Demons warned on draft tampering

[Born to Run 204]

I thought it worth posting a summary of views about the Jack Viney and our drafting situation. There have been a few good points raised which have generally started to calm me down about perhaps having to (slightly) over pay [or most likely not get an incredible bargain] when drafting Jack Viney.

Someone has raised that this problem of overpaying has somewhat been brought on by us in our inability to win games and climb the ladder. If we were sitting atop the AFL ladder, we would all be grateful to be drafting JV with our first round pick. I think that is unanimous. The fact we are languishing at the bottom of the ladder means that by default we may pay market or slightly overs for a father son prospect, something that has not happened before which no doubt adds to the frustration of Melbourne supporters who need as much hope as they can get right now.

Another extremely valid point that has been raised is that by being trash this year (assume for a moment – like everyone else does – that we finish third from bottom) we get a much higher pick as our first compo pick for Scully (pick #4). So we may pay slightly overs for Jack because we are junk, but we get much better compo pick for the same reason. Say it is ‘decided’ unanimously by recruiters and commentators alike that JV is rated #5 in the draft. We are effectively getting players rated #4 and #5 in the pool with our picks #3 and #4. If we finished top of the table we would be getting player rated #5 and player rated something like #18. Given the lottery of the draft, from a pure recruiting perspective we are better off with the current situation. So we are fortunate in this regard.

Of course, like everyone, I wish we could get players rated #3, #4, our next compo pick AND JV, but that is very optimistic, and I suppose it’s not really worth thinking it as a likely outcome, rather like winning the lottery if that happens.

I do think the AFL needs to think about FS selections, as you don’t want a club paying overs simply to keep a family member running at the club (no matter what the premium of payment is).

Other points raised about GWS and GC potentially getting compensation picks which might change the order of the draft are worthy of discussion too. The AFL are in for a hard time when deciding these things. GWS have deliberately chosen youth for the future rather than to win as many games as they can this year (sound familiar??). So do they deserve a priority pick for season 2012 performance? What happens if MFC win less than 5 games this year. Do we deserve a priority pick? It would mean that over the past 6 years we have won <5 (2012), 8 (2011), 8 (2010), 4 (2009), 3 (2008), 5 (2007) games. We have been absolutely hopeless. Assuming 4 wins this year as a guess, that is a winning % of 24%. Terrible. Last year that winning ratio saw Brisbane, Port and GC get priority picks. Can the AFL really say that this year a club like Melb does not deserve one?

One argument posted previously suggested that MFC would not get one because we already have so many picks in this draft. This can’t be used as consideration for a decision by the AFL as we could have stockpiled those picks for next year, or the year after. The fact we have compo picks for Scully is to compensate us for losing a key member of our side, it can’t then be used as a penalty when assessing the merit of us getting a priority pick for poor performance.

All in all, I am comfortable wherever we take Jack Viney so long as he is rated a top 5 player. I am staggered to look back and see our winning record since 2006 it makes me so frustrated. What I would love to see happen is a situation where MFC get JV with second round, pick GREAT players with our other 3 picks in the first round and if we are very poor and win less than 5 games this year (a chance) that we push hard to receive a priority pick from the AFL on the same terms as everyone else. All this and we are less than one third through the season! Talk about becoming masochistic!

[Pates 9,625]

.

........

Very well summed up, there are different ways of looking at it. Viney has been highly rated for a long time now, he may well have been looked at as a top 5 pick regardless of our advertising of him. If we finish low, which current indications are that we likely will, we need to look past the negative of getting Viney for too much and focus on the fact that our compo picks will be a lot more valuable.

[daisycutter 29,343]

Very well summed up, there are different ways of looking at it. Viney has been highly rated for a long time now, he may well have been looked at as a top 5 pick regardless of our advertising of him. If we finish low, which current indications are that we likely will, we need to look past the negative of getting Viney for too much and focus on the fact that our compo picks will be a lot more valuable.

why not focus on BOTH

we need to HTFU just like other clubs would and fight for every inch of territory and not just roll over when it gets difficult

you'll never never know if you don't give it a go

[Dr. Mubutu 778]

Who was the last top 10 pick under 180cms?

