AFL needs new draft pick allocation system to avoid tanking

The issue of AFL clubs allegedly “tanking” for higher draft picks has reared it’s ugly head again this week after Carlton player Brock McLean alluded to his former club Melbourne’s ‘experimental’ tactics in games in 2009.

That year the Demons ended up with national draft picks 1, 2, 11 and 18, #1 being a priority pick for winning four or less games.

Other clubs have also been alleged to have been involved in the practice of tanking by former employees and those in the media.

In a draft overhaul partly aimed at removing suspicions that clubs tank, the AFL announced in February the ‘priority’ pick would be moved to the end of the first round from this year. As a result a switch from pick e.g. 1 to 19 effectively eradicates any incentive to win four or less matches.

However the AFL’s ladder-order based draft system remains a controversial talking point in the game, with manipulation of performance still able to result in higher draft picks.

Other major sporting codes around the world such as the NFL, NBA and Premier League are not open to these scandalous draft rumors, because their lottery and free agency systems are not directly linked to performance.

A novel solution for the AFL is to split the season into halves and the ladder into thirds with an exclusive draft handicapping points system. (Note these points do not replace the 4-2-0 premiership points, they are for draft order purposes only).

In the first half of the season when it is mathematically possible for all teams to make the finals and clubs are desperate for wins to help grow their membership bases, each win is worth two draft points.

In the second half of the season when ladder positions are more established and incentives for clubs to win vary, draft points should be weighted according to ladder thirds. For example clubs in the top six receive three draft points for every win, middle six receive two points and the bottom six get one point.

The team on the lowest number of draft points at the end of the season gets the first pick, second lowest second, third lowest third, etc. In the event of tied draft points, percentage determines selection order.

In theory the system is fairer because the battle for final ladder positions from within a cluster is almost impossible to manipulate.

Under this model using the 2011 home and away results and the AFL’s revised priority pick rule (minus GWS and their establishment picks), the 2011 National Draft order would have been as follows:

Round One
1. Gold Coast 5 points (2 wins first half / 1 win second half, 56% for/against)
2. Port Adelaide 5 (2/1, 64%)
3. Brisbane 6 (2/2)
4. Adelaide 10 (3/4)
5. Bulldogs 12 (3/6)
6. Melbourne 18 (4.5/4, 85%)
7. Richmond 18 (4.5/4, 86%)
8. Fremantle 18 (6/3)
9. North Melbourne 20 (6/4)
10. Essendon 24 (5.5/6)
11. St Kilda 26 (4.5/8)
12. Sydney 31 (7.5/5)
13. Carlton 36 (8.5/6)
14. WCE 44 (7/10)
15. Hawthorn 46 (8/10)
16. Geelong 46 (11/8)
17. Collingwood 50 (10/10)
18. Gold Coast (priority pick)
19. Port Adelaide (priority pick)
20. Brisbane (priority pick)

Round Two
21. Gold Coast
22. Port Adelaide
23. Brisbane
24. Adelaide etc.

No one should begrudge the fairness of this hypothetical draft outcome, particularly when the model is applied to uncompromised drafts from 2012 and beyond.

The fixture for the following season would see the teams finishing in their third of the ladder play each other once in each half of the year, with the remainder of the draw at the AFL’s discretion (as it is now).

The race for the final national draft order would create media hype and excitement among fans without the stigma of tanking.