So far, the mood seems to be leaning towards a yes for some form of compensation. Compensating for the loss of #7 with #7 in the mid-season is kind of a neat solution. But given that it is unlikely any two coaches would agree on the numbers, would we be happy to let this ride until closer to the mid-season trading/draft and make our decision then, given a much better idea of how the Lilacs are faring? