2017 Draft thread

[Forward We Go]

That may be true, but dlanod is certainly right that it’s happening. Chad Wingard acknowledged that he did it a couple of years back and was greeted by praise from the media for his maturity and honesty. IIRC, Cal Twomey also spent some time discussing it on one of the earlier RTTD episodes this year: I got the impression it was reasonably common.

(EDIT: just re-read dlanod's post and he had already mentioned Wingard. Sorry for laboring the point).

Those rules appear to be toothless.

No need to re-read dlanod's post. I understand what he is saying. The issue I am referring to is his comment/statement that: "The AFL is doing exactly nothing to discourage players doing that." Toothless or not, the AFL are trying to stamp that out of the game. I don't think they are winning many fights but they are at least having a crack at it & do identify its an issue.
Does anyone have a better idea/solution?

 

[dlanod]

No need to re-read dlanod's post. I understand what he is saying. The issue I am referring to is his comment/statement that: "The AFL is doing exactly nothing to discourage players doing that." Toothless or not, the AFL are trying to stamp that out of the game. I don't think they are winning many fights but they are at least having a crack at it & do identify its an issue.

If I tell everyone they shouldn't do something, and then everyone does it anyway and I do nothing... is that really me doing something about it? Or is that me just giving myself plausible deniability? Because I see it as doing nothing but trying to cover my own arse.

Does anyone have a better idea/solution?

Longer mandatory contracts would be a start. It'd give the players who are more determined to get to particular clubs pause from entering the draft knowing they'll be locked at their club for, say, four years instead. An older draft age would be another option though probably less effective.

Or just get rid of the draft, since it's obviously a joke.

 

[briztoon]

No need to re-read dlanod's post. I understand what he is saying. The issue I am referring to is his comment/statement that: "The AFL is doing exactly nothing to discourage players doing that." Toothless or not, the AFL are trying to stamp that out of the game. I don't think they are winning many fights but they are at least having a crack at it & do identify its an issue.
Does anyone have a better idea/solution?

Do the AFL sign off on trades. Best thing they could do is not sign off on lopsided trades, such as the Kennedy to Carlton trade, and tell clubs they need to offer the club losing the player a fairer deal.

 

[dlanod]

Do the AFL sign off on trades. Best thing they could do is not sign off on lopsided trades, such as the Kennedy to Carlton trade, and tell clubs they need to offer the club losing the player a fairer deal.

The trick with that is there's such a wide range of "what's lopsided". I'm a GWS supporter in my spare time and for me the Kennedy trade was spot on - GWS didn't offer him a contract, he's not lit the field up when he's been selected, being solid at best, so a pick around 30 is about right. However you obviously consider it lopsided. Enforcing opinions on trades is pretty fraught.

IMO an option would be to allow clubs to take the corresponding pick in the National Draft if one of their players enters the draft. e.g. if GWS and Carlton couldn't come to a deal on Kennedy, and he gets taken at pick 25 in the ND, GWS then enters the draft to take that pick before normal picking takes place again. However that's a pretty complicated scenario.

 

[Kevvo]

No need to re-read dlanod's post. I understand what he is saying. The issue I am referring to is his comment/statement that: "The AFL is doing exactly nothing to discourage players doing that." Toothless or not, the AFL are trying to stamp that out of the game. I don't think they are winning many fights but they are at least having a crack at it & do identify its an issue.
Does anyone have a better idea/solution?

Sorry, that was my bad. I meant that I had just re-read his post.

Some ideas:

• Longer initial contracts
• If a player wants to return home after the first two years, their current club gains the right to trade the player to any club in the player's state of choice subject to matching T&Cs
• More club flexibility in trades, in general, to address the current imbalance.

 

[briztoon]

The trick with that is there's such a wide range of "what's lopsided". I'm a GWS supporter in my spare time and for me the Kennedy trade was spot on - GWS didn't offer him a contract, he's not lit the field up when he's been selected, being solid at best, so a pick around 30 is about right. However you obviously consider it lopsided. Enforcing opinions on trades is pretty fraught.

IMO an option would be to allow clubs to take the corresponding pick in the National Draft if one of their players enters the draft. e.g. if GWS and Carlton couldn't come to a deal on Kennedy, and he gets taken at pick 25 in the ND, GWS then enters the draft to take that pick before normal picking takes place again. However that's a pretty complicated scenario.

Well I wanted to use Schache as the example, but there are extenuating circumstances involved.

 

[Forward We Go]

If I tell everyone they shouldn't do something, and then everyone does it anyway and I do nothing... is that really me doing something about it? Or is that me just giving myself plausible deniability? Because I see it as doing nothing but trying to cover my own arse.



Longer mandatory contracts would be a start. It'd give the players who are more determined to get to particular clubs pause from entering the draft knowing they'll be locked at their club for, say, four years instead. An older draft age would be another option though probably less effective.

Or just get rid of the draft, since it's obviously a joke.

Great idea...get rid of the draft altogether. That will be a big help for the Lions. Good suggestion.

