why do carlton get priority pick if they dont win a game?

[NICK94]

can someone please fill me in? dont know much about PSDs. I thought it was #16th placed: 1st pick, #15th placed: 2nd pick and so on.

 

[rfctigerarmy]

Carlton have won less then 5 games over the two years. Its a new system that they've brought in. That earns them the right to have the #1.

We'll have #2 if we finish last, Carlton #3 if they finish 2nd last.

Then we'll have pick #17, Carlton #18 as this years priority picks if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Calcium Man]

Its because they won less the 5 games last year. If you win less then 5 games 2 years in a row you recieve a priority pick before any other team can use its selection.

 

[NICK94]

thats stupid. should be the good old, simple last placed gets first pick, second last gets second pick runover. are they just trying to confuse every footy loving bloke under the sun? i bet its got something to do with money.

 

[Calcium Man]

Carlton have won less then 5.5 games over the two years. Its a new system that they've brought in. That earns them the right to have the #1.

We'll have #2 if we finish last, Carlton #3 if they finish 2nd last.

Then we'll have pick #17, Carlton #18 as this years priority picks if I'm not mistaken.

If carlton and melbourne win one more game we will get picks 1,17,18

If only Melbourne wins 1 more game we will get picks 2,18,19 Carlton will get pick 1

If only Carlton wins 1 more game we will get picks 1,17,19 melbourne will get picks 18 and 20

This is of course if we dont win more the 5 games.

 

[Calcium Man]

thats stupid. should be the good old, simple last placed gets first pick, second last gets second pick runover. are they just trying to confuse every footy loving bloke under the sun? i bet its got something to do with money.

It was changed in attempt to stop teams like melbourne and collingwood who would have one shocking year then one good year from getting 2 picks in the top 6.

It is trying to make sure only long suffering teams get the opportunity to benefit before the 1st rd of the draft.

 

[Madtiger2006]

It's a stupid rule and is the reason why Carlton have lost about 9 in a row. We are getting ripped off by the AFL.

 

[polakthetiger]

If you look at the scenarios CM has outlined above, it really matters little at the end of the day. Kids not living up to their potential, injuries and in the end, 1 player isn't going to win a flag.

Whether it is..

1,17,18
2,18,19
or
1,17,19

assuming we get OUR priority, we get 3 kids that have alot of potential that we need to develop into good players. The Baggers have several years of top draft picks, but time will tell how they develop them.

The top 4 sides, as everyone knows, if you go through their lists and see where they all come from, they aren't all top 20 picks, and there are plenty of top 20 picks that never made it.

More time needs to be put into WHICH kid to take!

 

[nugget_12]

If carlton and melbourne win one more game we will get picks 1,17,18

If only Melbourne wins 1 more game we will get picks 2,18,19 Carlton will get pick 1

If only Carlton wins 1 more game we will get picks 1,17,19 melbourne will get picks 18 and 20

This is of course if we dont win more the 5 games.

Yep thats 100% Spot on.

No-one else try to explain it because they are always wrong.....

This right on the money!

 

[Calcium Man]

More time needs to be put into WHICH kid to take!

More money will be spent on which kid to take this year. But more importantly Money needs to be put into development if the kids. Guys like Tambling and Meyer dont seem to be gaining the neccesary strength, especially thru their hips, compared to teams like WC and Collingwood.

West Coast dont always take the right kid but they are far better at developing players then any other team.

I think the best example of this are the Brown Twins. Before the draft Nathan was rated higher yet in their first seasons Mitch, who is at WC, has had a far greater impact.

 

[polakthetiger]

Guys like Tambling and Meyer dont seem to be gaining the neccesary strength, especially thru their hips, compared to teams like WC and Collingwood.

West Coast dont always take the right kid but they are far better at developing players then any other team.

We don't have money unfortunately to compete with the interstate teams and the wobbles in some areas where recruiting and then development is concerned.

I was referring to spending more time and hopefully better decision making with choosing them in the 1st place.

So with our limited resources, we need to get it right from the pick stage. I do think we can do better in getting their attitude right though as that only takes a smart player development team which might be where you are coming from.

 

[Calcium Man]

We don't have money unfortunately to compete with the interstate teams and the wobbles in some areas where recruiting and then development is concerned.

I was referring to spending more time and hopefully better decision making with choosing them in the 1st place.

So with our limited resources, we need to get it right from the pick stage. I do think we can do better in getting their attitude right though as that only takes a smart player development team which might be where you are coming from.

What i was suggesting that even with all the money west coast and collingwood spend on recruiting its still hit and miss. They have had plenty of flops.

What West coast does better then any other team is development when kids arrive at the club. As i pointed out Mitch Brown v Nathan Brown. Mitch was considered behind Nathan at draft time but after their first season he is proabably ahead.

I would rather more money on development of players when they arrive then on scouting potential players.

 

[polakthetiger]

My point is that, although 'picking' them costs money, the development part is the more expensive part of the whole process, thus our dilemma!

Edit: Although I have no idea on that, just guessing that to be the case!

 

[MTBTYT]

Storm in a teacup. In the long run No 1 or No 2 pick will make little difference. Draft picks don't win you premierships.

 

[Calcium Man]

My point is that, although 'picking' them costs money, the development part is the more expensive part of the whole process, thus our dilemma!

Edit: Although I have no idea on that, just guessing that to be the case!

Scouting is far from an exact science. Its just peoples opinions. Where as building up a players strength and fitness base are far more scientific and therefore more likely to be succesful.

A good example of some of the problems with scouting is Mathew Priddis. West Coast watched him so much that they found to many percieved flaws in his game and refused to pick him. But he just kept racking up the numbers at WAFL that he forced West Coast to pick him.

It wasnt good scouting on West Coast behalf it was just good luck.

A lot of kids are on a very similar level when they get drafted. But West Coast develop them that much faster. Id rather spend say 1.5 to 2 times more money on development compared to recruiting.

 

[polakthetiger]

Id rather spend say 1.5 to 2 times more money on development compared to recruiting.

Totally agree...but maybe that extra 1.5 or even 2 times increase will be still 50% less than what WC brings to the table??

 

[Calcium Man]

Totally agree...but maybe that extra 1.5 or even 2 times increase will be still 50% less than what WC brings to the table??

Good point. Given the choice i'd sacrafice money for recruiting so we could match WC in terms of development. I just feel that we have actually recruited very talented players over the last 3 season but they are just developing slower.

I know there was an article on the spending of each team but cant find it.