Analysis Which clubs deserve a priority pick?

[outwecome2play]

I actually believe that Carlton will finish between 9-12 next year without needing a priority pick. The Gold Coast however don't appear to have any hope.

 

[RoversFC]

Gold Coast certainly could use one and I would have no problem with them getting one. As for Carlton, I would be happy for them to get just one more as well. That’s all they really need is just another good draft and their other players will develop enough. For the sake of Carlton not being a laughing stock anymore, like Melbourne use to be not too long ago, just another kid that is expected to make noise in the AFL is not the worst thing to happen.

No club is being penalized moving back one spot. 1) every club does it so no advantage for anyone, and 2) no picks are being lost, you are still getting a pick in the first round. Just didn’t get the pick that matched up to your play through the season, but moving back one spot is very, very minor.

Carlton for the fans can’t afford to be tanking for draft picks. 1 more good draft and they’ll be very happy with the direction they are heading, and would want to get there as soon as possible. Only injuries could stop that.

 

[Faz 2000]

I really think most fans are agreed on this now - that priority picks are not the right mechanism for sorting out rabble clubs (like mine).

Carlton's self-inflicted decade of list damage is why we're non-competitive in 2018, not a lack of top-end talent. A priority pick is really just a bonus at the moment which - whilst the rules are there - we should totally greedily try to get.

In addition, there's CLEARLY been some poor management and disharmony over the journey at the Blues (and now certainly at the Suns) which means we would screw up any talent that is fed into the system. If the system (club) is broken, feeding it more high-end talent and raw materials doesn't fix it!

It's a crap solution to a complicated problem.

On results, yes Carlton deserves one. In principle, nobody should get one. Do we need one? No, but I'll take it as a bonus to the rebuild, which is going well.

 

[Portology]

Trying to "quantify" things is hard work, and interesting, many thanks to the OP for trying to invent a "system" to do that.

I'd prefer to step back and look at the whole landscape first and then see where the draft fits now.

FA has opened up trading. That was intended to be good...

a) for teams in "rebuild". "Lower" risk mature heads get opportunity to teach young heads and moderate some risk of "very low" team performance.
b) for "aspirational" players seeking opportunity. Risk is shared, a club tries to "pick a winner" on relatively unexposed form of a still-maturing player.

But one unintended consequence of opening up FA has been the change in culture around trading in general, a shift in power towards the players...

c) an increasing talent drain from chronically poorly performing clubs to "name" clubs

AFL-sanctioned draft tampering forcing more top end young talent into poorly performing development pipelines at already poorly performing clubs may not do anyone a favor - not without "conditions attached" anyway. Talent - relatively speaking - is freer than ever to move from "bottom tier" to "top tier" clubs, even before maturity. Paradoxically, unintentionally, shoving more talent into chronic underperforming clubs might turn them into "feeders". No one wants that, it's the opposite of the intent of equalization. At the same time "mid tier" clubs see compo and priority picks bump their key R1 and R2 picks down a few spots with - relatively speaking - a lesser compensating influx of talent compared to the "top tier".

"Go home" factors influence the flows as well. Some to WA and SA. Some to Vic. Less so for "Country Vic" kids in SA because distance and because Adelaide can look like a big country town at times It's not a single or equal current in all directions. There is also a major competitive distortion - the pool of Vic based clubs provide "competition" for salary in later contracts. That amplifies any existing "go home" factor for Vic metro kids - it's two factors not just the one.

FA compensation picks are tied up with contract offers and roughly linked to ladder position, fair enough.

So, that's the "geography", it's not and won't be a level playing field. Now back to priority picks alone. IMO you want to tie them to "an intervention" or root-and-branch review of some defined kind that includes AFL representation, with teeth. Qualifying for a priority pick ought to be a source of shame and a trigger for ... something more than just draftandtradelust.

