List Mgmt. 2014 Draft Trade FA Megathread

[Barrels]

ahhh bugger. i was hoping he was a Uncle Barrels style big boy

Been talking to my wife again?

 

[ike2112]

If our current form continues theres a very good case for a priority pick to head our way. No more than 8 wins over 2 years was the last criteria set for priority picks. I seriously cant see us winning another game and if we keep getting thumped every week theres no way the AFL can ignore our situation

An amendment to an old post I made in March:

Lets look at the likelihood of a priority pick properly then.

Remember the ‘rule’ used to be 20.5 points or less to get a PP, then they lowered it to 16.5 and required it to be 2 consecutive years at that level to get a start-of-draft pick. Then they wanted to make it less frequent again, and less transparent, so it should become even more difficult than having two seasons of less than 5 wins… the criteria is now:

a) premiership points that a club has received over a period of years (with greater weight to recent seasons),
b) a club's percentage (points for/points against x 100) over a period of years (another indication of on-field competitiveness, with greater weight to recent seasons),
c) any finals appearances that a club has made in recent seasons,
d) any premierships that a club has won in recent seasons, and
e) a club's injury rates in each relevant season.

Even if we ignore that we played the GF in 2009 and 2010, and that our current predicament is of our club’s own making through decisions it made in the years that got us to those finals, the last three seasons have given us:

2011 – made finals; 12 wins, 1 draw, 50 points, 6th place, 112.76%
2012 – just missed finals; 12 wins, 48 points, 9th place, 123.33%
2013 – 5 wins, 20 points, 16th place, 82.59%

From our previous seasons therefore we don’t really match up well with the criteria.

a) It’s an average of 39.33 points, basically 10 wins. That’s not awful. In none of the seasons have we dropped below 16.5 points, which was the marker for a PP, and realistically that points threshold for true mediocrity is probably lower now.
b) we don’t have a terrible %age. In fact the average of the last 3 years is 106.23%. Even last year when we lost all those games, we remained competitive in most of them. We weren’t getting blown out every other week, or trying to just win a quarter like the Demons. We were staying within roughly 3 goals for most games, usually then bringing the gap down to 10 or so then tiring in the last quarter.
c) We’ve only been out of the finals for 2 seasons, and if you broaden it to last 5 seasons obviously we’re 3 out of 5 for appearances and 2 GFs.
d) none, with the caveat that we were very close twice
e) last season actually works against us here – the injury situation is to negate ‘good’ clubs having an off year with a spate of injuries. So if sympathy pick is your aim, you want bad results with low injury numbers. However we had relatively high injury numbers in 2013. Now you could delve further into the argument that our club’s staff wage bill means Saints players might get lesser treatment or preventative work, and so are more susceptible to injury… but the equality debate is for another thread.

Compare those 3 years to others who’ve been around the basement:
Melbourne
2010 – 8 wins, 1 draw, 34 points, 12th place, 94.52%
2011 – 8 wins, 1 draw, 34 points, 13th place, 85.27%
2012 – 4 wins, 16 points, 16th place, 67.49%
2013 – 2 wins, 8 points, 17th place, 54.07%
Port Adelaide
2010 – 10 wins, 40 points, 10th place, 82.38%
2011 – 3 wins, 12 points, 16th place, 64.51%
2012 – 5 wins, 1 draw, 22 points, 14th place, 78.87%
Western
2010 – 14 wins, 56 points, 4th place, 125.37%
2011 – 9 wins, 36 points, 10th place, 95.59%
2012 – 5 wins, 20 points, 15th place, 67.01%
2013 – 8 wins, 32 points, 15th place, 85.15%

In 2011 Gold Coast (3 wins, 12 points, 56.27%), Port Adelaide (3 wins, 12 points, 16th place, 64.51%) and Brisbane (4 wins, 16 points, 80.98%) were the last teams to get Priority Picks.

