...and Tim Duncan.
The Clippers got Michael Olowokandi and Danny Manning.
Lucky bugger.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
NBA Draft system seems better.
- Thread starter benno87
- Start date
- Tagged users None
...and Tim Duncan.
The Clippers got Michael Olowokandi and Danny Manning.
Lucky bugger.
I left out the Tim Duncan draft so I didn't leave myself open to any tanking accusations. 
Also got us Sean Elliott.
Also got us Sean Elliott.
I don't think an NBA draft system should be adopted by the AFL. If any side is to get the number one pick, it should be the bottom team.
I do agree however, that the concession picks must be removed. In 2001 we were faced with a ridiculous situation where three teams received priority picks and the premiership side had to wait until pick #19 for their first selection.
Clubs are also more likely to 'tank' games when they're aiming for an arbitrary target (ie less than five and a half wins) rather than for a final ladder position, where they have no control over other results which will affect their final position.
I do agree however, that the concession picks must be removed. In 2001 we were faced with a ridiculous situation where three teams received priority picks and the premiership side had to wait until pick #19 for their first selection.
Clubs are also more likely to 'tank' games when they're aiming for an arbitrary target (ie less than five and a half wins) rather than for a final ladder position, where they have no control over other results which will affect their final position.
- Apr 2, 2000
- 75,716
- 25,441
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Chicago Bulls.
Originally posted by mattyc2422
I left out the Tim Duncan draft so I didn't leave myself open to any tanking accusations.
Yeah that was a shocker...tank tank and more tanking.
- Apr 2, 2000
- 75,716
- 25,441
- AFL Club
- West Coast
- Other Teams
- Liverpool, Chicago Bulls.
I had read something about that...apparently that is how LA got the number 1 pick that brought them Magic Johnson. They beat Chicago for the coin toss.
I'm sick of this speculation. A dodgy quote from a dodgy character and all of a sudden its hawthorn wh 'deliberately lost games' yet WE WON ALL LAST 5 GAMES that year STUPID - after only winning 3 games for the rest of the year.
If you want to use an example look at Collingwood or Fremantle who are far more likely to have ACTUALLY tanked to get draft picks. It may even have been discussed at hawthorn but IT DID NOT HAPPEN.
As fare as I am aware discussing it is not a crime.
NakedDeadGuy
Club Legend
My only problem with a lottery is in the case where you have one very ordinary team that needs a high pick. My modification to what's been suggested is to get rid of concession picks altogether, and if a team dosn't win more than 5 games they are exempt from a lottery and keep their draft pick position, excepting where there is more than one team in this situation - where they would have a lottery with the lower ladder side getting more balls.
Hypothetically, this year the Scraggers could finish last with only a couple of wins and a draw, other lowly teams (Geelong, Carlton) could end on six or seven wins. That's a fair way behind. A team like Essendon may win 11 games and finish 9th, there is no way known they should have any chance whatsoever to go in the draft before the Scraggers.
I'd rather see the chances of getting a high pick related to wins rather than just ladder position. Break up the draft into sections determined by wins rather than just ladder position, have a lottery for each of those 'groups'.
eg (hypothetically remember): 5 wins or less - Dogs pick 1
8 wins or less - Geelong 5 balls, Carlton 4 balls, St Kilda 3 balls, Melbourne 2 balls, Richmond 1 Picks 2-6
11 wins or less - Hawthorn 3 balls, North 2 balls, Essendon 1 Picks 7-9
The rest, with balls correlating to ladder position.
Does that make any sense?
Hypothetically, this year the Scraggers could finish last with only a couple of wins and a draw, other lowly teams (Geelong, Carlton) could end on six or seven wins. That's a fair way behind. A team like Essendon may win 11 games and finish 9th, there is no way known they should have any chance whatsoever to go in the draft before the Scraggers.
I'd rather see the chances of getting a high pick related to wins rather than just ladder position. Break up the draft into sections determined by wins rather than just ladder position, have a lottery for each of those 'groups'.
eg (hypothetically remember): 5 wins or less - Dogs pick 1
8 wins or less - Geelong 5 balls, Carlton 4 balls, St Kilda 3 balls, Melbourne 2 balls, Richmond 1 Picks 2-6
11 wins or less - Hawthorn 3 balls, North 2 balls, Essendon 1 Picks 7-9
The rest, with balls correlating to ladder position.
Does that make any sense?
Portia
#DrewBlood
30k Posts
10k Posts
TheBrownDog
Port Adelaide - Jesse Palmer Player Sponsor 2017
Podcaster
Port Adelaide - Riley Bonner Player Sponsor 2016
Port Adelaide - Brendon Ah Chee Player Sponsor 2014
Port Adelaide - Jarrad Redden Player Sponsor 2014
Port Adelaide - Matthew Broadbent Player Sponsor 2013
Port Adelaide - Captains Club 2012 Sponsor
Port Adelaide - John Butcher 2012 Player Sponsor
- Oct 7, 2001
- 50,502
- 24,864
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Muckbuckle Dolmens
You don't need a lottery for the main draft. The only time this might be necessary is if we raised the minimum draft to 21 or higher, as the #1 would correspondingly be a much surer thing. As we can see, the gems still slip through a fair amount and most #1 picks still aren't the best in their draft. We're dealing with developing players, so the risk involved makes tanking less viable.
