Does it take too long for clubs to rebuild their lists?

[HeavyPop]

Coaches are always more important than players. I know Clarkson is an anomaly, but I have no doubt that if he coached at any of these clubs he would have Melbourne in the top 4, GWS would have won a flag by now and Carlton would be pushing top 8. People have an expectation that just because you hit the draft, it means eventually you will come good. How many players excel in good sides and then drop off? WB had a bunch of star players at the end of 2016, while Richmond only had 2-3 good players, yet it's now the opposite.

 

[RUNVS]

The draft restricts rebuilding, you only get one pick before the premiers do. If you want another pick you need to trade away a best 22 player, therefore worsening your team in the short run and making your club unattractive for free agents.

I reckon scrap the draft all together and have unrestricted free agency to all out of contract players including 18 year olds entering the league for the first time.

While teams at the top of the ladder will be focused on having mature established players for a premiership tilt, teams down the bottom can offer better contracts to 18 year olds and better opportunity to play in the senior team. Lower clubs can offer contracts to multiple top talented players and essentially what takes 3-4 years of rebuilding a list can happen in one off-season with out trading away best 22 players.

Players also get a choice of where they go, instead of been randomly selected by a club with poor development that'll ruin your career. So it's up to clubs to make your club attractive to these players.

If a bottom club offered you $200000 per year over 3 years with good opportunity to play, and a top club $80000 per year for 2 years but likely playing in the state leagues for a while, where do you go? If the bottom club misses out, move on to the next player.

The salary cap and list sizes restrict clubs from stockpiling all the talent.

To me the draft has a big flaw compared to the NBA as in the NBA one very talented kid can be enough to change everything because in basketball you only have 5 players on the court at any one time, so that means one really talented player is something like 20% of your team.

In the AFL though 1 really talented player is 4.5% of your game day team and it just isn't enough.

The AFL needs to start giving more draft picks to the teams that have been out of the finals for a number of years (3 or 4 years) so these teams can regenerate their lists faster.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

Things like that really don't help. Like I said earlier, you have to be setup to rebuild properly....

If not, it can take a while....

So cleaning out an organisation of corrupt individuals doesn't help? You don't work for the government by any chance, do you?

 

[TedDougChris]

So cleaning out an organisation of corrupt individuals doesn't help? You don't work for the government by any chance, do you?

You have misinterpreted - I meant having the boys club in there didn't help.

 

[DrEvil_]

And I think that's one of the big question marks over the Saints.

They last played finals in 2011 after a pretty solid run. But that means this will be their seventh season without finals, assuming they don't make it this year.

And how have they drafted in that period?

2012: Nathan Wright (#24), Spencer Wright #25), Brodie Murdoch (#40), Josh Saunders (#43), Lewis Pierce (#75), Sam Dunell (#90)
2013: Jack Billings (#3), Luke Dunstan (#18), Blake Acres (#19),
2014: Paddy McCartin (#1), Hugh Goddard (#21), David McKenzie (#22), Jack Lonie (#41)
2015: Jade Gresham (#18), Brandon White (#40), Bailey Rice (#49),
2016: Ben Long (#25), Josh Battle (#39), Ed Phillips (#56)
2017: Hunter Clark (#7), Nick Coffield (#8), Oscar Clavarino (#35), Ben Paton (#46)

It's striking that after six years out of the finals, they've only had four top 10 picks. Are there enough hits there to suggest they can have a really good run at it with a talented core at some point in the next five years? They'd be desperately hoping Clark and Coffield make it.

How is that striking? There are only so many top 10 picks and there are 10 teams missing the finals each year. With all the trades and GWS compensations 4 is about right.

 

[markr]

The draft restricts rebuilding, you only get one pick before the premiers do. If you want another pick you need to trade away a best 22 player, therefore worsening your team in the short run and making your club unattractive for free agents.

I reckon scrap the draft all together and have unrestricted free agency to all out of contract players including 18 year olds entering the league for the first time.

I'm not sure I want it to happen but this is, for mine, the only answer to enable clubs to quickly rebuild. Massively opening up player mobility. At the moment the best you can really hope for is one or two draftees who become good players in 3 or 4 years time, and trading in one or two players from the limited pool of players who are up for trade or free agents a year. Ooops, to trade someone good in you had to give up your draft picks so you don't get those good kids after all.

