Author Topic: tanking  (Read 1949 times)

the claw

  • Guest
tanking
« on: August 03, 2012, 10:43:22 AM »
article about it over here today. says most coaches want a lottery to determine who gets what.

personally im against a lottery but all for making changes to the system.
 i firmly believe the teams who most need the best players should get first crack at them if we are to have a pp system.
 dont they do everything possible to equalise the comp except the draw which will always be compromised due to television money.

there seems to be some misconception that teams tank for the #1 pick me i thought teams tanked so they got the pp.  there is a subtle difference.
take melbourne this yr they will get pick 1 2 or 3 regardless.  history tells us all 3 picks are as good as the other.  what melbourne could potentially do is throw a game so they get a pp at  1 and 2, 2 and 3,  or 3 and  4 depending on how many other sides qualify for a pp.
so why not take having to lose so many games out of it and let an independent person analyse if your list could do with a pp regardless of if you win 4  5 or 7 games. a couple of criteria could be percentage a good guide of just how poor a team has been. time in the bottom half of the ladder  if a team is in the bottom 3rd of the ladder constantly theres something wrong.

no one could argue when analysing melbournes list that of all the clubs they could do with a pp so let an independent analyst determine how badly they need the pp and where they should get it.
if carlton finish 9th on the back of a injry riddled season and are a good chance of turning that around and making finals the following yr why do we then give them the opportunity of walking away with the best kid in the country.   the team who most needs  thats kid should at least have the first option of taking him.

one could make a case for our depth.   the amount of times we miis the 8 etc that we could do with some sort of pp to help us get around the depth problem let an independent analyst go thru and work out where each teams list is at useing strict criteria and then determine what pp they will get if any.

anyway just some thoughts on it what do others think. what criteria should teams have to meet to qualify for a pp this way.

Offline Eat_em_Alive

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 4858
Re: tanking
« Reply #1 on: August 03, 2012, 10:49:57 AM »
I've heard a few different ideas, most include a lottery and the team on the bottom gets the most lottery balls etc etc.
In the NBA they have a lottery system.
In the last 27 years the NBA has had the lottery system only 3 times out of 27 years has the bottom team been rewarded with the no 1 pick.

The anywhere, anytime Tigers.
E A T  E M  A L I V E  M O F O S

Offline tigs2011

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5517
Re: tanking
« Reply #2 on: August 03, 2012, 10:52:43 AM »
GWS are tanking for no.1 pick this year.

The reason the lottery is good is that although you can tank still there are no guarantees. It's just giving you a better chance.

Pretty sure with lottery systems even though 9th could get the 1st pick it is manipulated so that the bottom team is guaranteed a top 3 or 4 pick so if they don't tank and just suck then they will be fine.

Offline Go Richo 12

  • Richmond tragic, bleeding heart, hopeless cricketer and terrible fisherman.
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5410
Re: tanking
« Reply #3 on: August 03, 2012, 11:30:07 AM »
I've heard a few different ideas, most include a lottery and the team on the bottom gets the most lottery balls etc etc.
In the NBA they have a lottery system.
In the last 27 years the NBA has had the lottery system only 3 times out of 27 years has the bottom team been rewarded with the no 1 pick.
Thats the reason why we should have it. It stops teams tanking as they may not get the no. 1 pick. I think the lottery is the way to go but make the teams who finish in the top eight excluded from it. Their picks would depend on finishing position as is currently the case.

gerkin greg

  • Guest
Re: tanking
« Reply #4 on: August 03, 2012, 11:32:20 AM »
Our tanking is going well  :cheers

Offline wayne

  • Fame of Hall
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8464
  • In Absentia
Re: tanking
« Reply #5 on: August 03, 2012, 12:06:59 PM »
The bottom ten teams should go into a lottery, the top 8 sides then follow in the positions they finished on the ladder.

I'm not sure how you work out how many balls each side would get, you'd want to weight it heavily in favour of a team that had 3 wins compared to a side that had 12.

Maybe:

18th team - 50 balls
17th team - 45 balls
16th team - 40 balls
15th team - 35 balls
14th team - 30 balls
13th team - 25 balls
12th team - 20 balls
11th team - 15 balls
10th team - 10 balls
9th team - 5 balls

They could maybe throw in incentives for sides in the bottom 4 to win games late in the season. With 4 rounds to go, any side that was in the bottom 4 at that time get 5 bonus balls for any win they get in the last 4 rounds. So a side may finish 15th, but have more balls than 16th, 17th or even 18th if they can win their last 4 games.

