2017 Draft thread

[CarterS]

Can you expand on the "very good draft position".

The two sort of go in hand, you are a bad team, which means you will get a high first pick.

Just playing devils advocate here. Don't we have 1, 15 and 18 under current standings? In the media this morning I saw it described as an incredible position. Keep in mind that this was in no way used in a context of 'they don't deserve a PP pick' or anything like that, it was just stated OTC that we have a good draft position, should we trade for players or not?

Nonetheless. The AFL system seems to me to be that they look for reasons not to give them out rather than the other way around, so to me they'll say the reason mentioned, plus that we are now more competitive (assuming we don't drop off again and cop half a dozen 10 goal beltings).

 

[a mayes ing]

Just playing devils advocate here. Don't we have 1, 15 and 18 under current standings? In the media this morning I saw it described as an incredible position. Keep in mind that this was in no way used in a context of 'they don't deserve a PP pick' or anything like that, it was just stated OTC that we have a good draft position, should we trade for players or not?

Nonetheless. The AFL system seems to me to be that they look for reasons not to give them out rather than the other way around, so to me they'll say the reason mentioned, plus that we are now more competitive (assuming we don't drop off again and cop half a dozen 10 goal beltings).

Yeah, tbh l don't think we need one anymore. I would love one and l know we have so few top 10 draft picks compared to everyone else but it's not always about how high a draft pick goes. I feel like we are in a good position going forward with out team if we can keep everyone. We don't always need to be asking for handouts. I don't think they would give us one anyway because we have definitly improved

 

[jjami15]

Just playing devils advocate here. Don't we have 1, 15 and 18 under current standings? In the media this morning I saw it described as an incredible position. Keep in mind that this was in no way used in a context of 'they don't deserve a PP pick' or anything like that, it was just stated OTC that we have a good draft position, should we trade for players or not?

Nonetheless. The AFL system seems to me to be that they look for reasons not to give them out rather than the other way around, so to me they'll say the reason mentioned, plus that we are now more competitive (assuming we don't drop off again and cop half a dozen 10 goal beltings).

The way i read it was more trying to paint a positive outlook and in doing this we shouldn't get one (bit of reading between the lines). It was merely Sam (death to the Brisbane Lions) Landsberger trying a different tack. I prefer Gil's statement awhile ago that there should be more done to turn around those teams who've been down for so long, especially Brisbane. Currently I think if we did then a pick 11, just before the final eight could be a viable option, hopefully.

 

[a mayes ing]

The way i read it was more trying to paint a positive outlook and in doing this we shouldn't get one (bit of reading between the lines). It was merely Sam (death to the Brisbane Lions) Landsberger trying a different tack. I prefer Gil's statement awhile ago that there should be more done to turn around those teams who've been down for so long, especially Brisbane. Currently I think if we did then a pick 11, just before the final eight could be a viable option, hopefully.[/QUOTE]
Just watch this be introduced as soon as we are competitive enough to not receive one

 

[CarterS]

Dont know what thread this goes in... Draftee contracts staying at 2 years. Plea from Lions to double the length of players' first deals has fallen on deaf ears. (From Herald Sun, Twitter).

 

[John_Proctor]

I don't think we'll get one if we get to 4 wins.

But lets say we end up with 3 wins again (as we did last year).

How does the AFL say you don't deserve one this year? when we've spent 2 years in a row on 3 wins (enough to get a Priority Pick 1, 2 years in succession in most past formulas for priority picks), won your first wooden spoon in 20 years, spent a third seasons in a row in the bottom 2, finished 2/3/4 wins behind any other club in the competition.

If we end up with 3 wins I'd be shocked if we didn't get another end of first round pick.

The Gil McLachlan "more assistance" measures could be something from left field like allowing us to expand our rookie list or give us more freedom to use our rookie list (eg. play a rookie player without needing to have a long term injury to elevate them to senior list), or some sort of 'pre list' Queenslanders to the rookie list (which I think we can do already with our Academy players).

 

[spotthedog1]

I don't think we'll get one if we get to 4 wins.

