Should the AFL have NBA type lottery draft.

[Portia]

Originally posted by sabre_ac
Your suggesting that the WAFL is an inferior league to that of the under 18s?

I'm saying its an inferior league to the AFL with a lot of non-AFL standard players in it. Medhurst could be tearing apart complete hacks as far as we could guess.

Secondly, he's bloody short! No player that short gets drafted high up, because too many of them don't meet AFL standards in the end, especially when they're not built to be midfielders.

 

[sabre_ac]

Originally posted by Chris_Judd
They generally won't waste top 30 or even top 40 draft picks on older players... generally you go for raw talent in the hope they will develop into the next Wayne Carey or Kouta. The reason Medhurst went so late is because he was 19 and generally by the age of 19 you know how good someone is going to be. You'd have to be blind to not see Medhurst was going to be a good AFL Player if you had seen him in the WAFL.... but a club like the dockers could afford to gamble and wait and see if he was still available late in the draft which he was.

Its a little sad because I would have thought that seeing how he carved them up in the WAFL, would have been a good indication as to the player he could be.
Taking on Physically mature men would also suggest he could play imediately in the big league.
I mean ultimately how many players in that draft taken before him were better players at the time and will be better players in the future?
I couldnt see it being much higher than 20

 

[Chris_Judd]

Originally posted by sabre_ac
Your suggesting that the WAFL is an inferior league to that of the under 18s?
You have got to be joking.
The WAFL has recieved a bad rep for some time now and its probally why so few WA players were recruited last year.

There is a common misconception amongst people that the WAFL is an inferior league. I get to watch quite a few of the VFL games on ABC... and I can say without a doubt that the WAFL is a much much stronger league than VFL is. The skills are alot better. There is no way Under 18s is better than WAFL. I saw an interview with Eagles recruit Brent Staker.. and they asked him how he was going in the WAFL... and his reply was that its a hell of a lot faster than he was used to in Under 18's and you are playing against grown men twice as strong as you... not to mention most WAFL teams are made up of current AFL players or ex AFL players. Under 18s doesn't even compare.

 

[sabre_ac]

Originally posted by Porthos
I'm saying its an inferior league to the AFL with a lot of non-AFL standard players in it. Medhurst could be tearing apart complete hacks as far as we could guess.

Secondly, he's bloody short! No player that short gets drafted high up, because too many of them don't meet AFL standards in the end, especially when they're not built to be midfielders.

Yes but its more superior to the under 18 comp so wouldnt that suggest hes better than he appears?
Plus at 19 hes only going to get better.

Hes short yes but so is many of hte games stars, i mean he can play in the middle.
Its a little sad that players arnt chosen on there ability so much anymore.

 

[Yze_Magic]

Originally posted by 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?

I have though about this often, and Chris_Judd, you are 100% correct

god, i cant believe i just said that

but a draft Lottery in the AFL would be sensational. It would also give us something exciting to look forward to in the off-season



I doubt any of the geniuses at AFL headquarters have ever had the brains to even think of something like a draft lottery though, since they live in the stone age

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by sabre_ac
Yes but its more superior to the under 18 comp so wouldnt that suggest hes better than he appears?

As I said, not necessarily. He could well be play on players that wouldn't ever get near an AFL list.

Plus at 19 hes only going to get better.

In theory. Maybe you can explain why Derek Murray was able to consistently carve up at junior and SANFL level, but couldn't get a touch in the AFL.

 

[pazza]

Perhaps it has some merit. Eliminate the meat market. 16 names into a hat each draft round. Might be a way of creating an equal playing field for everyone.

 

[Still Crowing]

Originally posted by pazza
Perhaps it has some merit. Eliminate the meat market. 16 names into a hat each draft round. Might be a way of creating an equal playing field for everyone.

Thats not what C_J is saying at all. I believe that the idea has merit, but only for the bottom 4 clubs. The top 8 are happy they made the finals, and the other 4 are usually trying hard for the last finals berth(s) well towards the final rounds.

Here's how I would do it.
16th - 50%
15th - 30%
14th - 15%
13th - 5%

That way, the bottom club has a fairly decent chance of getting the no1 choice. If 15th got the no1, then only the remaining clubs have the chance for no2, meaning that 16th has an even greater chance of getting it's number called here. I would say that most reasonable people would say that you can't really go wrong with a number 1 or 2, and if you do, it's probably your own fault.

I agree with the call to abolish priority picks. If you win less than 6 games over 2 years, you could make a case for a priority type pick. I would implement this with an additional 'team' entering the 4 club "loser lottery" to make 5, just change the percentages. That way, if you suck 2 years in a row, you get a chance to take 3 good players over 2 years (2 from #1-5 and 1 from #1-4), but you are in no way guaranteed the top 2 from one year, and the no 1 from the next. Sound complicated, but I hope I explained it well enough to get my point across - the only guarantee you should get from finishing last is a wooden spoon.

Cheers,

Kasey

 

[Chris_Judd]

Originally posted by pazza
Perhaps it has some merit. Eliminate the meat market. 16 names into a hat each draft round. Might be a way of creating an equal playing field for everyone.

I think the way it would work and should work... is that the bottom 8 teams who miss the finals go into the lottery.... 16th team gets more balls than the 9th placed team... and the first 8 draft picks are decided by the lottery.... picks 9 to 16 are given to the top 8 clubs in the order they finished.

