Roast AFL need to change the draft system next season for bottom four clubs.

[Free Agent]

The last few weeks have been horrible. Wanting you're side to lose to obtain a pick 1 is just is a horrible feeling.

Now that Eagles finally got a win to get us out of this feeling of wanting to lose the comp just really needs to change the draft system next year. And I'm saying this as Eagles will likely be bottom four. This might be demientrial to our club but there needs to be a lotto system for the bottom 4 clubs. AFL can't keep going on like this where the bottom four clubs have nothing to play for except trying to lose and get lowest possible like Kangas have been doing the last half of the season. After the game against the Bulldogs even though we won we lost the number 1 pick, there was a huge sense of relief that went with it. I'm sick of wanting my side to lose for a draft pick. It's ruined the integrity of the comp and the season for me. I haven't been able to enjoy watching my club at least wanting to win over the season. It just isn't enjoyable and winning should be enjoyable on every occasion.

Don't want to go through this exact same scenario next season. It needs to change for the good. Last place on the ladder should have something to fight for. Bottom 4 clubs need some initiative for winning games. Especially the bottom 2.

Lotto draft is the only way I feel it can be done. If a side is too bad in last place PP will always be in discussion but at least change the order of draft so it's not guaranteed. Take pick position out of clubs hands.

 

[Colonial]

100% agree.
Clubs trying to lose has to stop.

 

[RUNVS]

I strongly believe that a points system for the draft and trade periods is what the AFL needs to go to. Give 18th lets say 4000 points, give 17th 3700 points and so on.

Then in the trade period no need to worry about a club not having picks in the right range for a player as points are traded instead.

Then on draft night we go into a blind auction. Pick 1 is announced and all 18 clubs are able to pick a player they want and the points they are willing to pay for said player, and after 2 minutes when everyone has submitted their blind bids it is announced who bid the most and what player they nominated.

Keep doing that for pick 2 and so on.

That way it matters less who finishes 18th in the season, and a team like West Coast can target Western Australians in the draft, rather than only having Vic Metro kids in their draft range and having to really reach to get the player they actually want.

 

[Engimal v3]

AFL can't keep going on like this where the bottom four clubs have nothing to play for except trying to lose and get lowest possible like Kangas have been doing the last half of the season.

The sentiment is nice, but we're genuinely just a bit s**t

 

[Chadwiko]

Knew this thread was started by a WCE fan before I even clicked on it.

 

[Colonial]

Knew this thread was started by a WCE fan before I even clicked on it.

So you are ok with tanking and fans wanting their clubs to lose?

 

[Chadwiko]

So you are ok with tanking and fans wanting their clubs to lose?

There hasn't been any tanking in recent years.

Fans seeing the upside in their club finishing 18th instead of 17th doesn't keep me up at night.

 

[juss]

The last few weeks have been horrible. Wanting you're side to lose to obtain a pick 1 is just is a horrible feeling.

Now that Eagles finally got a win to get us out of this feeling of wanting to lose the comp just really needs to change the draft system next year. And I'm saying this as Eagles will likely be bottom four. This might be demientrial to our club but there needs to be a lotto system for the bottom 4 clubs. AFL can't keep going on like this where the bottom four clubs have nothing to play for except trying to lose and get lowest possible like Kangas have been doing the last half of the season. After the game against the Bulldogs even though we won we lost the number 1 pick, there was a huge sense of relief that went with it. I'm sick of wanting my side to lose for a draft pick. It's ruined the integrity of the comp and the season for me. I haven't been able to enjoy watching my club at least wanting to win over the season. It just isn't enjoyable and winning should be enjoyable on every occasion.

Don't want to go through this exact same scenario next season. It needs to change for the good. Last place on the ladder should have something to fight for. Bottom 4 clubs need some initiative for winning games. Especially the bottom 2.

Lotto draft is the only way I feel it can be done. If a side is too bad in last place PP will always be in discussion but at least change the order of draft so it's not guaranteed. Take pick position out of clubs hands.

Which clubs have tried to lose?

West Coast had pick 1 on a platter and they actually won and lost the pick.

I feel this is a supporter issue more than an AFL club issue. Supporters hate being compromised in their thinking, do we want to win or do we want pick X for example, but I don't think the same is translating to clubs.

That being said, a bottom 4 lottery isn't the worst idea for picks 1-4, however it does make it harder if there's an absolute terrible team.

