Lottery Draft System

[stinky wingman]

I don't know if people remembered this system, or if someone has already started a thread for it.

Just wanted to know peoples opinions on this, i personally think its a great idea which would eliminate tanking and playing for picks.

The system is like this:

Once the season comes to an end, all teams are ranked 1 - 16 with obviously 1 being the premiers, and 16 being the wooden spooners.

Once all teams are ranked, the AFL then proceeds with a lottery type system where each team is a chance to get the number 1 pick, but the lower you finish in the season, the more chance you have.

They would say give the bottom team say 16 chances in the so called lottery, with the premiers only having one chance.

This means that the bottom team still has a high chance of getting the much prized pick, but its not guaranteed.

This would happen for every pick in the draft, with teams that have already got a pick in that current round, not being able to get another.


I think they use this system in the NBA (not sure just remember hearing it)

Could this system eliminate tanking and playing for picks? and do you think its fair?

[Dylan12]

There was a thread on this last week...and the week before...and the week before that.

In all seriousness, there was a detailed thread on on this exact topic last week:thumbsu:

[Clean Heels]

I dont think Melbourne are tanking, I think Melbourne are genuinely trying to win matches - as we've seen in the past couple of weeks, winning is made hard without Robbo and Neitz, as they were probably their 2 main avenues to goal..

[doggiesin08]

The only way a draft lottery would work is if you still made sure that the first 8 picks were for the bottome 8 teams (excluding priority).

[greennick]

I don't know if people remembered this system, or if someone has already started a thread for it.

Didn't think about using the search function? It would have saved a lot of time as your entire post is now wasted.

[anti.]

i wish we had a system like the NBA, it makes total sense and eliminates all this tanking talk.

[stinky wingman]

Didn't think about using the search function? It would have saved a lot of time as your entire post is now wasted.

regardless of a thread already being there i was going to post it. I havent been on this board much

[07M.Eagles]

The draft lottery would work fine if it involved all bottom 8 sides and then the top 8 got picks 9-16 in the first round and so on in the next round

it would avoid teams tankings as the all 8 bottom teams go into the draw...
this is an example but it would be something like this......
the team that finishes last would have the most balls in the lottery... the team finished last had 40 balls...then whoever finished second last had 30...and third last had 25 and so on till the team that finised 9th had 5 balls or something along those lines...remember this is just an example.....
it would have to be worked out by odds and all mathematics stuff but i think it would work to avoid teams tanking becuase the bottom team isnt guaranteed a pick..they could end up with pick 8 in the draft....
it seems to work in the NBA so i think it should be done here..

[Bourky23]

i reckon make it for the teams in the bottom six.. would prevent the 2 teams who just miss the finals from snagging a first pick...

picks 1-6 are raffled..

16th - 6 balls
15th - 5 balls
14th - 4 balls
13th - 3 balls
12th - 2 balls
11th - 1 ball

10th - pick 7
9th - pick 8

[tintin]

i wish we had a system like the NBA, it makes total sense and eliminates all this tanking talk.
drafting isnt as important in the nba, as we all know money talks and a team can be brought with players all in their prime.
however it is beneficial if u are a lower profile franchise to get a high pick to secure a talented player and hopefully build a team around them

this doesnt happen in the afl. we have a tight salary cap.

[tintin]

i reckon make it for the teams in the bottom six.. would prevent the 2 teams who just miss the finals from snagging a first pick...

picks 1-6 are raffled..

16th - 6 balls
15th - 5 balls
14th - 4 balls
13th - 3 balls
12th - 2 balls
11th - 1 ball

10th - pick 7
9th - pick 8
it works in theory, but if ur in position 9 and 10 y not tank for a chance at pick one and only slip a couple of spots?
how about tank from 11th to 12th and double ur chances or to 14th to quadrupial them?

[TigerGlory]

Just do what the original poster said, if you miss out by a stroke of bad luck, then stiff biscuits.