Lose the concessions (its the extra first round pick that seems to get people salivating, so dump it), and then suddenly finishing a spot lower or higher doesn't have much impact on your draft. Again, it removes the viability of tanking - you only gain position, not a whole extra high pick.
Lottery the pre-season draft (for -all- clubs equally) so that the bottom club can't rip off a random other club with the greatest of ease at trade time. Unlike the rest of the draft process which is victimless crime, this very much has a victim, and needs to be fixed. And quite clearly, don't lottery it until after draft nominations are complete.
Lose the concessions (its the extra first round pick that seems to get people salivating, so dump it), and then suddenly finishing a spot lower or higher doesn't have much impact on your draft. Again, it removes the viability of tanking - you only gain position, not a whole extra high pick.
Lottery the pre-season draft (for -all- clubs equally) so that the bottom club can't rip off a random other club with the greatest of ease at trade time. Unlike the rest of the draft process which is victimless crime, this very much has a victim, and needs to be fixed. And quite clearly, don't lottery it until after draft nominations are complete.
I still like my idea. It gets rid of priority picks and it gets rid of temptation to chuck games. It still sends the best palyers to the worst clubs which is one main reason for the draft in the first place.
Portia
#DrewBlood
30k Posts
10k Posts
TheBrownDog
Port Adelaide - Jesse Palmer Player Sponsor 2017
Podcaster
Port Adelaide - Riley Bonner Player Sponsor 2016
Port Adelaide - Brendon Ah Chee Player Sponsor 2014
Port Adelaide - Jarrad Redden Player Sponsor 2014
Port Adelaide - Matthew Broadbent Player Sponsor 2013
Port Adelaide - Captains Club 2012 Sponsor
Port Adelaide - John Butcher 2012 Player Sponsor
- Oct 7, 2001
- 50,502
- 24,864
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Muckbuckle Dolmens
It doesn't really, if anything it increases the temptation, but for a different team. Who wants to finish 12th (the season is still over for you early) when you could drop one game and be a good chance of getting pick 1-4 instead of pick 5-8. Big gap there.
Just dropping priority picks is good enough for the National.
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,341
PERFECT!!!!! GENUIS!!!
even better - teams with 5 and a half (the current cut off for concession picks) wins or less go into their own lottery, however many teams.
the rest of the teams that missed the final's go into the lottery for the next position.....
Portia
#DrewBlood
30k Posts
10k Posts
TheBrownDog
Port Adelaide - Jesse Palmer Player Sponsor 2017
Podcaster
Port Adelaide - Riley Bonner Player Sponsor 2016
Port Adelaide - Brendon Ah Chee Player Sponsor 2014
Port Adelaide - Jarrad Redden Player Sponsor 2014
Port Adelaide - Matthew Broadbent Player Sponsor 2013
Port Adelaide - Captains Club 2012 Sponsor
Port Adelaide - John Butcher 2012 Player Sponsor
- Oct 7, 2001
- 50,502
- 24,864
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Muckbuckle Dolmens
Nah its not. It still creates the dilemma of throwing one game - if you're on 5 wins and its late season, why win just one more game? If you lose it, you're guaranteed #1, if you win it....well, you could pick as low as #8 in that model.
- Mar 25, 2003
- 35,681
- 28,341
yea i thought of that as well, but I still think its better than the current set up.
it allows the real strugglers who need help to battle out for the number 1 draft pick, while the strugglers who don't need as much help still have a chance of getting a very high pick.
another way is to base it on the number of wins a team has in a season. Say 15 - (the number of wins a team has in one season) is the number of balls that they get into the barrell. That way throwing one game gets them one extra ball in the barrel, which won't really give them all that much of an advantage....
PowerOfThePussy
Cancelled
Lottery
On the ping pong ball lottery - maybe we could get the woman from The Adventures of Priscilla to "draw" out the balls.
Then we'll have a television ratings winner for sure
Sorry couldn't resist - especially when you have a nic like mine.
Cheers
POTP
On the ping pong ball lottery - maybe we could get the woman from The Adventures of Priscilla to "draw" out the balls.
Then we'll have a television ratings winner for sure
Sorry couldn't resist - especially when you have a nic like mine.
Cheers
POTP
We're still discussing the best method or rewarding mediocrity I see.
What was the best method the Russians had of lining up for potatoes? We should just use that until the whole thing collapses. Then the surivors can start again with a workable system.
What was the best method the Russians had of lining up for potatoes? We should just use that until the whole thing collapses. Then the surivors can start again with a workable system.
- Mar 24, 2003
- 2,167
- 15
- Banned
- #43
Hawthorn supporters still got their heads in the sand hey..... Don Scott would never lie... and Ken Judge makes statements that leave him open to liabel all the time.