Liam Sumner: pick 10, 2011; 178cm

Dion Prestia: pick 9, 2010; 172cm

Chris Yarran: pick 6, 2008; 180cm

[Dr. Mubutu 778]

Another extremely valid point that has been raised is that by being trash this year (assume for a moment – like everyone else does – that we finish third from bottom) we get a much higher pick as our first compo pick for Scully (pick #4). So we may pay slightly overs for Jack because we are junk, but we get much better compo pick for the same reason. Say it is ‘decided’ unanimously by recruiters and commentators alike that JV is rated #5 in the draft. We are effectively getting players rated #4 and #5 in the pool with our picks #3 and #4.

To nitpick, realistically, we'd be getting #5 (JV with pick 3) and #3 (with pick 4)

[Undeeterred 3,045]

It's tampering becaue it's altering the way the draft will play out. It means someone who would be taken at say 25 (Melbs 2nd round possibly) goes at 3 instead.

If all recruting experts and the what not come out and say that Whitfield is clearly the no 1 pick and GWS nominate Viney as number 1 just to alter who Melbourne and there for other clubs recruit, it's tampering.

At risk of being labelled a heretic, we could always call their bluff and take a kid who is 'generally considered' to be better, with our pick 3, and make them take Viney with 1....

[Bossdog 2,002]

At risk of being labelled a heretic, we could always call their bluff and take a kid who is 'generally considered' to be better, with our pick 3, and make them take Viney with 1....

Very dangerous to bluff and risk losing the player you have put 2 years into.......for the sake of 1 draft pick....

[olisik 4,060]

Very dangerous to bluff and risk losing the player you have put 2 years into.......for the sake of 1 draft pick....

It dosnt matter how much time we have put into him. If another kid is still better then why would we prefer one who isn't as good even with the extra 2 years. By better i mean the more suitable, skilled and appropriate player for the club. and yes it is possible for another kid to be better more suitable and appropriate then Viney regardless of the 2 yrs. Not likely but yes possible

[Guest José Mourinho]

There's not another kid in the entire country who better suits our needs.

It's that simple.

[Undeeterred 3,045]

A very good idea..........except for the fact that we suck 9 different types of balls at the moment and wouldn't win 8 games this season if there were 1,000 games left.

Gold.

[Undeeterred 3,045]

At risk of being labelled a heretic, we could always call their bluff and take a kid who is 'generally considered' to be better, with our pick 3, and make them take Viney with 1....

I really should have read the whole 7 pages before posting this....

[Bossdog 2,002]

It dosnt matter how much time we have put into him. If another kid is still better then why would we prefer one who isn't as good even with the extra 2 years. By better i mean the more suitable, skilled and appropriate player for the club. and yes it is possible for another kid to be better more suitable and appropriate then Viney regardless of the 2 yrs. Not likely but yes possible

While I agree there maybe some one better.....The draft is not an exact science....What happens if we let Viney go and the great player we pick turns out to be a dud????? The devil you know............Demonland would be in an uproar that we didn't take Viney Edited May 10, 2012 by Bossdog

[Sir Why You Little 36,670]

While I agree there maybe some one better.....The draft is not an exact science....What happens if we let Viney go and the great player we pick turns out to be a dud????? The devil you know............Demonland would be in an uproar that we didn't take Viney

As long as JV's jaw and Mojo both repair 100% we will draft him. He has the toughness of his dad.

If there is a better draft choice than JV, he is going to have to be beyond exceptional.

Although the media told me Tom $cully was exceptional so i will not hold my breath.

We know how good Viney is. He has done the test drive.

Edited May 10, 2012 by why you little

[daisycutter 29,343]

As long as JV's jaw and Mojo both repair 100% we will draft him. He has the toughness of his dad.

If there is a better draft choice than JV, he is going to have to be beyond exceptional.

Although the media told me Tom $cully was exceptional so i will not hold my breath.

We know how good Viney is. He has done the teat drive.

You're a worry WYL

[Sir Why You Little 36,670]

You're a worry WYL

Ipad spelling. Insert (gently) the word test...

[Viney12 196]

As long as JV's jaw and Mojo both repair 100% we will draft him. He has the toughness of his dad.

If there is a better draft choice than JV, he is going to have to be beyond exceptional.

Although the media told me Tom $cully was exceptional so i will not hold my breath.

We know how good Viney is. He has done the test drive.

