My Draft Proposal

[Books]

I have been thinking a lot lately about the draft system and how it works. Given that the basic aim of the draft (helping the lower clubs improve) must be maintained while also taking away the incentive to tank, I have come up with the following suggestion:

Picks 1-16: All clubs outside the 8 go into a lottery. The 1'st club drawn gets picks 1 and 16, the second club gets 2 and 15, third gets 3 and 14 etc. until the last club drawn gets picks 8 and 9. There is then no incentive to tank as surely all clubs would rather play finals if they can and no team is particularly disadvantaged by the lottery, they will all get a fairly even deal.

Picks 17-32: All clubs inside the 8 get two picks in reverse order, ie. the 8th team has picks 17 and 25, the premier team has picks 24 and 32.

Priority picks, if they are still necessary, would be before round 3 (ie. pick 33). However seeing as all teams outside the 8 are effectively getting two 1st round picks already there would surely be no need for PP's except for genuinely weak teams (like 2 wins or less for the year).

Other possible changes:

1. Either round 3 or 4 could be held in ladder order, TOP to BOTTOM instead of reverse order, to compensate the top 8 teams for not getting a pick in the top 16.
2. Father-Son selections could be for ANY 3rd round pick, not necessarily the clubs original pick, thus providing a way of eliminationg the current flaw where a weak team is actually penalised by having to give up more for a F/S pick than a strong team has to give up.

So:
Round 1. - 2 picks each for all bottom 8 sides (subject to trades).

Round 2. - 2 picks each for all top 8 sides (subject to trades).

Priority Picks (If any)

Round 3. - Bottom to Top of ladder (including F/S picks)

Round 4. - Top to Bottom of Ladder.

Rounds 5 and all subsequent - Bottom to Top of ladder.


This would eliminate the temptation (or perception) of tanking and it would provide help for all the bottom 8 teams so we see different sides featuring in the finals. Obviously the lottery would have to be held before trade week so every club knew exactly what they were dealing with.

As I said I have thought about it a lot and I think this system would work.

Thoughts / feedback / other suggestions????... (Sensible ones please. Try to think about it and understand it before you criticise it!) Thanks!

 

[silverphoenix]

So u just want to speed up the equalisation by giving teams down the bottom not one by 2 picks before those who make the finals?

Quite possibly the dumbest idea ive ever heard.

 

[Books]

OK thanks for the feedback. Is "speeding up the equalisation" a problem? That was not really my intention, my main aim was to eliminate tanking. But the primary reason that the draft exists is to even-up the competition, so I don't see why doing that is such a problem.
Teams may be in the 8 for a year and then get overtaken by others, but they will in turn get their turn at early picks. The AFL would be happy to see different teams featuring in the finals from year to year.

Do you have a better idea? Or are you like Mike Sheahan who thinks the system is fine as it is?

 

[celtic_pride]

OK thanks for the feedback. Is "speeding up the equalisation" a problem? That was not really my intention, my main aim was to eliminate tanking. But the primary reason that the draft exists is to even-up the competition, so I don't see why doing that is such a problem.
Teams may be in the 8 for a year and then get overtaken by others, but they will in turn get their turn at early picks. The AFL would be happy to see different teams featuring in the finals from year to year.

Do you have a better idea? Or are you like Mike Sheahan who thinks the system is fine as it is?

Any system is better then the one you have devised IMO. As the previous writer said, is it fair that all bottom 8 clubs get 2 picsk in the first rnd of the draft ?
Also having first rnd picks does not speed up the rebuilding process. At carlton we have wasted a lot of first rnd picks of the years on the likes of Kris Massie, Livingstone, Murray Vance etc.
No the system is fine as it is, and it will stay the same for at least the forseeable future. Lottery systems isn't a good idea long term.

 

[jules101]

why does it need change? I did a study on the competitve balnce of the AFL compared to other sport leagues around the world NFL and EPL ones i could remember and its definately up there as one of the most competitive...

 

[Books]

why does it need change? I did a study on the competitve balnce of the AFL compared to other sport leagues around the world NFL and EPL ones i could remember and its definately up there as one of the most competitive...

