Priority Picks fair?

[Third Ring]

Can anyone justify the current priority pick system?

I know the season's still got a long way to go, but at this time last year, only 1 team from the top 8 didn't make the finals - so the ladder should be a pretty fair indicator of how the season will finish.

Looking at the current ladder, Collingwood would get a priority pick at the end of the year - even though they finished 2nd last year.

While Melbourne who got a priority pick last year, are currently 2nd.

How does it feel Tigers, Hawks, Cats and Roos fans? Gotta be a change to the system.

 

[dodgey]

I ahve always said it should be worked out over 2 Seasons and Not just the one ....

If a teams won 10 Games or Less over 2 years then certainly look into it, but a Team could have a Bad year based on a few Major injuries and be rewarded with Priority Picks

Sure ...a season of injuries isn't good for any club, but it doesn't mean that they aren't up to the Standard of other clubs...which is what the Picks are supposed to reward

 

[MarkT]

I doubt Collingwood will get a priority pick. Regardless of who does and doesn’t qualify, it is a ridiculous system. The worse you go the more you are rewarded. The mere fact that supporters start talking about draft picks 1/3 of the way through a season is proof enough for me that it has to be changed.

 

[Grendel]

My oath it's justified.

At least it will be this season if/when the Hawks get one.

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by dodgey
I ahve always said it should be worked out over 2 Seasons and Not just the one ....

If a teams won 10 Games or Less over 2 years then certainly look into it, but a Team could have a Bad year based on a few Major injuries and be rewarded with Priority Picks

Sure ...a season of injuries isn't good for any club, but it doesn't mean that they aren't up to the Standard of other clubs...which is what the Picks are supposed to reward

I think thats true. Basically the system rewards teams who lack competitive spirit and roll over to get the picks. Those who fight hard and overacheive will have a hell of a time stepping to elite status. Contrast the current situation of St Kilda with that of Essendon, Kangaroos or West Coast- losers are rewarded, triers get nothing.

Just by way of example, look at the Eagles' situation this year. With Gardiner out for the season, realistically we've got our work cut out to make the finals, and even if we do it astronomically unlikely that we'll win the flag.

So, the honest question is, why try and make the finals? What benefit do we derive from doing so? When we get Gardiner back next year our top 4 window should open again, so why on earth don't we just screw about for 15 rounds and add another Chris Judd to our lineup as a result?
Aside from our players probably having a bit too much pride to do that, what logical reason is there for an average side to finish 7th-12th rather than cellar dwelling for draft picks?

I'm convinced that the entire draft system needs an overhaul, not just the priority picks. The best option would probably be to go to an NBA style lottery, where the lower a team finishes the greater the number of chances they have in the lottery- that would, in a general sense, allow crap teams to top up, but remove the simple certainty that exists where if you throw games, you're guaranteed the best young talent in the country.

Another thing I would like to see is an introduction of some tangible benefit for making the finals- to give teams a reason to actually aspire up the ladder. One possibility I think would be a very good idea would be to give team's starting from 10th upwards a higher total salary cap the following year? I mean, if you're in the top half of the ladder it suggests that you have better players and are going to have more trouble retaining them, so shouldn't the league recognise that.

That'd give players an obvious incentive for making their team reach the finals, and would give some reward to the honest triers of the competition- you can keep your core group together, so there's more chance of you building as a side.

 

[PowerOfThePussy]

When 2 teams with 5 wins apiece play each other in Round 22 - then the laws will be changed.

It will be ugly. Can you imagine it? Coaches would be accidentally throwing a 19th man on the ground to be disqualified. Could get messy.

Cheers
POTP

 

[Joffaboy]

Originally posted by Mead
Contrast the current situation of St Kilda with that of Essendon, Kangaroos or West Coast- losers are rewarded, triers get nothing.

This may help with your ignorance

Priority and High St.Kilda Draft Picks

Reiwoldt and Kosi (picks 1 and 2 in 2001) and Goddard (pick No 1 2002), four extremely good players were the only players on the list that couldn’t be picked up by other clubs, with Ball (pick No 2 2001) available to Hawthorn who chose Luke Hodge. All the other Saints players could have been drafted by a number of other clubs but they chose some other player.

