Demons warned on draft tampering

[mauriesy 7,299]

I know he wasn't a top 10 pick, but being 179cm hasn't stopped Sam Mitchell from being a star (and amassing 30 Brownlow votes last year).

[Nasher 33,616]

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?

Obviously nobody here is going to know specifically if Viney is still growing or not, but the average 17/18 year old still has growing to do. Probably no more than a cm or two though you'd think.

[JT9 104]

A caller on SEN made a brilliant point tonight on the show. Melbourne offering GC or GWS a player to not go in for Viney is called draft tampering, but those clubs nominating a player they have no intention of ever taking just to force us to take him early isnt?

As Garry Lyon pointed out, theres a legal way of doing it and its called draft week, so if we do it by legal means how can the AFL do anything about it?

[Guest José Mourinho]

A caller on SEN made a brilliant point tonight on the show. Melbourne offering GC or GWS a player to not go in for Viney is called draft tampering, but those clubs nominating a player they have no intention of ever taking just to force us to take him early isnt?

As Garry Lyon pointed out, theres a legal way of doing it and its called draft week, so if we do it by legal means how can the AFL do anything about it?

What??

This point has been argued on this forum, and I don't understand the Garry comment.

"Draft week" or "trade period"?

And yet still I don't get what you're trying to say.

[Guest strawberry_gumdrops]

Might as well put a lid on all this talk until we win a game for starters hey?

[Born to Run 204]

Might as well put a lid on all this talk until we win a game for starters hey?

Yep. You never know we might have an extra first round pick by way of o priority pick the way we are going!! 1,2,11,19 and JV. Surely we can do something with that!!!

[Dee Fan 3,247]

It will be interesting to see what happens if we finish second last behind either GWS or GC; both of those sides probably view each other as the natural enemy and not us, they will obviously both be looking at each other's growth potential over the next few years.

If say we finish in front of GWS and they bid for Viney then the benefit of that will go to GC not to them and they will be gifting the second or third best player in the draft to their biggest competitor, strategically not a great move. So it would probably be beneficial for them not to force our hand because the net benefit to them would be zero other than the nark factor in stuffing us up. The same thing applies to GC they would be giving GWS a leg up if they do the same.

I'm sure that under the circumstances a behind the scenes trade could be the answer and at least there would be some sort of benefit for the club that finishes last; of course if that's us, the point is moot.

[olisik 4,060]

It will be interesting to see what happens if we finish second last behind either GWS or GC; both of those sides probably view each other as the natural enemy and not us, they will obviously both be looking at each other's growth potential over the next few years.

If say we finish in front of GWS and they bid for Viney then the benefit of that will go to GC not to them and they will be gifting the second or third best player in the draft to their biggest competitor, strategically not a great move. So it would probably be beneficial for them not to force our hand because the net benefit to them would be zero other than the nark factor in stuffing us up. The same thing applies to GC they would be giving GWS a leg up if they do the same.

I'm sure that under the circumstances a behind the scenes trade could be the answer and at least there would be some sort of benefit for the club that finishes last; of course if that's us, the point is moot.

If we finish last we can make a deal to let Lachie Whitfield slide to 3rd pick so GWS can draft him. His a skinny mid, something we dont need anyway.

Maybe a 17yr old to let him slide could be put on the table.

[Guest José Mourinho]

If we finish last we can make a deal to let Lachie Whitfield slide to 3rd pick so GWS can draft him. His a skinny mid, something we dont need anyway.

Maybe a 17yr old to let him slide could be put on the table.

We don't need to make any deals if we finish last - no team would be able to force us to use a pick earlier than our 2nd round, so any deal would be moot.

Further to that, I wouldn't be making any deals if we finish 2nd last that involved us not selecting certain players.

We don't know who GWS will want, and we don't want to be limiting who we can select.

What we would do, is hope GWS finish last instead of GC, so then we are in the position to offer the most of any other team for mini-draft pick 1, that being the offer of pick 2.

GWS want pick 2 to be "active", not tied to Viney, so they can acquire it - incentive to not nominate Viney.

They also want to get max value for their mini-draft pick 1 - incentive to do the deal.