It's easy to say you're happy with it, but how happy are you if the Eagles finished last 3 years in a row, and instead of pick 1 they got pick 4 each year, which after bids and academy and compensation etc become the 6th kid in the draft each year while the teams that finished 15th each year got pick 1 and became even stronger?

 

[worldlylizard19]

A lotto system for the bottom 4 shifts the tanking up the ladder. it would be in the best interest for Gold Coast and Freo to tank their % as hard as possible this week and secure a chance at pick 1.

 

[The Passenger]

Let's say the cut off for the number one pick is bottom four...

Does that create an even bigger incentive for teams who are 12th to 14th to tank...

Currently the tanking debate is confined to the bottom two teams... Occasionally bottom three teams. Each of those teams is already in a position to grab an A-grade prospect.

With a lottery, teams could go from pick #6 (a very good prospect) to pick #1 (to an exceptional prospect)... Obviously in a lottery system losing games doesn't guarantee that you get your hands on a specific prospect, but the potential jump up the board is large.

In any case I think the whole tanking thing is overstated. As a coach or player the easiest way to get sacked is to lose consistently. So how does the conversation go? "Your job is safe, just lose a few extra games so we can get some good draft picks"... Said player, assistant coach or head coach loses games and gets sacked anyway... "ooo yeah, so we had to be seen to be doing something so thanks for the draft picks but sorry you're sacked".

The incentive for tanking seems quite low seeing as though your potentially putting your own job on the line.

This is not a like-for-like example because of the positional speciality in American Football but in the season Indianapolis Colts picked up one of the highest rated college quarterbacks of all time in Andrew Luck, they used three quarterbacks in their 2-14 season. None of those three ever started an NFL game again after that season - they have literally zero reason to help the Colts get pick #1 of that draft. That #1 pick is literally taking their job.

Furthermore the nature of Aussie Rules as a sport doesn't lend itself to destabilising club culture for a single player. Obviously there are star players, but it's not like basketball where each player makes up 20% of your starting personnel or American Football where a quarterback is crucially important to a teams success.

On top of that IMO If you failed to develop the #2 or #3 draft pick into a star player, there is a pretty strong chance you'd have messed up the career of the #1 pick as well.

Successful clubs will concentrate on their development pathways. Unsuccessful clubs search for messiahs.

 

[EBERT THE KING]

Has to be a lottery. and it has to come in after this season.

Id do the bottom 6 having the same amount of opportunity to get pick 1.

There's simply no incentive to win games for the poor sides

 

[Ry009]

It's easy to say you're happy with it, but how happy are you if the Eagles finished last 3 years in a row, and instead of pick 1 they got pick 4 each year, which after bids and academy and compensation etc become the 6th kid in the draft each year while the teams that finished 15th each year got pick 1 and became even stronger?

Yep. Exactly why none of it should exist - F/S, NGA, PP - all of it.

Only time draft compromisation should occur is the introduction of a new team. Even then there should be a balanced method so clubs near the bottom aren't disadvantaged through picks or mid range clubs through loss of experienced players.

AFL like always make it up as they go along and no surprise no-one is happy.

 

[juss]

Yep. Exactly why none of it should exist - F/S, NGA, PP - all of it.

Only time draft compromisation should occur is the introduction of a new team. Even then there should be a balanced method so clubs near the bottom aren't disadvantaged through picks or mid range clubs through loss of experienced players.

AFL like always make it up as they go along and no surprise no-one is happy.

I'm leaning more and more towards that. The one I do love sentimentally is the F/S rule, but it's harder and harder to justify the pot luck of getting a top pick just because of genetic luck.

Maybe we could get rid of them all, and keep F/S picks to outside the top 20? I don't think it's too compromised if someone gets pick 21 as a F/S and pays pick 30.

Not a fan of Academies or FA compo though, or the AFL secret priority assistance.

 

[Chadwiko]

Has to be a lottery. and it has to come in after this season.

Id do the bottom 6 having the same amount of opportunity to get pick 1.

There's simply no incentive to win games for the poor sides

You'd be comfortable with the Adelaide Crows winning the 1st overall pick this year? Over NMFC or WCE?

The Crows who have won 10 games? Which is 1 fewer than North have won over the last 4 seasons combined?

You think that makes the league stronger?

Really?

 

[EBERT THE KING]

You'd be comfortable with the Adelaide Crows winning the 1st overall pick this year? Over NMFC or WCE?

The Crows who have won 10 games? Which is 1 fewer than North have won over the last 4 seasons combined?

You think that makes the league stronger?

Really?

Yep. 100%.

