That's brilliant - did mum help you with this for an assignment ?saint3d wrote:I've waded through all the defeated straw men in this thread and so far this is about as close as you've come to explaining your preferred strategy.Teflon wrote:we wont get near pick 1 IMHO that doesnt mean we should not, where we can, maximise our opportunities at getting the highest selection we can
That doesnt mean losing every week - its a balance and trade off.
This idea of 'maximising our opportunities' can only mean losing games that may otherwise be winnable. Doesn't it? Or have I missed something?
I assume that's the trade off to which you refer. Trade some wins now for better selections in the draft. But not too many, apparently.
As an aside, nobody disputes that having pick 3 is better than having pick 5. No one. Anyone that does is deluded or attempting comedy, and their argument can be ignored.
So the question is how does the club go about trading wins for draft position? The obvious answer (I'm not trying to put words in anyone's mouth, but these concepts have been mentioned by some, including in this thread) is to 'play the kids' and to send players off for surgery before season's end and get them right for preseason. The trouble is that it's really difficult to dress that up as anything but tanking, and the consensus seems to be that tanking is bad.
'But what about the development?' I hear you (that's the proverbial you, not necessarily the actual you) ask, 'we need to get games into the kids!'
Let's consider a brand new recruit. He's selected on the basis that he's a teenager. He can play as poorly as he likes, but he'll still get picked next week. After all, his skills are sublime. The fact that he doesn't chase hard enough isn't really relevant. Until he hits the age of twenty, when he can't get picked for being a teenager any more. Now he has to bust his backside to stay in the team, except he's developed a habit over the last couple of years of not working hard, so he struggles.
Meanwhile, at some other club, the new recruit is told in no uncertain terms the effort required to get into the team. He sees older players, even those who won't be around when the team starts to rise up the ladder, busting their backsides. 'This is serious business,' he thinks to himself, 'better get to work'.
The first player has forty games under his belt. The second a mere fifteen. Which do you want at your club?
I know that hypothetical is slightly over the top, but if 'development' is the means by which you secure better draft picks, what exactly is it that you're developing?
Anyhow, of course we'll need to lose games along the way to get desired picks - I cant believe that needs clarification.
I was asked do I want us to lose games - the answer to that too is of course not but what I want and need aren't always the same thing...
The rest of the that rambling , shambolic mess of a post about some kid drafted who for some weird reason will "get magically picked each week" and somehow not run as fast as the kid at another club blah blah blah is possibly some of the best bile I've read on here in years ....and I've read some bile (posted a little bit too but that's my bile and I like it).
Anyway, well done on "wading through" .... we all can't wait for your next pearl of wisdom ...
