Gun KPP vs Gun midfielder

[mightytiges]

Which is more important in footy right now - a gun key position player or a gun midfielder?

And which is/will be more important for us in the next few years?

Your guys thoughts ....

[letsgetiton!]

Which is more important in footy right now - a gun key position player or a gun midfielder?

And which is/will be more important for us in the next few years?

Your guys thoughts ....

both, they are both as equally imp imo

[letsgetiton!]

but with the way the rules are heading, 6'3 midfielders are the way to go, cos they can play midfield and hold kp posts also

[Gracie]

It is a good question MT. Both would seem to be the answer but on giving it more thought you can look to the make up of the current teams and how successfull they are. West Coast is full of gun midfielders but no gun KPP and is obviously the bench mark team notwithstanding they lost the GF. Carlton on the other hand have two very good KPP in Fevola and Whitnall but have no midfielders you could class as guns and they finished with the wooden spoon. So I would say get the midfield right first.

[F0551L]

 need both  all part of the team  west coast is not a good example  they are screaming out for a goal kicking mark taking forward  we would  have an advantage over them in that aspect

[H Tiger]

Gun Mid fielders make teams competitive.

Gun KKPs make teams dominant.

Guns ie J. Brown, M. Voss, J. Akermanis, N. Brown, B. Johnson, A. Koutafiedies (spelling?) can almost do both jobs.

[PuntRdRoar]

6'2- 6'3s who can run are what everyone is looking for

[Captain__Blood]

KPP > Midfielder

[bluey_21]

but with the way the rules are heading, 6'3 midfielders are the way to go, cos they can play midfield and hold kp posts also

guys like Lids and Judd are prime examples

[bluey_21]

Although both a gun KPP and midfielder would be good, I personally am leaning more towards a gun midfielder because a gun midfielder can control his destiny and his performances, whereas KPP regardless of how good they are, still need quality deliverance from the midfield

[one-eyed]

Saw this post by Wisbey on his Pies forum and it reminded me of this Gun KPP vs Gun midfielder thread.

Food for thought?

If you go through every club and look at their top 2 players over recent years, how many genuine KPPs would be in their top 2? Just top of my head, IMHO,:-

Adelaide: 0
Brisbane: Jon Brown
Carlton: Fevola, Whitnall
Collingwood: 0
Essendon: Either Lloyd or Fletcher but Hird would have to force 1 out
Freo: Pavlich
Geelong: Scarlett?
Hawthorn: 0
Kang: Thompson?
Melbourne: 0
Port: Tredrea
Richmond: Richo?
StK: Riewoldt
Sydney: Hall
WBD: 0
WCE: 0

That's 11 out of 32 and that matches my proportion. Using that as the basis, it is the draft's proportion that is out of kilter IMHO, rather than mine.

That's simplistic of course. The mentality of the recruiting (footballing?) community has historically been that a good tall is harder to get your hands on than a good mid so draft day sees them go for a premium price. However the failure rate of kids taken as potential KPPs is higher than that of mids. eg Looking at top 30 picks between '98 and '03:-

- 23 of the KPPs remain on a list and have played at least 30 games. 16 have been delisted.

- 53 of the players under 189cm remain on a list and have played at least 30 games. 18 have been delisted.

What does that tell me? That a lot more (overly?)optimistic speculation/extrapolation goes into KPPs (overall) than for smaller players and that anyone pushing the line that most/all clubs draft for best (as in "most likely to succeed at AFL") rather than need would struggle for historical evidence to support their case.

In the above '98-'03 draft results, forget the raw numbers (teams have more mid/flanker types than KPPs) and just focus on the percentages of hits versus misses from the top 30 draft picks for both categories.

http://forums.magpies.net/hotrod/

[Gordon Bennett]

The proportion of key defenders, taken in the top 30, who have failed would be even higher. It's food for thought for those people who regularly say we need a key defender with our 1st or 2nd rd picks.

[mightytiges]

The proportion of key defenders, taken in the top 30, who have failed would be even higher. It's food for thought for those people who regularly say we need a key defender with our 1st or 2nd rd picks.

Agree GB. Austin Lucy and Kirkby come to mind in recent years. Phantom drafts both had them in the top 20 but they feel through. Lucy was picked up late in the 2005 National draft by the Bombers and Kirkby in 2004 rookied by the Hawks (straight after we selected Thursty with pick 1 in the rookie draft). Both now delisted.

Not sure who was the first to say it on here (might have been Ramps) but a good rule of thumb is to only go after junior key forwards and if they fail as a key forward at AFL level then you can always try them as key defenders. 

[Gordon Bennett]

The proportion of key defenders, taken in the top 30, who have failed would be even higher. It's food for thought for those people who regularly say we need a key defender with our 1st or 2nd rd picks.

Agree GB. Austin Lucy and Kirkby come to mind in recent years. Phantom drafts both had them in the top 20 but they feel through. Lucy was picked up late in the 2005 National draft by the Bombers and Kirkby in 2004 rookied by the Hawks (straight after we selected Thursty with pick 1 in the rookie draft). Both now delisted.

Not sure who was the first to say it on here (might have been Ramps) but a good rule of thumb is to only go after junior key forwards and if they fail as a key forward at AFL level then you can always try them as key defenders. 

You can also add Luke Livingstone (Carl), Chris Lamb (Melb), Luke Molan (Melb),Murray Vance (Carl), Brandon Hill (West Coast)  - all 1st round picks, I believe, and that's from memory.I'm sure I could come up with plenty more with some research.

[Darth Tiger]

The proportion of key defenders, taken in the top 30, who have failed would be even higher. It's food for thought for those people who regularly say we need a key defender with our 1st or 2nd rd picks.

Agree GB. Austin Lucy and Kirkby come to mind in recent years. Phantom drafts both had them in the top 20 but they feel through. Lucy was picked up late in the 2005 National draft by the Bombers and Kirkby in 2004 rookied by the Hawks (straight after we selected Thursty with pick 1 in the rookie draft). Both now delisted.

Not sure who was the first to say it on here (might have been Ramps) but a good rule of thumb is to only go after junior key forwards and if they fail as a key forward at AFL level then you can always try them as key defenders. 

You can also add Luke Livingstone (Carl), Chris Lamb (Melb), Luke Molan (Melb),Murray Vance (Carl), Brandon Hill (West Coast)  - all 1st round picks, I believe, and that's from memory.I'm sure I could come up with plenty more with some research.

From memory, Darren Glass is the only real 1st round draft choice specifically chosen as a KDP to have a high value career.

Scarlett & Fletcher were chosen as Father-Sons.