The odds are pretty good if 16th got 16 balls, 15th got 15 balls etc. That it would go reasonably in order of the ladder. :thumbsu:

[play2win]

the flaw in introducing the lottery is drawing the line as to which teams are eligible. if a team is perceived to tank for the no.1 pick, similarly a team will be perceived to tank to gain entry into the lottery.

the system needs to make some basic changes;

1. rank teams over more than 1 year (which has been done for priority picks but also needs to be done for the draft order)

2. don't draw the line on lottery entry or priority picks, or at least make it less transparent - this would do wonders for the perception side of things

[swuzzlebubble]

Thought the idea on the radio the other night had merit.

Determine the draft order half-way through the season.
Based on last half of prior year and first half of the current.
So after round 11 we would know this year's order and the rest of this year count only to next year's draft.

[Richard Cranium]

In the NBA it is only the top 3 picks that are done through the lottery, and from there on the order is based on W-L record, meaning that a truly bad team that finished last can't fall below pick #4.

I think that if the AFL were to make it top two (NBA lottery is 14 teams, here it would only be 8), then it would be a fair system. This year, for example, Melbourne wouldn't have anything worse than the third pick.

[DaveyBlues]

drafting isnt as important in the nba, as we all know money talks and a team can be brought with players all in their prime.
however it is beneficial if u are a lower profile franchise to get a high pick to secure a talented player and hopefully build a team around them

this doesnt happen in the afl. we have a tight salary cap.

You kidding me? Sometimes teams are built around high picks in the NBA. Kevin Durant for example, pick 2, is the leader of the Sonics with the rest of the team built around him. Draft the right player in the NBA and you could go from no playoffs to finals. Obviously not paying those kind of dividends for them yet but in time. Watch the Bulls next season.

[Bradesmaen]

NHL has the best lottery system I have seen. All teams go into a lottery ranging from 26.5% for 30th and 0.5% for 1st in the year. However the winner of the lottery can only move up four spots. Applying this to the AFL, bottom 8 go in the lottery, max move is 3 spots, so last will get first or second draft pick, fourth last cannot get the bottom draft pick.

[swuzzlebubble]

A lottery system if introduced would only last until a really crap team got a bad lottery draw and/or a reasonable team got first pick via the lottery.
The AFL would be forced to change it quicker than the interchange rules due to public and press pressure.

[Budda 230]

A lottery system if introduced would only last until a really crap team got a bad lottery draw and/or a reasonable team got first pick via the lottery.
The AFL would be forced to change it quicker than the interchange rules due to public and press pressure.

I was thinking the exact same thing. That would definitely give the AFL unwanted pressure as it would eventually happen.

Although, maybe the so called "unlucky teams" could be compensated with extra balls in later drafts? You'd obviously have to judge this over a few different drafts, but surely some mathematical wiz could come up with a formula (I suppose similar to crickets Duckworth/Lewis system) that would work.

[prattsta]

Do all you guys who are calling for a draft lottery like they have in the NBA actually follow the sport? If you did, you'd know that teams definitely tank (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/070411&sportCat=nba) in the NBA. They do exactly the same thing we complain about, only it's much, much more blatant. Resting superstars, giving bench players extended minutes, they do what ever they can. After all, 250 ping pong balls are still better than 199 ping pong balls right?

(250 and 199 is the difference between last and second last, which is about a 5% chance)

Giving the worst team over the course of the season the number one pick isn't where the AFL system fails. Unlike the NBA, the difference between the 1st and 2nd picks is minimal. So is the individual impact that player will ultimately have. After all great teams win premierships, not great players.

The priority pick system, which encourages teams NOT to win more than 'x' number of games is the biggest problem. The PSD, which gives teams first crack at - not to mention a massive advantage at the trade table - any out of contract senior players to go along with their new young talent is also a massive problem.

