Should the AFL have NBA type lottery draft.

[Chris_Judd]

I was thinking about this afer hearing Tim Watson's comments about Geelong being better off finishing towards the bottom and getting some draft picks. This together with St Kilda getting so many top 3 picks in the last 4 or 5 years leaves a really bad taste in my mouth.

We all know that St Kilda are going to eventually turn into the Brisbane lions.... and dominate the competition given the players they have been able to get... but do they deserve it? I agree they should be given a draft pick for finishing low.... but why are we rewarding teams who are as bad as St Kilda and basically guaranteeing them Brisbane Lions type domination in the next 5 to 10 years. What have they done to deserve it? Nearly all of the problems they have had have been because of their own poor management..... when they do win a premiership its not going to be through hard work or excellent recruiting.... Blind Freddy could have recruited Ball, Reiwoldt, Ko****zke and Goddard..... yet they are rewarded for being useless while other teams who try their hearts out to only just miss finals or finish mid table basically get little.

What I would like to see is an NBA type lottery draft. How it would work is that depending on how low you finish you get a higher number of balls in the lottery. The laws of probablity mean that if you finish 16th you receive say 100 balls in the lottery where the premiership team gets maybe 5 balls. It means that finishing last doesn't guarantee you the number 1 pick in the draft and neither should it. The last thing you want is teams "throwing" games or "not trying" as hard as they should once its obvious they cannot make the finals. I can speak from personal experience because 2 years ago I was watching an Eagles V Dockers game and I was torn between wanting the Eagles to win and wanting them to lose because it meant we finished below the Dockers. In the end we lost by 1 point and were able to get Chris Judd with that pick.

If we had a lottery then teams would be trying their hardest to win all games knoxing that the difference between finishing 13th and 14th doesn't mean you will lose a player... as there is still the element of luck there. It works very very well in the NBA... and as a result the NBA draft lottery is one of the most watched exciting events of the year. Could you imagine if they did the same with the AFL draft... it could be televised live and you'd be hanging on every drop of the ball to see if your team got the number 1 pick or not.

This may not be an issue now.. but I can see in 3 to 5 years it will be dominating the media much like the Brisbane Lions dominance is.... people start to look at reasons why teams are so strong.... with Brisbane it was their ridiculous concessions they were handed.... nobody cared about Brisbane's concessions when they were $hit.... but now they do..... Nobody cares about the amount of concession picks St Kilda are getting because they are astill a joke of a clube but in 3 to 5 eyars when people are looking for reasons why.... remember this post.

What do people think?

 

[Ausgard]

I agree with Chris_Judd

(I actually felt physical pain when I typed that )


perhaps soemthing like the bottom 8 get 1 ball for every game they lost and then randomly drawn out of a proverbial hat.

I think it will come to a head at one stage where a team will basically give up in a final round game to get the compensation draft pick

It will always be a dud when you can have one bad season and get the number 1 & 2 kid in the country

 

[Fall Out Boy]

We need a cap on concession picks, rather then a lottery.

BTW If a lottery were adopted, it would still need to be weighted, to make it fair for all.

 

[Port01]

a) I think the NBA lottery is only for teams that miss the playoffs.

b) You didn't lose to Freo the year you drafted Chris Judd, nor did you finish below them. You were crap enough to get a handout though.

 

[Chris_Judd]

Originally posted by Ausgard
I agree with Chris_Judd

(I actually felt physical pain when I typed that )

Someone pick me up off the floor.

Originally posted by phatandphreaky
BTW If a lottery were adopted, it would still need to be weighted, to make it fair for all.

Yup... of course... it would be weighted in favour of the teams finishing at the bottom... but the beauty is that altho the odds are in their favour of getting the number 1 pick.. it doesn't guarantee you it and clubs won't be aiming to lose games to finish lower.

Originally posted by Ausgard
It will always be a dud when you can have one bad season and get the number 1 & 2 kid in the country

The reason the current system is a dud is that you look at St Kilda as the perfect example. You give a team that finishes bottom of the ladder the top 2 picks in the draft Kositzke and Reiwoldt. These kids aren't going to become superstars overnight... its going to take 3 to 5 years. This means that the next season St Kilda aren't going to be an improved side because they have these 2 draftpicks... so again they finish bottom... for that they get Luke Ball... he's not going to be a superstar in his first year either... so its not going to help them... even Reiwoldt and Kositzke in their 2nd years aren't going to dominate.... so by the 3rd year they are getting Brendan Goddard... and so it goes on and on... eventually by about the 4th or 5th year they have Kositzke and Reiwoldt as experienced footballers in their prime. Luke Ball in his 4th year and Goddard in his 3rd.... along with who knows who else they pick up. The draft as it currently is doesn't help sides become stronger the next year... it builds up "superteams" with talent that no other club will be able to match 5 years from now. Its a ridiculous system really.

