Opinion Should the team ask for a Priority Pick 2025 edition.

[UseR2006]

 

[Goldfish]

I think it's as simple as:

• Should priority picks exist? No.
• Should a team that finishes last in an 18-team competition have its second pick pushed out to pick 29 or 30? Also no.

The whole "bad choices, list management, unlucky injuries etc" argument is fine, however if a club is unable to rebuild from the draft because of various other factors introduced by the AFL and out of its control, the AFL needs to further complicate the system to try and even things up a bit, or risk teams wallowing at the bottom of the ladder in perpetuity (more than some do already).

 

[WCErevival]

I think it's as simple as:

• Should priority picks exist? No.
• Should a team that finishes last in an 18-team competition have its second pick pushed out to pick 29 or 30? Also no.

The whole "bad choices, list management, unlucky injuries etc" argument is fine, however if a club is unable to rebuild from the draft because of various other factors introduced by the AFL and out of its control, the AFL needs to further complicate the system to try and even things up a bit, or risk teams wallowing at the bottom of the ladder in perpetuity (more than some do already).

Agree with this. I just want to be compensated for the shit draft.

 

[InTheWings]

I thought this might be a good place to put this in, considering how sides have benefitted from draft (or academy) concessions over the past 10 years.

Top-20 picks in AFL drafts from 2015-2024:
GWS = 23 picks in the top 20 (inc. 7 of those being top 10, of which 5 were top 5)
Gold Coast = 20 (16 in the top 10, including 8 top 5)
North = 17 (8 top 5)
West Coast = 7 (2 top 10 and 1 top 5)

By the way, Hawthorn = 8 top-20 picks (4 in the top 10 and 1 in the top 5), but we know how active they have been in trading.

 

[Obeanie1]

As a bare minimum we need a couple of additional rookie spots.

Kids take time and turfing them out after two years especially nga prospects is not helpful when rebuilding.

Would also help get our WAFL squad stronger and really does a couple of rookie spots hurt other sides? No they don't.

 

[Doashuey]

Easy solution.

You finish last your 2nd becomes and end of 1st.

Not drop another 10 spots.

If I'm understanding you correctly, this would only be a 1 spot upgrade anyway no?
If there are say 10 "quirks" in the first round that means what was pick 18 is now pick 28 meaning the end of the 1st additional pick would be 29 and the first 2nd rounder which was 20 is now 30. So in essence, an upgrade from 30 to 29.

 

[Goldfish]

If I'm understanding you correctly, this would only be a 1 spot upgrade anyway no?
If there are say 10 "quirks" in the first round that means what was pick 18 is now pick 28 meaning the first 2nd rounder which was 19 is now 29. So in essence, an upgrade from 29 to 28.

And therein lies the issue.

I'd imagine Obeanie1 means our actual pick would be at pick 19 regardless of the quirks, but under the current system you're right, there really would be no benefit.

 

[kaiserchief13]

I thought this might be a good place to put this in, considering how sides have benefitted from draft (or academy) concessions over the past 10 years.

Top-20 picks in AFL drafts from 2015-2024:
GWS = 23 picks in the top 20 (inc. 7 of those being top 10, of which 5 were top 5)
Gold Coast = 20 (16 in the top 10, including 8 top 5)
North = 17 (8 top 5)
West Coast = 7 (2 top 10 and 1 top 5)

By the way, Hawthorn = 8 top-20 picks (4 in the top 10 and 1 in the top 5), but we know how active they have been in trading.

Do it pre trading though e.g. WC should have had 2 additional top 5 picks but they traded both away. It's not the other clubs or AFL's fault WC management are a joke

 

[Happy Mastenator]

I have PPs, but given they exist and are used by the AFL, just give us the same PP as North got.

 

[Obeanie1]

Do it pre trading though e.g. WC should have had 2 additional top 5 picks but they traded both away. It's not the other clubs or AFL's fault WC management are a joke

Are they?

We split to land Ginbey and Hewett.

Sheezle didn't want to move nor did Wardlaw.

Last year we split pick 2 and landed 4 players including the highest rated WA kid.

So six players with two picks.

We don't get gifted access nor additional picks.

And when we ask they would say "you should split your picks to get more players. Not just beg for them"

So yer....nah. Not as simple as you are making out.

 

[kaiserchief13]

Are they?

We split to land Ginbey and Hewett.

Sheezle didn't want to move nor did Wardlaw.

Last year we split pick 2 and landed 4 players including the highest rated WA kid.

So six players with two picks.

We don't get gifted access nor additional picks.

And when we ask they would say "you should split your picks to get more players. Not just beg for them"

So yer....nah. Not as simple as you are making out.

Tough luck - it's a draft you go where you are drafted. Weak response by WC - look at Freo's midfield led by Serong and Brayshaw - where are they from?

 

[Spange]

All non vic clubs should draft best available or their targeted players regardless of if they don’t want to leave. Let it be a problem not bandaid over it and pretend like it’s not a thing.

Anyway - yep want priority picks. Not one but multiple to get around this ****ery the afl call a complicated draft

 

[ziad]

Are they?

We split to land Ginbey and Hewett.

Sheezle didn't want to move nor did Wardlaw.

Last year we split pick 2 and landed 4 players including the highest rated WA kid.

So six players with two picks.

We don't get gifted access nor additional picks.

And when we ask they would say "you should split your picks to get more players. Not just beg for them"

So yer....nah. Not as simple as you are making out.