If you want to reduce the incentive to tank remove the priority pick system (at least in the first round) and introduce free agency.

[btdg]

Do all you guys who are calling for a draft lottery like they have in the NBA actually follow the sport? If you did, you'd know that teams definitely tank (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/070411&sportCat=nba) in the NBA. They do exactly the same thing we complain about, only it's much, much more blatant. Resting superstars, giving bench players extended minutes, they do what ever they can. After all, 250 ping pong balls are still better than 199 ping pong balls right?

(250 and 199 is the difference between last and second last, which is about a 5% chance)

Giving the worst team over the course of the season the number one pick isn't where the AFL system fails. Unlike the NBA, the difference between the 1st and 2nd picks is minimal. So is the individual impact that player will ultimately have. After all great teams win premierships, not great players.

The priority pick system, which encourages teams NOT to win more than 'x' number of games is the biggest problem. The PSD, which gives teams first crack at - not to mention a massive advantage at the trade table - any out of contract senior players to go along with their new young talent is also a massive problem.

If you want to reduce the incentive to tank remove the priority pick system (at least in the first round) and introduce free agency.

I agree 100%. Its strange that the people calling for a lottery generally have no knowledge at all of the NBA, while those who do know the NBA think a lottery is pointless.

As a Carlton supporter, I can tell you the reason some supporters wanted to lose last year was for the priority pick. We didn't care whether we picked first, second or third, but picking first AND third was mighty different to just picking second (as our ladder position dictates).

Get rid of the priority pick system, and introduce compensated free agency. Carlton would have had pick 2 last year, signed Judd and Hadley as free agents, and forfeited our first round pick to West Coast (compensation) and a fourth-rounder to Brisbane. Evaluating the scenarios (assuming we had the option of tanking round 22 against Melbourne and could have won, which is debateable):
- Current system, no tanking: picks 3, 20 and Kennedy traded to West Coast for Judd and pick 46, pick 52 traded to Brisbane for Hadley. Net result is Judd, Hadley, pick 37, pick 46.
- Current system, tanking: trades as before. Net result is the same, except with the addition of Kreuzer.
- Proposed system (compensated free agency, no priority picks) with tanking: pick 2 goes as compensation for Judd, pick 18 and Kennedy retained, pick 50 goes to Brisbane for Hadley. Net result is Judd, pick 18, Kennedy, pick 34, Hadley
- Proposed system no tanking; pick 3 goes as compensation for Judd. Net result is the same!

My system eliminates tanking totally because there is no benefit to it. Carlton would be slightly better off, West Coast worse off (losing Judd) although the compensation system could be tweaked to reflect that (throwing in a second-round pick as well for example...)

[stinky wingman]

I agree 100%. Its strange that the people calling for a lottery generally have no knowledge at all of the NBA, while those who do know the NBA think a lottery is pointless.

As a Carlton supporter, I can tell you the reason some supporters wanted to lose last year was for the priority pick. We didn't care whether we picked first, second or third, but picking first AND third was mighty different to just picking second (as our ladder position dictates).

Get rid of the priority pick system, and introduce compensated free agency. Carlton would have had pick 2 last year, signed Judd and Hadley as free agents, and forfeited our first round pick to West Coast (compensation) and a fourth-rounder to Brisbane. Evaluating the scenarios (assuming we had the option of tanking round 22 against Melbourne and could have won, which is debateable):
- Current system, no tanking: picks 3, 20 and Kennedy traded to West Coast for Judd and pick 46, pick 52 traded to Brisbane for Hadley. Net result is Judd, Hadley, pick 37, pick 46.
- Current system, tanking: trades as before. Net result is the same, except with the addition of Kreuzer.
- Proposed system (compensated free agency, no priority picks) with tanking: pick 2 goes as compensation for Judd, pick 18 and Kennedy retained, pick 50 goes to Brisbane for Hadley. Net result is Judd, pick 18, Kennedy, pick 34, Hadley
- Proposed system no tanking; pick 3 goes as compensation for Judd. Net result is the same!