And we essentially lose pick 2.

Pick 2 we can't then use, but it would be just like having to take Viney with pick 2, except instead of getting to keep approx pick 23, we get mini-draft pick 1.

A good deal for us.

[Guest José Mourinho]

Obviously, if GC finish last, we have to somehow skew the trade deal in GC's favour.

With GWS, we just to make sure we offer a great deal, better than any other team, for the mini-draft pick that they can't keep.

And if the AFL deems this trade deal to be null and void, as it is draft tampering, it will be once papers have been lodged after the trade period has commenced, and F/S bidding is over...

So GWS/GC lose and the status quo remains with GWS/GC having not bidded for Viney.

[sylvinator 96]

If we come second last, and have picked 2 and 3, I honestly think we may not take Viney.

If we judge that Viney is worth pick 10 in this draft, and GWS are willing to take Viney for pick 1, then why wouldn't we take Whitfield if we rate him much higher?

If we end up with pick 4 or lower, we'll 10000% take Viney, because it seems that he's worth around pick 5-10. BUT, if we get pick 2, however nice it would be to have Todd Viney's son at the club, we aren't going to pass over Whitfield for a guy we rank much lower.

There would definitely be some 'get out' clause in Viney's contract. We aren't committed to anything until we read out his name.

I honestly think it would be a HUGE risk on GWS to nominate Viney with pick 1 if they aren't geniunely interested in taking him at that pick

[Harcourt 146]

I know I'll be absolutely smashed by everyone for this post but here goes:

If at the end of the year it is GWS or GCS in 18^th and MFC 17^th we sit down with Todd and Jack Viney in the weeks leading up to the bidding and say – “We are getting Jack with our second rounder or not at all, we simply must do this due to the current state of our list, it is vital to the clubs future”.

Then we pay out the remaining years on Jack contract (2 years), produce documentation to say it has been paid out. Have everyone involved in the recruiting department, CEO, Coach etc. to sign a sworn affidavit addressed to GWS saying – “we’ve paid out Jack Viney’s contract and we absolutely promise you via this signed guarantee that we will not be drafting Jack with our pick 2.”

In effect we are basically saying to GWS “We know Viney isn’t worth pick 1 and you know he isn’t worth pick 1 so quit trying to screw us. If you want him he is yours and we will take the true #1”.

In the lead-up to this we air “rumours” etc through our contacts in the media Schwarz/Lyon etc. that Viney would only ever sign a 2 year deal and would return to Melbourne immediately afterwards, he would be absolutely gutted if a team like GWS picked him up purely to just screw him and us over and that he would take great pleasure in inflicting as much pain as possible on all the young recruits etc etc. Melbourne say “We think we’d be a great chance to pick him up in subsequent years once his contract with GWS is up”.

In poker the player who bluffs first usually wins the pot so I reckon we get in first and make them make the decision rather than them just making us pay up.

So GWS/GCS can either take the best player in the draft or they can try and just screw us and potentially pick up a player who doesn’t want to even play for them – wasting pick 1 in the draft.

Flame away.......

[Viney12 196]

We don't need to make any deals if we finish last - no team would be able to force us to use a pick earlier than our 2nd round, so any deal would be moot.

Further to that, I wouldn't be making any deals if we finish 2nd last that involved us not selecting certain players.

We don't know who GWS will want, and we don't want to be limiting who we can select.

What we would do, is hope GWS finish last instead of GC, so then we are in the position to offer the most of any other team for mini-draft pick 1, that being the offer of pick 2.

GWS want pick 2 to be "active", not tied to Viney, so they can acquire it - incentive to not nominate Viney.

They also want to get max value for their mini-draft pick 1 - incentive to do the deal.

And we essentially lose pick 2.

Pick 2 we can't then use, but it would be just like having to take Viney with pick 2, except instead of getting to keep approx pick 23, we get mini-draft pick 1.

A good deal for us.