Traded top ten Draft picks by the Saints

The only 2 first round draft picks over the past four years the Saints traded were No 4 in 2000 for Hamill (Carlton picked up Livingstone) and no 8 (and draft No.22) in 2002 for Brookes (a long term prospect for the Saints in ruck and a draft pick from Hawthorn for the Everitt deal).

So the Saints have kept their high draft picks and used them on young potentials over the past four years.

List of draft picks by the Saints (not priority or 1st /2nd picks - current playing seniors)

Lenny Hayes – pick 11 1998
Xavier Clarke – pick 5 2001
Nick Dal Santo – pick 13 2001
Matt McGuire – pick 21 2001
Aussie Jones – high 40’s 1994

Trades

Gehrig was traded for Sierokwiski and draft pick No 18 in 2000 (WC picked up Kerr).
Black was traded for draft pick #17 (J.Kelly)in 2001
Penny was traded for draft pick # 17 (C.Faulkener) in 2002
Powell in the preseason draft 2002.


Further trading from the Saints:


Players the Saints have picked up for DP's

2002 B.Brooks DP8 (S.Salopek) & DP35 (?)
2002 L.Penny DP17 (C.Faulkner)
2001 T.Knobel DP45 (Nathan Clarke ?)
2001 H.Black DP17 (J.Kelly)
2000 A.Hamill DP4 (L.Livingston)
2000 F.Gehrig DP18 (D.Kerr)
2000 S.Lawrence DP33 (M.Pike)

DP's the Saints have Picked up for players

2002 P.Everitt DP8 (B.Brooks) & DP22 (M.Ferguson)
2001 B.Hall DP13 (N.Dal Santo)
2000 D.Wakelin DP4 (A.Hamill)
1998 M.Lappin DP22 (J.Begley)


Top 5 draft pick allocations per team since 1998.

Fremantle - 7
Melbourne - 5
St.Kilda - 5
Collingwood - 4
Carlton – 4

Note that Carlton’s total includes the forfeited draft picks.

So apart from Reiwoldt, Kosi, Ball, and Goddard (a gift from Carlton) the rest of the clubs structure has been good trading or lower round draft picks.

So in essence the myth of the Saints being given all these players, is just that, a myth. Great recruiting, and looking at the long term is what the Saints are all about.

Hope that helps

Cheers

Joffaboy

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by Joffaboy

Top 5 draft pick allocations per team since 1998.

Fremantle - 7
Melbourne - 5
St.Kilda - 5
Collingwood - 4
Carlton – 4

Note that Carlton’s total includes the forfeited draft picks.

So apart from Reiwoldt, Kosi, Ball, and Goddard (a gift from Carlton) the rest of the clubs structure has been good trading or lower round draft picks.

So in essence the myth of the Saints being given all these players, is just that, a myth. Great recruiting, and looking at the long term is what the Saints are all about.

Hope that helps

Cheers

Joffaboy

So in other words, since 1998 St Kilda have had in the top 2 draft pick allocations in the competition, with only Freo, who are excused on account of throwing away good draft picks for hacks throughout the 90s having had more.

Um...so... aside from you being a twit, isn't that exactly my point? Check the ladder- where are St Kilda, Melbourne and Fremantle at the moment? Are you arguing that the Top 5 draft pick allocations per team since 1998-
Fremantle - 7
Melbourne - 5
St.Kilda - 5
aren't at all relevant to the current AFL ladder? I would say that is as concrete evidence of the current system rewarding perennial losers as anyone could ask for? Cheers for digging it up.

I don't understand why you're so sensitive about it?
As you have just noted, its a matter of fact that perennial suckiness = rewards. Nobody is questioning that St Kilda have generally drafted very well and taken full advantage of the leg up they were given thanks to the current system, but why are you trying to deny what is staring you right in the face? Long term its better to be a basket case rather than an average side

 

[MarkT]

Joffa

No matter how you like to cut it the Saints have had good quality given to them for being crap. They are by no means the only ones and they have made the most of the opportunities being crap has afforded them but it is an indisputable fact that they have been rewarded for being crap. That is what I hate about the system. When you line up Freo, St. Kilda and Collingwood who have had draft choices for their poor performance and compare them to Kanga's, Essendon, etc who have battled to be as good as they can and damn well been good at it, it is just unfair.