Melbourne didn’t get one in 2012, despite being on an obvious downward slide. They then didn’t get one in 2013 either. Now yes you can make the argument that the AFL commission could have determined that the problem at Melbourne was institutional rather than with the value of draft picks they were getting. So paying for Roos was felt a better solution than giving them pick 1. I’d agree with them were that the case. But that’s not within the boundaries of the criteria laid out. So just applying points, %age, finals and injury rates, Melbourne with their performances, weren’t deemed worthy of a PP.
Port didn’t get one in 2012, despite having not played finals for 3 years, having a percentage of only 75.25%, and having averaged 24.66 points over the three seasons (average of 4 wins in those last two years).
Western didn’t get one in 2012 or 2013, despite having not played finals for 3 years, having a percentage of only 82.58%, and having averaged 29.33 points over the three seasons (average of 6.5 wins in those last two years).

Port rebounded a little in 2012, then more in 2013.
Bulldogs rebounded a little in 2013 – they look likely to have another low-key year this season but I think they’re setting up nicely for 2015 or 2016.
Melbourne are in a situation now where you have to expect improvement from the talent they have, but they will still suffer for some time due to poor recruiting decisions.

Amended section:

So now lets say we end with 3 wins (personally I think we might find 1 more; maybe a split with Richmond, they might be in bits by round 22) and 55%.

Our last 4 seasons would look like;

2011 – made finals; 12 wins, 1 draw, 50 points, 6th place, 112.76%
2012 – just missed finals; 12 wins, 48 points, 9th place, 123.33%
2013 – 5 wins, 20 points, 16th place, 82.59%
2014 – 3 wins, 12 points, 17th place, 55%

That would give us an average over the last four seasons, of 8.125 wins, 32.5 points, 93.42%.
Just the last three seasons would be 6.67 wins (7 avg if we won another game in 2014), 26.67 points, 86.97%. Those are still above the old thresholds for a Prio Pick, and are better stats than Melbourne and Port had in their down years, and are comparable with Western during their down period.

We therefore still wouldn’t be scraping the depths that others have reached.

Now…. If we were to still be winning only 2 or 3 games in 2015… then I absolutely think we’d be a chance of getting assistance of some kind. And it saddens me to say that I think that is starting to look likely, because even though we recruited 2 KPDs we still look shoddy at the back a lot of the time, we are outgunned in the midfield, and our forwards are all ineffective other than a great mark, goal or effort here and there. Having 8 or 9 players in the lineup that drift in and out is killing us.

However I’d also point out that it was pretty clear back in preseason that we were going to struggle. My original version of the above reply was to someone suggesting we might go the entire season without a win. Understandably so, because you could make the argument that Melbourne, GWS and Essendon are all better teams than us.

The old pre-GWS record was 6 games lost by 100+ points, and I worried that we would hit that benchmark. The current record is 7. I hoped we would stay within 30-40 of the decent teams, maybe even give one or two a scare, and only get blown out by the top 4. Getting smashed off Adelaide was not great, neither is getting a pasting off the Pies when they rest a couple.

At this moment in time I think all but 3 or 4 clubs would fancy their chances at putting 80 points on us. Port this week, Geelong in Rd 13, North (Rd 17 in Tas), Freo Rd 18, GC (Rd 19 at Metricon), Sydney (Rd 21 at SCG) and Adelaide (Rd 23 at Oval) are all capable of putting 100 on us. Hopefully some of those will take the chance to rest players against us, and save us a little.

 

[mighty sainters]

An amendment to an old post I made in March:

Lets look at the likelihood of a priority pick properly then.

Remember the ‘rule’ used to be 20.5 points or less to get a PP, then they lowered it to 16.5 and required it to be 2 consecutive years at that level to get a start-of-draft pick. Then they wanted to make it less frequent again, and less transparent, so it should become even more difficult than having two seasons of less than 5 wins… the criteria is now:

a) premiership points that a club has received over a period of years (with greater weight to recent seasons),
b) a club's percentage (points for/points against x 100) over a period of years (another indication of on-field competitiveness, with greater weight to recent seasons),
c) any finals appearances that a club has made in recent seasons,
d) any premierships that a club has won in recent seasons, and
e) a club's injury rates in each relevant season.

