have many more youngsters than mght appear (23 is much younger than 30+). 29 players 23 yo or under. Is that not enough?

 

[Tiger74]

Geez you're pedantic. Ok 2/3rds of our team are 23 or younger. The point was we have many 30yo+ players who lift up the average whereas the reality is in terms of numbers we have many more youngsters than mght appear (23 is much younger than 30+). 29 players 23 yo or under. Is that not enough?

Actually you are slightly wrong here. If you look at the numbers Claw gave, you get the following averages:

mean average - 23.27 years
median average - 22 years
mode average - 22 years

Even with the outliers of Richo and co, the drop off in numbers from 25+ does distort it too much. In fact, if next year Richo and the two 31 y/o are our only departures, and they are replaced with 3 18 year olds, our mean average age would be unchanged.

Also you delete all players 30+ this year, the mean average only falls to the mid 21's.

This is because we have so many players around 20-23, keeping or killing the older guys doesn't skew the numbers too greatly.

 

[YinnarTiger]

Here's my two bob's wort of pedantry:

If you're going to round off the median and mode to whole numbers they should be 23 as is the mean. Mode=22.7, median =22.9.

 

[Djevv]

Here's my two bob's wort of pedantry:

If you're going to round off the median and mode to whole numbers they should be 23 as is the mean. Mode=22.7, median =22.9.

???

T74's calculations are correct.

 

[YinnarTiger]

???

T74's calculations are correct.

Only if you treat the ages as discrete values. They should be treated as continuous. Here is an example of how to calculate the median for continuous data.

For claw's figures, median = 22 + 8/9=22.9

mode = 22+5/(5+2) =22+5/7=22.7

 

[Djevv]

Only if you treat the ages as discrete values. They should be treated as continuous. Here is an example of how to calculate the median for continuous data.

For claw's figures, median = 22 + 8/9=22.9

mode = 22+5/(5+2) =22+5/7=22.7

OK but the ages used for the mean in T74'scalculation are discrete. So if you are going to do this method with the mode and mean you would have to calculate players ages to 1dp to get a comparative mean.

 

[YinnarTiger]

All the formulas are approximate because we do not use the exact ages but whole numbers. The results should be rounded to whole numbers as well giving 23 for all 3 measures. These measures don't mean much, the skewness comes from the "empty hole" in 28 and 29 year olds.

 

[ILuvLids]

I agree - Simmonds & Richo fully fit are the 2 most critical players this year - the rest we can replace

In a few years we will be able to replace simmo but right now he is very important.
We have won games without Richo last year. But they were against lowly teams. He is important but I want him to get through the season.

I wouldn't have thought our list was that old. I know we have top end players but we also now have a group of players in the 21-24 age bracket.
When the older boys finally hang up the boots our average age will go down and we will be one of the younger lists.

 

[JohnnyLawrence]

Yeah those stat's (being second oldest) really don't reflect the list.

Must be a lot of players under 22 at RFC, would like to see stats on that for each team.

 

[Lonthalion]

the age of a list is always used by spin doctors (ala Wallace) to try show that they have a young team will improvement left. I think the stat without context is over rated

 

[Tygrys]

the age of a list is always used by spin doctors (ala Wallace) to try show that they have a young team will improvement left. I think the stat without context is over rated

True...how many coaches or directors of football go on about their club having one of the oldest lists in the competition...?

 

[the claw]

If our list development continues as it has for the last few years this problem will be rectified within the next 12 months.

Johnson, Bowden, Pettifer, King and Oakley Nichols will all be gone, maybe even Coughlan. If we are able to trade a couple to the Gold Coast in an influx of up to 8, 18 year olds is possible.

In two years Brown, Simmonds and Rich may be gone as well. This would only leave Cousins. Only the elite play beyond 32.

In this scenario we are still giving ourselves the opportunity to continue with this rebuild. Something that is only half finished.

if we continue the way we have the lower age brackets will continue to be poor citizens. to fix a problem higher in the age bracket usually means the lower age brackets suffer. why because the clubs practice has been to trade into the bracket it is deficient in.
how the hell we can fix anything at all regularly useing just 3 nd picks most yrs is beyond me. how having 8 18 yr olds fixes not having anyone in the 21 22 bracket is also beyond me. im assuming if we take 8 in one draft we can expect 3 knowing us probably more being failures. this sort of strategy is one you adopt at the start of a rebuild and use it for 2 or 3 or 4 drafts. list structure and strategy should ultimately become nothing more than list maintenance. after 5 drafts of wallace we are still only half way thru rebuild.

 

[tigertim]

Somewhat off the topic but as an under 23 team we have:

White Thursfield Rance
Tambling McGuane Raines
Hislop Cotchin Edwards
Connors Riewoldt Jackson
Pattison Hughes Morton
Vickery
Deledio
Foley

Inter: Graham, Oakley Nicholls, Gourdis, Thompson, Browne, Nahas, Post.

Handy but the I guess 15 other clubs would claim their under 23 as being "handy" too.

 

[GoodOne]

So Richmond have the second oldest list and Hawthorn have the youngest list yet when we played them at the end of 2008, on average every Hawthorn player was 10 months older per player. Go figure.

 

[Lonthalion]

So Richmond have the second oldest list and Hawthorn have the youngest list yet when we played them at the end of 2008, on average every Hawthorn player was 10 months older per player. Go figure.

if you asked Wallace he would say yes that is because Richmond give the most games to under 21s and thus we really have the youngest team or something along those lines. Hawthron's team is just young because Clarkson culled the older brigade around 2003 or 2004