Worse than being unfair in an AFL that completely ignores equity at every level is the fact that teams and supporters see that being the worst they can be is good for their future. This is what can destroy the fabric of a 100 year old competition in a relatively short period. Not destroy it in the sense it will die or disappear, but destroy it in the sense that it removes or dramatically lessens one of the things that made it great. That is, the weekly fight to the death for supremacy over your rivals which builds the sort of passion we see.

The fact is that for Collingwood this year it may well be better to lie down and get the first and second draft picks and it may well be better to let Hawthorn beat us when we play them. That is a massive flaw in the AFL operative system and a massive threat to passion that has built great clubs and a great competition. I don’t want Collingwood supporters to have a reason to be happy about losing and I don't want our board to have any reason to show silver linings in losing clouds. All clubs should play to win every game every year and no club should accept honorable losses with a draft pick consolation prize. Unfortunately is does happen.

I hear Carlton supporters say the best thing to do is lay low and gather draft picks to get quality players. In the past they would have said they wanted to work their arses off to get back into the finals this year and then go up from there.

 

[Third Ring]

I thought Mead was saying that tryers don't get the benefits of good (ie: priority) picks.


I didn't want to get into this argument because my initial thread was about 'swinging teams' (ie: ones that fluctuate between finals campaigns and priority picks), but I think the argument for priority pick reform can also be applied to StK.

you say that:

"apart from Reiwoldt, Kosi, Ball, and Goddard (a gift from Carlton) the rest of the club's structure has been good trading or lower round draft picks"

Ok, so are you saying that not all the club's structure has come from draft priorities? Yes?

I agree - you have drafted some very good players.


However, can you say that getting the above 4 players hasn't given you a significant benefit over other clubs without priorities?

Can you say that your team would be in its current position without those 4 players (that other teams didn't have a chance of getting)?

Put it this way, name me any team that wouldn't have benefitted from these priority picks, that would pin a significant amount of their future on these 4 players?

If you're trying to say they make no significant difference, that doesn't sell. Can you tell me how any 2 of these players would not have benefitted the perenial 'not quite there clubs' like Richmond, Hawthorn, Geelong? How many priority picks (in strong draft years too) have these clubs had...in aggregate?

The truth is StK is where it is because of (among other things) a combination of good trading and priority picks. Other clubs who have traded well, are still behind the Saints in terms of quality players because of the priority picks. The total gap will become obvious over the next 5 to 10 years, subject to any self-destruction.

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by MarkT
Joffa

No matter how you like to cut it the Saints have had good quality given to them for being crap. They are by no means the only ones and they have made the most of the opportunities being crap has afforded them but it is an indisputable fact that they have been rewarded for being crap. That is what I hate about the system. When you line up Freo, St. Kilda and Collingwood who have had draft choices for their poor performance and compare them to Kanga's, Essendon, etc who have battled to be as good as they can and damn well been good at it, it is just unfair.

Worse than being unfair in an AFL that completely ignores equity at every level is the fact that teams and supporters see that being the worst they can be is good for their future. This is what can destroy the fabric of a 100 year old competition in a relatively short period. Not destroy it in the sense it will die or disappear, but destroy it in the sense that it removes or dramatically lessens one of the things that made it great. That is, the weekly fight to the death for supremacy over your rivals which builds the sort of passion we see.

The fact is that for Collingwood this year it may well be better to lie down and get the first and second draft picks and it may well be better to let Hawthorn beat us when we play them. That is a massive flaw in the AFL operative system and a massive threat to passion that has built great clubs and a great competition. I don’t want Collingwood supporters to have a reason to be happy about losing and I don't want our board to have any reason to show silver linings in losing clouds. All clubs should play to win every game every year and no club should accept honorable losses with a draft pick consolation prize. Unfortunately is does happen.

I hear Carlton supporters say the best thing to do is lay low and gather draft picks to get quality players. In the past they would have said they wanted to work their arses off to get back into the finals this year and then go up from there.