But lets say we end up with 3 wins again (as we did last year).

How does the AFL say you don't deserve one this year? when we've spent 2 years in a row on 3 wins (enough to get a Priority Pick 1, 2 years in succession in most past formulas for priority picks), won your first wooden spoon in 20 years, spent a third seasons in a row in the bottom 2, finished 2/3/4 wins behind any other club in the competition.

If we end up with 3 wins I'd be shocked if we didn't get another end of first round pick.

The Gil McLachlan "more assistance" measures could be something from left field like allowing us to expand our rookie list or give us more freedom to use our rookie list (eg. play a rookie player without needing to have a long term injury to elevate them to senior list), or some sort of 'pre list' Queenslanders to the rookie list (which I think we can do already with our Academy players).

Another end of first rounder won't do much for us though. The go-home 5 alone cost us an entire pick 1 worth of draft points. I'd say we need to ask for a pick 1 PP, or additional AFL measures/enticers to help us recruit a genuine player. For example, a Gary Ablett / Israel Folau style AFL-house marketing allowance to get Josh Kelly to sign on with the Lions. Maybe with an end-of-first-rounder PP to help us out with trade value (to package with Port's pick).

 

[Dalions]

The Gil McLachlan "more assistance" measures could be something from left field like allowing us to expand our rookie list or give us more freedom to use our rookie list (eg. play a rookie player without needing to have a long term injury to elevate them to senior list)

Looks like this may have already happened for all teams as part of the new CBA.
Category A rookies can be played at any time as of next year.

Players get 20 per cent pay rise in new CBA - http://m.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-20/players-get-20-per-cent-pay-rise-in-new-cba

 

[jjami15]

Vic M and Vic C streamed on AFL.com at 12p.m. Saturday.

 

[pulpdriver]

Vic M and Vic C streamed on AFL.com at 12p.m. Saturday.

Good news. Seemed like they were just going to neglect the best display of this year's talent at the champs. Won't be able to watch it live though because I've got to attend a friend's child's party.

 

[briztoon]

 

[pulpdriver]

Saw the first half of that game and it was plain to see why you've been riding his train. Hell of a talent.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Another end of first rounder won't do much for us though.

I'd take it happily. Would be pick 18 in this draft. Last year that was good enough to get you Sam Powell-Pepper, Tim English, Will Hayward or Alex Witherden.

 

[POBT]

I'd take it happily. Would be pick 18 in this draft. Last year that was good enough to get you Sam Powell-Pepper, Tim English, Will Hayward or Alex Witherden.

And it has value if we want to engineer an upgrade to secure another top ten pick.

 

[spotthedog1]

I'd take it happily. Would be pick 18 in this draft. Last year that was good enough to get you Sam Powell-Pepper, Tim English, Will Hayward or Alex Witherden.

Well done, you've successfully taken me out of context.

I'll take anything the AFL will give us, but at the same time, I don't think we're one pick 18 away from being a competitive team. The AFL seem to be making noise that a beginning of round 1 PP is not likely. So I suggested that maybe it'd be a good idea to consider alternatives to pick 1 priority picks - just as meaningful and likely to make a difference, but less likely to get the Vic media up in arms. I even provided an example.

 

[Hollow Knight]

Well done, you've successfully taken me out of context.

.

Have I?

 

[Ironmonger]

Have I?

No.

On PPs more generally, the occasional end of first rounder probably isn't that big a deal. But if the new system involves clubs in our position getting repeated end of first rounders until things improve then that will make a very real difference.

Which is part of why I suspect the AFL will probably deny our request with last year's PP as the (inadequate) justification. Setting that precedent at this point might lock them in for when the next club struggles. Or even for another request from us the following year. And other clubs might get cranky, and make it harder for the AFL to negotiate other things they want.

 

[jackess]

They could give us points for bidding. So we might be able to get away with a third or fourth rounder for Ballenden

 

[The Flying Belgian]

I don't think we're one pick 18 away from being a competitive team.

