List Mgmt. Priority pick

[BluStreak]

I like the idea of leaving the draft untouched by priority picks etc and rather the focus be on the football department, the TPP and the off field side of things.
The list management structures, the football department and even the player managers are the ones who need to be addressed for struggling clubs.
These areas a foundational to improving the players.
I don't believe that additional players will help. The idea that the compensation for loosing a FA is with the gaining club is great idea, how it actually works out is still a little ambiguous but fundamentally correct.

 

[true blue19]

If priority picks are given to clubs that have been on the bottom of the ladder for multiple years there should be conditions.

- Picks can only be traded and must involve at least one player.

- clubs can't keep a 2nd first round pick from there priority trades but can continue to on trade picks.

E.g. We get pick 2 trade it to Sydney for Papley and pick 5

then trade pick 5 to Freo from Darcy and pick 8

then trade pick 8 to Gold Coast for Martin and pick 15

Then trade 15 to Brisbane for pick 19 and 44

As a result of a priority pick we add 3 player to improve our best 22 Papley, Darcy and Martin and hit the draft with picks 11, 19, 38, 44 and 47. That'll be a greater help than just pick 2 (Anderson).


Gold Coast could do the same or add an A grader like offer pick 1 to GWS for Whitfield.

It'll help clubs improve quicker.

 

[Eiffel 65]

If priority picks are given to clubs that have been on the bottom of the ladder for multiple years there should be conditions.

- Picks can only be traded and must involve at least one player.

- clubs can't keep a 2nd first round pick from there priority trades but can continue to on trade picks.

E.g. We get pick 2 trade it to Sydney for Papley and pick 5

then trade pick 5 to Freo from Darcy and pick 8

then trade pick 8 to Gold Coast for Martin and pick 15

Then trade 15 to Brisbane for pick 19 and 44

As a result of a priority pick we add 3 player to improve our best 22 Papley, Darcy and Martin and hit the draft with picks 11, 19, 38, 44 and 47. That'll be a greater help than just pick 2 (Anderson).


Gold Coast could do the same or add an A grader like offer pick 1 to GWS for Whitfield.

It'll help clubs improve quicker.

I like it but I'm not 100% sure Gold Coast would be able to attract top end talent that would warrant trading such a high selection.

The idea in principle is how it should work though because battling clubs need support now, not 5 years down the track when their draftees have developed.

 

[Eiffel 65]

Just a thought but maybe Gold Coast and GWS need to swap zones for their academy picks.

Every time I look at draft form guides, there always seems to be a gun GWS academy midfielder coming through the ranks. Gold Coast haven't been as lucky in recent years.

Just saying that if Gold Coast had access to Tom Green, that would potentially act as a mechanism to move up the draft order and have access to a second top 10 draft selection.

 

[Tushay]

Can we close this thread? I realise there'll be a discussion, but honestly, what's the point of this thread?

1. We won't get one, unless we ask.

2. If we do ask, others will kick up a fuss, and we won't get one. And we'll be pilloried.

So we won't get one and we may or may not be pilloried. That is the end game of this entire wasted discussion.

Seriously, do we really need this discussion thread so other supporters can heap it on us?

While we as supporters or as a club entertain this discussion we will never be a destination club.

A bit of pride would see this thread locked.

 

[Magruder]

If priority picks are given to clubs that have been on the bottom of the ladder for multiple years there should be conditions.

- Picks can only be traded and must involve at least one player.

- clubs can't keep a 2nd first round pick from there priority trades but can continue to on trade picks.

E.g. We get pick 2 trade it to Sydney for Papley and pick 5

then trade pick 5 to Freo from Darcy and pick 8

then trade pick 8 to Gold Coast for Martin and pick 15

Then trade 15 to Brisbane for pick 19 and 44

As a result of a priority pick we add 3 player to improve our best 22 Papley, Darcy and Martin and hit the draft with picks 11, 19, 38, 44 and 47. That'll be a greater help than just pick 2 (Anderson).


Gold Coast could do the same or add an A grader like offer pick 1 to GWS for Whitfield.

It'll help clubs improve quicker.

Sorry this falls at the first hurdle... a club is given additional trade capital but that capital is instantly compromised. It MUST be traded and in he absenceof competition, it’s worth less than it’s face value ; particularly as clubs would approach players to move and would effectively court them for months. Clubs commit to players way out from trade periods.

In each of the circumstances Whereis the incentive for the other club to give up the first rounder? Are you mandating that Sydney agree to add #5 to Papley, then Freo are compelled to add 8 to Darcy to get 5? Are you suggesting this is a compulsory trade? Because it feels confected.

Sydney are more likely to say,
Papley for your newly minted PP?
No? Ok how about:
Papley and our 3rd for your 4th and the PP?
Coz you know you have to trade thepick? And you’re welcome to go find a better deal.

Quick question... does anyone else remember the circumstances that led us to trade #16 for Barnaby French in 2002.?

 

[Magruder]

Can we close this thread? I realise there'll be a discussion, but honestly, what's the point of this thread?

1. We won't get one, unless we ask.

2. If we do ask, others will kick up a fuss, and we won't get one. And we'll be pilloried.

So we won't get one and we may or may not be pilloried. That is the end game of this entire wasted discussion.

Seriously, do we really need this discussion thread so other supporters can heap it on us?

While we as supporters or as a club entertain this discussion we will never be a destination club.

A bit of pride would see this thread locked.

I think you’re right.

Thread should closed, deleted, chopped into small pieces and the parts buried in different locations.

 

[Stig O'Hara]

Would take it in the blink of an eye.

 

[Magruder]

Would take it in the blink of an eye.

Of course...