Now back to the current state of our two candidates. "Shit" is not a disease. Constipation and diarrhea are. Basically Carlton's list has constipation and Gold Coast's list has diarrhea. One is "stuck" full of spuds it traded in, and the other can't hold onto the solids it eats. You treat diseases accordingly, a doctor don't dish out the same medicine based solely on the inability of the patient to get out of bed. Gold Coast needs old heads on field to harden things up, to build something fans and community can actually attach to emotionally. At some point you can't just keep watching kids arrive, show promise and depart, that's what junior footy and feeder clubs are for. Carlton needs wiser heads off field to get more fiber into their diet. Gold Coast is dangerously irrelevant as a club but has gold-plated AFL-backing, for now. Carlton has enough "rusted on" support to weather a Richmond-like three decades of on field irrelevance, and we all saw how that ended. Bear in mind I'm describing the conditions, not judging how they got there. That comes next.

Gold Coast peaked in 2010, in Ablett's fourth year there, a year after a Brownlow. Gold Coast started with a list much "shorter" than GWS's. They wanted faster success, and failed.

Carlton peaked in 2011, in Judd's fourth year there, a year after a Brownlow. Interesting similarity, isn't it? But from here on Carlton have "history". Carlton delayed a rebuild up to 2002, got hit by those well deserved sanctions, and launched a rebuilt which should have had it's momentum jumped to the next level post Judd's arrival. What we have here, kids, in the long view, is a second over-delayed rebuild. Silvagni ignored the warning signs when he crossed back, "topped up" with GWS "offcuts" and all that has finally crashed.

Both clubs have won ~20 games in their last four seasons. Four years of #fail, and we're all pretty much "convinced". Another dot point of similarity.

To massively oversimplify and to stereotype individuals and club geographies, it seems GC have been unable to draft+develop+hold, where Carlton have been unable to stop themselves overrating who they are, what they have, and topping up via questionable trades.

So what to do... maybe this:

Gold Coast, end of round 1 PP "to be traded for a player at least at the end of their first contract". Attached to an AFL-involved top to bottom review. I don't need to wait for a review to not trust their drafting.

Carlton, end of round 1 PP "not to be traded". Attached to an AFL-involved top to bottom review. I don't need to wait for a review to not trust the bloke they've had doing their trading.

Weird? Not if you regard "basket case" as an exception. As a "market failure" requiring intervention. Entirely different situations but Melbourne basically had an interim, medium term coach appointed by the AFL, and at another time, Port basically had an entire board appointed by the AFL. Both clubs have turned it around considerably from their lowest ebbs. Just throwing picks out there, or not, and hoping the market sorts things out is bogus. It's not a level playing field and just sometimes, as an exception, not as a "general rule", an intelligent intervention is what is needed.

I hate to end on a sour and downcast note but I have to say I'd trust old Vlad, Andrew D, with this sort of thing much much more than Gilligan

 

[Wild Bill]

Another pick doesn't help with development and coaching issues. Should stop asking for handouts and fix the real problems.

I don't mind the idea of getting one under the proviso that they trade it for a mature player that can help with on field leadership.

Isn't this what Paul Roos said the other night?

 

[jezzajay]

Like you can talk.. Walker, Murphy and Kreuzer were all handed to you. Enough is enough.

Righto...like my post was suggesting we need to go for another priority pick was it?
I was calling someone out for having received a priority pick due to their own ineptness...to call us out is hypocritical.
Your salt is laughable.

 

[MITSUHIRATO]

We desperately need a PP.

Most of our players are wanting to request a trade to the Northern Blues.

 

[jezzajay]

You are comparing once to your yards numerous times of failed attempts to recruit and trade, with numerous offerings from the AFL.....

Make some changes to your footy department first, see if that has an impact, before you start singing for a PP.

Look at Brisbane, change up the off-field, some smart recruiting and bam, they are on the right track.

Salt.
I don't see us singing for a PP...can you point me to your source of us doing this?

Brisbane are going gang busters hey...
I dare say that if we had the same luck injury wise etc as them this year we wouldn't be far off them.
But hey, semantics and all...

 

[Theo X]

Stuff Carlton, GC can have one though.

 

[DapperDon]

Isn't this what Paul Roos said the other night?