Biggest load of convoluted garbage I've ever read

So according to your proposal, we trade pick 2 in a super draft for pick 1 in the 17 year old mini draft, and we end up with a kid who can't play for 12 months

We also use our pick on the 20's on Viney, meaning we don't have a shot at picking a good kid in the apparent deep super draft

If it comes to it, we just take him with pick 2, if not so be it

Otherwise, I'm sure there are plenty of other ways to satisfy anyone finishing below us (if that even happens)

Geez I wish we'd start winning some games so all of this nonsense became a non issue

[Guest José Mourinho]

I know I'll be absolutely smashed by everyone for this post but here goes:

If at the end of the year it is GWS or GCS in 18^th and MFC 17^th we sit down with Todd and Jack Viney in the weeks leading up to the bidding and say – “We are getting Jack with our second rounder or not at all, we simply must do this due to the current state of our list, it is vital to the clubs future”.

Then we pay out the remaining years on Jack contract (2 years), produce documentation to say it has been paid out. Have everyone involved in the recruiting department, CEO, Coach etc. to sign a sworn affidavit addressed to GWS saying – “we’ve paid out Jack Viney’s contract and we absolutely promise you via this signed guarantee that we will not be drafting Jack with our pick 2.”

In effect we are basically saying to GWS “We know Viney isn’t worth pick 1 and you know he isn’t worth pick 1 so quit trying to screw us. If you want him he is yours and we will take the true #1”.

In the lead-up to this we air “rumours” etc through our contacts in the media Schwarz/Lyon etc. that Viney would only ever sign a 2 year deal and would return to Melbourne immediately afterwards, he would be absolutely gutted if a team like GWS picked him up purely to just screw him and us over and that he would take great pleasure in inflicting as much pain as possible on all the young recruits etc etc. Melbourne say “We think we’d be a great chance to pick him up in subsequent years once his contract with GWS is up”.

In poker the player who bluffs first usually wins the pot so I reckon we get in first and make them make the decision rather than them just making us pay up.

So GWS/GCS can either take the best player in the draft or they can try and just screw us and potentially pick up a player who doesn’t want to even play for them – wasting pick 1 in the draft.

Flame away.......

I'm not sure I agree, but it isn't the worst suggestion.

But what if we actually rate Viney as number 1?

[Guest José Mourinho]

Biggest load of convoluted garbage I've ever read

So according to your proposal, we trade pick 2 in a super draft for pick 1 in the 17 year old mini draft, and we end up with a kid who can't play for 12 months

We also use our pick on the 20's on Viney, meaning we don't have a shot at picking a good kid in the apparent deep super draft

If it comes to it, we just take him with pick 2, if not so be it

Otherwise, I'm sure there are plenty of other ways to satisfy anyone finishing below us (if that even happens)

Geez I wish we'd start winning some games so all of this nonsense became a non issue

Having trouble getting your head around it..?

[Viney12 196]

Having trouble getting your head around it..?

No I get it, it's just ludicrous

[Harcourt 146]

I'm not sure I agree, but it isn't the worst suggestion. But what if we actually rate Viney as number 1?

If we rate Viney 1 we take him with 2 and move on.

[Bossdog 2,002]

I know I'll be absolutely smashed by everyone for this post but here goes:

If at the end of the year it is GWS or GCS in 18^th and MFC 17^th we sit down with Todd and Jack Viney in the weeks leading up to the bidding and say – “We are getting Jack with our second rounder or not at all, we simply must do this due to the current state of our list, it is vital to the clubs future”.

Then we pay out the remaining years on Jack contract (2 years), produce documentation to say it has been paid out. Have everyone involved in the recruiting department, CEO, Coach etc. to sign a sworn affidavit addressed to GWS saying – “we’ve paid out Jack Viney’s contract and we absolutely promise you via this signed guarantee that we will not be drafting Jack with our pick 2.”

In effect we are basically saying to GWS “We know Viney isn’t worth pick 1 and you know he isn’t worth pick 1 so quit trying to screw us. If you want him he is yours and we will take the true #1”.

In the lead-up to this we air “rumours” etc through our contacts in the media Schwarz/Lyon etc. that Viney would only ever sign a 2 year deal and would return to Melbourne immediately afterwards, he would be absolutely gutted if a team like GWS picked him up purely to just screw him and us over and that he would take great pleasure in inflicting as much pain as possible on all the young recruits etc etc. Melbourne say “We think we’d be a great chance to pick him up in subsequent years once his contract with GWS is up”.