Sheezel was pick 3 and is by far and away the best player from last years draft. Daicos was pick 4 the previous year.

Need to eradicate the tanking at all costs.

 

[Chadwiko]

 

[EBERT THE KING]

Clearly you have a dog in the fight but facts are facts.

Rarely in AFL drafts has pick 1 been the best player from that draft. There has also been a lot of busts at pick 1.

 

[Colonial]

There hasn't been any tanking in recent years.

Yep and santa is real.

 

[Chadwiko]

Clearly you have a dog in the fight but facts are facts.

Rarely in AFL drafts has pick 1 been the best player from that draft. There has also been a lot of busts at pick 1.

It's not about having a dog in the fight.

I follow (and have covered) the NBA closely, as the largest professional competition that utilises a draft lottery. And it is extremely flawed. There are perennial cellar-dweller teams that have never won a championship, or haven't even been competitive for decades.

There is no perfect system, but a results-based, uncompromised draft is by far the best solution.

Get rid of father sons, academies, and priority picks first.

 

[Off Tap]

A lotto system for the bottom 4 shifts the tanking up the ladder. it would be in the best interest for Gold Coast and Freo to tank their % as hard as possible this week and secure a chance at pick 1.

This.

The Dallas Mavericks sat out players in order to lose and they were nearly in the playoffs.

Tanking to not play in finals.

 

[Nugett]

I strongly believe that a points system for the draft and trade periods is what the AFL needs to go to. Give 18th lets say 4000 points, give 17th 3700 points and so on.

Then in the trade period no need to worry about a club not having picks in the right range for a player as points are traded instead.

Then on draft night we go into a blind auction. Pick 1 is announced and all 18 clubs are able to pick a player they want and the points they are willing to pay for said player, and after 2 minutes when everyone has submitted their blind bids it is announced who bid the most and what player they nominated.

Keep doing that for pick 2 and so on.

That way it matters less who finishes 18th in the season, and a team like West Coast can target Western Australians in the draft, rather than only having Vic Metro kids in their draft range and having to really reach to get the player they actually want.

I’m of a similar opinion. Have points rather than picks. Bottom team gets 2000 top team gets 300. The team with the least points gets to bid first. Have the first round starting at 100 point bids.

 

[Colonial]

Get rid of father sons, academies, and priority picks first.

Nah plenty of other things need to be equalised at the same time as that.

 

[EBERT THE KING]

It's not about having a dog in the fight.

I follow (and have covered) the NBA closely, as the largest professional competition that utilises a draft lottery. And it is extremely flawed. There are perennial cellar-dweller teams that have never won a championship, or haven't even been competitive for decades.

There is no perfect system, but a results-based, uncompromised draft is by far the best solution.

Get rid of father sons, academies, and priority picks first.

Absolute agree on your last point there. Father/Sons are the most Victorian centric thing of all time.

Would love to get your thoughts on how the NBA draft lottery is flawed though? Once again, multiple multiple first picks have been busts in that league (Fultz, Bennett, Williamson, to name a few)

It comes down to the level of the teams scouts, and the resources the clubs allocate to this.

 

[Carn The Berries]

Yep. 100%.

Sheezel was pick 3 and is by far and away the best player from last years draft. Daicos was pick 4 the previous year.

Need to eradicate the tanking at all costs.

By your own example, you've shown why this isn't as big an issue as some people are trying to make out. The hoopla around pick 1 seems unjustified to me. The "incentive" for "tanking" just isn't really there. Ultimately, if you're down the bottom of the ladder there is SFA difference between pick 1 and pick 2.

The lottery is barely a better idea that the "wildcard" round (hint: not a wildcard round, just an extended finals series). Why do we insist on wanting to replicate everything the USA does, without assessing whether it's actually fit for purpose?

 

[EBERT THE KING]

By your own example, you've shown why this isn't as big an issue as some people are trying to make out. The hoopla around pick 1 seems unjustified to me. The "incentive" for "tanking" just isn't really there. Ultimately, if you're down the bottom of the ladder there is SFA difference between pick 1 and pick 2.

The lottery is barely a better idea that the "wildcard" round (hint: not a wildcard round, just an extended finals series). Why do we insist on wanting to replicate everything the USA does, without assessing whether it's actually fit for purpose?

It is though when the actual games are being compromised.

Im pointing out that a team that finished 12th getting the first pick would alleviate the tanking by teams 17 and 18.

Clearly, this season, there is a clear number one choice for the 1st pick, which is causing the tanking to occur.