Heard someone saying it on the radio, I thought it was Beveridge, but could have been Roos

 

[Peel67skin]

Heard someone saying it on the radio, I thought it was Beveridge, but could have been Roos

Yup .

https://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/af...s/news-story/eadf8d6a30e5a5cfda23435d98bbbe0d

 

[Wild Bill]

Heard someone saying it on the radio, I thought it was Beveridge, but could have been Roos

Michael Gibbons was the example. Won a Liston in 16 & contested ball winner that has had a great year.

 

[Robertio]

Stuff Carlton, GC can have one though.

This coming from a Melbourne supporter, if it wasn't for the AFL you would still be down the rear end of the ladder.

 

[My name geoff]

Your list may look very rosey but when you analyse the table in depth, it's very concerning from a Carlton Football Club perspective as a whole

I would be more concerned if my team just got knocked out of the finals race while fielding a side with only 3 players aged under the age of 23. Also if our best player in that game just retired.

 

[jezzajay]

This coming from a Melbourne supporter, if it wasn't for the AFL you would still be down the rear end of the ladder.

All teams have had their level of ineptness and incapability's at the draft/trading pool at stages over the years.
And gained help from the AFL too.
Some just can't see past their own nose...or are just too short minded to think past their hatred of us.
All good, they can seethe in their sweaty pile of salt - wreaks of jealousy.

 

[jezzajay]

I would be more concerned if my team just got knocked out of the finals race while fielding a side with only 3 players aged under the age of 23. Also if our best player in that game just retired.

Don't worry....they'll put their hands out for help to the AFL again in the near future.
Nothing more certain.

 

[biaseddustyfan]

carlton got everything they needed and are an established club and stuffed it up themselves. don't deserve one yet

gold coast are gonna die soon so if Gil wants to keep them then give them whatever they need

 

[My name geoff]

Trying to "quantify" things is hard work, and interesting, many thanks to the OP for trying to invent a "system" to do that.

I'd prefer to step back and look at the whole landscape first and then see where the draft fits now.

FA has opened up trading. That was intended to be good...

a) for teams in "rebuild". "Lower" risk mature heads get opportunity to teach young heads and moderate some risk of "very low" team performance.
b) for "aspirational" players seeking opportunity. Risk is shared, a club tries to "pick a winner" on relatively unexposed form of a still-maturing player.

But one unintended consequence of opening up FA has been the change in culture around trading in general, a shift in power towards the players...

c) an increasing talent drain from chronically poorly performing clubs to "name" clubs

AFL-sanctioned draft tampering forcing more top end young talent into poorly performing development pipelines at already poorly performing clubs may not do anyone a favor - not without "conditions attached" anyway. Talent - relatively speaking - is freer than ever to move from "bottom tier" to "top tier" clubs, even before maturity. Paradoxically, unintentionally, shoving more talent into chronic underperforming clubs might turn them into "feeders". No one wants that, it's the opposite of the intent of equalization. At the same time "mid tier" clubs see compo and priority picks bump their key R1 and R2 picks down a few spots with - relatively speaking - a lesser compensating influx of talent compared to the "top tier".

"Go home" factors influence the flows as well. Some to WA and SA. Some to Vic. Less so for "Country Vic" kids in SA because distance and because Adelaide can look like a big country town at times It's not a single or equal current in all directions. There is also a major competitive distortion - the pool of Vic based clubs provide "competition" for salary in later contracts. That amplifies any existing "go home" factor for Vic metro kids - it's two factors not just the one.

FA compensation picks are tied up with contract offers and roughly linked to ladder position, fair enough.

So, that's the "geography", it's not and won't be a level playing field. Now back to priority picks alone. IMO you want to tie them to "an intervention" or root-and-branch review of some defined kind that includes AFL representation, with teeth. Qualifying for a priority pick ought to be a source of shame and a trigger for ... something more than just draftandtradelust.