In poker the player who bluffs first usually wins the pot so I reckon we get in first and make them make the decision rather than them just making us pay up.

So GWS/GCS can either take the best player in the draft or they can try and just screw us and potentially pick up a player who doesn’t want to even play for them – wasting pick 1 in the draft.

Flame away.......

I understand your thinking. but if we get Whitfield (don't know much about him,but presume a skinny kid) and with Viney (solid build and a go getter). I don't think the draft number is that important.......If we bluff and Viney turns out the superior player how dumb are we going to look.......Skully was touted as the No 1 pick for about a year before he was drafted and look at Martin and a few others picked later in the draft. ......As I said don't know much about the kids in the upcomming draft but I believe we have commited to Viney and believe he will be a great choise.........Most poker players that bluff get beaten.....And god help us if we stuff this up...

[Jordie_tackles 354]

We don't need to make any deals if we finish last - no team would be able to force us to use a pick earlier than our 2nd round, so any deal would be moot.

Further to that, I wouldn't be making any deals if we finish 2nd last that involved us not selecting certain players.

We don't know who GWS will want, and we don't want to be limiting who we can select.

What we would do, is hope GWS finish last instead of GC, so then we are in the position to offer the most of any other team for mini-draft pick 1, that being the offer of pick 2.

GWS want pick 2 to be "active", not tied to Viney, so they can acquire it - incentive to not nominate Viney.

They also want to get max value for their mini-draft pick 1 - incentive to do the deal.

And we essentially lose pick 2.

Pick 2 we can't then use, but it would be just like having to take Viney with pick 2, except instead of getting to keep approx pick 23, we get mini-draft pick 1.

A good deal for us.

I think Olisik is being extra smart,

We give up nothing but lettin ga player slide, we get all our top picks and a 17yo for what taking the second and third best players this year and a 17yo instead of the true number one.

Add Viney onto this at 20odd we we would be getting 4 top 5 picks and pick

edit - i dont like thinking about and it wont happen (us finishing 18th)

i honestly think we will have a strong second half to the year

Edited May 14, 2012 by Jordie_tackles

[Harcourt 146]

I understand your thinking. but if we get Whitfield (don't know much about him,but presume a skinny kid) and with Viney (solid build and a go getter). I don't think the draft number is that important.......If we bluff and Viney turns out the superior player how dumb are we going to look.......Skully was touted as the No 1 pick for about a year before he was drafted and look at Martin and a few others picked later in the draft. ......As I said don't know much about the kids in the upcomming draft but I believe we have commited to Viney and believe he will be a great choise.........Most poker players that bluff get beaten.....And god help us if we stuff this up...

But in my (delusional) world there is no possible way Viney will be a better player than Whitfield because Viney will be so pee'd off with GWS for picking him up just to screw us (and him) that he will be too busy causing training mishaps (which would be pure accidents of course) involving $cully than actually playing footy.

Disagree re poker players that bluff get beaten - bluffing is absoutely vital to winning the game, without it you will be guaranteed to lose.

[daisycutter 29,617]

Don't worry about fs/draft tactics guys,the club will have our best brains working on it

Hey, wait a minute........ummmmmm.........scratch that

carry on with suggestions, guys

[old dee 23,796]

Don't worry about fs/draft tactics guys,the club will have our best brains working on it

Hey, wait a minute........ummmmmm.........scratch that

carry on with suggestions, guys

Excellent return to good form DC

Second smile for the day

[furious d 464]

Vic Metro's first game in the Champs is Saturday week. It's pretty safe to assume Jack will miss round 1. Then they have a week off before playing 2 in a row. I don't see any point in rushing him back just so other recruiters can have a look at him against his peers. We should be very cautious managing this injury to a contracted player. I'd suggest 6 weeks off, followed by a week of APS and he should be ready, and hopefully a little rusty, for the final 2 rounds of the Championships. No point making it ant easier for other clubs.

Let's worry about the subterfuge we can control for now.