Success of the mini draft

[daniel_4tw]

How good has the mini draft been?

Jaeger and Crouch taking number 1 & 2 in the first mini draft.

The year they play their first season finish 1 & 2 in the rising star.

Best two young guns in the country both taken with mini draft picks.

Melbourne and Gold Coast should be salivating about next year with two more mini draft picks debuting.

How come GWS could trade mini draft picks but Gold Coast didn't?

Should 'mini draft picks to trade' (eg. The conditions GWS had) be given to struggling clubs instead of PP?

 

[KAYNE]

They do all look like they will be successes. Even Melbourne look like they couldn't stuff these guys up. Interesting that they all had a full year to train and play in the reserves level before being able to debut. This can also be said for Viney (maybe even Danniher)

 

[TedDougChris]

They clearly should have restricted GCS from trading for the mini-draft picks, and also restricted GWS for trading them for picks, rather than players. But apart from that, it's a matter of clubs identifying the best players and then chasing them.

There has been a general improvement in identifying and drafting the right players into clubs over the past few years, so it's hardly groundbreaking that they are such good players - particularly combined with the extra year of assistance and development at the clubs themselves.

But it's pretty early to state that they are the best two young guns in the country. Most judges on this years form have Grundy much higher than the pick he was taken at, Daniher too.

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

Mini draft was a good idea but wouldnt like to see it every year... Would have been interesting to see where O'Meara would have gone (draft pick wise).

Best two young guns in the country both taken with mini draft picks.

Crouch is good but he isnt the one of the best two on the country

- Wingard and Cameron both say hey

 

[Red Black and Blue]

I'd like to see it introduced with the caveat that it is only to be used for acquiring players and not stockpiling additional draft selections. Encourages immediate improvement upon the lower sides.

 

[Chopperdave]

I think the extra year of being at least semi involved in the system definitely helped. I think it actually presents a pretty good case to possibly lower the draft age slightly and allow these borderline aged players get picked up on the proviso that they do play out a season in the reserves whilst they still finish year 12 and whatnot.

 

[Underarm]

How good has the mini draft been?

Jaeger and Crouch taking number 1 & 2 in the first mini draft.

The year they play their first season finish 1 & 2 in the rising star.

Best two young guns in the country both taken with mini draft picks.

Melbourne and Gold Coast should be salivating about next year with two more mini draft picks debuting.

How come GWS could trade mini draft picks but Gold Coast didn't?

Should 'mini draft picks to trade' (eg. The conditions GWS had) be given to struggling clubs instead of PP?

They must be looked at in reference to what they gave up.
GC gave up pick 4
Adelaide 2 first round picks.
Melbourne gave up 3 and 13 (got 20 +dom Barry)
GC gave up pick 2.
As an alternative to PP, its a massive leg up from 'end of first round' pick.

 

[Catsace]

Unfortunately as a Cats fan, i cannot comment as it's virtually prohibited for us to participate, as our picks are so crappy to start with. But if you have high picks to play with it seems a good thing.

 

[Suma Magic]

I think they've been a disaster. They provided Gold Coast and GWS with unnecessary advantage on top of their generous array of draft and other allowances. If they hadn't had the mini draft, both teams already had more than enough assistance to ensure they will have on-field success within a five year period of entering the AFL.

I would strongly oppose the use of the mini draft, or any similar concept, in any circumstances in the future. Their use will create a culture of dependence and entitlement from clubs who finish near the bottom of the ladder. The opportunities provided by the draft, free agency and trading of players is sufficient.

 

[Agent93]

The mini-draft was conceived as a way for GWS to attract established talent after GC found it hard to do so. Given that GWS then traded these mini-draft picks for picks in the national drafts it's pretty clear-cut that the scheme failed to meet objectives.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Mini draft was a good idea but wouldnt like to see it every year... Would have been interesting to see where O'Meara would have gone (draft pick wise).


Crouch is good but he isnt the one of the best two on the country

- Wingard and Cameron both say hey

Number one, guaranteed.

GWS wanted him and wanted him bad, AFL stepped in and prevented an elaborate trade that would have made it happen.

As for the mini draft, probably a failure. In fact an abject failure. The core purpose was to allow GWS to attract more mature talent to make them competitive early.

It may be a boon for GC, but the result for the AFL in the short term has probably been bad.

Will the extra young talent at both clubs though pay dividends in the long run? Maybe. GC could well become a menace with both O'Meara and Martin, but the young kids at GWS could flouder without experienced players to protect and guide them. They also may reach a tipping point, where without that boost an Ablett provides, players may start to jump ship.

 

[Suns of Anarchy]

Everyone was entitled to bid for O'Meara, Crouch, Hogan and Martin. High risk, high return.

 

[lenny&carl]

after 5 or 6 years of mediocre high-pics (sept nicnat,) the recruiters got it all wrong by not copping on and producing hefty bids for these 4 guys, who all turn out to be awesome. Actually, the Crows, the Demons and the GC got it very right. Say lar vee.

 

[Calcium Man]

Everyone was entitled to bid for O'Meara, Crouch, Hogan and Martin. High risk, high return.

Yes everyone was entitled to bid but there was a distinct advantage to those that finished lower on the ladder. Would GC been willing to give up Swallow or Day or Matera for O'Meara? Melbourne willing to give up Trengove or Watts? And remember thats before O'Meara played a game of football. Its like giving up one of those guys for Aish this year.