My system eliminates tanking totally because there is no benefit to it. Carlton would be slightly better off, West Coast worse off (losing Judd) although the compensation system could be tweaked to reflect that (throwing in a second-round pick as well for example...)

you just confused a lot of people lol.

I think a lottery system may work if it's properly planned out and structured.

I just think that by eliminating the certainty of a 1st pick to the bottom team will help this. But like any system, it has it's positives and it's negatives. Just need to balance it all up and see which one works best.

[rotto]

NBA is a total different sport and country. Only the first round picks are guanteed a spot on the roster and second round picks are not. Also, the number one pick in the nba is far more important than in AFL. A nba superstar on the court is 1 out of five players but AFL star is one out of 18.

I like the idea that you take the last 11 rounds of the previous year and first 11 of the next year to determine the draft order. Also, maybe have a lottery with the first three picks with the four lowest winning teams. 16 gets 7 balls, 15 gets 5 balls, 14 gets 3 balls, and 13 gets 1 ball.

Also, get rid of the preseason draft and priority picks.

[Richard Cranium]

I agree 100%. Its strange that the people calling for a lottery generally have no knowledge at all of the NBA, while those who do know the NBA think a lottery is pointless.
No, you're completely right. I haven't played and followed basketball all my life at all.... :thumbsd::rolleyes:

Let me ask you, was it worth Miami tanking that hard this year? Was it worth it for Memphis, Milwaukee and (especially) Boston last year? Those teams all turned it off long before the season ended, yet didn't end up with the No1 pick. THAT'S why it's a good system, the bottom team is guaranteed to not move down any more than 4th, but they are not guaranteed the top pick.

Unlike the NBA, the difference between the 1st and 2nd picks is minimal.What? Since when is there is huge gap between the 1 and 2 at NBA level? Do you even follow the draft at all? Top picks turn out busts, second rounders stars - this year there is no certain No 1 pick who will be better than the 2nd (Rose and Beasley), as was there last year (although Oden was the smart move), or in 06, or 05......

[btdg]

No, you're completely right. I haven't played and followed basketball all my life at all.... :thumbsd::rolleyes:

Let me ask you, was it worth Miami tanking that hard this year? Was it worth it for Memphis, Milwaukee and (especially) Boston last year? Those teams all turned it off long before the season ended, yet didn't end up with the No1 pick. THAT'S why it's a good system, the bottom team is guaranteed to not move down any more than 4th, but they are not guaranteed the top pick.

What? Since when is there is huge gap between the 1 and 2 at NBA level? Do you even follow the draft at all? Top picks turn out busts, second rounders stars - this year there is no certain No 1 pick who will be better than the 2nd (Rose and Beasley), as was there last year (although Oden was the smart move), or in 06, or 05......

It was absolutely worth it for Miami to tank this year. They ended up with the second pick in a draft with 2 sure-things. Had they played out the year with Marion and Wade and the rest of the team going full pace, they probably win an extra 10-12 games and have a signficantly lower chance of getting that top 2 pick.

This year, a team who were in playoff contention won the lottery and added an instant star to the mix. Teams who really needed the help missed out. Basically, the lottery is pointless. Teams whose seasons are finished still tank, because they have nothing left to play for, and the added ping-pong balls are better than nothing. Yet the draft system doesn't necessarily help poorly performed teams get back to the top. So it doesn't equalize the system, and it doesn't stop tanking - what exactly does it achieve?

And as for the top picks in the NBA - the point was that a star NBA player impacts his team more than a star AFL player. Some drafts have 3-4 clear stars at the top, some have none, and there have been some #1 pick busts, but they were generally in weak years with no clear star. But no matter what, teams still try to tank to improve their chances of getting the top pick; the difference between Kevin Durant (pick 2) and Jeff Green (pick 5) in last years draft demonstrates why...

[prattsta]

What? Since when is there is huge gap between the 1 and 2 at NBA level? Do you even follow the draft at all? Top picks turn out busts, second rounders stars - this year there is no certain No 1 pick who will be better than the 2nd (Rose and Beasley), as was there last year (although Oden was the smart move), or in 06, or 05......

Firstly, yes I follow the draft. Secondly, Oden was a dumb move ;).

So let me get this, in a year where there is no certain number one pick and no guaranteed superstar, teams in the NBA still tanked. Great, it's reassuring to know that in a year that reflects the AFL draft perfectly teams still preferred a 25% chance over a 20% chance and played accordingly. Let me know how hard the bottom few NBA teams are trying when the next Lebron James is up for grabs.

Also, whether teams in the NBA should be tanking or not isn't the point. The fact teams still do tank is the issue. People assume a lottery will just stop teams tanking and point to the NBA as an example, which is just retarded. Was it worth Miami putting the cue in the rack 4 months ago? In hindsight, probably not, they still did it though.

The difference one player has on an AFL team is minimal compared to the NBA. For example, who is more valuable to their team Jonathan Brown or Kobe Bryant? So the incentive to tank just to get the number one pick is already less in the AFL. When you consider how many top picks don't work out it only reduces the justification for tanking in the AFL, when only 1 pick is up for grabs.

If Richmond got the number 1 pick last year, and Carlton got the number 2 pick nobody would've cared. The fact Carlton failed to win 'x' number of games, so got 2 picks in the top 3 is where all this tanking talk comes from. The fact they could also hold their PSD selection over WCE at the trade table just made it worse.

Take away the incentive for teams to lose games by removing priority picks. Then take away their ability to hold clubs to ransom during trade week with the PSD.

[wall_ryan]

Great system.

If you finish last your pretty much guaranteed an early pick but not worth tanking because its not guarenteed.

lottery with the bottom 8

16. 32
15. 25
14. 20
13. 10
12. 5
11. 4
10. 3
9. 1

Similar

[prattsta]

Great system.

If you finish last your pretty much guaranteed an early pick but not worth tanking because its not guarenteed.

lottery with the bottom 8

16. 32
15. 25
14. 20
13. 10
12. 5
11. 4
10. 3
9. 1

Similar

If I wasn't guaranteed the first pick for coming last, i'd make sure i got my hands on the priority pick. That first PSD selection is still looking mighty tempting as well.

[wall_ryan]

if I Wasn't Guaranteed The First Pick For Coming Last, I'd Make Sure I Got My Hands On The Priority Pick. That First Psd Selection Is Still Looking Mighty Tempting As Well.

No Priotity Picks!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Richard Cranium]

Firstly, yes I follow the draft. Secondly, Oden was a dumb move ;).

So let me get this, in a year where there is no certain number one pick and no guaranteed superstar, teams in the NBA still tanked. Great, it's reassuring to know that in a year that reflects the AFL draft perfectly teams still preferred a 25% chance over a 20% chance and played accordingly. Let me know how hard the bottom few NBA teams are trying when the next Lebron James is up for grabs.

Also, whether teams in the NBA should be tanking or not isn't the point. The fact teams still do tank is the issue. People assume a lottery will just stop teams tanking and point to the NBA as an example, which is just retarded. Was it worth Miami putting the cue in the rack 4 months ago? In hindsight, probably not, they still did it though.

The difference one player has on an AFL team is minimal compared to the NBA. For example, who is more valuable to their team Jonathan Brown or Kobe Bryant? So the incentive to tank just to get the number one pick is already less in the AFL. When you consider how many top picks don't work out it only reduces the justification for tanking in the AFL, when only 1 pick is up for grabs.

If Richmond got the number 1 pick last year, and Carlton got the number 2 pick nobody would've cared. The fact Carlton failed to win 'x' number of games, so got 2 picks in the top 3 is where all this tanking talk comes from. The fact they could also hold their PSD selection over WCE at the trade table just made it worse.

