AFL Draft Lottery

[Furn2]

What if you have a lottery to see how many teams are in the lottery.

So you draw a random number from 1 to 10 and then whatever the number drawn is you have a lottery with that many teams starting from the bottom.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

It's a strange topic to be bringing up this year, when the clear favourite for the wooden spoon has a team full of players that are having a crack and just doesn't have the talent right now to compete with the rest of the league.

 

[Lefthanded]

What would people think of this?

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/t...g-good-bye-to-the-lottery-hello-to-the-wheel/

Good suggestion but think it would lack a little in marketability as not everyone would grasp the concept straight away (some not even in time) and isn't geared towards equalisation.

The priority draft pick created a negative stigma about tanking because other clubs thought it was unfair after seeing Hawthorn and Collingwood do very well out of priority picks. Without the priority picks tanking doesn't have to be seen as negatively. As teams don't have to fight to stay under 5 wins these days it allows teams to keep playing to win for most of the year and then only tank the last few rounds which really isn't too bad a deal. And say St Kilda tanked a game to stay under Brisbane it's hardly going to be an outrage.

Good point about the priority pick. Made me think of the FA compensation pick as a possible tanking problem. I certainly don't think Melbourne have been tanking this year but with Frawley as an UFA if they knew he was going they'd have extra incentive to tank as it increases their compo. Granted they don't know for sure if compo will be 1st or 2nd round etc but would have a fair idea it will be first. Agree with others who think building winning culture and development of players are more important than high picks. Especially when looking at the years 2001 to 2009 there's only 2 number one picks I'd even try to argue have become the best player of their draft year (Goddard & Cooney) with apologies to Hodge but in 2001 you wouldn't really be too unhappy with any of Hodge, Ball, Judd, Mitchell, Bartel, Dal Santo, Kelly, Johnson, Montagna, Lake & Swan (yes I'm deliberately excluding father sons).

A lottery would be absolutely 100% certain to be rigged by the AFL at some point.

I love the idea of #1 pick goes to the team that has gone the longest without playing finals, #2 to the team next longest since finals etc. Where two teams have gone the same number of year out of finals, the one finishing higher on the ladder gets first pick. Removes absolutely any incentive at all to tank (unless you think a team that has already missed the 8 for several years would deliberately miss it again). Unfortunately this system would take more than ten seconds to explain to the average moron footy fan, so it will never come in.

Like the idea, sadly agree with the conclusion.

 

[KGBeast]

I can only see the lottery being of use if it is just the bottom three or four teams going for picks 1-3/4. No need for a team that finished just out of the finals to have a chance at pick one or two.

 

[Pessimistic]

Someone suggested something along the lines of use the order in which they can no longer make the final

Eg for the saints it was last week, bris, mel, giants this week, and carlton next

After that point, any more wins no longer couny

 

[Lana]

Talking about Wheels,why not have the picks decided by a "Wheel of fortune" style game, played by the list managers, first to 1000 points gets the next pick. When a team wins a pick they exit the game and are replaced by the next team in reverse ladder order. The Best thing about it is they can put in on FOX footy as another footy reality TV show.

 

[Pykie]

People saying that the 9th placed team getting the #1 pick is a bad thing?

I view it as the complete opposite, if they did hit the 1% lucky strike like has happened in the NBA, I think it would be really good for the league. Most years there's only maybe 4 genuine contenders, if it happened to create a 5th or 6th contender if for instance a 9th and a 10th placed team got the #1 pick in years A and B, and 6 genuine powers developed in the next few seasons, It would provide for some exciting seasons.

As for the bottom teams missing out, like in the NBA, the bottom couple of teams have guaranteed picks, the bottom side has a guaranteed top 4 pick, if their ball doesn't come out in the first 3 selections, they automatically get #4, in the AFL there's not realistically much between the top 3-4 picks anyway.

 

[TradeDraft]

Never will Happen.

How would you like if the team that Finished 9th get the number 1 Pick?

 

[TradeDraft]

People saying that the 9th placed team getting the #1 pick is a bad thing?

I view it as the complete opposite, if they did hit the 1% lucky strike like has happened in the NBA, I think it would be really good for the league. Most years there's only maybe 4 genuine contenders, if it happened to create a 5th or 6th contender if for instance a 9th and a 10th placed team got the #1 pick in years A and B, and 6 genuine powers developed in the next few seasons, It would provide for some exciting seasons.

