Fair enough. I think it is good system so curious to hear lots of thoughts of what people think, including reasons why you do not want it.
Should the AFL have NBA type lottery draft.
- Thread starter Chris_Judd
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Fair enough. I think it is good system so curious to hear lots of thoughts of what people think, including reasons why you do not want it.
It’s actually amazing they haven’t done this. They had every excuse to with all the tanking shenanigans... and the kicker, they love trying to create an event they can sell for TV revenue. They’ve tried to do it with the draft itself, and the lottery is more exciting and would out-rate it.
The AFL emulates the NFL more than the NBA from what I've seen. If it was in the NFL I reckon it'd have been done a while ago.
Last edited:
- Jul 10, 2012
- 7,499
- 9,218
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Manchester City, Lakers
I don't think it matters tbh. It's not like college ball where the Pelicans are getting a guy who can literally come in and destroy from day 1 so getting that pick 1 can literally be the difference between making playoffs and not. It's a spectacle for this reason. AFL draft is about as entertaining as paint drying, and once the draft is over, most of the top 20 won't even make a scratch on the league for years.
Bound For Rory
Team Captain
- Banned
- #80
In round 9 generally nobody is tanking.
Ask again at round 21.
Carlton wont this year.
North might?
Gold Coast might?
St Kilda might?
hawkman
Hall of Famer
If this was brought in, of course the AFL would never manipulate it to get the teams it wants to have the best picks
I like the concept mathematically but I found the tv coverage on ESPN not that interesting in itself. I found it weird they seem to force the likely top ten draftees to be there when it is not draft day. It is about working out the draft order itself. Was kind of pointless having likely early draftees there that cannot talk about where they going as not drafted yet. Even after they had known whom has pick one, the expected number one draftee getting interviewed was dull as all * as there is nothing really to add by him. It is not like he is certain to go pick one or to that club. So the presentation itself was weird as did not even see the draw at all. All they did was announce which clubs had picks progressively from pick 14 to 1 but you never actually saw the lottery drawn. Not sure how that for tv presentation adds anything. I certainly would not want AFL to copy the tv presentation or the uninteresting way they announce pick order via envelopes.
Call me old fashioned but I like the idea of the worst side getting the best pick.
caloschwaby
Whisper
- Jan 3, 2017
- 4,842
- 6,455
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Celtics, Renegades, Packers
Well, that sure aged well...
- Jun 23, 2008
- 33,485
- 27,225
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Norwood, Everton, Detroit Red Wings
Alright, I'll re-phrase - Who has genuinely tanked in the last decade? Usually teams don't win because they just aren't good enough anyway.
In an 18-a-side game where draftees don't usually hit their prime until 5-6 years into their career, the draft isn't nearly the quick fix that it can be in other sports, which renders tanking kind of pointless.
Last edited:
- May 5, 2006
- 62,726
- 70,019
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I don't think lack of immediate impact is a reason for or against a draft lottery. Even in the NBA there's not always a consensus #1 pick and the #1 pick can still be a bust. Fultz, Wiggins, Bennett, Bargnani, Oden, Brown all went #1 this century.
If anything multiple bottom 4 finishes can lead to a team being stacked. Bit different now that first round priority picks are basically gone but 2004/5 were examples of teams getting 2 stabs at the pointy end of the draft. Richmond and WB got one star each, Hawthorn got 2 in 2004. Carlton and Collingwood got 2 in 2005, Hawthorn probably got none in the end from their two picks. No one thought much of Roughead/Franklin/Kennedy after just one year because they were 18 year old talls, but Carlton in particular followed up 1 & 4 in 2005 with 1 again in 2006 and then 1 & 3 in 2007. Obviously Carlton bottled it but they could've ended up with a bunch of stars all coming good at once.
If a team won B2B2B spoons I'd be happy to see them get picks 1, 5, 3 over a 3 year period.
If anything multiple bottom 4 finishes can lead to a team being stacked. Bit different now that first round priority picks are basically gone but 2004/5 were examples of teams getting 2 stabs at the pointy end of the draft. Richmond and WB got one star each, Hawthorn got 2 in 2004. Carlton and Collingwood got 2 in 2005, Hawthorn probably got none in the end from their two picks. No one thought much of Roughead/Franklin/Kennedy after just one year because they were 18 year old talls, but Carlton in particular followed up 1 & 4 in 2005 with 1 again in 2006 and then 1 & 3 in 2007. Obviously Carlton bottled it but they could've ended up with a bunch of stars all coming good at once.
If a team won B2B2B spoons I'd be happy to see them get picks 1, 5, 3 over a 3 year period.
