Tanking and Picks

[Rogue 585]

I am talking about NOT TRADING FIRST ROUND PICKS.

Thinking logically, the draft WON'T work they way it was set up to 'even out the competition' if clubs trade the picks they get.

I am all for trading player(s) for player(s) and second round and beyond draft picks; but if the AFL truely want the draft to do what it is designed to do then they should make sure that at least the first round is set in concrete at the end of round 22.

Talking of thinking logically, your reasoning for barring first round pikcs can be simply copy/pasted in order to argue against trading any other pick (which you're okay with).

[DV8 2,271]

Can we fake 5-6 injuries, leaving us with only 17 on the ground?

That way we won't look pathetic or as if we're tanking when we lose.

If all else fails, the dodgy curry and a bottle of Vodka will work just as well! :D

How about a draw, I don't care about finishing below caarrlton, it's just a bonus for the pick if that happens. I think we almost owe it to the TIGERS & the integrity of the draft & the competion to make sure that either caarrlton does not get the priority pick, or niether of us gets a priority pick. There's all sorts of things that could happen like a week defence continually fumbling & rushing points thru the opp' goals, poor field kicking causing turnovers, lack of defensive pressure, etc, etc.

caarrlton may even turn up to play, but that wouldn't bring any glee' to a kerna expression.

[Rhino Richards 1,467]

Don't get me wrong, I am all for doing whatever the system allows, but trading early draft picks is clearly compromising the system.

I exercise a draft pick I get a player who has the potential to be good. I trade the pick I get a player who may never be as good as the one yo could have drafted but he is ready made to play.

In both cases a team has improved their list based on what they believe they need to improve their list.

So whats the problem?

I dont see the benefit of restricting what you do with the PP. It merely restricts the recipient from doing what they believe is best for the list to succeed. And that compromises the system.

[Toad33 57]

Talking of thinking logically, your reasoning for barring first round pikcs can be simply copy/pasted in order to argue against trading any other pick (which you're okay with).

Sorry Rogue. I am keen to discuss this topic HEAPS more but unfortunately don't have a lot of time.

In short, my reasoning for allowing post first round draft selections to be traded is that almost always the best players in any draft are selected in the top 10 if not the top 4 or 5. (this year it is a one horse race), from then on it is usually a bit of a raffle anyway.

Simply making teams use their first round draft selections ensures they get their turn to select the next best player in their rightful order, and if their recruiting staff are any good they WILL get the next best player.

At the end of the day trading draft selections makes a mockery of the draft, or at least the reason we have it; to even out the competition over time. It wasn't adopted so clubs can 'load up' on youth or experience.

Fundimentally it is a good system, but could use a few tweaks around the edges.

There are a few variations I would be happy with like allow picks 6 to 16 to be traded but making picks 1 to 8 untradable.

My ideas are not set in concrete, but I do believe the system could work better than it is.

At the end of the day there will always be a few anomalies with any system put in place. For example the depth of the draft candidates in any given year to name one.

Go Dees - Onward and Upward (No I don't have a 'thing' for Daniel Ward )

[DV8 2,271]

How about a draw, I don't care about finishing below caarrlton, it's just a bonus for the pick if that happens. I think we almost owe it to the TIGERS & the integrity of the draft & the competion to make sure that either caarrlton does not get the priority pick, or niether of us gets a priority pick. There's all sorts of things that could happen like a week defence continually fumbling & rushing points thru the opp' goals, poor field kicking causing turnovers, lack of defensive pressure, etc, etc.

caarrlton may even turn up to play, but that wouldn't bring any glee' to a kerna expression.

Recent events seem to have put a different slant on proceedings, would you say?

[Diablo 1]

Recent events seem to have put a different slant on proceedings, would you say?

I've got a solution to this problem. Demote Carlton to the VFL. No more tanking.

[Demondeb 8]

I heard rumours and of course they are rife at this time of year, that Carlton knew of Judd's leaving with about 5 or so rounds to go.

Now had Melbourne heard the same info, hypothetically now of course, would we have tanked that game to get that pick and keep him out of Carlton's hands??????

I was on the fence on the tanking issue. I wanted us to win badly but could also see the argument that we were going to be better placed for our future had we lost. It wasn't that far fetched an idea that we would lose and any team other than Carlton and we most likely would have however as fate had it that game became the # 1 pick game which ultimately may deliver the Blues the #1 player in the game today.

Cheats deserve to lose him to Richmond!

[deanox 9,773]

i actually heard that we knew he was leaving WC well before anyone else did...