As for the bottom teams missing out, like in the NBA, the bottom couple of teams have guaranteed picks, the bottom side has a guaranteed top 4 pick, if their ball doesn't come out in the first 3 selections, they automatically get #4, in the AFL there's not realistically much between the top 3-4 picks anyway.

The Idea of the Draft is that the Worst Team has the top picks so they can Re-Build Quicker and not just stay down the bottom

 

[L_W_P]

The Cavs getting the #1 pick in the draft eliminated the "tanking" debate in the NBA. The AFL draft lottery for the bottom 10 teams would be a good idea.

Uhhh no, it didnt.

There are plenty of people out there who believe that teams like the Lakers and Celtics are going to tank the upcoming NBA season in order to get the best chance possible at a top draft pick. A lottery doesn't eliminate the 'tanking' talk at all. In fact, in the NBA, people are calling for a revamp of the lottery system BECAUSE IT PROMOTES TANKING!

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...of-tanking-is-neither-tanking-nor-an-epidemic

http://www.thescore.com/#/nba/news/414213

http://www.libertyballers.com/2014/3/4/5459688/the-nbas-tanking-problem

Is anyone talking about tanking in the AFL this year? Or are the Saints, Lions, Giants and Demons just shit?

I think the elimination of priority picks has been more than enough to stop the media from creating this storm in a teacup year after year.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Never will Happen.

How would you like if the team that Finished 9th get the number 1 Pick?

I'd rather that than teams trying to 'not win' after round 18.

 

[TradeDraft]

I'd rather that than teams trying to 'not win' after round 18.

Well then you might as well go back to Zones Then

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Well then you might as well go back to Zones Then

I'm more in favour of a bottom 5 lottery.

 

[Cobbler]

Haven't read through all the posts, but having followed drafts and lotteries of many sports perhaps the AFL could do a hybrid version.

Teams who finish 9th to 18th have equal chance of receiving the number one pick. Teams who play finals receive draft picks as in the norm currently.

Yes that does mean the team finishing 9th can receive the number 1 pick, but 'tanking' becomes a non event. Doing a lottery where teams receive greater chance based on finishing position etc, still promotes tanking.

Then from round 2 it can fall back into where the teams finish.

They won't get it perfect, but they can take what works best from a couple of scenarios and join them together.

So in this scenario the current 9th team Gold Coast could receive the number 1 pick with the same chances as Saints, GWS or whoever in the bottom 10. However in the second round they wouldn't receive pick 19 but pick 28.

Hope that makes sense, complicated but makes sense in my eyes.

 

[L_W_P]

I'm more in favour of a bottom 5 lottery.

Wouldn't the team sitting in 13th, just outside the bottom 5, have an incentive to tank then?

"We can finish with a couple of wins and pick 6 or put everyone in for surgery, lose a few games and have a shot at pick #1!"

Why would the Bulldogs, Richmond and Carlton try and win anymore games when a lottery could land them pick 1 for finishing 14th?

 

[L_W_P]

Haven't read through all the posts, but having followed drafts and lotteries of many sports perhaps the AFL could do a hybrid version.

Teams who finish 9th to 18th have equal chance of receiving the number one pick. Teams who play finals receive draft picks as in the norm currently.

Yes that does mean the team finishing 9th can receive the number 1 pick, but 'tanking' becomes a non event. Doing a lottery where teams receive greater chance based on finishing position etc, still promotes tanking.

Then from round 2 it can fall back into where the teams finish.

They won't get it perfect, but they can take what works best from a couple of scenarios and join them together.

So in this scenario the current 9th team Gold Coast could receive the number 1 pick with the same chances as Saints, GWS or whoever in the bottom 10. However in the second round they wouldn't receive pick 19 but pick 28.

Hope that makes sense, complicated but makes sense in my eyes.

Makes sense but its a horrible idea.

Would Collingwood prefer fight it out to finish 8th and play finals or put Swanny on ice, trial White at CHB and leave Reid in the 2's for 'fitness' so they just miss out and have a crack at pick 1? They could then grab Moore with their 2nd pick and laugh all the way to the top 4 next year.

Would waiting 1 more year for finals hurt the Suns? Just miss out, get a shot at pick 1 and add Petracca to that insane list of midfielders while the Saints and Lions continue to struggle.

Goes totally against competitive balance and equality.

