Strategy Draft assistance 2023 [Twomey: NMFC get #19 in 2023, x2 end of 1st rd picks in 2024, and x2 extra rookie list spots in 2024; no Sanders/#11]

[Harris 10]

JUH, Daicos and now Ashcroft, it is a case to argue the best talent isn't going where it is needed the most and the draft mechanism has failed, particularly with free agency.

I just went through it and our first pick in 6 of the last 8 drafts has been pushed back by either FS, FA compensation or priority picks.
You can also argue that we didn’t have access to Daicos last year.

 

[Only Forwards]

I just went through it and our first pick in 6 of the last 8 drafts has been pushed back by either FS, FA compensation or priority picks.
You can also argue that we didn’t have access to Daicos last year.

Working on ladder position for draft position 18=1, 17=2 etc, I am not sure how accurate your 6/8 is.

2021 - pick 1 ( no slide)
2020 - slide 2-3 10-13
2019 - no first (our pick 8 remained pick 8)
2018 - Traded first for Polec took Thomas (technically we had 10 and moved forward to 8, our pick 10 moved to pick 12 but we caused part of that)
2017 - no slide pick 4
2016 - slide 11-12 (not completely sure how that one worked as there were 2 academy picks in front of us but we finished in 8th with pick 11)
2015 - our our pick 15 became pick 19 but we had traded it. We did have 17 that became 21, which was somehow still considered first round(?)
2014 - finished 4th after finals this is pick 15(?) took 16 in the draft, but there was a compo and a F/S in front of us
2013 - oved forward pick 9 to pick 8 (Luke McDonald)
2012 - slide pick 11 to pick 15 (Garner)




no slide 21, 19, 17.
slide 20 (twice) 16,15,14,12
moved forward, 18, 13

There is a compounding of issues here.

• introduction of the franchise sides. f***ed the draft for years
• sliding rules on F/S LMac happned prior to bid matching and draft points so we were basically incapable of trading down.
• the sliding rules around NGA picks. We both benefitted and lost out because of this. Benefitted through Thomas, lost out the year JUH was taken. Now it would be inconsequential but we also would have no right to Thomas.

I think that the AFL has it nearly right. I would like to see the first round bid matching expanded to include the northern academies and not just the NGA. with the only reasons for sliding in the first round being through F/S matching. Which I think should be absolutely protected. I have no issue with there being a phasing element for the newer sides. ie GC/GWS can still have their academy until such time as they can take their first F/S at which point they lose first round access to academy players. Brisbane and Sydney lose it immediately.

For us the year that sticks out to me is 2018. If we had been able to take Blakey and Thomas (picks 8 & 10) we would have killed that draft.

 

[Hazey1977]

Perhaps a mid first round. I'd be aiming that high but I doubt it will happen. Other clubs are already campaigning against us.

We have gone the way of not asking for particular picks, but for xxxx points over multiple drafts. I highly doubt that is going to result in multiple first round picks.

I didn't even know XXXX has a members points program. Sneaky little Milton Mango's!

Hopefully we aren't forced to use it on mid strength?

People in C(l)UB land are not happy at this approach.

On SM-G781B using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[The Nostradamus]

Has to be priority pick 2 if the afl actually care about equalisation

9 wins in 3 seasons is as bad as it ever gets, worse than the suns

 

[roos 10]

Pick 2 pp pick 19pp this year
Pick 19 pp next year

 

[The Nostradamus]

Pick 2 pp pick 19pp this year
Pick 19 pp next year

Yep that would work with the whole 6000 point application

 

[scottywiper]

Has to be priority pick 2 if the afl actually care about equalisation

9 wins in 3 seasons is as bad as it ever gets, worse than the suns

The afl cares about equalisation... Did you laugh as you typed it?

 

[Only Forwards]

The afl cares about equalisation... Did you laugh as you typed it?

The afl cares about us not being a walk over every week.

Not good for advertisers or broadcast deals.

 

[Le Grille]

The afl cares about us not being a walk over every week.

Not good for advertisers or broadcast deals.

They dont

 

[The Nostradamus]

The afl cares about us not being a walk over every week.

Not good for advertisers or broadcast deals.

And also to keep the comp fair and not have some teams get easy double up wins

 

[shimaburnsgrieg]

My view on assistance now would be

- pick 19, pick 37 and 2 pre listed state based players.

 

[Only Forwards]

They dont

Nah man if the afl could plan it every game would be within about 4 goals and be typically a seesawing game with lots of lead changes.

Big teams on top often with fairytale upsets when it suits.

No team is good being s**t all the time.

 

[DesertRoo]

My view on assistance now would be

- pick 19, pick 37 and 2 pre listed state based players.

State league players have just been raided, we had one in Kallen running around today.
Pre-listing two now is pointless.. it’s not a free hit as it once was

 

[shimaburnsgrieg]

State league players have just been raided, we had one in Kallen running around today.
Pre-listing two now is pointless.. it’s not a free hit as it once was

Agree - but they will include them in nevertheless to round out the 'package of assistance measures'.