So far from all at the strategic positioning all we have a dashing HBF with questionable disposal abilities. It the identification of talent that has held us back for a decade.
Harsh I know as we have some good prospects but its how we got here.

 

[Scotland]

WC should ask for the picks we deserve.

I.e, assuming we finish last we should be entitled to pick 1 then a pick every 18 after that.

The other alternative is to go nuclear. I have nothing against Sydney but we should be trying to sign Chad Warner

1

Chad Warner

Age

24

Ht

185cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

7.0

2star

K

4.5

2star

HB

2.5

2star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.5

3star

CL

0.0

1star

D

7.0

1star

K

4.5

2star

HB

2.5

2star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.5

2star

CL

0.0

1star

D

7.0

2star

K

4.5

2star

HB

2.5

3star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.5

4star

CL

0.0

1star

with classic BigFooty PSD or GTFO threat.

The AFL have totally cooked player movement and the draft. Time to take a swing.

 

[Broken_Chairs]

I thought this might be a good place to put this in, considering how sides have benefitted from draft (or academy) concessions over the past 10 years.

Top-20 picks in AFL drafts from 2015-2024:
GWS = 23 picks in the top 20 (inc. 7 of those being top 10, of which 5 were top 5)
Gold Coast = 20 (16 in the top 10, including 8 top 5)
North = 17 (8 top 5)
West Coast = 7 (2 top 10 and 1 top 5)

By the way, Hawthorn = 8 top-20 picks (4 in the top 10 and 1 in the top 5), but we know how active they have been in trading.

The 'trade everything of value for high picks' as a list strategy is commonly spouted but hasn't yet been shown effective.

GWS have been good yes, but it took them a long time and a lot of turnover to get to that point of sustained success - and even then, no premiership trophy.

GCS have been a basketcase until this year and they've had the same access to top talent as GWS.

North still shit with all the top end talent they have on their list.

Hawks have somehow created a path out with only 1 extra top 20 pick than we have. Drafting the right players, building relationships, vision, and being clear with gameplan is key.

The O'Meara/Mitchell/Wingard experiments were dumb and anyone that's selling that as a genius strategy in hindsight is foolish. What it does show though is that paying for players that don't work out isn't team killing in itself - we should reflect on that when we think about TK/Baker/Graham

 

[Scotland]

GWS have been good yes, but it took them a long time and a lot of turnover to get to that point of sustained success - and even then, no premiership trophy.

GWS had generous start-up draft concessions and a reducing list size, plus have been good at managing their salary cap WRT which players to prioritise, and getting good returns on outgoing players.

They have traded out Cameron, Treloar, Shiel, Adams, Hopper, Taranto, Lobb, Boyd etc. and now they have free agents like Perryman, and Cumming bringing in compo. Plus they have access to academy selections.

GCS have been a basketcase until this year and they've had the same access to top talent as GWS.

GC were better quicker because they had Gary Ablett Jr. If not for GAJ doing his shoulder they would've played finals in 2014. They put all their eggs in that basket and it didn't work. They have also made horrendous list management decisions over the years. GWS opted to spend their initial money on Ward, Scully, Palmer, Davis and a couple of old players like Chad Cornes and Luke Power who were only going to be there a year or two.

 

[Dark Sharks]

Even if it's picks that must be traded or something like that, it'll still help build our list and address the lack of competitiveness.

 

[Cornelius Roy]

Should priority picks exist? No.

Should a club be able to draft three players in the top 20 every year pushing everyone else’s second rounders out past pick 30 completely destroying the draft and trade value of second rounders picks? No.

If the afl want to make the draft “complex” sooner or later it has to unfairly favour struggling clubs to fix the mess they’ve made.

With that said go have a look at the free kick differentials this year, the afl have no intention of running a fair competition they have an interest in marketing a product to maximise viewers and long term profitability.

Given eagles supporters will still pack stadiums after 5 years of shite, having us at the bottom of the table for as long as possible is the best possible outcome for them to acheive their strategic objectives.

 

[lusheslewis]

No handouts please.

 

[Boohemian]

Commentary from the talking heads is ridiculous.

We are in a deep hole, and fact that we won a premiership in 2018, whether it's our own fault for poor list management is irrelevant.

The integrity of the competition is compromised as it is, with the inequities of travel (from the disproportionate number of Melbourne sides), fixturing (again with the Vic's), access to academies and Father/sons.

Getting onto a soapbox about fairness and equity about granting us a PP is disingenuous at best.

 

[Scotland]

Not happening any time soon but eventually WC will win a 5th flag and at that time most of the teams today that have done an amazing job of list management will still be polishing trophies won before 2018 - if they have them.

 

[Obeanie1]

Tough luck - it's a draft you go where you are drafted. Weak response by WC - look at Freo's midfield led by Serong and Brayshaw - where are they from?

Well that's a very simple way to look at the situation.

Life and the AFL player landscape isn't simple.

 

[flyinghi64]

Do it pre trading though e.g. WC should have had 2 additional top 5 picks but they traded both away. It's not the other clubs or AFL's fault WC management are a joke

Even allowing that it is still pretty lopsided.

 

[Obeanie1]

No handouts please.

Except for the ones to premiership sides and grand finalists from expansion states.

You all good with that?

We finish last....again
Don't need any assistance.

Win the flag orplay in another GF. Yer sure they still need assistance because.......um.....well.......we need the TV audience to grow.

Feel free to explain how that works?

 

[Scotland]

Hate the concept of picks that must be traded away.