 

[Cobbler]

Another highly complicated method, but again would discourage tanking is to award teams for winning. So by that I mean give teams a certain number of balls for defeating teams above them on the ladder.

Example team placed 15th defeats team placed 9th - they receive 6 balls for the draft

It would almost be impossible for the 9th placed team to have many balls in the lottery as you'd expect that they'd have beaten most teams below them not above them. Obviously who ever finished last will receive balls as every team would be above them.

The balls should be awarded at the time the teams played and what their position was on the ladder at that time.

Again complicated, but imagine Saints playing Fremantle this week. Seemingly nothing to play for other then pride and Lenny, but the club future could be improved by actually winning and receiving greater chance of a high pick, then the current system of losing is ok because we will receive the first pick for losing.

No game would be seen as a 'dead rubber'. Teams placed higher in the bottom 10 would still want to beat teams below them to deny them a greater chance.

Sometimes it takes outside the box thinking and I'm sure someone will find a fundamental flaw in my plan, but reward for winning should be the aim, but at the same time still giving the bottom placed team a good chance of improving their future with a high pick.

 

[Cobbler]

Makes sense but its a horrible idea.

Would Collingwood prefer fight it out to finish 8th and play finals or put Swanny on ice, trial White at CHB and leave Reid in the 2's for 'fitness' so they just miss out and have a crack at pick 1? They could then grab Moore with their 2nd pick and laugh all the way to the top 4 next year.

No guarantee of getting a high pick, but if they choose to forfeit finals experience at the chance of a high pick then I guess the issue of tanking will raise it's head again. At the same time they could do as you have suggested and still get the pick they deserved and you'd find it difficult to convince supporters that what was done was in the best interests of the clubs future.

Clubs will find ways to dodge any system implemented.

That's why I think my next scenario about reward for winning has merit!

 

[Matt Stevic]

The real solution:
No draft at all. Free agency. How would you feel if the industry you chose to work in had only one company that chose where you played? Even sending you to the other side of the country at 18 and in 8 years you get a bit of a choice, depending on whether the new bosses match your offer.
NRL has this system and their competition has same level of variation in who wins the comp. The keys to equal competition on field are making the salary cap low enough so that all clubs can afford to pay it...but not forcing them to pay 95%. When you make them pay 95% even when they are at the bottom of the ladder it means they cannot make big offers to better clubs to even out the competition.
The way this competition is run is a joke...punish teams for success, award best fixtures for teams based on financial results, etc. Make the playing ground level and we can see who the best team is each year, not who has been given the best concessions, charity draft picks or easy draw.

Post of the thread I reckon.

 

[L_W_P]

Another highly complicated method, but again would discourage tanking is to award teams for winning. So by that I mean give teams a certain number of balls for defeating teams above them on the ladder.

Example team placed 15th defeats team placed 9th - they receive 6 balls for the draft

It would almost be impossible for the 9th placed team to have many balls in the lottery as you'd expect that they'd have beaten most teams below them not above them. Obviously who ever finished last will receive balls as every team would be above them.

The balls should be awarded at the time the teams played and what their position was on the ladder at that time.

Again complicated, but imagine Saints playing Fremantle this week. Seemingly nothing to play for other then pride and Lenny, but the club future could be improved by actually winning and receiving greater chance of a high pick, then the current system of losing is ok because we will receive the first pick for losing.

No game would be seen as a 'dead rubber'. Teams placed higher in the bottom 10 would still want to beat teams below them to deny them a greater chance.

Sometimes it takes outside the box thinking and I'm sure someone will find a fundamental flaw in my plan, but reward for winning should be the aim, but at the same time still giving the bottom placed team a good chance of improving their future with a high pick.

2 biggest flaws - uneven fixture would skew results and awarding balls at the 'time of the win' also leads to massive swings.

How many balls would GWS get for beating the Swans in round 1?

Hypothetically next year the Giants beat the Saints in round 1 by 100 while Richmond choke against Carlton by 60 to sit 17th after 1 round.

Round 2 the Tigers beat the Giants and earn 16 'pick 1' balls.

As the year goes on the Tigers finish top 4 while the Giants are 2nd bottom.

Seems pretty unreasonable for Richmond to have picked up that many tickets...

 

[Matt Stevic]

What would people think of this?

