Fantasia blast priority picks system

[feher]

IMO, priority picks don't reward poor performing teams, they reward clubs with deep-rooted problems. If a club honestly wants to win >5 games in a year, they can.

do you want me to dig up my post that state the facts where in the last 24 years their has ever only being 1 year were every team has won 6+ games? and we are talking about years were their was no PP, or first pick in the draft.

 

[conVINCEd]

do you want me to dig up my post that state the facts where in the last 24 years their has ever only being 1 year were every team has won 6+ games? and we are talking about years were their was no PP, or first pick in the draft.

If you would find that enjoyable, then go for your life.

I'm not saying clubs have always lost deliberately, that wouldn't make sense because, as you said, the PP system hasn't been around that long.

Some clubs, at given points, have a loser culture so engrained that it becomes impossible to be successful unless change is made. My point is that clubs in these positions sometimes choose to not make change.

 

[feher]

Some clubs, at given points, have a loser culture so engrained that it becomes impossible to be successful unless change is made. My point is that clubs in these positions sometimes choose to not make change.

and how exactly are these club suppose to turn that around? giving them an extra pick which the afl seems to love doing, gets them up the ladder, you think given the choice any club relisticly wants to be at the bottom? maybe you should think back a bit, but pre-draft days teams when their season where over still played the youngsters, nothing has changed, its just an extra pick in a hope to rebuild that extra bit quicker, think of it this way, the sooner those bottom side's rebuild the sooner your side gets a pp

 

[imbecile12]

How do you figure that? Had they not picked up Carey they would have had pick #2 instead. Richmond in essence gave up pick #2 for Johnson, the Crows wanted to on trade that pick for Carey, it was their choice to take Carey instead of pick #2.

The only reason the crows had pick 2 at all was because the deal was already in place for Carey. It all went hand in hand. If the crows hadnt delivered Johnson, Richmond would have kept pick 2. At no point could the crows really have said "forget Carey, we'll keep pick 2" because it was all contingent on that part being completed.

Another thing to mention is that the deal may have been very different if Carey wasnt involved. Johnson may not have ended up at Richmond. Then again its too difficult to speculate as other pieces like Torney or draft picks may not have lined up. Im just happy we've finally got a top 10 draft pick.

 

[Portia]

Priority draft picks are a bad idea. The competition would be better if they didn't exist.

 

[feher]

Another thing to mention is that the deal may have been very different if Carey wasnt involved. Johnson may not have ended up at Richmond. Then again its too difficult to speculate as other pieces like Torney or draft picks may not have lined up. Im just happy we've finally got a top 10 draft pick.

you have had at least 2 top 10 draft picks that you have traded away:

1) pick 8? you got for rehn that you gave to port for bode (not 3 way deal, 2 seperate trades)
2) pick 6 for m. clarke.

 

[jim boy]

The problem with priority picks is that that it just assumes that a team is performing poorly because of a poor playing list. But it ignores the fact that most teams finish that low for a whole different bunch of different reasons; poor coaching, a bad run with injuries, a bad culture at the club or just simple bad luck (somebody has to finish last).

Out of the last 10 years, the only side I can think of whose actual playing stocks had fallen so low was Carlton, and they managed to turn it around without the help normally afforded to such a low finish because of the salary cap penalties.

Priority picks simply do not do the job they're meant to.

 

[imbecile12]

now since the dogs haven't had pp since last year, doesn't that even more justify them getting pp? considering how bad they have being.

wrong, saints did not stock pile talent (i presume you mean on purpose here), they didn't have the talent to compete, now they do, now they don't need pp, now they can compete against the top sides. lets see you have a football player, he has a choice of giving it his all week in, week out, and being a career player or doing crap so his club ends up with top picks, which could be the pick that takes your spot in the squad, what do you think he would do? just lay over for the benefit of the club? or give it his all, even though he lacks the skills?

their is no guarrantee you will keep those picks, remember to get quality you have to give up quality, and imo fantasia is making it sound like your 1st rd pick is useless, which means he might as well trade it for anything.

I'll say this about priority picks: When a team has been consistent and competitive for a long time, they either bottom out and rebuild (Bulldogs) or they manage to replenish the side without falling too far (Essendon). I dont necessarily think either way is more effective cos as far as im concerned, the Bulldogs will be premiership contenders about the same time as Essendon are again. I agree that priority picks should have a place. Having 3 draft picks in the first 18 (which would happen if they moved the priority pick to the end of the first round) is still pretty good.

Bit of a misunderstanding about the saints there. I wasnt intimating the players were laying down or throwing games, I just meant they happened to gain a lot of talent through where they finished.

Everything the crows have been saying indicates we'll keep the number 8 pick, which is good considering the high likelihood of a very good South Australian player being available then. Always a very interesting time.

 

[imbecile12]

you have had at least 2 top 10 draft picks that you have traded away:

1) pick 8? you got for rehn that you gave to port for bode (not 3 way deal, 2 seperate trades)
2) pick 6 for m. clarke.

Even considering those two, its a small number compared to most other teams. I will say that part of that has been down to the club not pulling the trigger on more trades to enter the top 10, which is how a few clubs get into the top 10 anyway.

As far as the other significant draft pick that we kept, which turned out to be Lawrence Angwin, you cant really criticise that because at the time he was the logical choice. It turned out horribly, and you can criticise the result, but not the trade. It's very much the same with Carey. Right decision to trade, wrong outcome. You take the risk and live with the consequences. All part of the magic of trading.