Even if we ignore that we played the GF in 2009 and 2010, and that our current predicament is of our club’s own making through decisions it made in the years that got us to those finals, the last three seasons have given us:

2011 – made finals; 12 wins, 1 draw, 50 points, 6th place, 112.76%
2012 – just missed finals; 12 wins, 48 points, 9th place, 123.33%
2013 – 5 wins, 20 points, 16th place, 82.59%

From our previous seasons therefore we don’t really match up well with the criteria.

a) It’s an average of 39.33 points, basically 10 wins. That’s not awful. In none of the seasons have we dropped below 16.5 points, which was the marker for a PP, and realistically that points threshold for true mediocrity is probably lower now.
b) we don’t have a terrible %age. In fact the average of the last 3 years is 106.23%. Even last year when we lost all those games, we remained competitive in most of them. We weren’t getting blown out every other week, or trying to just win a quarter like the Demons. We were staying within roughly 3 goals for most games, usually then bringing the gap down to 10 or so then tiring in the last quarter.
c) We’ve only been out of the finals for 2 seasons, and if you broaden it to last 5 seasons obviously we’re 3 out of 5 for appearances and 2 GFs.
d) none, with the caveat that we were very close twice
e) last season actually works against us here – the injury situation is to negate ‘good’ clubs having an off year with a spate of injuries. So if sympathy pick is your aim, you want bad results with low injury numbers. However we had relatively high injury numbers in 2013. Now you could delve further into the argument that our club’s staff wage bill means Saints players might get lesser treatment or preventative work, and so are more susceptible to injury… but the equality debate is for another thread.

Compare those 3 years to others who’ve been around the basement:
Melbourne
2010 – 8 wins, 1 draw, 34 points, 12th place, 94.52%
2011 – 8 wins, 1 draw, 34 points, 13th place, 85.27%
2012 – 4 wins, 16 points, 16th place, 67.49%
2013 – 2 wins, 8 points, 17th place, 54.07%
Port Adelaide
2010 – 10 wins, 40 points, 10th place, 82.38%
2011 – 3 wins, 12 points, 16th place, 64.51%
2012 – 5 wins, 1 draw, 22 points, 14th place, 78.87%
Western
2010 – 14 wins, 56 points, 4th place, 125.37%
2011 – 9 wins, 36 points, 10th place, 95.59%
2012 – 5 wins, 20 points, 15th place, 67.01%
2013 – 8 wins, 32 points, 15th place, 85.15%

In 2011 Gold Coast (3 wins, 12 points, 56.27%), Port Adelaide (3 wins, 12 points, 16th place, 64.51%) and Brisbane (4 wins, 16 points, 80.98%) were the last teams to get Priority Picks.

Melbourne didn’t get one in 2012, despite being on an obvious downward slide. They then didn’t get one in 2013 either. Now yes you can make the argument that the AFL commission could have determined that the problem at Melbourne was institutional rather than with the value of draft picks they were getting. So paying for Roos was felt a better solution than giving them pick 1. I’d agree with them were that the case. But that’s not within the boundaries of the criteria laid out. So just applying points, %age, finals and injury rates, Melbourne with their performances, weren’t deemed worthy of a PP.
Port didn’t get one in 2012, despite having not played finals for 3 years, having a percentage of only 75.25%, and having averaged 24.66 points over the three seasons (average of 4 wins in those last two years).
Western didn’t get one in 2012 or 2013, despite having not played finals for 3 years, having a percentage of only 82.58%, and having averaged 29.33 points over the three seasons (average of 6.5 wins in those last two years).

Port rebounded a little in 2012, then more in 2013.
Bulldogs rebounded a little in 2013 – they look likely to have another low-key year this season but I think they’re setting up nicely for 2015 or 2016.
Melbourne are in a situation now where you have to expect improvement from the talent they have, but they will still suffer for some time due to poor recruiting decisions.

Amended section:

So now lets say we end with 3 wins (personally I think we might find 1 more; maybe a split with Richmond, they might be in bits by round 22) and 55%.