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/t...g-good-bye-to-the-lottery-hello-to-the-wheel/

"...a system in which each of the 18 teams would pick in a specific first-round draft slot once — and exactly once — every 18 years. Each team would simply cycle through the 18 draft slots, year by year, in a predetermined order designed so that teams pick in different areas of the draft each year. Teams would know with 100 percent certainty in which draft slots they would pick every year, up to 18 years out from the start of every 18-year cycle. The practice of protecting picks would disappear."

Bold = edited for AFL.




A visual representation of any given team's draft cycle (over 18 years instead of 30 ofcourse);

Lotteries have proven ineffective at preventing tanking. In my opinion this sort of system is the future of drafting. The AFL could use it's implementation as a chance to be seen in a positive light internationally and a way in which to demonstrate the AFL is forward thinking or ahead of the curve in some way.

I am dead set against the use of a draft in the AFL but if it was implemented in this manner I would change my mind. IMO there is no logical reason why a team finishing lower on the ladder should get a higher draft pick just because they're worse.

 

[L_W_P]

What would people think of this?

http://grantland.com/the-triangle/t...g-good-bye-to-the-lottery-hello-to-the-wheel/

"...a system in which each of the 18 teams would pick in a specific first-round draft slot once — and exactly once — every 18 years. Each team would simply cycle through the 18 draft slots, year by year, in a predetermined order designed so that teams pick in different areas of the draft each year. Teams would know with 100 percent certainty in which draft slots they would pick every year, up to 18 years out from the start of every 18-year cycle. The practice of protecting picks would disappear."

Bold = edited for AFL.




A visual representation of any given team's draft cycle (over 18 years instead of 30 ofcourse);

Lotteries have proven ineffective at preventing tanking. In my opinion this sort of system is the future of drafting. The AFL could use it's implementation as a chance to be seen in a positive light internationally and a way in which to demonstrate the AFL is forward thinking or ahead of the curve in some way.

This I like.

The only real argument against this is if a top team gets pick 1 in a year when there is a dead set gun but we have seen in the last 5 years or so that development is just as important, if not more important, than the kids talent.

Give clubs a 2-3 year heads up that the wheel will start based on the result of the 2017 ladder and run the math for the 18 spots from there.

Once the season is over each club gets their wheel and everyone can plan accordingly.

Fantastic!

 

[Pegasaur]

Another highly complicated method, but again would discourage tanking is to award teams for winning. So by that I mean give teams a certain number of balls for defeating teams above them on the ladder.

Example team placed 15th defeats team placed 9th - they receive 6 balls for the draft

It would almost be impossible for the 9th placed team to have many balls in the lottery as you'd expect that they'd have beaten most teams below them not above them. Obviously who ever finished last will receive balls as every team would be above them.

The balls should be awarded at the time the teams played and what their position was on the ladder at that time.

Again complicated, but imagine Saints playing Fremantle this week. Seemingly nothing to play for other then pride and Lenny, but the club future could be improved by actually winning and receiving greater chance of a high pick, then the current system of losing is ok because we will receive the first pick for losing.

No game would be seen as a 'dead rubber'. Teams placed higher in the bottom 10 would still want to beat teams below them to deny them a greater chance.

Sometimes it takes outside the box thinking and I'm sure someone will find a fundamental flaw in my plan, but reward for winning should be the aim, but at the same time still giving the bottom placed team a good chance of improving their future with a high pick.

What if the bottom team wins 1 or 2 matches for the season against teams right above them on the ladder, They may only have 2 or 3 balls in the draft as opposed to a team who can win on their day (eg the Bulldogs) but is still very raw and inexperienced who could end up with 10+ balls through a few upset wins.

 

[Pegasaur]

I am dead set against the use of a draft in the AFL but if it was implemented in this manner I would change my mind. IMO there is no logical reason why a team finishing lower on the ladder should get a higher draft pick just because they're worse.

To help them improve is a fairly logical reason.

 

[Matt Stevic]

To help them improve is a fairly logical reason.

But why should they? The AFL bangs on about equalisation but if things were truly equal then every team, no matter where they finished on the ladder, should be given equal opportunity to improve their list. Having a draft in reverse ladder order to me is like giving the bottom ranking teams a higher salary cap than top ranking teams.

Take a look at the NRL. Every team has made the finals in the last 4 years (except for mine unfortunately). Not the case in the AFL. The NRL has no draft. In general the AFL is much better run but this is one of 2 things the NRL does better (the other being stadia).