 

[Blutopia]

I think you’re right.

Thread should closed, deleted, chopped into small pieces and the parts buried in different locations.

Sounds like you have been involved in a bethreading before...

 

[happydude]

We don't need nor should we ask for one.

No one to blame for our current situation but ourselves.

If anything we are proof high picks don't = success

 

[true blue19]

Sorry this falls at the first hurdle... a club is given additional trade capital but that capital is instantly compromised. It MUST be traded and in he absenceof competition, it’s worth less than it’s face value ; particularly as clubs would approach players to move and would effectively court them for months. Clubs commit to players way out from trade periods.

In each of the circumstances Whereis the incentive for the other club to give up the first rounder? Are you mandating that Sydney agree to add #5 to Papley, then Freo are compelled to add 8 to Darcy to get 5? Are you suggesting this is a compulsory trade? Because it feels confected.

Sydney are more likely to say,
Papley for your newly minted PP?
No? Ok how about:
Papley and our 3rd for your 4th and the PP?
Coz you know you have to trade thepick? And you’re welcome to go find a better deal.

Quick question... does anyone else remember the circumstances that led us to trade #16 for Barnaby French in 2002.?

Look at GWS with the mini draft in 2011 and 2012 they had to trade all four of those pick and they got a good return and lots of clubs wanted to trade with them

 

[BIGGUS 64]

Can we close this thread? I realise there'll be a discussion, but honestly, what's the point of this thread?

1. We won't get one, unless we ask.

2. If we do ask, others will kick up a fuss, and we won't get one. And we'll be pilloried.

So we won't get one and we may or may not be pilloried. That is the end game of this entire wasted discussion.

Seriously, do we really need this discussion thread so other supporters can heap it on us?

While we as supporters or as a club entertain this discussion we will never be a destination club.

A bit of pride would see this thread locked.

I must say, I mainly clicked on this thread thinking "What?! We're still talking about this? What can they be saying now?"
I don't think I'll bother anymore.

 

[Magruder]

Look at GWS with the mini draft in 2011 and 2012 they had to trade all four of those pick and they got a good return and lots of clubs wanted to trade with them

Circumstances and market was different.

Mini draft was early access to 17 year old kids. Effectively gave you early access to the next years obvious draftees. Allowed clubs to spread their age profile.

You are proposing something completely different.

Besides if you have a look at the trades that took place for mini draft picks, you won’t find many established senior players involved. It’s more mini draft #2 for national draft #4 balanced out by a swap of later picks.

 

[Salt Lake Cities]

Don’t need one

 

[dlb99]

We do not need any stinkin' priority picks.

 

[GapInIkonPark]

The Gold Coast had picks 2,3,6 and 23 and 3 mature aged players and it didn't help them. I don't think a priority pick will help them improve much next year but if they get one then Carlton should get one too.

Gold Cost lost Lynch and May.
And bent over to get Weller the year before.

They are going to lose Martin.

They got who ... a bunch of delisted or expendable players from other clubs, some mature age players and some high draft picks.

AFL has diluted the mature age players with the mid-season draft: there is really only the one tool left and that is a priority pick.

Unless there is some hope for Gold Coast, it will get worse next year when some of the top draft picks refuse to extend their contracts.

That is the reality of a basket case that needs help.


Carlton on the other hand we are digging ourselves out of the hole we were in very nicely and will continue to rise.

 

[BluesRule]

Unforeseen setbacks have Saints considering priority draft pick

The 2012 priority pick criteria may put St Kilda in the frame for rare draft compensation

www.afl.com.au

St Kilda not too proud to ask for a PP. 10 wins in last two years. Lost players due to injury/retirement....

We may have a stronger case, do we let STK (a team that is regularly beating us) get another AFL gift by not asking?

 

[Gethelred]

Can we close this thread? I realise there'll be a discussion, but honestly, what's the point of this thread?

1. We won't get one, unless we ask.

2. If we do ask, others will kick up a fuss, and we won't get one. And we'll be pilloried.

So we won't get one and we may or may not be pilloried. That is the end game of this entire wasted discussion.

Seriously, do we really need this discussion thread so other supporters can heap it on us?

While we as supporters or as a club entertain this discussion we will never be a destination club.

A bit of pride would see this thread locked.

Bolded is dumb, but it isn't your fault. I don't mind the rest.

 

[Gethelred]

Unforeseen setbacks have Saints considering priority draft pick

The 2012 priority pick criteria may put St Kilda in the frame for rare draft compensation

www.afl.com.au

St Kilda not too proud to ask for a PP. 10 wins in last two years. Lost players due to injury/retirement....

We may have a stronger case, do we let STK (a team that is regularly beating us) get another AFL gift by not asking?

... which won't happen. Their results are better than ours are, by a fair margin, over the same time frame. If they want to cry injuries, their current malaise is no worse than ours was last year.

 

[Blue__Balls]

St Kilda asking for a priority pick due to their slew of "non-traditional injuries".

Gee, I wonder how the media will respond to this...

 

[Aphrodite]

St Kilda asking for a priority pick due to their slew of "non-traditional injuries".

Gee, I wonder how the media will respond to this...

Eagerly awaiting Whateley's response.




#NoMutiny

 

[Magruder]

St K will find it hard to argue for a PP on the basis of injuries .

It could be construed that the injuries are due to poor training or player management.

Besides how can you ask for additional assistance on this basis when you trade in a Daniel Hannebery type?

What ya Gunns do with it? Trade for Wells?

 

[TwiggleyFanClub]

Give them a state league player, but no PP.

 

[Aphrodite]

Give them a state league player, but no PP.

They have won 33 games since 2016.

They don't deserve anything!