 

[dlanod]

Great idea...get rid of the draft altogether. That will be a big help for the Lions. Good suggestion.

Why did you ignore the other 90% of the post just to focus on the single line mentioning nuclear option? In a discussion wouldn't it make more sense to argue for better enforcement of the AFL rule you were passionately mentioning the existence of in bold and capitals, or suggest other measures to help improve the draft situation?

FWIW we'll then be able to do what struggling teams do in the NRL - offer big money to young players to get them to come straight to us, without having to worry about guys like Aish or Schache nicking off. It won't help badly managed clubs (nothing will) but it lets a club have a better allocation of resources than potentially losing a top pick for bugger all.

 

[jackess]

Off topic but what do people think of using a rolling ladder to determine draft order?

Maybe use the wins, losings and points for and against from the last 3 seasons combined to determine the draft order. Then if the gap becomes to great between teams outside the top 8 and the top teams you could slot in extra priority picks using some sort of agreed upon formula.

Would be more representative of where a team is at.

 

[mish33]

Why did you ignore the other 90% of the post just to focus on the single line mentioning nuclear option? In a discussion wouldn't it make more sense to argue for better enforcement of the AFL rule you were passionately mentioning the existence of in bold and capitals, or suggest other measures to help improve the draft situation?

FWIW we'll then be able to do what struggling teams do in the NRL - offer big money to young players to get them to come straight to us, without having to worry about guys like Aish or Schache nicking off. It won't help badly managed clubs (nothing will) but it lets a club have a better allocation of resources than potentially losing a top pick for bugger all.

Yeah, i agree. The AFL trading system institutionalises inequality by creating a constant flow of player value from battling clubs to strong ones. The draft is supposed to equalize this, but it takes too long to see the benefit due to draftees' ages.

Increasing the age would mean players have more of an immediate impact (e.g. Ben Simmons), the club rises quicker which might mean players stay more. Getting rid of the draft could do the same, but players could then easily refuse to move anywhere without fear of reprisals.

The main problem is with Vic kids and there are so many clubs that at any point there will usually be a struggler who could offer the same coin as an interstate club. How would those kind of issues be addressed?

 

[BuntonRules]

If we do go Brayshaw, I would love a Bonar type at 15 or 18. Speculate.

And on the above conversation - minimum 3 years for the first two rounds.

 

[Forward We Go]

Why did you ignore the other 90% of the post just to focus on the single line mentioning nuclear option? In a discussion wouldn't it make more sense to argue for better enforcement of the AFL rule you were passionately mentioning the existence of in bold and capitals, or suggest other measures to help improve the draft situation?

FWIW we'll then be able to do what struggling teams do in the NRL - offer big money to young players to get them to come straight to us, without having to worry about guys like Aish or Schache nicking off. It won't help badly managed clubs (nothing will) but it lets a club have a better allocation of resources than potentially losing a top pick for bugger all.

Don't know why you think I ignored the other 90% of the post...is that because I didn't reply back to everything you said? If so, please be advised that I read your post in its entirety. (confirmed)
I am not passionate about the AFL rules regarding the draft, I am merely clarifying something that was posted inaccurately to allow people to have an opinion & thoughts based on facts & not someone's emotionally loaded opinion that could be taken as fact & misleading. (you being a moderator & all. )
In summary, I cant see Brisbane ever being a destination club like some of the others, BUT, we can now finally present ourselves as a professional club, with strong principles, good administration & hopefully in a few years a good footy culture. Having this does give us a much better chance in retaining players. Not having this will provide a mass exodus like we have had time & time again for over 10 years. That and further development of our own Lions Academy kids should provide us with a list of players who will be competitive. Tweaking of the draft like some of Kevvo's suggestions I think are good, however overall I cant see the draft changing too much into the future and also see it as better opportunity for us to improve our list while not being flush with cash like other clubs who can go out & buy established, elite players. Once we have them on our list, we then have the challenge to hang onto them.

 

[M Malice]

I think we are performing pretty bloody well in the destination club stakes- Dayne Beams, Allen Christensen, Mitch Robinson, Charlie Cameron, Stefan Martin, Luke Hodge are some of the good to elite players who we have traded in over the last few years who would have been welcome at most other clubs apart from maybe Mitch at the time.

Then you have players looking for more opportunity or the go home factor- Tom Bell, Jack Frost, Ryan Bastinac, Josh Walker, Jake Barrett.

 

[Lazza16]

Brain explodes ..............BOOOOOOOM

 

[JakePeralta]

• Get rid of Draft
• Give teams a pool of signing bonus money at the end of each season to sign "draft eligible" players
• Reverse ladder, lower teams get bigger signing bonus pool to use etc so possible to lure "better" talent
• Minimum 2 year contract, max 4 years, obviously negotiated between team and player when signing

Obviously not very well thought out and with only a modicum of detail, but why not talk about getting rid of the Draft? Definitely a discussion worth having I think. I know they should be thankful to be in the position they are, but they are employees at the end of the day that work for our entertainment, I think they should be able to have a say in where they work.