No draft, everyone is free agents instantly, and it becomes entirely about attracting players and salary cap management. You could turn over your whole list in a year or two if you wanted to.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

How is that striking? There are only so many top 10 picks and there are 10 teams missing the finals each year. With all the trades and GWS compensations 4 is about right.

I assumed they'd have had more. If not top 10, maybe top 15.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

You have misinterpreted - I meant having the boys club in there didn't help.

Haha apologies, my mistake. For sure. The only reason we're still standing as a club and actually doing quite well all things considered is because the AFL got Peter Jackson in there and changed the management structure. Say what you will about club handouts and whatnot but from an organisational perspective the AFL had a responsibility to rid the MFC of the cancer that was the boy's club. Not the players' or supporters' fault that all that was going on, and they deserve to see if not success at least a reasonably functioning club.

 

[MaddAdam]

Best part of a decade rolls off he tongue but isn't true.

Guys like Lachie plowman, Will Hoskin- Elliot, James Stewart, Jacob Townsend, Curtly Hampton, Matt Kennedy, Jarrod Pickett and Jack Steele were all to some extent victims of our expanded list and the subsequent contraction. All are contributing to new clubs and in their best 22.

Guys we couldn't hold like Adam Treloar, Caleb Marchbank, Cam Mcarthy and Nathan Wilson are also best 22 at their new clubs

This is off the top of my head. We clearly have developed and fed playets to other clubs successfully.

Yeah, it isn't just about you. Gold Coast as well.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I'm not sure I want it to happen but this is, for mine, the only answer to enable clubs to quickly rebuild. Massively opening up player mobility. At the moment the best you can really hope for is one or two draftees who become good players in 3 or 4 years time, and trading in one or two players from the limited pool of players who are up for trade or free agents a year. Ooops, to trade someone good in you had to give up your draft picks so you don't get those good kids after all.

No draft, everyone is free agents instantly, and it becomes entirely about attracting players and salary cap management. You could turn over your whole list in a year or two if you wanted to.

That would mitigate against equalisation.

 

[Blackas87]

To me the draft has a big flaw compared to the NBA as in the NBA one very talented kid can be enough to change everything because in basketball you only have 5 players on the court at any one time, so that means one really talented player is something like 20% of your team.

In the AFL though 1 really talented player is 4.5% of your game day team and it just isn't enough.

The AFL needs to start giving more draft picks to the teams that have been out of the finals for a number of years (3 or 4 years) so these teams can regenerate their lists faster.

I disagree with giving out more picks, to me that's just giving a bigger incentive to tank. The last we've heard of tanking was when clubs, Melbourne, Carlton and the clubs before those were after a priority pick. Tanking in the NBA still exists because you are getting 20% of your starting lineup. If we are giving more out, then there is more reason to finish lower.

That's why I think get rid of the draft, lower the salary cap floor which will allow bottom clubs to give multiple contracts to 18 year olds entering the league.

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

in my opinion these long rebuilds that melbourne had to go through and carlton and brisbane are going through are happening because we've been the last to understand that this game is all about consistent development and list management.

You can't just stockpile talent for a couple years then go on a dynasty. rebuilding is something that well run teams do a little bit every year.

carlton and brisbane have lost lots of good players on the list which hasn't helped.

also the reduced rotations makes it harder to be competitive while bringing in kids, because the reduced time they can run needs be carried by the rest of the group. so if you've got 10 kids in the team in their 1st or 2nd year, they can't run out games the way experienced players can which means the other 12 have a much greater aerobic load to bear.

Yes, rebuilding takes way too long but in the modern afl you only need to go through this process when you **** up. we're in this situation because of our deplorable drafting in 2008-2012 and our list management from 2013-15. once brisbane and carlton have built their list up again we shouldn't see this sort extended cellar dwelling from anyone that often.

 

[Blackas87]

That would mitigate against equalisation.

The salary cap and list sizes keep things equal.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Yeah, it isn't just about you. Gold Coast as well.

Fair enough
The expansion did stuff clubs trying to rebuild through the draft for a few years, no doubt. Some players re-entered the system with other clubs later is my point.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

To me the draft has a big flaw compared to the NBA as in the NBA one very talented kid can be enough to change everything because in basketball you only have 5 players on the court at any one time, so that means one really talented player is something like 20% of your team.

In the AFL though 1 really talented player is 4.5% of your game day team and it just isn't enough.