 

[The Big O]

Hopefully we have asked for soft cap relief as well to pay out staff and let Clarko hire his dream team. More important than picks IMO.
A clean slate allows us to make football decisions not as strongly influenced by finance.

On SM-S901E using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Le Grille]

Hopefully we have asked for soft cap relief as well to pay out staff and let Clarko hire his dream team. More important than picks IMO.
A clean slate allows us to make football decisions not as strongly influenced by finance.

On SM-S901E using BigFooty.com mobile app

I don’t think it’s an issue as most are on similar rolling contracts like noble was

 

[Sillygit]

I'd be pleasantly surprised if we got pick 19. There's no way in hell they are going to give us GC level assistance, and I don't know why anyone would expext they would.

They don't apply the rules equally to all teams. If they get caught in a bind, they change the rules on the fly. Fluff something here or there and move on.

Hence pleasantly surprised with 19, cause even that doesnt seem like a given.

 

[CarnTheKANGAS]

This is a good article - and a change in narrative - perhaps conditioning the public when the assistance comes.

Have the Roos been unfairly impacted by father-son/Academy draft rules? (sen.com.au)

Even though it somewhat misses the mark by mentioning Thomas and McDonald -- (who shouldn't be compared to absolute top-end talent that we have had zero access to (Ugle Hagen, Daicos, and now Ashcroft), it still raises as an issue to be considered. I like it.

 

[Tas]

This is a good article - and a change in narrative - perhaps conditioning the public when the assistance comes.

Have the Roos been unfairly impacted by father-son/Academy draft rules? (sen.com.au)

Even though it somewhat misses the mark by mentioning Thomas and McDonald -- (who shouldn't be compared to absolute top-end talent that we have had zero access to (Ugle Hagen, Daicos, and now Ashcroft), it still raises as an issue to be considered. I like it.

They have been reading my posts from last week. :stern look

 

[Colbys Boots]

I'd be pleasantly surprised if we got pick 19. There's no way in hell they are going to give us GC level assistance, and I don't know why anyone would expext they would.

They don't apply the rules equally to all teams. If they get caught in a bind, they change the rules on the fly. Fluff something here or there and move on.

Hence pleasantly surprised with 19, cause even that doesnt seem like a given.

If we receive the points in lieu of a pick (as we've apparently requested), then we can trade those points to clubs with father-son or academy picks so that they can preserve their own draft hand as much as possible.

For example, the Ashcroft kid has nominated Brisbane but he is almost certain to be bid on with the first or second pick. Brisbane has picks in the first four rounds and to match the bid will cost them all four picks. Instead, they can trade their first round to us for enough points to preserve their second, third, and fourth round picks. Ashcroft costs them pick 14 (a bargain) instead of costing them 14, 32, 43, and 68. And for us, we turn the PP points into pick 14. We would probably still have points left over to repeat this the following year (the points scheme that we've suggested is meant to carry over).

 

[Sillygit]

If we receive the points in lieu of a pick (as we've apparently requested), then we can trade those points to clubs with father-son or academy picks so that they can preserve their own draft hand as much as possible.

For example, the Ashcroft kid has nominated Brisbane but he is almost certain to be bid on with the first or second pick. Brisbane has picks in the first four rounds and to match the bid will cost them all four picks. Instead, they can trade their first round to us for enough points to preserve their second, third, and fourth round picks. Ashcroft costs them pick 14 (a bargain) instead of costing them 14, 32, 43, and 68. And for us, we turn the PP points into pick 14. We would probably still have points left over to repeat this the following year (the points scheme that we've suggested is meant to carry over).

That certainly would be a fluff in our favour and ultimately better than what i expected.

Still, i dont at all see them just giving us pick 2/3 and then some, which some seem to be taking as granted.

 

[bengrina]

I wonder if we sign (coach I won't mention by name as I don't want to jinx it) would this impact on what we may or may not receive?

 

[Only Forwards]

I wonder if we sign (coach I won't mention by name as I don't want to jinx it) would this impact on what we may or may not receive?

IMHO absolutely it will.

The narrative is already shifting around us.

We have gone from being the worst team ever to being a team that has greenshoots and potential.

The Narrative that we want the AFL to get behind is the rags to riches story we could push.

Getting Clarko would be a massive win, He is the most sought after coach of the last 10+ years. How many times did I read he was going to Carlton prior to this year, even this year he is going to Brisbane, Essendon, and Port, all of whom have contracted coaches. It'd be a massive win for us and with it will come assistance to make it successful.

The flipside of course is if we don't get him, well, he'd be another big fish failure and those stories write themselves. Still think we would get help but it would not be the same level.

 

[King Corey]

Off-topic slightly, but I'd like this thread to move to the title "draft relief". Makes it sound edgier.

 

[franjon]

You can also argue that we didn’t have access to Daicos last year.

I was never concerned about that. We need to develop our early draftees to become, and want to become career players for our club. I don't really see the point in drafting a player who, most likely would be looking to be traded to Collingwood once his initial contract is up.