Does the PP make a difference?

[titan_uranus 23,088]

Basically, I wanted to know whether the Priority Pick is the main motivation for us wanting to see Melbourne lose. If it wasn't there, would people prefer to see Melbourne winning, and ultimately finishing further up the ladder?

Personally, I'm happy for us to finish last this year because the reward is two picks inside the top 2 or 3. If it was only to be one pick, even though we'd probably miss out on Scully, I'd prefer us to be winning games.

[Steamin Demon 370]

I don't think it does but why not give yourself every chance of grabbing the best young talent. I want picks !! TANK ON !!

[Guest JACKtheRIPPER]

Basically, I wanted to know whether the Priority Pick is the main motivation for us wanting to see Melbourne lose. If it wasn't there, would people prefer to see Melbourne winning, and ultimately finishing further up the ladder?

Personally, I'm happy for us to finish last this year because the reward is two picks inside the top 2 or 3. If it was only to be one pick, even though we'd probably miss out on Scully, I'd prefer us to be winning games.

nah, i just want to see melbourne lose, this has been done and dusted,surely you can think of a better thread than this.

[col=sk 0]

Depends on the draft, this years draft scully is the standout so and last years draft the top 10 were highly rated.

So to me it depends on depth of the draft.

[Old Gregg 1]

I would have thought this poll is slightly irrelevant, given that there IS a pp on offer....

Depends on the draft, this years draft scully is the standout so and last years draft the top 10 were highly rated.

So to me it depends on depth of the draft.

Agreed. any other year I would want to win games above all, but when there is someone like Scully on offer and a huge gap between 1st pick and 2nd, its certainly tempting.

Still, I would want the team to win games, just as much as in a year where we would be challenging for finals.

Edited August 7, 2009 by Stop: Jurrahtime

[Sir Why You Little 35,310]

2 picks in the top 5 will always be worth fighting for, regardless of the perceived Talent.

As nobody really knows how it will turn out. Remember Alex McDonald?. No 1 Pick in 1988.

Very Ordinary Career. His 2 Brothers Rocked as we know.

[Nasher 33,246]

If it were just for the difference between pick 1 and 4 I wouldn't bother. It's the free pick that is the (huge) incentive.

[rpfc 27,669]

I agree that number 1 has been overshadowed as many times as not by those picked from 2-7 but with that said, the tactics that we are employing are exactly what we would be doing even without the PP.

[Binmans PA 26,648]

Make sure we get the picks. Not worth the risk...unless the only team we beat is Carlton.

[Einstein 1]

The issue is two-fold.

One - get the widely regarded best player by a mile, Tom Scully.

Two - get another top rated talent.

The answer is easy really.

[45HG 1,539]

That's not really what the OP is talking about though Einstein.

In my mind, it would remove the need to tank (at least so early).

[Einstein 1]

That's not really what the OP is talking about though Einstein.

In my mind, it would remove the need to tank (at least so early).

What? You mean, I should read the OP?

Doesn't change my answer. I want Sculls.

But I would agree that withouth the PP it may not be the same temptation as it is with the reward of 2 picks.

[Old Gregg 1]

That's not really what the OP is talking about though Einstein.

In my mind, it would remove the need to tank (at least so early).

Sorry to sound ignorant but what exactly is the OP???

[45HG 1,539]

Nah, you're right. Opening post.

These things take ages to learn. There should be a sticky thread with the abbreviations used IMO.

Edited August 7, 2009 by 45hotgod16

[Dappa Dan 2,188]

It depends. If you're talking about how we approach the whole season, then yes, win all the games you can. However if you're talking about right now, I think it's fair to say Scully is good enough at this stage for us to tank to get him even without a PP on offer. There's only 4 rounds to go, and they mean very little.

I think what the thread is trying to point out is whether Scully is more important than the PP. If, for example, they put a gun to your head and you had to choose between either pick 1, or picks 2 and 4, what would you take? This year, it'd be a tough decision, as Scully is so far ahead of the others. But if it were last year, you'd take the two picks in a second.

If it were just for the difference between pick 1 and 4 I wouldn't bother. It's the free pick that is the (huge) incentive.

Even with Tom on offer?

[Pates 9,551]

The only reason why i'm content with Melbourne losing is because we have a second bite at a top 4 pick, if that wasn't there i'd be extremely [censored] if Melbourne tanked to improve their position on the drafting ladder. Even with Scully on offer, DD. At the moment he is just potential, like 50-60 other guys. There really isn't much between the top 5 picks.

[dee-luded 2,958]

depends how bad the list is when you answer that question & recent history.

[Neita3000 37]

Scully is the brightest midfield prospect since Hodge. He's worth tanking alone nevermind pick 2 or 3

[titan_uranus 23,088]

I'm quite interested to see that opinions are varied. This draft's a bit different, though, with Scully being the clear favourite.

I think what the thread is trying to point out is whether Scully is more important than the PP. If, for example, they put a gun to your head and you had to choose between either pick 1, or picks 2 and 4, what would you take? This year, it'd be a tough decision, as Scully is so far ahead of the others. But if it were last year, you'd take the two picks in a second.

Yeah, it's a bit different this year because the number 1 pick is a clear choice. But what I was trying to gauge is whether or not people would still be happy with us seemingly trying to lose these last 5 or so games if the reward was just one top 4 pick. I know that I would prefer us to be winning games if there wasn't a PP on offer.

[Rogue 585]

If there was no PP I certainly wouldn't have felt the same way I did in the last 10 minutes of the Richmond game.

[H_T 2,941]

If there was no PP I certainly wouldn't have felt the same way I did in the last 10 minutes of the Richmond game.

Yeah me too. Taking away the free pick certainly "moves the goal posts". In fact I dont think Melbourne would be last if there was no pp on 'offer', we could of been on 5-6 wins. With Scully still there at this point i would maintain the current experimentation as we have seen for sometime.

[Demon Disciple 11,184]

winning the wooden spoon no longer carries the amount of shame as it used to. What it means now is that you get the first pick in the draft (if no PP's apply).

I believe tanking would still exist, even if the PP's were removed. For instance, say there is a kid in an upcoming draft that is head and shoulders above the rest, similar to this years draft, teams will still tank games to get the #1 pick to draft said kid.

Removing the PP's will take away elements of tanking, but will not totally eradicate it from our game.

[Dee tention 611]

Take the tanking or the experimentation option as I call it.

We are going to finish last and get Picks 1 and 2. It might aswell be Pick 1 and Pick 1. Scully and Trengove are daylight between the others. If we had Pick 1 and 3 I am sure whoever has Pick 2 would snap up Trengove. Huge difference in finishing last to second last.

Sit back and look forward to the draft! We have the box seat! And PS Pick 1 which should not be under estimated.

[olgreydingo 51]

"Tanking" what?! at the moment with less than 24 fit players, we coudn't tank even if we tried!

[Wadda We Sing 10,685]

I would not be in favour of the current experiments being conducted by a certain mad scientist if the PP didnt exist...however Im still of the opinion that it doesnt matter how talented the draftees are, its the way they are handled and taught by the club that will make the difference in the end. <_<

Edited August 10, 2009 by Demon Den