I think it needs changing because there is a strong perception out there that teams are tanking for draft picks. Even if they are not, fans are certainly happier to be losing and getting good picks rather than winning and finishing 9th. Either way, it is not good for football.

 

[jules101]

I think it needs changing because there is a strong perception out there that teams are tanking for draft picks. Even if they are not, fans are certainly happier to be losing and getting good picks rather than winning and finishing 9th. Either way, it is not good for football.

Your theory makes it even better for teams to finish out of the 8

Finish 9th and u get two picks in a row lol

 

[Warwick]

Gee pick 8 and 9 for finishing 9th!!

 

[Books]

Your theory makes it even better for teams to finish last though.

Finish 9th and u get two picks in a row lol

No, it does assist the teams that miss the 8, but that is what the draft is supposed to do. Under the current system, once a team thinks thay cannot make the 8 they are better of losing and planning for next year. Under my system, all teams would keep trying all year because there is no advantage in being 15th over being 10th. Your number could come up anywhere in the lottery, and picks 1 and 16 or picks 8 and 9, depending on the players in the draft, is a fairly similar outcome.
Now if you finish 15th you get picks 2, 18, 34 etc, much better than finishing 12th and getting 5,21,37 etc.
Under my system there is less difference so no incentive to finish last.

 

[Books]

What about if we reversed the order of round 3 (instead of round 4) and went Top to Bottom of the ladder. Then:
The premier team gets picks 24,32,33 (currently 16,32,48) so they are not really any worse off.
The bottom teams might get 1,16,48 or 6,11,45 or whatever, depending where they were drawn in the lottery.
And you would eliminate the incentive to tank but still help the teams that need help.

 

[blues4flag]

Didn't read past initial post, but the difference between 9th and 8th is huge - big enough for a team who would be only filling up the numbers and missing the finals to be accused of tanking.

 

[Dirty Rutten Scoundrel]

Thanks for trying, but it's not a good idea. In fact, it's pretty bad. Like woeful.

 

[jules101]

Didn't read past initial post, but the difference between 9th and 8th is huge - big enough for a team who would be only filling up the numbers and missing the finals to be accused of tanking.

Carlton 1999 finished 8th made the grand final. Gotta be in it to win it!

 

[Books]

Didn't read past initial post, but the difference between 9th and 8th is huge - big enough for a team who would be only filling up the numbers and missing the finals to be accused of tanking.

Good point. It is a weakness (no system is perfect!). But would a team really tank when they could make the eight? Wouldn't 8th be better for the exposure and experience of playing finals?

 

[Books]

Thanks for trying, but it's not a good idea. In fact, it's pretty bad. Like woeful.

Reasons?

 

[jules101]

Good point. It is a weakness (no system is perfect!). But would a team really tank when they could make the eight? Wouldn't 8th be better for the exposure and experience of playing finals?

Yeah I agree with that no team abd I repeat NO TEAM will tank to get to 9th position. Every teams aim is to make the finals not get draft picks

 

[Books]

Any system is better then the one you have devised IMO. As the previous writer said, is it fair that all bottom 8 clubs get 2 picsk in the first rnd of the draft ?
Also having first rnd picks does not speed up the rebuilding process. At carlton we have wasted a lot of first rnd picks of the years on the likes of Kris Massie, Livingstone, Murray Vance etc.
No the system is fine as it is, and it will stay the same for at least the forseeable future. Lottery systems isn't a good idea long term.

ANY System is better??? Surely not. The current system where teams tank and the integrity of the competition is questioned? Or the old system where the rich clubs got whoever they wanted? I don't think so.
You say it is not fair for lower teams to get 2 picks before the top teams, but then point out that early picks are not a guarantee of success!? Which way are you arguing? I agree early picks are no guarantee (although these days they are usually better) but doesn't that mean the weak clubs need more to help them improve?

I would argue that the current system is a poor one and needs to be changed, while not losing sight of the focus - creating an even competition. I am simply looking for ways to achieve that.

 

[Books]

Thanks for trying, but it's not a good idea. In fact, it's pretty bad. Like woeful.

Well, come on. Don't just criticise. What is your suggestion?

