The Draft is Overrated

[PhatBoy]

It's absolute rubbish.

Then go and cry over it to someone else.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Then go and cry over it to someone else.

Nah, I'll just continue to laugh at you.

 

[PhatBoy]

Nah, I'll just continue to laugh at you.

That would be a pleasant change from the amount of melting you’ve done due to the opinion of a few guys on a webpage. Enjoy.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

That would be a pleasant change from the amount of melting you’ve done due to the opinion of a few guys on a webpage. Enjoy.

First-rounder, third-rounder. It's all the same.

Sure it is, champion. Sure it is.

 

[PhatBoy]

Rofl.

I don’t care mate. I’m going to keep replying because it amuses me. But I think what I think, and no amount of your testicular squeezing over the issue is going to make me feel differently. They’re pixels on a page mate. There’s 7 billion people on the planet - people are going to have different views to you. The inability to accept that will do you more harm than good.

 

[Scotland]

16 of our 22 from last week were drafted by the club.

I rate the draft.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I think what I think

The defence that even the most misguided fools can pull off.

no amount of your testicular squeezing over the issue is going to make me feel differently.

Is this reverse psychology to get me to cup your balls?

16 of our 22 from last week were drafted by the club.

I rate the draft.

Did you know that there's no difference between a first-rounder and a third-rounder?

 

[PhatBoy]

Lol this is priceless.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Lol this is priceless.

Tell everyone again how you like your balls squeezed.

 

[vozzon]

Geelong 07 - 11 proves my point really... I’m saying that the draft is basically a lottery. A lot of Geelongs good players from that era were taken with very late picks - hence the whole thing is overrated.

No doubt a lottery but being able to have F/S selections of Ablett, Scarlett and Hawkins also helped the list build.

Hawks built there team with priority picks. Pies had PP and also some good father sons (Shaws and Cloke).

Bulldogs also drafted well with 3 F/S in hunter, libba and wallis.

The best way to build a team is through the draft, the dee's are looking good by having early picks with Brayshaw, Petracca and Oliver all top 5 picks. You also need to nail the picks.

 

[PhatBoy]

Tell everyone again how you like your balls squeezed.

It was a reference to the self-harm you seem to be doing because some guy you’ve never met disagrees with you actually

 

[Sweet Jesus]

No doubt a lottery but being able to have F/S selections of Ablett, Scarlett and Hawkins also helped the list build.

If it's a lottery, will you trade your first-rounder for two fourth-rounders?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

It was a reference to the self-harm you seem to be doing because some guy you’ve never met disagrees with you actually

Me: Hey PhatBoy, what's better out of $10 and $100?

PhatBoy: Pfffttt ... same same. The number next to the dollar sign doesn't make a difference.

Me: But that's ridiculous. One is clearly better than the other.

PhatBoy: Whatever. I think what I think. Now squeeze my balls.

 

[PhatBoy]

Me: Hey PhatBoy, what's better out of $10 and $100?

PhatBoy: Pfffttt ... same same. The number next to the dollar sign doesn't make a difference.

Me: But that's ridiculous. One is clearly better than the other.

PhatBoy: Whatever. I think what I think. Now squeeze my balls.

This is by some distance the worst analogy I have ever seen, combined with what seems like a borderline homoerotic attempt at a genital insult I think?

Keep railing against a screen mate.

 

[jacksgh]

Me: Hey PhatBoy, what's better out of $10 and $100?

PhatBoy: Pfffttt ... same same. The number next to the dollar sign doesn't make a difference.

Me: But that's ridiculous. One is clearly better than the other.

PhatBoy: Whatever. I think what I think. Now squeeze my balls.

You seem like a real ball squeezer figuratively and literally.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

This is by some distance the worst analogy I have ever seen, combined with what seems like a borderline homoerotic attempt at a genital insult I think?

Keep railing against a screen mate.

It's amazing that all these years clubs and list managers have been labouring under the misapprehension that first-rounders are more valuable than second-rounders, which are in turn more valuable than third-rounders and so on down the line.