Our last 4 seasons would look like;

2011 – made finals; 12 wins, 1 draw, 50 points, 6th place, 112.76%
2012 – just missed finals; 12 wins, 48 points, 9th place, 123.33%
2013 – 5 wins, 20 points, 16th place, 82.59%
2014 – 3 wins, 12 points, 17th place, 55%

That would give us an average over the last four seasons, of 8.125 wins, 32.5 points, 93.42%.
Just the last three seasons would be 6.67 wins (7 avg if we won another game in 2014), 26.67 points, 86.97%. Those are still above the old thresholds for a Prio Pick, and are better stats than Melbourne and Port had in their down years, and are comparable with Western during their down period.

We therefore still wouldn’t be scraping the depths that others have reached.

Now…. If we were to still be winning only 2 or 3 games in 2015… then I absolutely think we’d be a chance of getting assistance of some kind. And it saddens me to say that I think that is starting to look likely, because even though we recruited 2 KPDs we still look shoddy at the back a lot of the time, we are outgunned in the midfield, and our forwards are all ineffective other than a great mark, goal or effort here and there. Having 8 or 9 players in the lineup that drift in and out is killing us.

However I’d also point out that it was pretty clear back in preseason that we were going to struggle. My original version of the above reply was to someone suggesting we might go the entire season without a win. Understandably so, because you could make the argument that Melbourne, GWS and Essendon are all better teams than us.

The old pre-GWS record was 6 games lost by 100+ points, and I worried that we would hit that benchmark. The current record is 7. I hoped we would stay within 30-40 of the decent teams, maybe even give one or two a scare, and only get blown out by the top 4. Getting smashed off Adelaide was not great, neither is getting a pasting off the Pies when they rest a couple.

At this moment in time I think all but 3 or 4 clubs would fancy their chances at putting 80 points on us. Port this week, Geelong in Rd 13, North (Rd 17 in Tas), Freo Rd 18, GC (Rd 19 at Metricon), Sydney (Rd 21 at SCG) and Adelaide (Rd 23 at Oval) are all capable of putting 100 on us. Hopefully some of those will take the chance to rest players against us, and save us a little.

I think that you've missed something though, the fact that our talent coming through is not where it should be. Basically, in the years when the draft was diluted, and we were gonna get picks that weren't as high anyway, we finished high on the ladder. Coupled with that, our recruiting/development was so terrible that we have almost no one in a particular age bracket (23-28 I think it is). When our older players, who are about 30 now, retire, we're gonna be so much worse off than we are now, unless we can get some talent in now and develop them. That would be the only reason we get a priority pick (perhaps not right after our first round pick, but a middle or end of first round selection); to have players now, so that in a few years when our reliable stars are gone, we have someone ready to take the load. Otherwise, they're just being reactionary, and are gonna have to give a start of first round pick, because we will be so bad that we will most likely go through seasons only winning 2 games

 

[ike2112]

butcher for stanley doesnt make much sense.

trading out for a resting ruck who can play fwd for another tom lee type fwd. we dont have any other options to cover stanley either

The knock on Tom Lee is lack of tank, injured shoulders and lack of size. Even once fit and in shape, he's not a Full-Forward type that could play alongside a roaming forward like Roo.
Butcher is bigger than Lee with less doubts about what type of player he is.

Stanley always had a high ceiling, but hasn't gotten close to it. Imagine if he was as good at being a fwd/ruck as he could be, and with that athletic talent too.
Butcher has a lower ceiling but is more likely to achieve it at this point. He's a KPF that drops a clanger a game and can't kick straight.

 

[ike2112]

Stanley has no currency I would not pick him up if I was a recruiter. Potential is one thing but he is a poor second ruckman and a poor KPP who has talent but cannot put it on the park. We are dreaming.

You underestimate that there is always one or two people out there who think they can 'cure' someone.

 

[Defacto]

The knock on Tom Lee is lack of tank, injured shoulders and lack of size. Even once fit and in shape, he's not a Full-Forward type that could play alongside a roaming forward like Roo.
Butcher is bigger than Lee with less doubts about what type of player he is.