His mojo repaired 30 seconds after the hit, telling the trainer where to go (that is, if his mojo ever left)

and I think you make an excellent point

Form in the jnrs doesn't always translate to the snrs

Scummy a perfect example of this

From the reports on how good he was, he should've blitzed from day one

To this day, there'd have to be questions on whether he should've even gone top 10

JV will have invaluable experience this year playing in the 2s, as well as training with the senior squad, learning the structures / game plan etc

We will not under any circumstances not select him

Edited May 10, 2012 by Viney12

[Dr. Mubutu 778]

Form in the jnrs doesn't always translate to the snrs

And this is exactly why we will be picking him regardless. End of discussion.

[Viney12 196]

And this is exactly why we will be picking him regardless. End of discussion.

Agreed, has exposed form, we know what we are getting

[olisik 4,060]

There's not another kid in the entire country who better suits our needs.

It's that simple.

So I assume u have knowledge on every kid in the entire country to be able to make a statement like this?

[Range Rover 1,935]

While I agree there maybe some one better.....The draft is not an exact science....What happens if we let Viney go and the great player we pick turns out to be a dud????? The devil you know............Demonland would be in an uproar that we didn't take Viney

This is it in a nutshell. No way we're going to risk letting Viney go if there's a chance "the next Judd" turns out to be a dud. Even if that chance is relatively small, the supporters would riot if it occurred and we ended up with a Tambling type at pick 3.

I hear what Daisycutter is saying, we should play the poker game and all that, but realistically other clubs know we have backed ourselves into a corner over this and there's very little we can do about it.

Edited May 10, 2012 by Range Rover

[daisycutter 29,343]

This is it in a nutshell. No way we're going to risk letting Viney go if there's a chance "the next Judd" turns out to be a dud. Even if that chance is relatively small, the supporters would riot if it occurred and we ended up with a Tambling type at pick 3.

I hear what Daisycutter is saying, we should play the poker game and all that, but realistically other clubs know we have backed ourselves into a corner over this and there's very little we can do about it.

I don't think you do hear rangey

I never talked about playing a game of bluff and poker (like some have)

I talked about doing win/win deals with gws/gcs

of course, if we can't do a deal and our hand is forced we will take him with our first rounder

but until our hand is forced we should try and come up with something

it's not rocket science

[Range Rover 1,935]

I don't think you do hear rangey

I never talked about playing a game of bluff and poker (like some have)

I talked about doing win/win deals with gws/gcs

of course, if we can't do a deal and our hand is forced we will take him with our first rounder

but until our hand is forced we should try and come up with something

it's not rocket science

Sorry DC, lazily lumped you in with the others. I agree we should try to broker deals in the face of Vlad's finger-wagging. Collingwood wouldn't think twice.

[daisycutter 29,343]

Sorry DC, lazily lumped you in with the others. I agree we should try to broker deals in the face of Vlad's finger-wagging. Collingwood wouldn't think twice.

that's ok

[Biffen 12,842]

We could prepare a letter for the AFL by way of explanation as how we came to acquire young Jack .

I've taken the liberty of making a rough draft as follows:

Dear Andrew and Mignons ,

Go F.ck Yourselves with a pineapple.

We got JV the good old honest way.

(We cheated everyone else out of it)

To Clarify our understanding of the rules re Tom Scully ,Chris Judd ,Gary Ablett Jnr, Bryce Gibbs et al etc etc..

We took our future directive of such drafting procedure to mean ,as previously permitted to be :

Section 165b3 partXI . "That in the case of a very good or potentially very good player (possibly no 1) in the draft the special rule of the modern AFL rules committee shall apply: "The rules are there aren't no rules" Unless otherwise decided by the rules committee .

F.CK you all again .

MFC .

[Goodvibes 3,596]

Liam Sumner: pick 10, 2011; 178cm

Dion Prestia: pick 9, 2010; 172cm

Chris Yarran: pick 6, 2008; 180cm

Thanks for that. It'll be interesting to see how Sumner and Prestia in particular develop. There was a period there where anyone other than a dangerous, ridiculously quick forward pocket under 180cm was simply off the wishlist of clubs, particularly in the first round. Normally you've got to be super quick and super skilled to even get a look in. Has Viney actually stopped growing?