The AFL needs to start giving more draft picks to the teams that have been out of the finals for a number of years (3 or 4 years) so these teams can regenerate their lists faster.

That's why in AFL you need to do well with a handful of picks over a window of 3-5 years. That's how you build a core of players.

 

[RUNVS]

I disagree with giving out more picks, to me that's just giving a bigger incentive to tank. The last we've heard of tanking was when clubs, Melbourne, Carlton and the clubs before those were after a priority pick. Tanking in the NBA still exists because you are getting 20% of your starting lineup. If we are giving more out, then there is more reason to finish lower.

That's why I think get rid of the draft, lower the salary cap floor which will allow bottom clubs to give multiple contracts to 18 year olds entering the league.

No, only giving more picks to teams that have been out of the finals for 3 or 4 years. No one is going to tank themselves out of the finals.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

The salary cap and list sizes keep things equal.

Is that what has has happened currently?

 

[PP34]

Why is Sydneys name no good?

The AFL is the reason they haven’t bottomed our sorry.

 

[Blackas87]

Is that what has has happened currently?

No because players get stuck at clubs in rebuild mode and want out. Therefore the clubs in rebuild mode get stuck in rebuild mode.

 

[rippersnipper]

So you would screw over the other teams in the bottom half because carlton and brisbane can't get their shit together yet?

I actually think brisbane are on the right path. They have a solid core group of leaders in beams, hodgey, Rich and Robinson. They got in a good coach and restructured, they have some guys that will lead by going hard at the opposition and then a huge amount of young talent across the ground. They need another year and maybe another midfielder or two but everything else is there imo. Also trading for players who are from queensland will benefit them massively.

Carlton appear to be in massive trouble because we're meant to be useless (i don't think we are, just inconsistent) and we belted them. Their talent isn't developing properly apart from a select group of maybe 5 or 6. They need a clean out from the board down. GCS are a weird one, they seem to be missing leadership and quality A-graders unlike the Giants who have both in huge amounts.

 

[Blackas87]

No, only giving more picks to teams that have been out of the finals for 3 or 4 years. No one is going to tank themselves out of the finals.

Most teams that bottom out are going to spend 3-4 more years out of the finals, why wait that long to bring in multiple players?

 

[TedDougChris]

Haha apologies, my mistake. For sure. The only reason we're still standing as a club and actually doing quite well all things considered is because the AFL got Peter Jackson in there and changed the management structure. Say what you will about club handouts and whatnot but from an organisational perspective the AFL had a responsibility to rid the MFC of the cancer that was the boy's club. Not the players' or supporters' fault that all that was going on, and they deserve to see if not success at least a reasonably functioning club.

Not a problem, poorly worded/highlighted on my part.

You need to have a structure in place to support a proper rebuild.

It's an interesting discussion point - would Hawthorn stick with Clarkson if they had dived further this year ? He clearly can do it, but does he get the chance in this football environment ?? The system is designed to even clubs out, so do you stick with a good coach during these lean periods ??

 

[RUNVS]

Most teams that bottom out are going to spend 3-4 more years out of the finals, why wait that long to bring in multiple players?

Because they are the ones that need it. Sure Hawthorn missed the finals in 2017 but no one would argue that they would need extra help to get back into the finals, but a team like Brisbane, they could have really been helped by extra draft picks in 2014, 2015 and so on.

 

[Turnover]

The AFL tweaking the draft, I think they have done enough tweaking and going by their records they will just f it up. Thats why the draft is so important, some clubs just constantly get it wrong, they may get a couple of diamonds, but generally they get it incorrect. The response/thinking is generally halfway threw a season, it ok always next draft, hopefully we can finish lower (picks). However if u get the draft right, then developing the players correctly is vital. Once it comes together having a good mix of new players and veterans is vital to any premiership. The shaping of a list/team with some element of surprise will help, as its different and catches coaches of guard, Richmond v crows last year was a great example. Crows became too predictable. Anyway blah blah me, it’s very hard to win flags, barracking for hawks, swans, cats would be fun, it’s not luck why they are always up there.

 

[Blackas87]

Because they are the ones that need it. Sure Hawthorn missed the finals in 2017 but no one would argue that they would need extra help to get back into the finals, but a team like Brisbane, they could have really been helped by extra draft picks in 2014, 2015 and so on.

Hawthorn though with a mature experienced list would be tight on salary cap, they wouldn't be able to offer multiple good deals to a number of top talented players.