There is now no advantage in finishing last!

[Mikee]

Only 20 more loss away go tigers you can do it.

Come on Tiges!  Please no more than 4 wins.  It's pathetic, yes, but what's more pathetic is our draft record over the last 5-10 years.  If it wasn't for our pathetic drafting i wouldn't even consider wanting this.  Unfortunately we need these picks beyond comprehension.

NO MORE THAN 4 WINS,  :clap :clap :clap.   NO MORE THAN 4 WINS,  :clap :clap :clap.  NO MORE THAN 4 WINS,  :clap :clap :clap.  Stuff it.  We have to get the cream and plenty of it.  I know i will get bagged but to be honest, i dont give a rats.  Reality hurts.  I'm sick of our crap recruiting and being a shambles team onfield.  NO MORE.  ALL OF U.  Blame our admin and recruiting department for this mindset.

NO MORE THAN 4 WINS PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!

GO TIGES!!!

GO TIGES!!!

 

[MalenyTiger]

I cannot believe the attitude of people on this thread - how can you give up so early in the season? We have just played three of the best teams in the competition in the opening rounds - sure Round 1 was a disaster but we were unluckly against StKilda and who beats WCE at subiaco?? Injuries aside we can still win our fair share of game. don't give up yet.

 

[23.21.159]

Because of the new rules about priority picks, there is effectively no advantage to finishing last except for having the No 1 pick in the draft.

...

Wake up Tigers, success breeds success.

I want a winning culture at Tigerland, for too long we have been the easybeats.

Whilst I fully agree with the last sentence, tigerjoe, what logic have you used for your opening statement? Even without any kind of priority pick, the side finishing last gets to pick before every other side in every round of the draft. I have always considered this to be incredibly weighted towards the bottom side(s), and why I have always thought priority picks were too much help to the poor performers. They get enough out of their first picks in each round anyway.

 

[Bingo!]

I dont want a spoon, *smile* the pics.

Smart drafting and good player management is the key.

 

[Mikee]

There is an advantage to finishing last with four wins or less even with the priority pick coming after the first round. However, whether this outweighs the negatives is debatable and of course depends on how strong the top 20 of this years draft is.

Personally I don't believe in throwing games, yet I do believe in playing the kids even if it costs us games. In the long run we will be better off for it. And if as a consquence of playing youth we get the first pick and a bonus at 17 and don't waste them (ie we get a couple of gun KPPs) then it could well prove pain worth enduring.

Great point Tygrys.  This is exactly what the Hawks have done since Clarkson took over.  He played the kids last year, not worried about the wins or short-term pain, they consequently finished low & received priority picks, etc...  He didn't buckle to supporters and look for quick short-term fixes.  He's stuck to his vision and goal and now their future is looking mighty rosy.  (Sorry Rosy. )

GO TIGES!!!

 

[tigerjoe]

Because of the new rules about priority picks, there is effectively no advantage to finishing last except for having the No 1 pick in the draft.

...

Wake up Tigers, success breeds success.

I want a winning culture at Tigerland, for too long we have been the easybeats.

Whilst I fully agree with the last sentence, tigerjoe, what logic have you used for your opening statement? Even without any kind of priority pick, the side finishing last gets to pick before every other side in every round of the draft. I have always considered this to be incredibly weighted towards the bottom side(s), and why I have always thought priority picks were too much help to the poor performers. They get enough out of their first picks in each round anyway.

My logic is, is one gun player going to turn the whole club around?

I think not!

 

[AZZORP]

Gaspar for Freo's first round draft pick will do me fine  ;D

or 2nd, or 3rd or 4th round pick .... anything really.

 

[WesternTiger]

Whilst I fully agree with the last sentence, tigerjoe, what logic have you used for your opening statement? Even without any kind of priority pick, the side finishing last gets to pick before every other side in every round of the draft. I have always considered this to be incredibly weighted towards the bottom side(s), and why I have always thought priority picks were too much help to the poor performers. They get enough out of their first picks in each round anyway.



My logic is, is one gun player going to turn the whole club around?

I think not!