Stanley always had a high ceiling, but hasn't gotten close to it. Imagine if he was as good at being a fwd/ruck as he could be, and with that athletic talent too.
Butcher has a lower ceiling but is more likely to achieve it at this point. He's a KPF that drops a clanger a game and can't kick straight.

why cant he play a third tall role similar to gunstan when buddy and roughhead were playing fwd?

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

Alan Richardson was on "talking football" tonight and they brought this up as a comparison from Hawks 2004 and Saints 2014 and Richo said it's a good comparison. Funny how much similar that is ..

Not to mention at the end of 2004 Hawthorn got Roughead, Franklin and Lewis through the door and we'll likely snag a KPF at the end of this year.....They got a priority pick though which sadly it's unlikely we'll get to help fast track our rebuild a little.


Had a look at Hawks full 2004 trades/drafting

Nathan Thompson > North Melbourne for Pick 10 + 26
Pick 10 + 37 > Collingwood for Pick 7 (Jordan Lewis) and Bo Nixon

Pick 2 J.Roughead, Pick 5 L.Franklin, Pick 7 J.Lewis, Pick 21 T.Murphy, Pick 26 M.Little, Pick 53. S.Taylor

 

[Defacto]

what if the drafts dont turn out to be as strong :-(

 

[Periphery]

Not only did 2004 get them picks 2,5,7,21,26 but the 2005 draft also got them 3,6,14,18,22.

Pelchen and Co. will have to work overtime to get anything remotely like that in the next few years.

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

Not only did 2004 get them picks 2,5,7,21,26 but the 2005 draft also got them 3,6,14,18,22.

Pelchen and Co. will have to work overtime to get anything remotely like that in the next few years.

3 was a priority and 6 normal selection they traded in 14 for Nathan Lonie and 18 for Jonathan Hay.

Doubt we'll get near those unless the AFL lend a hand.

I'd be over the moon if the AFL gave us a priority top 5 pick over the next two years but yeah i'm dreaming haha

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

U18 Championships: Div 1 Round 2 stats

 

[Defacto]

great post ike2112 on the PP

i think we might be a chance next year but i dont think they'll hand out first rounders anymore. maybe end of first rounders

 

[ike2112]

why cant he play a third tall role similar to gunstan when buddy and roughhead were playing fwd?

Mainly because Gunstan > Lee, Buddy +/- > Roo and Roughead > Maister(or Stanley).

Buddy is more versatile and less of a solitary focal point than Riewoldt. Roughead is far, far better than whatever 2nd tall forward we have been able to muster in the last 3-4 years. And Hawthorn win so much ball they can have numerous ways to work the ball forwards. Cyril aside, we don't even have a Jordan Lewis.
When Buddy was around, Roughead was their equivalent of Stanley. Hale is more competent as a forward than Hickey/Longer. It's generally a case of balance in the forward line - you can only have a 3rd medium/tall in there, if one or both of your other talls are flexible.

IF say Spencer White turns out to be a Buddy Franklin, and IF we get a monster FF in the draft (or other recruitment), then Tom Lee would probably bring an ideal balance to our forward line.

On the upside: He can be a matchup nightmare where the 3rd tall defender (if the opponent have one) might struggle to run with him. And a more agile defender can’t match up with him overhead. He’s able to contribute as a big-body crumber, and find space in the forward line between a stay-home FF and a roaming KPF will Franklin/Riewoldt/White.

Downside: He’s too small to be a KP focal point, can’t work hard consistently enough to be a hit-up player like Roo down the flanks, doesn’t have the low-enough centre of gravity to be a fwd pocket/goal sneak type yet doesn’t have the ability to rotate through the midfield. In the modern game if he can’t be a KP, fill the single goal sneak spot, or play some MF, then he’s kind of in the way.

Right now I feel sorry for Tom Lee and Arryn Siposs because frankly they are onto a hiding just now regardless. We aren't going to have enough ball, and certainly not enough good quality possession and quality f50 entries to allow them to look good. They will be lucky to see the ball 5 or 6 times. Yet they're bigger lads so it's not as easy for them to chase the ball like a headless chicken or play a little MF.