Now back to the current state of our two candidates. "Shit" is not a disease. Constipation and diarrhea are. Basically Carlton's list has constipation and Gold Coast's list has diarrhea. One is "stuck" full of spuds it traded in, and the other can't hold onto the solids it eats. You treat diseases accordingly, a doctor don't dish out the same medicine based solely on the inability of the patient to get out of bed. Gold Coast needs old heads on field to harden things up, to build something fans and community can actually attach to emotionally. At some point you can't just keep watching kids arrive, show promise and depart, that's what junior footy and feeder clubs are for. Carlton needs wiser heads off field to get more fiber into their diet. Gold Coast is dangerously irrelevant as a club but has gold-plated AFL-backing, for now. Carlton has enough "rusted on" support to weather a Richmond-like three decades of on field irrelevance, and we all saw how that ended. Bear in mind I'm describing the conditions, not judging how they got there. That comes next.

Gold Coast peaked in 2010, in Ablett's fourth year there, a year after a Brownlow. Gold Coast started with a list much "shorter" than GWS's. They wanted faster success, and failed.

Carlton peaked in 2011, in Judd's fourth year there, a year after a Brownlow. Interesting similarity, isn't it? But from here on Carlton have "history". Carlton delayed a rebuild up to 2002, got hit by those well deserved sanctions, and launched a rebuilt which should have had it's momentum jumped to the next level post Judd's arrival. What we have here, kids, in the long view, is a second over-delayed rebuild. Silvagni ignored the warning signs when he crossed back, "topped up" with GWS "offcuts" and all that has finally crashed.

Both clubs have won ~20 games in their last four seasons. Four years of #fail, and we're all pretty much "convinced". Another dot point of similarity.

To massively oversimplify and to stereotype individuals and club geographies, it seems GC have been unable to draft+develop+hold, where Carlton have been unable to stop themselves overrating who they are, what they have, and topping up via questionable trades.

So what to do... maybe this:

Gold Coast, end of round 1 PP "to be traded for a player at least at the end of their first contract". Attached to an AFL-involved top to bottom review. I don't need to wait for a review to not trust their drafting.

Carlton, end of round 1 PP "not to be traded". Attached to an AFL-involved top to bottom review. I don't need to wait for a review to not trust the bloke they've had doing their trading.

Weird? Not if you regard "basket case" as an exception. As a "market failure" requiring intervention. Entirely different situations but Melbourne basically had an interim, medium term coach appointed by the AFL, and at another time, Port basically had an entire board appointed by the AFL. Both clubs have turned it around considerably from their lowest ebbs. Just throwing picks out there, or not, and hoping the market sorts things out is bogus. It's not a level playing field and just sometimes, as an exception, not as a "general rule", an intelligent intervention is what is needed.

I hate to end on a sour and downcast note but I have to say I'd trust old Vlad, Andrew D, with this sort of thing much much more than Gilligan

Silvagni set out to gut the list from day 1 of his time as list manager. Not sure how going moneyball on a trade for 4 gws players for pick 28 is delaying the rebuild. At worst the pick secured us Lachie Plowman who is well worth that pick for us and at best, Phillips is a long term ruckman and Lamb is a handy depth player as well as Plowman who is a best 22 lock.

Ironically, if any club is delaying a rebuild and topping up with questionable trades, it’s the one in your bio.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

I would be more concerned if my team just got knocked out of the finals race while fielding a side with only 3 players aged under the age of 23. Also if our best player in that game just retired.

Nah not all. At least I know I support a team that is going to have a genuine crack each week and not accept mediocrity.

Sure, we may not end up being world beaters anytime soon, but at least we beat 4 of the top 8 sides this year and were in the hunt for finals until late. All this after being widely tipped for the spoon before the start of the season...

I'd be far more concerned if my team was laden with top end talent yet getting blown away in most games by half time... even against other bottom 4 teams!

That would indicate some serious issues!

 

[My name geoff]

Nah not all. At least I know I support a team that is going to have a genuine crack each week and not accept mediocrity.

Sure, we may not end up being world beaters anytime soon, but at least we beat 4 of the top 8 sides this year and were in the hunt for finals until late. All this after being widely tipped for the spoon before the start of the season...

I'd be far more concerned if my team was laden with top end talent yet getting blown away in most games by half time... even against other bottom 4 teams!

That would indicate some serious issues!