No but three from the top 20 in the 2006 draft will go a bloody long way towards it

 

[Heather]

Excuse my ignorance, I know that the priority pick was scrapped at the end of last year, which means finishing last only gets you the first pick. But there was talk of teams which are continuously poorly performing getting some compensation pick wise. Does anyone know what that is exactly and if so surely we would qualify.

 

[Tubytiger]

The new priority pick rule

Part of an article from the official AFL site


- If a club claims 16 points or less after one season, a selection will be awarded before the second round of the NAB AFL Draft. That club will then receive selections No.1, No.17 and No.18, plus the first pick in the NAB AFL Pre-Season Draft.

- If a club claims 16 points or less* after two or more years, a selection will be awarded before the first round of the NAB AFL Draft. That club will then receive selections No.1, No.2 and No.18, plus the first pick in the NAB AFL Pre-Season Draft.  

http://afl.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=237544

*No team finished with 16 points or less in 2005.

Courtesy of DDT Heather on a earlier page of this thread.

 

[Heather]

The new priority pick rule

Part of an article from the official AFL site


- If a club claims 16 points or less after one season, a selection will be awarded before the second round of the NAB AFL Draft. That club will then receive selections No.1, No.17 and No.18, plus the first pick in the NAB AFL Pre-Season Draft.

- If a club claims 16 points or less* after two or more years, a selection will be awarded before the first round of the NAB AFL Draft. That club will then receive selections No.1, No.2 and No.18, plus the first pick in the NAB AFL Pre-Season Draft.  

Oh thanks - I must have missed that post :don't know

http://afl.com.au/default.asp?pg=news&spg=display&articleid=237544

*No team finished with 16 points or less in 2005.

Courtesy of DDT Heather on a earlier page of this thread.

 

[tigerjoe]

Whilst I fully agree with the last sentence, tigerjoe, what logic have you used for your opening statement? Even without any kind of priority pick, the side finishing last gets to pick before every other side in every round of the draft. I have always considered this to be incredibly weighted towards the bottom side(s), and why I have always thought priority picks were too much help to the poor performers. They get enough out of their first picks in each round anyway.



My logic is, is one gun player going to turn the whole club around?

I think not!

No but three from the top 20 in the 2006 draft will go a bloody long way towards it

WT, not 2006, you are assuming we win less than 4 this year and again next year so we can get 3 in the top 20 in 2007.

As bad as we are I don't think we will win less than 4 games this or next year.

As much as I hate to say it the Hawks have done the right thing. They got rid of an overatted dud in Jonathon Hay and traded other players to get some fantastic early picks in the last draft. Hope I'm wrong but I think they will be going places before us.

 

[TOT70]

I'm getting really tired of the Hawks comparison...but, just for the record.....

The Hawks did their good work in 2000-2001 when they recruited Hodge, Sam Mitchell, Ladson, Williams, Brown, Osborne and lucked out when Croad came back, via the clueless Dockers.

The true value of Deledio, Tambling, Meyer, Pattison, Polo, McGuane and Limbach can't be assessed until 2008 or so.  We are seeing that they are not ready yet, hence our poor performance so far this year.  Like the Hawks (and the Bulldogs) another poor season will see the bonus of some more useful draft picks.

There is no instant cure for anything.  The reality is that only good recruiting over 4 or 5 seasons will see a club build a strong team.  Our 2000 crop of Pettifer, Coughlan, Hyde, Newman and Krakouer are now sitting by themselves because we recruited next to no-one in the years leading up and again for the years that followed.

BTW, why did they need Roughhead and Franklin in 2004?  Because they had been trying to rebuild their midfield for years and were betting on Holland, BArker, Thompson and Rawlings standing up.  They have been no smarter than we have.  The only difference is that they started a couple of years earlier.  RFC was in denial all through 2002, 2003 and 2004.

 

[tigerjoe]

I totally agree TOT70, but my point was the last 2 drafts, they offloaded players who were crap for high picks and following 5 in the top 20 in 2004, got another 4 in the top 16 in 2005.
Our list was not too dissimilar to theirs in 2004, why could they trade the way they did when we couldn't?

 

[Ian4]

i'm over the hawthorn comparison. not sure why we're discussing this 3 rounds into the season. this thread should be dropped for 3 months.