But now you've come along with this radical new theory and turned it all on its head. It turns out all these draft picks are actually equally valuable. The number of the pick doesn't actually make a difference. OMG, how did no one see this before now?!

You should let the clubs know. I'm sure they'll be fascinated to learn of this amazing strategic breakthrough. You are truly one of the sharpest minds around. No one else could have solved this mystery.

You seem like a real ball squeezer figuratively and literally.

Yet another invitation.

 

[PhatBoy]

It’s amazing after all these years I thought any grown person with an interest in sport would have mastered the ability to insult someone’s point of view but accept that they hold it.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

It’s amazing after all these years I thought any grown person with an interest in sport would have mastered the ability to insult someone’s point of view but accept that they hold it.

This is complete gibberish.

Tell me again how first-rounder = third-rounder.

The extra 30-odd spots in the order count for nought.

 

[vozzon]

If it's a lottery, will you trade your first-rounder for two fourth-rounders?

No. But in the past year port traded a first round pick for multple 2nds in the 2016 draft (not 100% sure) but we ended up picking marshall, SPP and atley all in the top 32.

My comments came across wrong, but yes its still a lottery.

 

[jacksgh]

This is complete gibberish.

去他妈的你自己

 

[Sweet Jesus]

No. But in the past year port traded a first round pick for multple 2nds in the 2016 draft (not 100% sure) but we ended up picking marshall, SPP and atley all in the top 32.

So what?

Also, you didn't do that.

You traded picks 9, 19 and 49 for picks 14, 17 and 31. So you added a first-rounder, which is the opposite of what you claimed. You also upgraded a third-rounder (#49) to a second-rounder (#31). If it's a lottery, why would you bother doing any of that?

My comments came across wrong, but yes its still a lottery.

If it's a lottery, then two picks are by definition better than one.

So you should be willing to give up a single first-rounder to get two fourth-rounders. Why wouldn't you do that?

 

[falcons2]

Hawks built there team with priority picks.

Liberal use of built here. Roughead and Ellis were the priority picks. Franklin and Dowler later 1st round. Even without the priority system we still get Roughead and Ellis. So that leaves only Franklin as Dowler was a bust.
As Hawthorn had the next live pick through trading we get Franklin anyway. But it would leave us without Lewis.
Happy to say Hawthorn has done well with its own early picks + imported early picks, but built a team with priority picks, nah. Mythology

 

[vozzon]

So what?

If it's a lottery, then two picks are by definition better than one.

So you should be willing to give up a single first-rounder to get two fourth-rounders. Why wouldn't you do that?

your offer wasn't the best, point was its a lottery yes, not all picks end up being good but there is an element of talent identification involved thus why port offered what they did to have multple picks in that draft.

 

[jacksgh]

http://www.nber.org/papers/w11270

A question of increasing interest to researchers in a variety of fields is whether the incentives and experience present in many “real world” settings mitigate judgment and decision-making biases. To investigate this question, we analyze the decision making of National Football League teams during their annual player draft. This is a domain in which incentives are exceedingly high and the opportunities for learning rich. It is also a domain in which multiple psychological factors suggest teams may overvalue the “right to choose” in the draft – non-regressive predictions, overconfidence, the winner’s curse and false consensus all suggest a bias in this direction. Using archival data on draft-day trades, player performance and compensation, we compare the market value of draft picks with the historical value of drafted players. We find that top draft picks are overvalued in a manner that isinconsistent with rational expectations and efficientmarkets and consistent with psychological research

Rather than a treasure, the right to pick first appears to be a curse. If picks are valued by the surplus they produce, then the first pick in the first round is the worst pick in the round, not the best!

 

[Sweet Jesus]

your offer wasn't the best.

Huh?

point was its a lottery yes

If it's a lottery then why wouldn't you take two fourth-rounders instead of a first-rounder?

In a lottery, you want two tickets rather than one. So why wouldn't you do that deal?

there is an element of talent identification involved

Wait, what? I thought it was a lottery? Now it's about identifying talented kids? When did this happen?