I'm not going to call you old fashioned. Relatively new in grand scheme of league history. I have never liked the idea. But it is what the system has been for a few decades. I'd been happy if we progressed beyond it.
Wrong. you are forgetting our list was gutted so bad in early 2000's from virtually unable to pick any elite youngsters for about two or three drafts that all we were doing in mid to late 2000's was trying to get head above water on a list talent basis.
It is only this coming decade we can end up with a bunch of stars all coming good at once as the generation of players the covered all the picks we lost from salary cap scandal is only just ending now. The draftees from 2015 to 2018 all coming good at once is basically what will happen early next decade.
I've never be a fan of the draft system in general but it is here to stay so anything that can make it more fair to sides towards middle of ladder I think would be the next step improving the draft system. Draft lottery system for bottom 10 teams I think would be an improvement. It still favours teams towards bottom getting elite picks but not automatically reward more for finishing lower I think makes so much more sense on so many levels.
- May 5, 2006
- 62,726
- 70,019
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I don't care about the early 2000s.
Picks 1 & 4 in 2005, 1 in 2006 and 1 & 3 in 2007 could've netted the core of a team.
Murphy (1), Pendlebury (4), Gibbs(1), Judd (trade 1 & 3) would've been handy. Can substitute Pendlebury for Josh Kennedy too. Could've taken Cotchin in 2007 also if you traded Kennedy.
Picks 1 & 4 in 2005, 1 in 2006 and 1 & 3 in 2007 could've netted the core of a team.
Murphy (1), Pendlebury (4), Gibbs(1), Judd (trade 1 & 3) would've been handy. Can substitute Pendlebury for Josh Kennedy too. Could've taken Cotchin in 2007 also if you traded Kennedy.
- Apr 30, 2015
- 13,615
- 24,441
- AFL Club
- West Coast
I'm pretty sure it's well accepted that Melbourne were tanking a few years back. Has the incentive to do so been removed since then? Not that I recall.
Therefore, at some future point, the tanking debate will raise its head again. So I am all for the lottery system.
How would it work though? Would it just be for first round picks? Just the top 10 picks? etc.
Therefore, at some future point, the tanking debate will raise its head again. So I am all for the lottery system.
How would it work though? Would it just be for first round picks? Just the top 10 picks? etc.
- Apr 30, 2015
- 13,615
- 24,441
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Also, check out the OP's Likes-to-Posts ratio. Fair effort that.
kane249
Wibble
- Oct 27, 2006
- 52,122
- 68,645
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Sth Freo, Liverpool, Chicago Bulls
Was in the ancient days before the like system was brought in
Likes are a recent introduction, they didn't exist when he was posting.
- Apr 30, 2015
- 13,615
- 24,441
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Chaisa
Brownlow Medallist
- Jun 2, 2013
- 14,627
- 14,415
- AFL Club
- Sydney
- Other Teams
- The Exers
It kinda has. Melbourne's tanking was more obvious because of the rule that meant that sides that won 4 or fewer games in back-to-back years got a pre-first round priority pick. Same thing happened to Carlton.
Starburns_
Moderator
- Mar 30, 2011
- 49,590
- 96,689
- AFL Club
- Richmond
- Other Teams
- Colts, Stars, The Exers
- Moderator
- #96
^^This. Tanking hasn't been a thing since the AFL stopped handing out bonus picks to teams that won (or lost) a predetermined number of games.
All this does is open the door for teams that finish 9th or 10th to pinch a high draft pick ahead of teams that need it much more.
There's so much talk of how hard it is to rebuild from the bottom, how much harder would it have been for the Suns and Carlton if the lottery dumped them out of the top 4 a few years in a row.
Virgin Dog
Cancelled
- Oct 29, 2017
- 9,734
- 20,645
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
I do believe a lottery system is the fairest way to go, provided we cap it based on draft position (i.e. Wooded Spooners must end up with a pick in the top 5, premiers can't be in the top 10, and various other restrictions).
Even just look at last year. If Carlton didn't get Pick 1, at worst they could have taken someone like Connor Rozee, Bailey Smith, Jye Caldwell, etc. Not the end of the world, and also gives the top player a chance at not ending up at the wooden spoon club every year
The top ten picks. All the clubs missing finals go into the draft lottery to decide whom gets pick 1 to 10. Do that during the week before the first weekend of finals start.
- Apr 30, 2015
- 13,615
- 24,441
- AFL Club
- West Coast
So in the second round, does the order revert to where teams finished on the ladder?
Also, how would the lottery interact with trading of future picks? I like the idea, but the AFL would need to think through these issues. And I don't trust them to get it right.
Similar threads
