Physical testing characteristics better explain draft outcome than in-game movement profile in junior elite Australian rules football players

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate the extent to which Australian Football League (AFL) draft outcome is associated with physical performance and/or in-game movement profile.DesignObservational cohort design.MethodsPhysical testing results and in-game global positioning system (GPS) data were collated from Victorian-based, draft-eligible participants in the under 18 boys NAB League competition (n = 450; age = 17.1 ± 0.3 y). Players were grouped by position as nomadic, fixed-position or fixed&ruck.ResultsIndividually, variables that best distinguish drafted and non-drafted players were: estimated V̇O₂ max (all-position, nomadic, fixed&ruck: d = 0.60, 0.64, 0.53), standing vertical jump (d = 0.57, 0.58, 0.53), running vertical jump (d = 0.52, 0.51, 0.56), AFL agility (d = 0.49, 0.44, 0.67) and 20-m speed (all-position, nomadic: d = 0.50, 0.61). Factor analysis prior to binary logistic regression assessed the probability of factors influencing position-specific draft outcome. AFL agility (all-position, fixed&ruck: OR = 4.58, 15.86), anthropometry (all-position, nomadic, fixed, fixed&ruck: OR = 2.55, 2.06, 11.41, 7.99), and jumping (all-position, nomadic, fixed&ruck: OR = 1.75, 1.69, 2.68) were the factors most associated with positive draft outcome. More game involvement (fixed&ruck: OR = 2.22), sprinting (all-position, fixed&ruck: OR = 1.45, 2.06) and less non-sprinting activities (all-position, nomadic: OR = 0.64, 0.61) were associated with positive draft outcome. The fixed&ruck model was the best performing (χ²(115) = 30.59, p < 0.001, AUC = 84.7%).ConclusionsPhysical testing-related factors were most likely to influence draft outcome, where larger and more agile players were desirable draft picks. In-game movement profile had some bearing on draft outcome in all positional groups with the exception of fixed.