Maybe you could also trade balls for players? A side might trade 20 balls in the draft to any side in the AFL for a player???
And you may not think I care for you
When you know down inside that I really do

Offline Penelope

  • Internet nuffer and sooky jellyfish
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12777
Re: tanking
« Reply #6 on: August 03, 2012, 12:17:52 PM »
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways my ways,” says the Lord.
 
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are my ways higher than your ways,
And my thoughts than your thoughts."

Yahweh? or the great Clawski?

yaw rehto eht dellorcs ti fi daer ot reisae eb dluow tI

Offline one-eyed

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 98251
    • One-Eyed Richmond
Re: tanking
« Reply #7 on: August 03, 2012, 01:03:27 PM »
Brett Ratten today - It's not tanking; it's called development.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/143463/default.aspx

 :whistle

Offline Phil Mrakov

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8213
  • They said I could be anything so I became Phil
Re: tanking
« Reply #8 on: August 03, 2012, 01:06:49 PM »
Brett Ratten today - It's not tanking; it's called development.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/143463/default.aspx

 :whistle

Hahaha what a loser.
hhhaaarrgghhh hhhhaaarrggghhh hhhhaaaarrrggghh
HHAAARRRGGGHHHH HHHHAAARRRGGGHHHH HHHHHAAAAARRRRGGGGGHHHHH

Offline Go Richo 12

  • Richmond tragic, bleeding heart, hopeless cricketer and terrible fisherman.
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5410
Re: tanking
« Reply #9 on: August 03, 2012, 01:37:00 PM »
Brett Ratten today - It's not tanking; it's called development.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/143463/default.aspx

 :whistle
32 years of development has not helped us one bit!

Offline rogerd3

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 2213
Re: tanking
« Reply #10 on: August 03, 2012, 02:17:12 PM »
development...shouldnt this be happening
all the time to improve.

so TANKING is part of CFC's development

gerkin greg

  • Guest
Re: tanking
« Reply #11 on: August 03, 2012, 02:34:35 PM »
cant you see
rogerd that
ratts is developing them using
his old methods
this year?

Offline Francois Jackson

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14049
Re: tanking
« Reply #12 on: August 03, 2012, 04:13:25 PM »
I can see it already

Blues season over finish 9th

Get 3 lucky balls lands pick 1

Tigers finish last get 40,0000 balls yet gets pick 8
Currently a member of the Roupies, and employed by the great man Roup.

Offline unplugged

  • Premiership Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 328
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: tanking
« Reply #13 on: August 03, 2012, 04:41:11 PM »
I am for a lottery system.  But it must be for every club outside of the 8.  Must be an even roll of the dice for all the remaining clubs.

There must be no weighting.  As long as there is an advantage to go one spot lower on the ladder, then tanking is possible.  The 8th club has the incentive to play finals, the 9th club once finals is out of reach can't have an incentive to tank and finished 10-14th depending on how even the year is for a small perceived gain in draft order.  Would defeat the purpose.   (There is no incentive in the draft for Richmond to win the rest of their games this season but plenty to lose them starting with Brisbane).

The current draft system is bad for the game and for the u18 comps.  You can't have your number 1 draft pick constantly going to teams that do not know how to develop players, have bad coaches, facilities and are poorly managed.  If you are the best player, being picked at number 1 shouldn't be instant doom for your career and you shouldn't have to suffer loss after loss after loss as a reward for being that good.  If you were the potential number 1 draft pick, there is an incentive to tank the last few weeks and hope you get picked up later in the draft by a decent team.

If a team finishes bottom 4 multiple years in a row, there are much bigger concerns than their list.  Those things need to be addressed before that club can go forward.  These are the things the AFL can help with.  If asked for assistance, the AFL can step in and help a club improve their structures and finances.  Much like a poorly run business goes into voluntary administration, a poorly run club should do the same.  This will do a lot more than a  priority pick ever would.

This kind of lottery will force the lower teams to be more aggressive trading and recruiting players from the middle competitions and other clubs.  This is preferred to them putting their hand out for easy draft picks.  It will mean that a team that has clawed their way to 9th will have a better opportunity to reach higher.  This will create more competition which is better for the game.

dwaino

  • Guest
Re: tanking
« Reply #14 on: August 03, 2012, 05:58:59 PM »
Brett Ratten today - It's not tanking; it's called development.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/143463/default.aspx

 :whistle

Hahaha what a loser.

Always thought I had seen him before