Take away the incentive for teams to lose games by removing priority picks. Then take away their ability to hold clubs to ransom during trade week with the PSD.
You're missing the point. I'm not (I don't think anyone is) saying that a lottery will stop tanking! It would be stupid to think so, which is what alot of you anti-lottery people on here seem to think everyone is expecting, and it's nay on the sole point of your agruments. The point of the lottery is that teams are not automatically rewarded for tanking.

I give on this thread, people like yourself and btgb have their opinions and clearly they won't change and I doubt mine will either. Yeah, Miami would be happy with their decision to tank becaue they ended up with the #2 pick, but they still don't get to pick whoever they actually want, just whoever is left there. And Chicago weren't challenging for a playoff spot (btgb), they were a shambles and were 8th in the lottery. That's the middle of the lottery.

And really, if there is not as much need for ONE player to draft and have your team built around at AFL level, why would teams care if they dropped one or two spots? Have the lottery for the two picks, then you can't fall more than two picks.....

[RhEF JC]

I was thinking the exact same thing. That would definitely give the AFL unwanted pressure as it would eventually happen.

Although, maybe the so called "unlucky teams" could be compensated with extra balls in later drafts? You'd obviously have to judge this over a few different drafts, but surely some mathematical wiz could come up with a formula (I suppose similar to crickets Duckworth/Lewis system) that would work.

Well, I don't like to constantly draw attention to my being a mathematical wiz (though we prefer the term 'genius'), but why not have a lottery where all teams are equally represented?
The law of averages tells us that over time there'd be no such thing as "unlucky teams".
There would be absolutely no reason for tanking (in my mind, there would be just as great reason to tank if falling one spot guaranteed you (for example) a pick between 1 and 4, compared to the one between 5 and 8 that you're currently in contention for).
Indeed, it would eliminate any concept of the 'premiership clock' as talent is spread more evenly across all teams (rather than the shift in the talent of teams being cyclical) thereby minimising the number of completely one-sided games.

Of course, the problem (as you and the poster you quoted point out) is that the AFL would come under pressure from the media when the premiers take the number 1 pick. But there's no problem with this at all; its just an idea we've become used to that lower teams should generally get better picks. All that is needed is for the AFL to show some balls.

[prattsta]

You're missing the point. I'm not (I don't think anyone is) saying that a lottery will stop tanking!

Then why introduce it, seriously, what's the point?

It would be stupid to think so, which is what alot of you anti-lottery people on here seem to think everyone is expecting, and it's nay on the sole point of your agruments. The point of the lottery is that teams are not automatically rewarded for tanking.

I'm not anti-lottery, of all the problems with the current draft/trade system i just don't feel that 'order of selection' is one of them. What's wrong with the worst team getting the first pick?

Some times teams just aren't that good. Does anyone actually think Melbourne are deliberately losing this year. If the season ended today would you have a problem with them getting the first pick in the draft?

Would you of had a problem with Richmond getting the first pick last year?

I give on this thread, people like yourself and btgb have their opinions and clearly they won't change and I doubt mine will either.

If priority picks and the PSD got given the flick i reckon it'd be sorted without the need for a lottery. You disagree with me, that's fine, at least we agree that as it stands there is something wrong with the system. The AFL reckon it's all rosey and tanking is just crazy talk. Who are really the stubborn ones?

And really, if there is not as much need for ONE player to draft and have your team built around at AFL level, why would teams care if they dropped one or two spots? Have the lottery for the two picks, then you can't fall more than two picks.....

Look the fact one player doesn't have a huge impact is why we don't need a lottery. Teams aren't going to deliberately suffer through all the negatives that come with finishing last if the only reward is first dibs. When you consider the club picking after you might not rate that player as highly anyway it would be monumentally retarded.