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

AFL be nice if we finish bottom give us Pick 2.

Pick 1: Patrick McCartin
Pick 2: Peter Wright

I could live with that......

HF: Jack Billings, Peter Wright, Eli Templeton
FF: Tom Lee, Patrick McCartin, Daniel Markworth/Josh Saunders/Someone



Ok.. I need to find my pillow and start dreaming more.

 

[Defacto]

AFL be nice if we finish bottom give us Pick 2.

Pick 1: Patrick McCartin
Pick 2: Peter Wright

I could live with that......

HF: Jack Billings, Peter Wright, Eli Templeton
FF: Tom Lee, Patrick McCartin, Daniel Markworth/Josh Saunders/Someone



Ok.. I need to find my pillow and start dreaming more.

i dont think its going to happen and based off the 1 game i saw i dont think wright will ever be a CHF...that is unless we consider someone like kruizer or the dons hille to be a CHF

:-(

 

[Defacto]

maybe its the game of thrones i just watched thats made me all pessimistic and the weekends shizen U18 game..but i'm starting to think our timing might be doomed here, coupled with the failures of past list management

i'm worried the talent is softening and we might be in trouble

another pick inside the top 10 in the draft just gone would have been really helpfull

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

i dont think its going to happen and based off the 1 game i saw i dont think wright will ever be a CHF...that is unless we consider someone like kruizer or the dons hille to be a CHF

:-(

I'm still pretty hopeful on Spencer White, i mean he has had two pre-seasons and both he has had that wrist injury. Imagine what a full pre-season could possibly do? hopefully he can get that full pre-season this up and coming 2014/2015 one and beyond. I think some of us on here have forgotten he hasn't had a full pre-season yet, i'll admit i forgot until the other week.

That way....
HF: Jack Billings, Spencer White, Eli Templeton
FF: Tom Lee, Patrick McCartin, Daniel Markworth/Josh Saunders/Someone

 

[ike2112]

I think that you've missed something though, the fact that our talent coming through is not where it should be. Basically, in the years when the draft was diluted, and we were gonna get picks that weren't as high anyway, we finished high on the ladder. Coupled with that, our recruiting/development was so terrible that we have almost no one in a particular age bracket (23-28 I think it is). When our older players, who are about 30 now, retire, we're gonna be so much worse off than we are now, unless we can get some talent in now and develop them. That would be the only reason we get a priority pick (perhaps not right after our first round pick, but a middle or end of first round selection); to have players now, so that in a few years when our reliable stars are gone, we have someone ready to take the load. Otherwise, they're just being reactionary, and are gonna have to give a start of first round pick, because we will be so bad that we will most likely go through seasons only winning 2 games

Making an arbitrary assessment of the grade of talent we recruited during expansion-affected drafts is not one of the criteria for determining a Priority Pick.
Also whilst I agree with what you say about our recruitment/development in the years 2008-2011, that's not an argument to get league help. That's an admission that we did it to ourselves in the mindless pursuit of glory and if anything should be made to suffer as a result.

I think it would be very bad for the league to give us help - the message it would send the league is "mortgage your future - don't worry, we'll bail you out when you need a major overhaul".

Lets be honest here - they used to give them out too easily. Since 2011 they've drawn right back on them - Melbourne and Port in their bad years, had less to cheer about than we do right now. They didn't have the silver linings we're seeing. The Dees versions of Billings and Dunstan were either injured or looking like spuds. Port were apparently devoid of talent, structure and leadership. And they didn't get Priority picks. Both have turned the corner to varying degrees without extra picks (the league did help the Dees but not with a pick), so the AFL's decision there is actually vindicated in my eyes.
Likewise for us, I think the AFL is more likely to step in and help us in budget-affecting ways. The Junction Oval thing too - whilst I can't actually see what tangible benefit it makes to us, the league might help us out there.