 

[grayham]

I think we've had this thread before, but I like the idea. I also like the idea that you can "trade" balls prior to the draft. If Geelong have, say, 20 balls next year, they could trade 18 of them to Brisbane for Akermanis for example.

But first things first, lets get rid of the priority picks.

 

[Chris_Judd]

Originally posted by Port01
a) I think the NBA lottery is only for teams that miss the playoffs.

yes it is... so why not have a lottery for the bottom 8 teams that miss the finals? Its the top 8-10 picks that make the most difference... not pick 10 to 16

Originally posted by Port01
b) You didn't lose to Freo the year you drafted Chris Judd, nor did you finish below them. You were crap enough to get a handout though.

We did lose to freo that year.... yes Freo finished below us but gave Hawthorn their #2 pick for that crab Trent Croad.. Thats their own stupidity

 

[Port01]

Originally posted by Chris_Judd

We did lose to freo that year.... yes Freo finished below us but gave Hawthorn their #2 pick for that crab Trent Croad.. Thats their own stupidity

Freo won 2 games, v Hawthorn in Melbourne and v Adelaide in rd 22.

Draft order was Hawthorn (Hodge), StKFC (Ball), WC (Judd), Freo (Polak), StKFC (Clarke), WC (Sampi)

Freo traded #1 as part of the Croad/McPharlin deal.

 

[Kenny_01]

Originally posted by Chris_Judd
I can speak from personal experience because 2 years ago I was watching an Eagles V Dockers game and I was torn between wanting the Eagles to win and wanting them to lose because it meant we finished below the Dockers. In the end we lost by 1 point and were able to get Chris Judd with that pick.

You got McDougall with that pick (#5 in the 2000 draft IIRC). We had pick #6 and we traded that in the deal that got us Bell.

 

[DaveW]

I don't see how it takes away the incentive to lose games. The closer you finish to the bottom (or more games you lose, whichever it is), the more likely you are of getting good draft picks. So its not much different to the current system. We need a better solution.

 

[Kenny_01]

And yes, the lottery is a great idea.

To determine draft order:

1st: 2 balls
2nd: 3 balls
3rd: 4 balls
4th: 4 balls
5th: 5 balls
6th: 5 balls
7th: 6 balls
8th: 6 balls
9th: 7 balls
10th: 7 balls
11th: 8 balls
12th: 8 balls
13th: 9 balls
14th: 9 balls
15th: 10 balls
16th: 12 balls

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by Kenny_01
And yes, the lottery is a great idea.

To determine draft order:

1st: 2 balls
2nd: 3 balls
3rd: 4 balls
4th: 4 balls
5th: 5 balls
6th: 5 balls
7th: 6 balls
8th: 6 balls
9th: 7 balls
10th: 7 balls
11th: 8 balls
12th: 8 balls
13th: 9 balls
14th: 9 balls
15th: 10 balls
16th: 12 balls

The lower you finish the more balls you get. So again I ask, what's to stop teams throwing matches to rort the draft system?

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by grayham
But first things first, lets get rid of the priority picks.

Agree with that much.

 

[Mong]

I disagree

At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that teams are deliberately losing to get higher draft picks, which was suggested with NBA teams.

If that's the case then why not keep it as it is. Surely it is better to give the top draft pick to the bottom team than say, the team that finished 9th. If we are to have a draft and there is going to be a 1 draft pick, then the bottom is the best team to give it to.


****

 

[Lockyer24]

Heres how the NBA do it...the lottery adds a bit of excitement IMO..

Under the system, 14 ping-pong balls numbered 1 through 14 are placed in a drum. There are 1,001 possible combinations when four balls are drawn out of 14, without regard to their order of selection. Prior to the Lottery, 1,000 combinations are assigned to the Lottery teams based on their order of finish during the regular season. Four balls are drawn to the top to determine a four-digit combination. The team that has been assigned that combination will receive the number one pick. The four balls are placed back in the drum and the process is repeated to determine the number two and three picks. (Note: If the one unassigned combination is drawn, the balls are drawn to the top again.)

In October of 1995, the Board of Governors increased the number of teams participating in the Lottery from 11 to 13 to account for the addition of expansion teams Toronto and Vancouver. Starting in 1996, the team with the worst record in the Lottery continued to have a 25% chance of winning the first pick, teams two through six have slightly fewer chances, team seven has the same number of chances and teams eight through 12 have slightly more chances. The number of chances for team 13 did not change.

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by ****
At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that teams are deliberately losing to get higher draft picks, which was suggested with NBA teams.

I don't think that's really the point though. The incentive is there. I think it's too late if we wait for teams to rort the system (if they haven't already).

