SA Footy

Should the SANFL mini draft change the order in which it delegates selections. Currently as we know the 9th placed side gets first pick followed by the 8th and so on. I was thinking that maybe this should be changed, with selection order going by which team loses the most players interstate in the AFL draft.

If two teams had the same amount of players taking interstate then the team who fininshed lower on the ladder would get the first pick.

for example this year would see the mini draft order go like

pick 1- North (2 draftees) 5th (ladder position)
pick 2- Central (2) 1st
pick 3- South (1) 9th
pick 4- Eagles (1) 4th
pick 5- Glenelg (1) 3rd
pick 6- Sturt (1) 2nd
pick 7- Port (0) 8th
pick 8- Norwood (0) 7th
pick 9- West (0) 6th

I really don't like the idea of rewarding mediocrity which the current system does. At least with this system teams will be rewarded for what they lose to the AFL, there is no bias in this system and it gives ever team an oppurtunity to get the number one pick in the mini draft.

Just my thought anyway, play on.

The mini draft is designed to, in a small way even up the comp, as is the AFL draft.

A couple of points for you whufc that occurred in trade week you may have forgotten or overlooked:

1. Mitch Farmer traded to Richmond for Jay schultz. Panthers lose Farmer, Eagles pick up Schultz as he is originally from there.

2. As part of the Burgoyne deal Jay Nash arrives back at elizabeth, a free pick up for the Dogs.

Maybe you could look at all losses / gains & then work out who desevers the new players.

pantherfromwayback wrote:The mini draft is designed to, in a small way even up the comp, as is the AFL draft.
...
Maybe you could look at all losses / gains & then work out who desevers the new players.

Or perhaps give teams a pick based on the number of AFL-listed players currently with that club, with a view to evening out the numbers across the nine clubs.

Even better if one could figure out a way to strike an even balance of reserve-level AFL players with walk-up AFL starters.

Pseudo wrote:

pantherfromwayback wrote:The mini draft is designed to, in a small way even up the comp, as is the AFL draft.
...
Maybe you could look at all losses / gains & then work out who desevers the new players.

Or perhaps give teams a pick based on the number of AFL-listed players currently with that club, with a view to evening out the numbers across the nine clubs.

Even better if one could figure out a way to strike an even balance of reserve-level AFL players with walk-up AFL starters.

Yes. my first thoughts when I read this idea was that there is a fair difference between the quality of the players lost interstate. This year there is little doubt that Sturt have been most seriously affected (so far) as Trengrove has already acheived SANFL standard while the remaining players are still developing.

pantherfromwayback wrote:The mini draft is designed to, in a small way even up the comp, as is the AFL draft.

A couple of points for you whufc that occurred in trade week you may have forgotten or overlooked:

1. Mitch Farmer traded to Richmond for Jay schultz. Panthers lose Farmer, Eagles pick up Schultz as he is originally from there.

2. As part of the Burgoyne deal Jay Nash arrives back at elizabeth, a free pick up for the Dogs.

Maybe you could look at all losses / gains & then work out who desevers the new players.

yeah good point about the players lost in trade week, i just personally don't like the idea of 'evening' the comp up or rewarding teams for bad performances, they should be rewarded for positive reasons such as having players drafted,

maybe a points system such as

played 15+ league games = 10 points (trengove, farmer)
played 1 + 14 league games = 7 points (Nason)
played reserves = 5 points (Menzel)
played underage only = 3 points

im just throwing ideas out there really, like i said i think the mini draft can be done in a better format than it currently is.

adjusting for the trading period but still giving bootom first pick in a countback situation Burgoyne and farmer out Nash and the big fella in

for example this year would see the mini draft order go like

pick 1- South (2) 9th (ladder position)
pick 2- North (2 draftees) 5th
pick 3- Port (1) 8th
pick 4- Glenelg (1) 3rd
pick 5- Sturt (1) 2nd
pick 6- Central (1) 1st
pick 7- Norwood (0) 7th
pick 8- West (0) 6th
pick 9- Eagles (0) 4th

I really dont think it matters, a lottery to who you get.

whufc wrote:
yeah good point about the players lost in trade week, i just personally don't like the idea of 'evening' the comp up or rewarding teams for bad performances, they should be rewarded for positive reasons such as having players drafted,

I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to evening up the competition. It's hardly healthy for the comp if one or two clubs are forever at one end of the ladder.
But what you're proposing, whufc, wouldn't achieve your desire anyway because a club could lose 6 players in the draft (as Westies did a few years ago) and the rest of the SANFL clubs not lose one player, and all that happens is the ravaged club gets a pick in the mini draft before everyone else.

nickname wrote:

whufc wrote:
yeah good point about the players lost in trade week, i just personally don't like the idea of 'evening' the comp up or rewarding teams for bad performances, they should be rewarded for positive reasons such as having players drafted,

I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to evening up the competition. It's hardly healthy for the comp if one or two clubs are forever at one end of the ladder.
But what you're proposing, whufc, wouldn't achieve your desire anyway because a club could lose 6 players in the draft (as Westies did a few years ago) and the rest of the SANFL clubs not lose one player, and all that happens is the ravaged club gets a pick in the mini draft before everyone else.

true but if that mini pick happened to be a rookie like Cameron Cloke, it would be very very handy and would almost help the league side as much as losing reserves players.

Some clubs deliberately avoid picking these guys up I thought?

It depends on who they are but some will play very rarely with their SANFL club, if at all.

Others will play a lot but won't really have their heart in the SANFL club if push comes to shove.

Others will turn out to be really good pick ups for the SANFL club.

So it can be a lottery. I guess I am questioning whether it's really a best solution for a club who has lost players in the draft. I think you'd rather be replacing them with players who aren't on an AFL list.

nickname wrote:

whufc wrote:
yeah good point about the players lost in trade week, i just personally don't like the idea of 'evening' the comp up or rewarding teams for bad performances, they should be rewarded for positive reasons such as having players drafted,

I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to evening up the competition. It's hardly healthy for the comp if one or two clubs are forever at one end of the ladder.

Why? Dominance has been a recurrent feature of the competition since its inception.

whufc wrote:Should the SANFL mini draft change the order in which it delegates selections. Currently as we know the 9th placed side gets first pick followed by the 8th and so on. I was thinking that maybe this should be changed, with selection order going by which team loses the most players interstate in the AFL draft.

It's flawed straight away, as you've just used the National Draft. Glenelg have lost Jolly to the Gold Coast as well, as a priority pick, so that's 2 blokes gone.

StrayDog wrote:
I don't understand why anyone would be opposed to evening up the competition. It's hardly healthy for the comp if one or two clubs are forever at one end of the ladder.

Why? Dominance has been a recurrent feature of the competition since its inception.[/quote]

I was referring to both ends of the ladder. i.e. I think it's unhealthy if the same clubs are at the top and bottom year after year. And while periods of dominance at the top level have occurred in the past, our competition is a bit more fragile nowadays than it used to be, as it's not now the premier comp in the State.

i'm waiting for the day (& we've had a few spot fires) that every club 'passes' on their pick(s) & both the crows & port have to field a reserves team in the vfl & perhaps the vfl could go back to 16 players on the ground like it was when they were the vfa.......yeah i know very doubtful that it would happen but you never know