Exactly- the scary thing is you can imagine a round 22 clash between cross town, Collingwood and Carlton, West Coast and Freo, Adelaide and Port or whatever- if one of those clubs is a loss away from the priority pick, and there is an extremely highly rated standout waiting in the draft, what do you feel as a fan? Regardless of ladder positions, when you lose those matches, you should be crushed, and when you win them you should be euphoric. Walking away after a loss thinking 'Woohoo, welcome to the club, player XYZ' kind of makes a mockery of the whole thing.

I think the problem is that the current draft system was really more appropriate for the early 90s when picking the best young talent was a very hit and miss affair.

Nowadays, the quality of recruiting staff and pre-draft research means that virtually every promising young player in the country will have been assessed and examined by scouts from every team. There's always a few disappointments from highly rated players, and a few who slip under the radar and go later, but nowadays, a top 10 pick probably gives you a 40% chance of a real star, a 50% chance of a very good player, and 10% chance of a dud. With those odds, priority picks are worth their weight in gold- you're adding really class players, the kind whose trade value would require you to dismantle your side to get, just for sucking? How ridiculous is that?!

 

[nutbeennn]

would this even be discussed if StKilda wasnt on the top of the ladder.
Granted, Brisbane have been given an advantage of higher salary cap to keep players but have received no preferential drafts picks and have won the last three premierships. They played collingwood for last two years who had no priority picks and before that essendon - also priority picks. Then essendon won the falg before that and adelaide two in a row - no priority picks.

So tell me - for the ultimate prize - where have the priority picks won teams a premiership.

 

[Falchoon]

Originally posted by Mead
I think thats true. Basically the system rewards teams who lack competitive spirit and roll over to get the picks. Those who fight hard and overacheive will have a hell of a time stepping to elite status. Contrast the current situation of St Kilda with that of Essendon, Kangaroos or West Coast- losers are rewarded, triers get nothing.

West Coast?

Pick 3 Judd
Pick 6 Sampi

smells like a priority pick to me

Originally posted by Mead

Just by way of example, look at the Eagles' situation this year. With Gardiner out for the season, realistically we've got our work cut out to make the finals, and even if we do it astronomically unlikely that we'll win the flag.

So you need your number 1 pick to fire to have a chance?

 

[Portia]

Priority picks are stupid idea, but if you absolutely must have them, then they should be conditional on surrendering your first round pick in the next draft year.

To re-explain it, if you have less than 5 wins, you may choose to forfeit your first-round pick in the draft for the next year, in order to gain a priority pick this year. You may continue to do this for as many seasons as you finish with less than 5 wins.

Year 1 with less than 5 wins: Priority and First Round
Year 2 with less than 5 wins: Priority
Year 3 with less than 5 wins: Priority
Year 4 with more than 5 wins: Your first pick is in the second round.

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by nutbeennn
would this even be discussed if StKilda wasnt on the top of the ladder.

Hasn't it been discussed a million times before?

 

[stopeedie]

The only way to stop this farce of playing for priority picks is to introduce a relegation system.

 

[Deej]

Originally posted by MarkT
I doubt Collingwood will get a priority pick. Regardless of who does and doesn’t qualify, it is a ridiculous system. The worse you go the more you are rewarded. The mere fact that supporters start talking about draft picks 1/3 of the way through a season is proof enough for me that it has to be changed.

Agree 100%, I hate the draft, players should be allowed to decide where they want to play. Salary Cap fair enough (imo) it stops clubs from putting themselves out of business, but the draft just sucks in every way. I was hoping for an honourable loss on saturday against your mob and half way through the last was pretty pleased, this sounds ridiculous to say but i was actually a tiny bit disappointed that we won. I'm going to cop heaps for that, all i can say is i love carlton and i'm a true supporter (well i think i am) but i want a flag more than anything and i just think the quickest way for us to get a flag is for us to get the cream talent. One more year at the bottom wouldn't hurt us too much. It's pathetic that a system like the draft has made me think this way.

 

[nutbeennn]

can someone please list the priority picks since inception and i think that this will highlight that in the broad scheme of things they have not made an impact

 

[morgoth]

Agree Deej and MT.