Reactionary is exactly what the Priority Pick always was. I don't think you can have a league that proactively tries to pre-empt mediocrity and hands out assistance. If there was such a thing, Lachie Plowman would play for Port Adelaide cos everyone thought they'd be awful after 2012...

I do think if we are still down around 2-3 wins in 2015, and there is league-wide chatter that our list need a boost, then we might get help of some kind.
However I also think that by 2015 teams will be allowed to trade future picks as well, so we could for example trade a player and a 2016 pick for a 1st round 2015 draft choice, thus improving our team in a more immediate way.

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

Luke Dunstan talking a bit about St Kilda/SA.

and Tommy Curren on TAC Future Stars

 

[Periphery]

and Tommy Curren on TAC Future Stars

Curren likes Bieber...Well I guess we can add another name to the list of delisted players at the end of the year.

 

[Nutsngum]

Jeez, Curren is a natural with the media. Am I nuts or does he kind of have similar accents on words as Dal Santo?

 

[mighty sainters]

Making an arbitrary assessment of the grade of talent we recruited during expansion-affected drafts is not one of the criteria for determining a Priority Pick.
Also whilst I agree with what you say about our recruitment/development in the years 2008-2011, that's not an argument to get league help. That's an admission that we did it to ourselves in the mindless pursuit of glory and if anything should be made to suffer as a result.

I think it would be very bad for the league to give us help - the message it would send the league is "mortgage your future - don't worry, we'll bail you out when you need a major overhaul".

Lets be honest here - they used to give them out too easily. Since 2011 they've drawn right back on them - Melbourne and Port in their bad years, had less to cheer about than we do right now. They didn't have the silver linings we're seeing. The Dees versions of Billings and Dunstan were either injured or looking like spuds. Port were apparently devoid of talent, structure and leadership. And they didn't get Priority picks. Both have turned the corner to varying degrees without extra picks (the league did help the Dees but not with a pick), so the AFL's decision there is actually vindicated in my eyes.
Likewise for us, I think the AFL is more likely to step in and help us in budget-affecting ways. The Junction Oval thing too - whilst I can't actually see what tangible benefit it makes to us, the league might help us out there.

Reactionary is exactly what the Priority Pick always was. I don't think you can have a league that proactively tries to pre-empt mediocrity and hands out assistance. If there was such a thing, Lachie Plowman would play for Port Adelaide cos everyone thought they'd be awful after 2012...

I do think if we are still down around 2-3 wins in 2015, and there is league-wide chatter that our list need a boost, then we might get help of some kind.
However I also think that by 2015 teams will be allowed to trade future picks as well, so we could for example trade a player and a 2016 pick for a 1st round 2015 draft choice, thus improving our team in a more immediate way.

Yeah, I'm not saying it will happen, just that it'd be a smarter thing to do. 100+ point blowouts aren't good for a television deal, which is where the AFL makes most of its money, so having uncompetitive teams is bad for business. I don't think that they'll just hand out a pick without taking something back (maybe a future pick will be taken from us and given to us now, or there'll be some kind of money incentive for it not to happen), but if they wait a few years, we're gonna need to get one anyway

 

[karaoke]

Am I right in saying this is the WCE f/s selection for this year.

Impressive stats - clearances, cont. possessions & DE.

 

[Barrels]

maybe its the game of thrones i just watched thats made me all pessimistic and the weekends shizen U18 game..but i'm starting to think our timing might be doomed here, coupled with the failures of past list management

i'm worried the talent is softening and we might be in trouble

another pick inside the top 10 in the draft just gone would have been really helpfull

I'm getting similar angsties... Fallen completely off Durdin, mostly off Wright and somewhat off Goddard ...

Starting to think - if McCartin's gone - we might be better off with Brayshaw and Touk Miller coming our way and taking someone via trade, and Schache or Weidman next year... Maybe snag Watchman with a later pick if he slides, and look at Le Grice with a rookie spot.

 

[Barrels]

Reece McKenzie still with 13 touches, 5 marks and a goal coming back after an ankle (?)... Like the lad a lot...

Maybe trade for a KPF, Brayshaw at #2 and McKenzie in the 2nd round?