Was anyone arguing otherwise? No. Would pick 18 be of benefit to the list? Yes. Would everyone be happier with a beginning of first round pick? Shit yes. Will the club ask for more than pick 18? Yes. Were you jumping at shadows a bit? Yes. Will I stop answering my own question now? Maybe.

 

[Cockliff38]

They could give us points for bidding. So we might be able to get away with a third or fourth rounder for Ballenden

I'm going to play this scenario out to the best of my ability. For this scenario I'm going to say the AFL grant us 1000 draft points (roughly pick 17/18 in value) and current ladder rankings stand.

The Bulldogs bid on Ballenden at pick 10. To match the bid, taking into account the 20% academy discount AND our 1000 draft points, we need 116 points.

This 116 comes off our next live pick (#15 AKA the Port pick) and leaves us with 996 points change, which would be pick 18 - sliding back our own second round pick to 19.

End result = Pick 1, Ballenden, pick 18 & pick 19

 

[SizeMatters]

I'm going to play this scenario out to the best of my ability. For this scenario I'm going to say the AFL grant us 1000 draft points (roughly pick 17/18 in value) and current ladder rankings stand.



End result = Pick 2, Ballenden, pick 18 & pick 19

I think academy points system for us at the moment is the best option. It can be extended to all other clubs northern academies and zone academies when they are struggling as well.

 

[Dalions]

I'm going to play this scenario out to the best of my ability. For this scenario I'm going to say the AFL grant us 1000 draft points (roughly pick 17/18 in value) and current ladder rankings stand.



End result = Pick 2, Ballenden, pick 18 & pick 19

So we are not going to have pick 1.

 

[spotthedog1]

Have I?

I've had a re-read, and I still think that yes, that took me out of context. Happy to clarify why it reads that way to me. The original posts:

Another end of first rounder won't do much for us though. The go-home 5 alone cost us an entire pick 1 worth of draft points. I'd say we need to ask for a pick 1 PP, or additional AFL measures/enticers to help us recruit a genuine player. For example, a Gary Ablett / Israel Folau style AFL-house marketing allowance to get Josh Kelly to sign on with the Lions. Maybe with an end-of-first-rounder PP to help us out with trade value (to package with Port's pick).

I'd take it happily. Would be pick 18 in this draft. Last year that was good enough to get you Sam Powell-Pepper, Tim English, Will Hayward or Alex Witherden.

To summarise:
Me: I don't think that another end of first rounder is sufficient if we want to actually be competitive. Here are some thoughts on strategies the club could employ to avoid the Vic Backlash of a Pick 1 PP.
You: I'd accept pick 18.

To me, that reads that you read my first sentence, assumed the rest of my post as "pick 18 is useless" and took a counter-position accordingly. If you take the view that an end of first rounder PP is sufficient to bring us back to a competitive balance with the rest of the competition, that would be relevant, and I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on that.

 

[Cockliff38]

So we are not going to have pick 1.

Good pick-up, edited now.

 

[mpal6]

I don't think we'll get one if we get to 4 wins.

But lets say we end up with 3 wins again (as we did last year).

How does the AFL say you don't deserve one this year? when we've spent 2 years in a row on 3 wins (enough to get a Priority Pick 1, 2 years in succession in most past formulas for priority picks), won your first wooden spoon in 20 years, spent a third seasons in a row in the bottom 2, finished 2/3/4 wins behind any other club in the competition.

If we end up with 3 wins I'd be shocked if we didn't get another end of first round pick.

The Gil McLachlan "more assistance" measures could be something from left field like allowing us to expand our rookie list or give us more freedom to use our rookie list (eg. play a rookie player without needing to have a long term injury to elevate them to senior list), or some sort of 'pre list' Queenslanders to the rookie list (which I think we can do already with our Academy players).

Just change the salary cap spend limit from 95% to say 90% for clubs finishing bottom 2 in consecutive years - say for us, 2016/2017 bottom 2, we get to spend at 90% for 2018 and 2019. If we continue to loiter in the bottom, an extra year could be added on a rolling basis.

For a list clean up and rebuild, this will be an ideal scenario. Clubs at lower end actually having cap space to attract some big names.