Seeing as the above is ridiculous to start with, I'll say something related to the upcoming draft. Take Brayshaw at 1, draft brother Hamish later on, sign Angus when he is off contract next year. Who says no?

 

[bungalow_bill]

• Get rid of Draft
• Give teams a pool of signing bonus money at the end of each season to sign "draft eligible" players
• Reverse ladder, lower teams get bigger signing bonus pool to use etc so possible to lure "better" talent
• Minimum 2 year contract, max 4 years, obviously negotiated between team and player when signing

Obviously not very well thought out and with only a modicum of detail, but why not talk about getting rid of the Draft? Definitely a discussion worth having I think. I know they should be thankful to be in the position they are, but they are employees at the end of the day that work for our entertainment, I think they should be able to have a say in where they work.

Seeing as the above is ridiculous to start with, I'll say something related to the upcoming draft. Take Brayshaw at 1, draft brother Hamish later on, sign Angus when he is off contract next year. Who says no?

If that happened all four Brayshaw bros would be living in Brisbane

 

[Jman78]

Cant find the media thread, but the Podcast with Berry (who I think all Lions supporters pretty much love being at our club) was fantastic. 4 moments stood out for me

1. “ I wouldn’t change it for the world”, literally yelped when he said that, sounded odd as people stared at me listening to my podcast while sitting down for my morning coffee at a cafe in Amsterdam... no AFL here.... unfortunately.

2. “We went out for tea”, just the fact he said tea not dinner. I know it’s silly but I really like the fact he said tea

3. He wants Dow at number 1 as he is a country kid. Jokingly possibly, idk....

4. “Hughie is anal about his golf”, just the fact he put it that way is pure gold.

I’m certain I didn’t get the paraphrasing 100% right but I’m close enough I think.




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[M Malice]

1. “ I wouldn’t change it for the world”, literally yelped when he said that, sounded odd as people stared at me listening to my podcast while sitting down for my morning coffee at a cafe in Amsterdam... no AFL here.... unfortunately.

2. “We went out for tea”, just the fact he said tea not dinner. I know it’s silly but I really like the fact he said tea

3. He wants Dow at number 1 as he is a country kid. Jokingly possibly, idk....

4. “Hughie is anal about his golf”, just the fact he put it that way is pure gold.

I’m certain I didn’t get the paraphrasing 100% right but I’m close enough I think.




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Is that what they call it there now?

 

[Jman78]

Is that what they call it there now?

Hahaha no no Cafe, not a coffee shop.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[HighReeve]

Answer from Lions_Insider re Cat B rookies (in other thread):
Jivlain said: ↑G'day Lions_Insider, do you know if Matty Eagles and/or Cian Hanley will be considered a Cat B rookie next year?
Both likely to be Cat B. Will be confirmed Wednesday, 29 November at list lodgement.

So this answer suggests that the AFL might have given us permission to list Hanley as Cat B again. Which frees up potentially 6 list spots at draft (if Clay Beams is rookied) or an extra cat A rookie spot if we only make 5 selections at draft. What do you think
dlanod? No precedent for this, so the AFL is making it up as they go?

Ciaran Sheehan of the Blues was a fourth year cat b rookie this year so there is precedent, the afl not very clear on these things it seems.

Good luck with the draft Lions, hope you smash it again.

 

[wantok]

Some thoughts on the draft with an eye to general improvement and also a reduction in the go home factor for interstate clubs.

- Raise the draft age to 19
- 3 year initial contracts
- If a player or destination club initiates a return home during the initial contract ,the destination club must pay the losing club a minimum of their first round draft pick for the next year or a compensatory player exchange as agreed by the losing club
- If the losing Club initiates the trade normal trading negotiation apply

Not perfect but should slow down the poaching activities of Victorian clubs.

 

[briztoon]

Second half of the article is the best part.

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2017/11/16/a-question-of-character/

 

[luthor]

Second half of the article is the best part.

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2017/11/16/a-question-of-character/

Excellent article all round I thought

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I'd fix the issue of go home factor compensation by forming an AFL arbitration panel to determine a fair trade value if the two clubs can't agree on what is fair value. If the clubs agree on taking the situation to the panel, they agree to abide by whatever the panel's decision is.

In conjunction with this, I'd eliminate the draft and replace it with a point auction for new players, with each team's points allocation based on their ladder position. That way trades are not subject to what draft picks a team has to trade with.

 

[jjami15]

Second half of the article is the best part.

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2017/11/16/a-question-of-character/

This article further outlines the different areas that recruiters look at besides their actual football talent. I suppose this why, especially this year, that people on BF are bemused when others are drafted before more highly rated players.

You can actually say that we are in the home straight in regards to the draft. I suppose for our club there is the extra 2km testing (which I think is actually a bit unfair having an extra month or so to specifically train for it) and the recruiters heading up to Brisbane for their final discussions. Exciting time ahead indeed.