Its like the alcoholic who can't admit he has a problem.. you don't WANT to believe it so you don't.
- Thread starter
- #44
Wow people get off the topic easily...
I still say draft lottery for whole bottom 8, no priority picks and people who suggest little groups of four still have the 'throwing games' problem. where 12th throws games to finnish 13th, because 12th wont give you finals but dropping one game may get you 1-4 pick instead of 5-8.
So just have a live to air lottery at a press conference, and do the 25% of balls to 16th, 20% to 15th so on.
Those who think Bulldogs should get pick one because they have played sh*thouse this year should re-think things. Bulldogs havent got the worst list in the AFL, they have one of the best ruckman [Darcy] two AWESOME forwards [Johnson, Brown] Scott West and a pile of good young talent. to say they deserve number 1 pick is just wrong, as Geelong, Carlton [exclude the under table payments for a second] and Melbourne are just as neady, but have strived to do that little better. Plus with 25% chance of 1st pick, Bulldogs would be VERY unlucky not to get a top 4 and as we have seen Judd at number 3, has been the best performer from his draft to date.
I still say draft lottery for whole bottom 8, no priority picks and people who suggest little groups of four still have the 'throwing games' problem. where 12th throws games to finnish 13th, because 12th wont give you finals but dropping one game may get you 1-4 pick instead of 5-8.
So just have a live to air lottery at a press conference, and do the 25% of balls to 16th, 20% to 15th so on.
Those who think Bulldogs should get pick one because they have played sh*thouse this year should re-think things. Bulldogs havent got the worst list in the AFL, they have one of the best ruckman [Darcy] two AWESOME forwards [Johnson, Brown] Scott West and a pile of good young talent. to say they deserve number 1 pick is just wrong, as Geelong, Carlton [exclude the under table payments for a second] and Melbourne are just as neady, but have strived to do that little better. Plus with 25% chance of 1st pick, Bulldogs would be VERY unlucky not to get a top 4 and as we have seen Judd at number 3, has been the best performer from his draft to date.
Personally, I'll be quite happy to see the Dogs get access to the No. 1 Pick.
Not because I they've come last, and not because I necessarily think that they need it. They have as good a list as any wooden spooner I can ever remember.
But it seems that the Dogs have been so competitive for the last decade without any real reward - they've been in and around the top 6 on the ladder more years than not, and I can't remember them having access to a Top 3 or 4 draft choice in all of that time. I could be wrong.
Basically, they've deserved a shot at some crack youngsters.
It'll also be good to see some other teams besides the Saints and the Dockers automatically qualifying for the best couple of juniors in the country for a change.
Not because I they've come last, and not because I necessarily think that they need it. They have as good a list as any wooden spooner I can ever remember.
But it seems that the Dogs have been so competitive for the last decade without any real reward - they've been in and around the top 6 on the ladder more years than not, and I can't remember them having access to a Top 3 or 4 draft choice in all of that time. I could be wrong.
Basically, they've deserved a shot at some crack youngsters.
It'll also be good to see some other teams besides the Saints and the Dockers automatically qualifying for the best couple of juniors in the country for a change.
If it was introduced this year, all that a lottery would do is provide them with another chance to get the number 1 pick.
As others have said, all that needs to be done is to abolish priority picks (next season - it's better to change rules in leap years, everybody knows that). The difference between pick 1 and, say, pick 3, isn't worth winning the spoon and being a laughing stock over. It's only where there's an additional player (of similar quality to Judd, Pavlich, Riewoldt) on offer when there's a pretty clear cut advantage to be gained by losing a couple of winnable games in the run home.
Facts are hawthorn won the last 5 games that year - looks like Don Scott found a way to get Judge to coach to win - which has eluded other hawthorn (and west coast) officials. I don't doubt it would have been discussed but the fact it is did not happen (tanking deliberately) at hawthorn. I just dont this to become an urban myth like the dogs and cats thing.
- Banned
- #48
Some things I like about the nba vs afl, for starters;
* supermax contracts; giving incentives to the teams drafting future star players, to pay more money than other teams are allowed, to retain that player. See Larry Bird / Bird rule.
* no free agency compo. your compo is cap space and trying to find FAs in the next couple years -this doesnt screw other teams over that are focusing on the draft but having the league create new draft picks, sending them down the order
* draft lottery, less tanking. way more interesting - for example NOLA losing AD but being very lucky getting pick 1 / Zion via the lottery system
* supermax contracts; giving incentives to the teams drafting future star players, to pay more money than other teams are allowed, to retain that player. See Larry Bird / Bird rule.
* no free agency compo. your compo is cap space and trying to find FAs in the next couple years -this doesnt screw other teams over that are focusing on the draft but having the league create new draft picks, sending them down the order
* draft lottery, less tanking. way more interesting - for example NOLA losing AD but being very lucky getting pick 1 / Zion via the lottery system
Last edited:
WillieNillie
All Australian
- Mar 31, 2018
- 866
- 2,052
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Its a no brainer but Gil will refuse to implement it because it wasnt his idea when its all said and done
100% wrong.
Similar threads