It's no more high risk then any other draft pick in the first 5 the only difference is that you in fact managed to get o'meara who was rated as a top 2 pick a year out for pick 4 (and something else) and similar with Melbourne and Hogan.

 

[goodie23]

7. Incentive to Other Clubs Trading with Team GWS in the 2011 and 2012 post-season:
Team GWS to be given access to four 17-year-olds born in the January to April 1994 window, with all players to be traded to other clubs. Selections will be allocated to Team GWS so the club can trade for established players, but the club will not have access to these 17-year-olds. If the four trades are not completed in the 2011 post-season, the balance of up to four trades may be used in the 2012 trading period.

It failed.

 

[Superstar swan]

I like the idea, in hindsight I rekon a few clubs would reconsider the mini draft . The talent that had come out of it has been amazing. Would have been a good chance for a contender to grab a highly talented player that could have helped lengthen their premiership window

 

[PapaJ]

The mini-draft was conceived as a way for GWS to attract established talent after GC found it hard to do so. Given that GWS then traded these mini-draft picks for picks in the national drafts it's pretty clear-cut that the scheme failed to meet objectives.

That's spot on. The OP's definition of 'success' is skewed, or only partially there at the most.

Of course the players selected have, so far, turned out to be guns, there was little doubt of that - but their intent was to help GWS draw mature established players from other clubs. This was never locked in, GWS took advantage of it - but AFAIC, they're a failure at what they were meant to do.

 

[Suns of Anarchy]

Yes everyone was entitled to bid but there was a distinct advantage to those that finished lower on the ladder. Would GC been willing to give up Swallow or Day or Matera for O'Meara? Melbourne willing to give up Trengove or Watts? And remember thats before O'Meara played a game of football. Its like giving up one of those guys for Aish this year.

It's no more high risk then any other draft pick in the first 5 the only difference is that you in fact managed to get o'meara who was rated as a top 2 pick a year out for pick 4 (and something else) and similar with Melbourne and Hogan.

GWS were hoping for established players and I'm sure a player of decent value would've trumped our pick 4 and landed them a Crouch or O'Meara. But no clubs offered anything of value and GWS took the highest draft picks available. We had to then wait 12 months for a player that was untested and this was a high risk. You had your chance.

 

[Calcium Man]

I like the idea, in hindsight I rekon a few clubs would reconsider the mini draft . The talent that had come out of it has been amazing. Would have been a good chance for a contender to grab a highly talented player that could have helped lengthen their premiership window

I don't think they would. GWS expected a Josh Kennedy or maybe a Hannebery for O'Meara's pick or a high draft pick. No club will give up a known quantity superstar for a potential superstar.

 

[Suns of Anarchy]

That's spot on. The OP's definition of 'success' is skewed, or only partially there at the most.

Of course the players selected have, so far, turned out to be guns, there was little doubt of that - but their intent was to help GWS draw mature established players from other clubs. This was never locked in, GWS took advantage of it - but AFAIC, they're a failure at what they were meant to do.

If GWS turned their back on established players as you're suggesting, who did your club (or others for that matter) offer for them?

 

[Calcium Man]

GWS were hoping for established players and I'm sure a player of decent value would've trumped our pick 4 and landed them a Crouch or O'Meara. But no clubs offered anything of value and GWS took the highest draft picks available. We had to then wait 12 months for a player that was untested and this was a high risk. You had your chance.

No GWS wanted a 20-24 year old star. They wanted a Cotchin, Dangerfield, Shuey, Sidebottom ect.. clubs were never giving these players up and GWS were demanding these in return. Not to mention GWS first instinct was to pass the parcel of draft picks to get the rights to MD pick 1.

In the end i think it will kill GWS as the experience and leadership are not there. It killed Melbourne going down that path offloading McDonald, Miller, Maloney, Rivers ect... and expecting the young guys to thrive on pure talent alone.

 

[Kram]

Complete failure for its intended purpose.

 

[master bate]

Complete failure. GWS traded away potentially the best talents in the land in order to get more draft picks, which is fair enough.

I think they made the right move last year. Getting the picks in then was probably better than having Hogan and Martin in this years draft pool. If they were available they might still rank below Boyd or other types or at least close.

But I think they were wrong to do the deals the first year. Trading away O'Meara and Couch for the extra picks when they already had heaps. Then last year they were picked Whitfield, O'Rourke and Plowman. I think they much would've prefered to have Whitfield, Couch and O'Meara - can you imagine those 3 together!

The other thing is that Gold Coast (massively), Adelaide and hopefully Melbourne have benefitted really well.

So all in all the mini draft has been:
Gold Coast - huge win
Adelaide - win
Melbourne - win
GWS - win

Everyone else -lose

 

[Suns of Anarchy]

As Gubby Allan said, he knew O'Meara was a gun and wasn't going to take an average player in return, which was offered. Sure the mini-draft was designed to fast track GWS but he said it's been a win-win for them and us in hindsight. We finished last in 2011 and ultimately got the best talent for that.

 

[PapaJ]

If GWS turned their back on established players as you're suggesting, who did your club (or others for that matter) offer for them?

No, I never said they turned their back, they had every right to turn their back on any offers, but they should not have had the option to use them to get (even more) draft picks.

I said the MDPs intended purpose was to help GWS get established players from other clubs. They should have been for that purpose and that purpose only - instead, GWS exploited the lack of restrictions placed on them (though the AFL probably could have put their foot down if they wanted to). From that point on they were a failure for what the other clubs had agreed would be their use.