If we leave it as is, we will have teams "resting" their star players every year, and fans cheering for the opposition so they can get better picks.
If we use Garry Lyon's theory the 9th team gets first pick and the 16th team stays at 16th.
If we use a lottery system only for the 1st 8 picks then we potentially get Garry Lyon's theory anyway, and if a team finishes last and is unlucky with the lottery they could be last for several years in a row.

Under my system we do give all the bottom teams a boost without giving them incentive to finish as low as possible.

I am looking for a solution. Do you have a better idea? I am open to hear it. Like I said, I have thought about this a lot. I encourage others to do the same.

 

[Books]

So u just want to speed up the equalisation by giving teams down the bottom not one by 2 picks before those who make the finals?

Quite possibly the dumbest idea ive ever heard.

At least that way a Victorian team might actually make it to a Grand Final! (lol). Eventually.

 

[Kickin_Goals]

Horrible system for the competition, this would have teams vying to drop out of the eight.
Completely ridiculous.
Lyon's idea is stupid also it creates the same scenario teams battling to finish ninth can come from above as well as below.

Here I will give you a simple draft scenario where there is no point to tanking.
Remove priority picks, BAM! any incentive to lose games gone.
Other draft ideas are overshooting the mark, the priority picks are the only definite incentive to not win.

This idea that teams are tanking has been pretty well dismissed by sides performance so basically it's a media fantasy.
If teams pick duds it's on them you can't spoon feed teams to be competitive it's rather belittling.

 

[Hadders]

It's definitely an idea that's outside the square.

But will it stop sides from tanking? Under your system there is still no incentive for winning games. Once a side can't make the finals they are still going to rest players and play the kids because they know that if they drop a few more ladder positions that they will still have the same chance in the draft as everybody else.

Sure it might stop teams seemingly battling it out to see who can win the spoon and the #1 draft pick but it won't really change anything else.

As for a solution to this problem? That's the $64,000 question.

 

[Yaaablett]

Worst possible system for the competition, this would had teams vying to drop out of the eight.
Completely ridiculous.
Lyon's idea is stupid also it creates the same scenario teams battling to finish ninth can come from above as well as below.

Here I will give you a simple draft scenario where there is no point to tanking.
Remove priority picks, BAM! any incentive to lose games gone.

This idea that teams are tanking has been pretty well dismissed by sides performance so basically it's a media fantasy.
If teams pick duds it's on them you can't spoon feed teams to be competitive it's rather belittling.

Wanting to drop out of the eight! C'mon I know you were just proving a point but thats taking it a bit far. His ideas arent ridiculous, they just need a bit of ironing out. Firstly the bottom 8 sides cannot have 2 picks before a side in the 8. Thats a no brainer. Also the thought of a side who finishes 9th potentially getting 1 and 16 is a bit much before the side who finishes 8 even get 1 pick. Every draft idea is flawed though. If 1 wasn't we'd go with it.

 

[Kickin_Goals]

A team in 8th is hardly a competitor for the flag just as lower teams aren't going to be able to get 9th spot they simply aren't good enough.
Any proposal other then the removal of priority picks I feel is an overeaction to media hype.

 

[Books]

It's definitely an idea that's outside the square.

But will it stop sides from tanking? Under your system there is still no incentive for winning games. Once a side can't make the finals they are still going to rest players and play the kids because they know that if they drop a few more ladder positions that they will still have the same chance in the draft as everybody else.

Sure it might stop teams seemingly battling it out to see who can win the spoon and the #1 draft pick but it won't really change anything else.

As for a solution to this problem? That's the $64,000 question.

Isn't winning itself the incentive? Unless there is a definite incentive to lose, like now finishing 15th is better than finishing 12th. Surely if there is no "reason to lose" teams will try harder to win for the fans. Some clubs may still rest players but it won't be as prevalent as it is now.

 

[Hadders]

A team in 8th is hardly a competitor for the flag just as lower teams aren't going to be able to get 9th spot they simply aren't good enough.
Any proposal other then the removal of priority picks I feel is an overeaction to media hype.

Didn't you see above? Blues in 1999 made the GF from 8th! Plus the membership and sponsorship bonuses that come from making the finals are too great for a side to purposely drop out.

And what are you talking about the priority picks? They have been all but removed. Not many teams are going to try and lose games for an extra 2nd round pick or purposely underperform for 2 seasons to get a priority 1st round pick.