 

[FIGJAM]

Originally posted by ****
At this stage there is no evidence to suggest that teams are deliberately losing to get higher draft picks, which was suggested with NBA teams.

Spot on!

 

[Lennyfan]

Yes Chris Judd, its so easy for the saints! Didn't the west coast eagles get a couple of leg ups when they came into the comp? Didn't you get a 2nd round one pick a few years back?? Can you take into account that 3/4 of our team haven't been absent from a large amount of games in the past 24 months?? Oh no, you keep you ****ing up over the saints, its funny and people just ignore most of it

cheers

 

[Portmanteau]

Both Denver and Cleveland threw their seasons in attempt to land LeBron James - the next big thing.

The inherent difference in football is that a #1 draft pick will be 1 out of 18 on his side, on the field... whereas in basketball he'll be 1 in 5. So basically what I'm saying is, it is more of a calculated risk in basketball, but unless you are positive that you are landing the next Wayne Carey or Michael Voss... AFL teams throwing for picks in a lottery system just would not be worth it.

Good idea.

 

[CharlieG]

I agree... but I'd want the lottery to take place before the trading period, so that draft picks could still be traded.

 

[Portia]

The other reason why teams are a little less likely to tank in the AFL is the fact that our draftees aren't fully developed adults, but 17 & 18 year olds. A lot can happen between 17 and 21.

No doubt raising the draft age would encourage more tanking. I daresay that the likes of Graham John****, Corey Jones, Dion Woods, Adam McPhee and Ryan Lonie would go a bit earlier than they did when they got picked up in 2000.....I also doubt that Luke Livingston would be going in the top 5 either. The older the players drafted, the more valuable the early picks are.

The balls system is ok, but dumping priority picks would solve most problems.

Having a strictly rotating draft pick system (so that every club will have a #1 pick every 16 years) would be an interesting idea.

 

[The invisible mullet]

Get rid of the priority picks but otherwise keep it the same. Who's to say that the Saints will retain the players they have picked up. The Watson approach is ridiculous - less wealthy clubs can't afford to adopt an attitude of aiming for the gutter to pick up a couple of potential stars for the following season. It hardly sends the right message to your existing playing staff.

 

[Chris_Judd]

Originally posted by Lennyfan
Yes Chris Judd, its so easy for the saints! Didn't the west coast eagles get a couple of leg ups when they came into the comp? Didn't you get a 2nd round one pick a few years back??

I'd hardly call being forced to have a 35 player squad while the rest of the AFL has 52 on a squad as being given a "leg up into the competition" but nice try.

Originally posted by Lennyfan
Can you take into account that 3/4 of our team haven't been absent from a large amount of games in the past 24 months?? Oh no, you keep you ****ing up over the saints, its funny and people just ignore most of it

All the more reason why the current draft system doesn't work. You have a few injuries for a few years and you all of a sudden you get 4 top 3 pick players in your club for the next 15 years. All of a sudden those injuries go away and you have a superclub. All the more reason to scrap it.

 

[Chris_Judd]

Another reason the draft does not work. Yes.. clubs may not "throw" games... but what happens every single year. You may have to read carefully to see what I mean.

You have clubs by about Round 15 with 7 rounds to go.. they know they cannot make the finals... What is the first thing they do? Bring in youth. Say they are on 4 or 5 wins for the season... its not in their best interests to win 5 of their remaining 7 games and finish 9th to 11th.... so they bring in "youth to develop". This immediately weakens the clubs even further... these clubs can now lose games against betetr clubs by 4 or 5 goals and it can be seen as a "good effort" as they are blooding young players... its effectively giving them a reason for not winning...

but here is where it is really unfair...

by Round 15... who are these bottom of the ladder clubs playing? You guessed it... they are playing the teams they played from round 1 to 6. Given that they are a bottom of the ladder club... they probably lost the majority of those games... and now are playing those same teams with an even weaker younger lineup. Because of the uneveness of the draw it means those teams effectively get wins against weakened sides whilst others have harder draws. Imagine your team fighting to get into the finals while the side you directly above you ahs a round 20 game against a St Kilda team who have dropped all their experienced players to play youth... basically forefeiting any chance of winning.

 

[llosis]

Worth implementing. A weighted system maintains the element of fairness for the true battlers on the bottom, whilst removing the issue of certainty regarding the guaranteeing of picks if the "youth policy" is adopted 2/3 the way through the season.

But I'd still cull the priority picks or shuffle them into the weighting system. The problem with the priorities is the certainty by which they are attained (ie less than 6 wins). That's not even relative to the rest of the competition which in my mind is dangerous.

Chris_Judd I wouldn't worry about the Saints just yet. But imagine if they got a coach....