PattyKwasagun
Norm Smith Medallist
Heading into the back half of the season, no doubt this conversation is going to pick up shortly. Trying as hard as possible to remove my Brisbane bias, I really do believe there is an overwhelmingly strong case for a start of first round priority pick this year. These are the two main reasons:
1. Comparison to other Priority Picks handed out in the past
Here is a list of each start of first round priority pick given out since the year 2000, along with the number of wins and average percentage that each club had from the prior four seasons (the season they received the pick as well as the three seasons preceding that year). The order is by most wins the team had in the four years leading up to the start of first round PP.
For Brisbane, I have included from season 2014 to where we currently sit halfway through season 2017. Obviously we may win more games this season and the average percentage from the past four years may rise, but this is accurate as of our 2017 Bye.
The chart also shows how many start of first round priority picks that club has received since the year 2000.
I'm aware that the rules have changed both in 2006 and in 2012 regarding priority picks, and that a number of the teams on this list received their priority picks under a much more generous system, however the point remains that at present we have by far the strongest argument for a start of first round priority pick of any of these clubs who have received one, yet we have never been given one at any stage.
The comparison to Melbourne of 2013 is often used - if they didn't get one that year, how could any club? It's not really a fair comparison though, as Melbourne had received two start of first round priority picks in the preceding ten years.
2. Players we've lost
Obviously we have lost a number of our young players over recent years and look set to lose another in Schache, and in almost all of these scenarios we have received less for the players than we initially drafted them for (bar Yeo, who was showing signs that he was really worth a fair bit more than we drafted him for).
Due to the quantity of players leaving at once, the lack of bargaining power we had with them being out of contract and nominating clubs, and the fact we had to accept whatever we could as they had all made their minds up to leave meant we really suffered in terms of what it did to our list quality.
This table is the players we've lost over recent years and what the differential of quality we received in return for them was in terms of draft points.
Essentially, that means we lost a total of 3668 draft points with those young players. That alone is equivalent to pick 1 & 29.
Summary
So we've never received a start of first round priority pick despite having the strongest case on field for one and also having lost the equivalent of picks 1 & 29 in terms of overall quality from our list due to player retention issues.
There are further in depth points that could be made to argue this, namely:
-Overall quality of our list by draft points
-Number of years spent out of the top 8 (round 1, 2012 being the last time we even had a cameo there)
-We've played just one finals campaign in thirteen years
-At the start of last season we lost one of our most promising young players to early retirement due to concussion
-We had to attempt part of our major list build in compromised drafts, being at the bottom of the ladder at the same time Gold Coast & GWS were given many picks to build their lists. This meant that what usually would have been earlier picks for us as a result of our finishing position were pushed back, further weakening the quality of the list we have now in comparison with the rest of the competition.
-In refer 'we created this mess, we should have to clean it up' argument as a reason we don't deserve a pick, it's worth pointing out that essentially every club who has ever received a priority pick created their own mess. Carlton (who have received three start of first round priority picks) received them after a salary cap breach. Melbourne got theirs from tanking.
So to compare this to the criteria the AFL currently sets out for priority picks:
We're rebuilding and will be for a while yet, but we need a massive injection of talent onto our list if we're ever going to build to be competitive again. There's already some talent on the list, but all of these factors paint a picture of just how far behind we're coming from and how poor the quality of our list has become.
1. Comparison to other Priority Picks handed out in the past
Here is a list of each start of first round priority pick given out since the year 2000, along with the number of wins and average percentage that each club had from the prior four seasons (the season they received the pick as well as the three seasons preceding that year). The order is by most wins the team had in the four years leading up to the start of first round PP.
For Brisbane, I have included from season 2014 to where we currently sit halfway through season 2017. Obviously we may win more games this season and the average percentage from the past four years may rise, but this is accurate as of our 2017 Bye.
The chart also shows how many start of first round priority picks that club has received since the year 2000.
I'm aware that the rules have changed both in 2006 and in 2012 regarding priority picks, and that a number of the teams on this list received their priority picks under a much more generous system, however the point remains that at present we have by far the strongest argument for a start of first round priority pick of any of these clubs who have received one, yet we have never been given one at any stage.
The comparison to Melbourne of 2013 is often used - if they didn't get one that year, how could any club? It's not really a fair comparison though, as Melbourne had received two start of first round priority picks in the preceding ten years.
2. Players we've lost
Obviously we have lost a number of our young players over recent years and look set to lose another in Schache, and in almost all of these scenarios we have received less for the players than we initially drafted them for (bar Yeo, who was showing signs that he was really worth a fair bit more than we drafted him for).
Due to the quantity of players leaving at once, the lack of bargaining power we had with them being out of contract and nominating clubs, and the fact we had to accept whatever we could as they had all made their minds up to leave meant we really suffered in terms of what it did to our list quality.
This table is the players we've lost over recent years and what the differential of quality we received in return for them was in terms of draft points.
Essentially, that means we lost a total of 3668 draft points with those young players. That alone is equivalent to pick 1 & 29.
Summary
So we've never received a start of first round priority pick despite having the strongest case on field for one and also having lost the equivalent of picks 1 & 29 in terms of overall quality from our list due to player retention issues.
There are further in depth points that could be made to argue this, namely:
-Overall quality of our list by draft points
-Number of years spent out of the top 8 (round 1, 2012 being the last time we even had a cameo there)
-We've played just one finals campaign in thirteen years
-At the start of last season we lost one of our most promising young players to early retirement due to concussion
-We had to attempt part of our major list build in compromised drafts, being at the bottom of the ladder at the same time Gold Coast & GWS were given many picks to build their lists. This meant that what usually would have been earlier picks for us as a result of our finishing position were pushed back, further weakening the quality of the list we have now in comparison with the rest of the competition.
-In refer 'we created this mess, we should have to clean it up' argument as a reason we don't deserve a pick, it's worth pointing out that essentially every club who has ever received a priority pick created their own mess. Carlton (who have received three start of first round priority picks) received them after a salary cap breach. Melbourne got theirs from tanking.
So to compare this to the criteria the AFL currently sets out for priority picks:
- premiership points that a club has received over a period of years (with greater weight to recent seasons) As in the first table posted, we are in a very bad way in this regard
- a club's percentage (points for/points against x 100) over a period of years (another indication of on-field competitiveness, with greater weight to recent seasons) Also see table 1
- any finals appearances that a club has made in recent seasons None since 2009, 1 in the last 13 years
- any premierships that a club has won in recent seasons Three in the early 2000's, but that was well over a decade ago now
- a club's injury rates in each relevant season It couldn't be argued that our poor form is due to injuries, with our injury list being not significantly worse than that of any other club
We're rebuilding and will be for a while yet, but we need a massive injection of talent onto our list if we're ever going to build to be competitive again. There's already some talent on the list, but all of these factors paint a picture of just how far behind we're coming from and how poor the quality of our list has become.