Ok.. so you basically said you don’t accept mediocrity and accepted mediocrity in the same post

We at Carlton are tired of mediocrity, which is why we accepted the short term pain in order to build an unbelievable team which will win multiple premierships. As Silvagni said in his interview with Caro ‘we could build an 8-10th team in the click of the fingers’ but we don’t want that at Carlton.

 

[Carl]

Completely agree with this!

Brisbane deserve a PP just as much as Carlton or Gold Coast, irrespective of the fact that they already received one in 2016. Brisbane has the worse win-loss record in the AFL over the past four years, and they haven't played finals for the best part of a decade. That being said, I don’t believe Brisbane or Carlton deserve, or are entitled to a PP.

For me Carlton have chosen to (consciously) trade out and move on experienced players such as E. Betts, Z. Tuohy, B. Gibbs, L. Henderson, J. Garlett, J. Waite, S. Grigg, M. Robbinson etc. in recent history. Choosing to bring in youth, and as one poster stated; they have more first round draft picks listed than any other club (barring GWS).

Gold Coast for mine are the only club worthy of a handout. But they need so much more than draft picks!

*Wins and losses (to date) for the past four seasons (2015-2018)

Brisbane Lions: W-17, L-70 with an overall average percentage of 73.15% (Last finals appearance - 2009)

Carlton - W-19, L-68 with an overall average percentage of 70.73% (Last finals appearance - 2013)

Gold Coast - W-20, L-66, D-1 with an overall percentage of 72% (Never played a final since being introduced in 2011)

Carlton chose to trade out?
Garlett and Robinson off field issues, had to go after many warnings: Received a 4th rounder for Garlett and SFA for Robinson.
Betts, Touhy and Grigg- Rightly or wrongly wanted more money than we were willing to pay. Touhy got us Marchbank.
Gibbs and Henderson- Wanted to leave the club. Got fair trades in return.

The reason we are shit is the totally useless drafting pre 2015. Go have a look at it and you will be amazed at the rubbish we recruited. From 2009 these are our picks in the first 2 rounds:
Boekhorst, Viojo-Rainbow, Giles, Cripps, Menzel, Temey, Bootsma, Watson, McCarthy and Lucas. 9 out of 10 is shit. How the hell we recruited Cripps is unbelievable. It just shows you even if you have no idea in recruiting you still have a chance in finding a decent player.

Good news is we have got Silvagni back to the club and have invested heavily in recruiters who hopefully can spot talent.

 

[My name geoff]

Don't worry....they'll put their hands out for help to the AFL again in the near future.
Nothing more certain.

It is a bit rich coming from a club who the AFL have to bank roll just to keep their faint pulse alive.

 

[Portology]

Silvagni set out to gut the list from day 1 of his time as list manager. Not sure how going moneyball on a trade for 4 gws players for pick 28 is delaying the rebuild. At worst the pick secured us Lachie Plowman who is well worth that pick for us and at best, Phillips is a long term ruckman and Lamb is a handy depth player as well as Plowman who is a best 22 lock.

Ironically, if any club is delaying a rebuild and topping up with questionable trades, it’s the one in your bio.

Personally, I'd be happy for your club to reject a PP, but I tried to park the inevitable personal biases for the duration of my thinking when writing earlier.

Wasn't even an option for us in the compromised drafts of 2011-2012 where for two inglorious years we were every bit as bad as you are now. Tough luck for us, but past inconsistencies, in different environments, ought to have little bearing on what would be right "for the game" now.

 

[blueiris]

Jon Ralph believes end of first round priority picks will come in for teams who have missed finals 5 years in a row Gil is apparently not happy with teams missing finals too many years in a row

 

[Beer n Skittles]

You are comparing once to your yards numerous times of failed attempts to recruit and trade, with numerous offerings from the AFL.....

Make some changes to your footy department first, see if that has an impact, before you start singing for a PP.

Look at Brisbane, change up the off-field, some smart recruiting and bam, they are on the right track.

Richmond once and Carlton numerous? Deledio and Rance were priority picks...

Maybe avoid inventing stories before you go singing about priority picks