Shaun Hampson / Hammertime [merged]

[the claw]

why do you think the pick we gave up is so valuable, claw?

do you really have to ask after all the posts ive done.
we just had a run in about 3rd rounders yet 3 rd round sucess rates goes at more than 50 %.
you build with your early picks 1st 2nd and 3rd rounders. you look after now with later nd picks rookie picks f/a and the psd.
if we cant grow our list with 2nd rounders we are surely doomed to forever fail.

you know what carlton traded a contracted player to us for pick 28. i wonder if they think its a valuable commodity.

its our processes that i want us to go thru.they have worked so why change now.

we have pick 28 even in the yr of poor drafts this has proved to be a valuable pick range.
pick 28, 29 30 31 32  a 5 pick range.
2012 - obrien, cluery, shaw mcintosh, close
2011- mciness, forster, yeo, merrett, hamling.
clearly to early to call these drafts . but already there have been good signs from most.
2010 - lester, lycett, batchelor, steinberg,green
2009 - duncan, gunstan,ball, tutt,winmar.
2008 - mckernan ,beams hanneberry, j roughhead , jones.

thats the last 5 drafts not the lottery people make it out to be.

even i have applauded the club for the processes its gone thru but and how to put it correctly. no i cant be bothered.

all i can finish with is im not against getting hampson ive advocated we take mature players but always at the right cost and we look after the long term while we are at it.
i actually think top 30 picks are more valuable in yrs of poor drafts than yrs of strong drafts.
why. well its pretty clear to me most drafts there are good players to be had top 50. but in the yr of a poor draft after pick 30 35 it  becomes very tough to get it right. where as in a good yr you are likely to get a similar player at pick 50. not sure if i made that clear or wrote it right.

i am sincere in wishing hampson all the best lets hpe hes ready to click and take a big step up.

[Penelope]

where do you get the success rate of 3rd rounders runs at 50%

I have picks over 20 running at approx 30%, based on the player playing 100 games. if you take out the players that did not play the 100 games at their original club, it would be less.

If you added your own subjectiveness and removed players like rains, mcguane and white it would be even less again.

(picks over 60 run at 9% BTW)

[the claw]

where do you get the success rate of 3rd rounders runs at 50%

I have picks over 20 running at approx 30%, based on the player playing 100 games. if you take out the players that did not play the 100 games at their original club, it would be less.

If you added your own subjectiveness and removed players like rains, mcguane and white it would be even less again.

(picks over 60 run at 9% BTW)

read it somewhere by pelchen i think  a few yrs back. also read  the success rate of all picks  in the nd goes at something like 60%. memory???
one im sure about is 18yo rookie picks go at one in 6, and thats to play a game. this one is why i advocate taking a percentage of state leaguers here or late in the nd. let the 18 yr old rookies go to the state leagues and improve there.its funny every state league ive looked at its the same  mature 22 - 24 yo players carving up afl listed players and we choose to ignore them constantly.

anyway you got an answer.sorry i cant be more precise.

[Penelope]

i remember reading an article a while back that listed the success rates, but i couldn't remember the figures, or find the article, which i why i worked out my own.
based on players playing 100 games or more, which is how the original article did it, and what paul roos worked off when he made the decision that draft picks were over rated, from 2000=2005.

anything later is too early to include as there are players that will most probably get to 100 games but are not there yet, so would give a falsely lower figure.



I suspect your memory has inflated the success rates

[Francois Jackson]

Let's all look at figures pre 2005 when recruiters were part time. Not comparing apples with apples

Sorry but that example is for the tip and so what if Roos said it doesn't mean it's gospel

If second round ain't worth much to you why weren't you keen on using it on Luke ball?

I'm sure I can find other examples where a second rounder was valued but hey just not in this example. Am I right?

[Judge Roughneck]

Ridiculous notion, a 2nd round pick is not valuable.

Hampsin drafted three picks. Behind jack reiwokdt 

[Andyy]

For me any pick on the wrong side of #25 isn't valuable. Hit and miss.

And al I can't take your table of figures seriously because it clearly indicates that picks 21-30 generally perform worse than the picks in the 31-40, 41-50 and 51-60 brackets. You would think that it would be a linear equation with the talent drying up and success going with it as the picks go lower and lower.

IMO probably just not an accurate enough test.

[Mimafied]

Article in the sun saying contract is 3 years at $250k a year with potential incentives, can anyone confirm this?

[Andyy]

Thank god he's cheapish

[Yeahright]

we have pick 28 even in the yr of poor drafts this has proved to be a valuable pick range.
pick 28, 29 30 31 32  a 5 pick range.
2012 - obrien, cluery, shaw mcintosh, close
2011- mciness, forster, yeo, merrett, hamling.
clearly to early to call these drafts . but already there have been good signs from most.
2010 - lester, lycett, batchelor, steinberg,green
2009 - duncan, gunstan,ball, tutt,winmar.
2008 - mckernan ,beams hanneberry, j roughhead , jones.

Who from any of them have shown anything? 2008 was good, 2009 2 are good, one was already an AFL player (basically the same as us trading pick 28 for Hampson) rest are duds

[one-eyed]

Richmond recruit Shaun Hampson lucky to be given second chance at high draft price

    Mark Robinson
    From: Herald Sun
    October 08, 2013

SHAUN Hampson is a lucky bloke — and not for the reason you might be thinking. You know, often having brekky with Megan Gale.