 

[grayham]

Originally posted by RIPPER_46
Good post C_J I think that the Extra picks should be scrapped unless team wins less than 5 games in 2 years.

While not an example of teams tanking games, Brisbane in 1998 (because of the merger) was a classic case of a team getting the No 1 pick even though there list was way better than the average wooden spooners.

Well under CJ's plan, Brisbane could finish 9th and still get the No.1 pick. So it could be even less fair.

I dont think we need a lottery. Its only useful in sports with one or two key players where a No.1 pick is extremely valuable like Basketball.

Just get rid of the priority picks, or make them only available for 2 wins or less per year. (ie real basketcase clubs).
[Average wooden spooner wins 3.5 games over the last 5 years]

 

[Chris_Judd]

Originally posted by grayham
Well under CJ's plan, Brisbane could finish 9th and still get the No.1 pick. So it could be even less fair.

but Brisbane had the number 3 pick this year... from Fremantle which they got Brennan... and they finished 2nd! The chances of them getting a number 1 pick in a draft lottery is very very small... not impossible but if they did good luck to them.

 

[grayham]

Originally posted by Chris_Judd
but Brisbane had the number 3 pick this year... from Fremantle which they got Brennan... and they finished 2nd! The chances of them getting a number 1 pick in a draft lottery is very very small... not impossible but if they did good luck to them.

So why bother giving 9th any chance at the 1st pick ?

 

[Chris_Judd]

Originally posted by grayham
So why bother giving 9th any chance at the 1st pick ?

Well what are you supposed to do? If you don't do that then you basically have the same problem as now... you finish 9th to 12th and you get nothing. Fnish 13th and u could get a #1 pick so u would still have teams not trying once they are in 9th to 12th place. It has to be bottom 8

 

[Jabber]

Leave the draft as it is. Keep the priority picks, but make them a lottery - Throw 32 balls into a barrel, and the team that gets a priority pick could end up with anything from 1st to 32nd pick overall.

 

[footyfan1978]

I do not follow Basketball at all but was curious about lottery system so tried to follow live but still hard to follow presentation of it as no draw of balls out of barrel.
But whatever way you would do it in AFL I guess you do it after round 22 completed and the 10 teams that not made finals go into Draft lottery to decide order of top 10 picks,.

IMO, a percentage weighting of getting number 1 pick should be 1% each for teams finishing 9th and 10th and for the team last on ladder 25% chance and team finishing 17th the same chance as bottom team.
From 11 to 16th a gradual increase in chance to get number 1 pick....

9th --- 1% chance of number 1 pick
10th -- 1% chance of number 1 pick
11th -- 2% chance of first pick
12th a 3% chance
13th a 5% chance
14th an 8% chance
15th a 12% chance
16th an 18% chance
17th a 25% chance
18th a 25% chance.

Overall effect is 80% chance of pick one going to a team in bottom four on ladder.

I suspect within a decade we may have something like this in AFL at end of August.

 

[radiojake]

Ah so now that Carlton have traded pick#1 we should bring in a lottery - I get it

 

[telsor]

Unless your name is Ablett or Fyfe, a bump like this might get you suspended!

16 years!

 

[rumply]

Knicks really do suck at everything.

 

[Bound For Rory]

Short answer: Yes - reduces tanking if done right.

Long answer: All BF Posters will be up in arms because its an idea that stems from America...like all professional sports ideas dont stem from there.
It will only be good if the %s are done right and it discourages teams from tanking instead of encouraging it.

 

[Bound For Rory]

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.

The NBA changed it this year so the bottom 3 teams had the same % regardless of wins.
So really the teams only tanked so far to get in that bottom 3.

The team that lost their last 20 odd games deliberately (Knicks) didnt even get top 2.

 

[Scotland]

The NBA lottery runs off all 14 non playoff teams having a chance of getting pick 1. If you did that for the bottom 10 in the AFL last year then you'd have North, Port, Essendon, Adelaide on 12 wins all with a slim chance of pick 1 while Geelong on 13 wins would get pick 11.

It's also a lottery system with constraints. The Knicks had the worst record of all 30 teams so had the (equal) highest probability of getting pick 1, but also the worst they could get was pick 5. I like it and the draft is already completely compromised so why not play with it even more.

 

[footyfan1978]

Short answer: Yes - reduces tanking if done right.

Long answer: All BF Posters will be up in arms because its an idea that stems from America...like all professional sports ideas dont stem from there.
It will only be good if the %s are done right and it discourages teams from tanking instead of encouraging it.

Yeah, I'm generally of opinion of lot of times of why do people just want to follow an American system but in this case I actually quite like the idea. Thought the presentation was not that interesting but the way to decide mathematically how top ten picks distributed, I think it is fairer and stops any real incentive to tank.

 

[Damon_3388]

Who is actually tanking at the moment?

This is a solution for a problem that isn't really a problem.

 

[footyfan1978]

Who is actually tanking at the moment?

This is a solution for a problem that isn't really a problem.

Nobody imo, I doubt any ever really have but the perception by so many that it existed and can still exist lives on imo. Anything the brings it to almost no incentive is an improvement of what we got.

 

[Damon_3388]

Nobody imo, I doubt any ever really have but the perception by so many that it existed and can still exist lives on imo. Anything the brings it to almost no incentive is an improvement of what we got.

Don't really see the point of changing the whole system based on a "maybe" TBH.