It sucks but that is the system, so use it like everyone else. Neither the Pies or Blues will challnge for the flag this year so are you better off finishing 10th or 15th/16th with less than 5 1/2 wins?

We all know the answer to that and that is a disgrace. That said I hope they leave it alone this year.

 

[nutbeennn]

i repeat again..
where have priority picks won a team a premiership ?

 

[Mead]

Originally posted by Falchoon
West Coast?

Pick 3 Judd
Pick 6 Sampi

smells like a priority pick to me

Yep, one priority pick thanks to KJ. And like any other priority pick, it was undeserved. So who had pick 2 in that draft, pray tell?

The difference is, though, the following year, we went in with a new coach and everyone tipping us to spoon, basically, if Worsfold had wanted to stay at the bottome and go for Wells or Goddard we could have done that and there would have been little or no repercussions- after Judge, we were expecting several years in the crapper. Instead, he believed in his players, backed them to play as well as they could and they made the finals- if he had of accepted mediocrity, he would be staring at a far better list at the moment.
Meanwhile the team that had pick 2 in that previous draft... had pick 1 the year thereafter- guess who?

So you need your number 1 pick to fire to have a chance? [/QUOTE]

A pick we got whilst finishing in the top 8, via a extensive and complicated (and absolute steal) trade. Your point?

Due to poor position on the ladder, West Coast have been given two top 5 draft picks since 1998, and finished outside the top 8 for 2 seasons.
St Kilda have had 5. Did you have a point or was it just a sort of generalised post along the lines of 'your team sucks nahnahnah'?

 

[Portia]

If you want to look at the impact of priority picks, you need to not so much look at the teams that got them, but at the teams who got bumped down the draft because of them.

For example Kangaroos finished 13th and had their first pick at #7 in 2001 when it should've been #4.

Thats Hale instead of Polak.
Geelong with Bartel instead of Xavier Clarke.
Melbourne with Luke Molan instead of Ashley Sampi.

Its not like the AFL just magically create extra players to give away as priority picks, you're taking them from somewhere and it is felt the most by teams that only just missed out on the threshold for priority picks by winning instead of losing.

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by morgoth
Agree Deej and MT.

It sucks but that is the system, so use it like everyone else. Neither the Pies or Blues will challnge for the flag this year so are you better off finishing 10th or 15th/16th with less than 5 1/2 wins?

We all know the answer to that and that is a disgrace. That said I hope they leave it alone this year.

I disagree. IMO the bigger picture is about what you want your club to represent. Collingwood have fought hard year upon year regarless of the list they had. They have made a number of grand finals with far from the second best list but that fight has carried them well over the more than 100 years. I don't now want to settle for not being 100% fighters so we can maybe get a gun in the draft and hopefully be able to fight when we need to in the future. This is 100+ years of Collingwood being Collingwood we are talking about.

 

[MarkT]

Originally posted by nutbeennn
i repeat again..
where have priority picks won a team a premiership ?

This is something I brought up in another thread. To date not one team has won a flag by being crap, gathering talent and then ascending the ladder. Maybe St. Kilda will and maybe they won't. It doesn't gurantee anything except the wrong attitude by clubs and supporters.

 

[JeffDunne]

Originally posted by Porthos
If you want to look at the impact of priority picks, you need to not so much look at the teams that got them, but at the teams who got bumped down the draft because of them.

For example Kangaroos finished 13th and had their first pick at #7 in 2001 when it should've been #4.

Thats Hale instead of Polak.
Geelong with Bartel instead of Xavier Clarke.
Melbourne with Luke Molan instead of Ashley Sampi.

Its not like the AFL just magically create extra players to give away as priority picks, you're taking them from somewhere and it is felt the most by teams that only just missed out on the threshold for priority picks by winning instead of losing.

But I draw your attention to

Nick Dal Santo – pick 13 2001
Matt McGuire – pick 21 2001

Both would now be ahead of the six you mention. It's all a simplistic arguement.

No doubt that the draft order spreads the talent based on performance. That's the whole point of having a draft. The P/P in reality give you a second pick before the other teams. The first pick you already get because of the draft order.

So we get Kosi & X.Clarke becasue of P/P's. Big fricken deal. They aren't the difference between us being 1st or 16th.