At 25, he's played 63 games in seven years for Carlton. At different times, he’s had a failing body, a bad knee, iron hands and a dodgy right foot.

And yesterday he was traded to Richmond for pick No. 28, which might end up being pick No. 32 with free agency compo picks incorporated.

On the surface, it is a staggering decision by the Tigers.

You’d agree to a third-rounder, but a second-rounder is a little too high for a lucky dip.

Try some of these players between drafted between picks 22 and pick 30 in recent years: Jack Darling, Cameron Guthrie, Jack Gunston, Mitch Duncan, Jake Carlisle, Dayne Beam, Jack Redden.

The Tigers are taking punt.

Richmond secured Shaun Hampson by trading pick 28 to Carlton. Picture: Wayne Ludbey

Of course, it helps if you are 201cm and the second ruck at your new club is a 31-year-old journeyman named Orren Stephenson.

Still, Hampson is lucky to have 1) a club prepared to invest so heavily in him and b) the opportunity to make a statement as to what sort of footballer he wants to be remembered as being.

Hampson is good-looking footballer.

He’s tall, he can mark, he can ruck and he can run. The problem is we haven’t seen him doing all of that on a consistent basis.

His past four seasons have returned games tallies of six, 13, nine and eight.

They are not the numbers of a pick No. 28.

Maybe the Tigers, under the astute eye of list manager Blair Hartley, sees something special when other see pedestrian.

In recent years, Hartley identified and landed Bachar Houli, Shaun Grigg, Ivan Maric, Troy Chaplin and Steve Morris.

Hartley went after Hampson soon after Carlton’s season had ended.

He was aware Hampson a problematic posterior cruciate ligament which kept him on the sidelines for most of the year, but the interest was strong.

Talks, a medical, a contract believed to be three years at about $250,000 with added incentives, was all completed, leaving the delicate issue of satisfying Carlton in a trade deal.

So, the Tigers offered No. 28, and the Blues said you had us at hello.

The Blues would never disrespect one of it’s own, but it’s safe to say they wanted the deal as much as the Tigers.

Maybe the Tigers fell in love with Hampson after Round 1 this year.

In that match, Hampson took eight marks, the second highest return in his career, and hounded the Tigers defence.

Clearly, the Tigers have invested in Hamspon and Hampson has to reward that investment.

Promising is Richmond’s ability to improve its players.

When Maric arrived from Adelaide, he had similar poor averages as Hampson. Then Maric blossomed, although this year he battled away with suspect groins, which makes the Hampson deal a little more understanding.

Hamspon will ruck, allowing Ty Vickery to play as a permanent forward, and will play forward which will free up Jack Riewoldt who does get the double-team.

The question is: Can he hold up his end of the bargain?

As for bargains, the Blues think they found one, and will try to use No. 28 to entice Shane Savage from Hawthorn.

http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/richmond-recruit-shaun-hampson-lucky-to-be-given-second-chance-at-high-draft-price/story-fndv8t7m-1226734333807

[tigs2011]

Last 5 pick 31's (which our pick will be after Buddy, Daisy, Sylvia get compo): Jordan Roughead, Jason Tutt, Ariel Steinberg, Jackson Merrett, Kamdyn McIntosh.

None have done anything. Roughead the best of them and he was in the 2008 superdraft. We're talking pick 31 in the 2013 Crapola draft.

[(•))(©™]

It evens up the Andy Collins deal

[yellowandback]

Let's all look at figures pre 2005 when recruiters were part time. Not comparing apples with apples

Sorry but that example is for the tip and so what if Roos said it doesn't mean it's gospel

If second round ain't worth much to you why weren't you keen on using it on Luke ball?

I'm sure I can find other examples where a second rounder was valued but hey just not in this example. Am I right?

That ID name of yours is hilarious 

[Penelope]

For me any pick on the wrong side of #25 isn't valuable. Hit and miss.

And al I can't take your table of figures seriously because it clearly indicates that picks 21-30 generally perform worse than the picks in the 31-40, 41-50 and 51-60 brackets. You would think that it would be a linear equation with the talent drying up and success going with it as the picks go lower and lower.

IMO probably just not an accurate enough test.

If you look at the table you will see in 2005 that no picks between 21-30 went on to play 100 games, while 7 in the 41-50 did. This is a statistical anomaly and why i use the figure of approximately 30 % as that is what it averages out to.

It is not as big a data set as would like, but if you start going further back you will get the criticism that  recruiting has changed and become more professional. In saying that, it would not change the overall numbers, but more the individual brackets. the later picks would probably be a higher rate, while the earlier pick would be lower. I do remeber reading an article saying how the strike rate for early picks is better now than the early days, but this does not affect the overall quality of players in the pool, just the order in which they are taken.

To include later years you would need to change the criteria, as i explained there are a number of players who do not yet each the 100 game mark, but probably will, so we would get lower numbers, but that too would be misleading.

It is hard to quantify what is a success and what is isn't, but using a set mark of games indicates a reasonable career and is much better than using simply a subjective rating of players, which could vary so much from individual to individual