How to avoid repeating the Lukosius Cup

Nice of you guys to defend Melbourne, but they tanked. Coach Dean Bailey was told by club administrator (I Think it was Rohan Connolly,) not to win games. The priority was pick 1 and the priority. It didn't work out to well for them nor did it Carlton. Clubs I think have learnt the damage of losing on purpose far out ways the gain of a few draft spot positions

Walsh may well go at Number 1 because neither Rankine nor Lukosius will stay at Carlton for long!

Nope I remember the year. Freo came home with a semi-wet sail, but I remember Freo playing Melbourne at one stage and the Natanui Cup chestnut was mentioned. I'm not disputing the WC were an ordinary side and had an unintended struggle to start off proceedings, but I question the extent of it from then on and whether there would've of been a bit more of an effort if there weren't a WA ruck vying for #1. Anyways it's only a peripheral interest to me really. If you've a chance at a top level KPF then the reward is worth the risk. If it were midfielders, then maybe there's a more abundant source that can be optioned. I agree they need to be shrewder with their selections than most, but think they could get more retainable steel and grit later while taking a chance on the best talent early still.

2008 the wheels fell off dal, our two best players went bub bye, effort didn't deteriorate the club imploded, evidence is there for all to see. Infighting, threats of sanctions from AFL, reports on previous years player behaviour. That's a fairly good cocktail for ending down the bottom.

Best way to remove the possibility of a side tanking their season to get the #1 draft pick would be to be give a priority pick to any team that has a 75% or worse losing record over the last 4 seasons. Any team that qualifies have proven itself truly rubbish for an extended period - not even the Demons could/would tank for 4 entire seasons? If you want to be really certain you could randomise who gets first priority pick. FWIW, this year only Carlton, Bribane and GC would qualify.

It is about as solid bit of reporting as wce being knee deep in any ruckman out there Pete. So far this week wce have been linked to Zac Clarke, sandi, Jordan Roughead and Tim English. 2 years back Goldstein was reported as wce bound. Believe it when it eventuates. But if gaff does go compo is a first rounder and if Kelly does want to leave the cats that's a good starting point in negotiations.

You might be thinking as I was originally of the season in 2010. That’s the one where they drafted Gaff at the end and lost a bunch of games in a rush towards the end. 2008 was the NicNat draft - they won 4 games for the year, rounds 1, 9, 17 and 19 and were bottom 4 from pretty much round 3 onwards. I have said for years the Suns can’t draft like other clubs and picks aren’t worth to them what they are worth to other clubs. If they have a high-rated academy pick that goes around pick 5-15, they assemble some 20/30 picks and match it. Only time they’d need a top 5 pick is if they have the equivalent of Heeney coming through and it’s likely that he’s the very first name called out. Spending a high end pick on an interstate talent is just far too much risk. Better off offering it for trade and seeing who can be convinced to come to the Suns from other clubs. Hence pick 2 for Weller being a fantastic deal for the Suns. That’s what it cost them to get a bird in the hand and I maintain the Roar editorial staff were intellectually lazy in insisting it was a bad deal.

I very nearly mentioned Brisbane as an example of that. Top thinking. It's very evident from last year he was system first, wins are nice but come second to learning and development.

I remember it pretty distinctly at the time they were battling away at trying to make the 8 and then almost as soon as Worsfold conceded they weren't likely to make headway on the 8, they dropped like a stone. As for the Suns, I reckon they'd be best off still picking the cream where they can (albeit maybe a little judiciously) particularly when there's KPF's near the top of the draft and bring in more mature bodies from the mid-lower picks from the best performing 21-25 y.o. players from the state leagues. The AFL should definitely bring in more checks and balances to the system to help clubs like the Suns with player retention.

The weagles obviously did a better job of disguising it - although they did have 2535 points kicked against them in 2008, comfortably the highest they've had in a season in the last 15 years If you're going to tank hard, best to do it after your best player leaves and you've got a drug scandal tearing the place up. They obviously bounced back pretty well from it. I don't think underperformance would be tolerated for long over there, they're just too big and powerful to be down for long. I'm in the camp that the Suns need to do more to start winning games in 2019 rather than endlessly building towards a future that never arrives, but agreed McGovern is one of the few names that would likely get their attention. @Brian - not sure if that's unintentional irony but it would be very apt if they Suns picked up another A grader that winds up leaving after a few years.

The solution you propose is fiddling with the probability of the worst team in any particular season getting the #1 pick, Effectively reducing the likelyhood that the seasons worst team will get the #1 pick - Isn't improving the worst team the whole point? Another mad scheme to make things more complicated, are you auditioning to join the AFL? Just imaging if using your scheme GWS for example fluked it and got the #1 pick this year - it could happen - you'd hear the squealing from space! because sure as eggs one day

Brisbane this season are the perfect example of what you said. Fagan has been focused on developing a style of play and being competitive rather than solely on winning (hence his admission after the loss to North they hadn't practiced what to do in dying minutes of a tight game). Mark Maclure on ABC radio is always a big one for teams that aren't yet ready to contend for a flag to concentrate on educating their players (e.g. he advocated for Essendon to put a young player on Tom Mitchell to learn how to get the ball recently) as they're not going to win the flag that year so prepare players for when they will be in a position to win the flag.

The only issue is that we have a terrible footy media, and we need to fight against their laziness instead of elevating it. Beautifully put.

There's a point in the season where some teams know that finals aren't a realistic goal. This proposal could potentially lead to teams starting the tanking process even earlier.

I don't mind the principle of introducing some uncertainty to who gets the very first picks in the draft but this is an arbitrary and frankly silly way to do it. Given teams often perform differently in different parts of the season it will almost certainly throw up anomalies where a club that finished reasonably high on the ladder gets an early pick, just because their weakest period happened to be the highest weighted - maybe they had a bunch of injuries. If the writer's weighting had gone in a different but equally possible direction you could get crazy results. Sydney went their first six rounds without a win, before ultimately finishing sixth. You can imagine the reaction if they wound up with a pick earlier than the slightly overachieving St Kilda, who did fairly well in the first couple of months before finishing mid-table. The NBA runs a weighted lottery and - for all its flaws - it's a better system than the one proposed. Better again would be a system that accounts for performance over a number of seasons. But as others have said, the Lukosios Cup was a figment of the media's imagination. This isn't a particularly pressing issue. The only issue is that we have a terrible footy media, and we need to fight against their laziness instead of elevating it.

Sorry my mistake. Based on the 2017 looking at it quickly it seems that we end up with making the whole thing more complicated for very little change in the order (so no real disincentive to tank) to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

Good young players is what you need as a feeder club. They could pick up the next Tom Lynch, Dion Prestia or Charlie Dixon.

He's doing the 2017 draft not 2018. Hawthorn did notionally have pick 7 which was traded a year earlier to St Kilda.

Yep, your first point is right, tanking is playing with fire. Mind you I don't think Melbourne is the only possible example. From our backyard here, it was amazing to see how much WC's efforts deteriorated once it was clear they weren't going to make the finals in the year Natanui was on offer as a high draft pick. As for the Suns trading their top pick. This would be the year that they should stick, given the quality KPF's on offer at the top (even if they do get a top end compensation pick). Your deal might be more attractive if McGovern were the player willing to go though.

Looks like North will land one finally with the offer for Gaff. leaves only Shiels for the Blues to target.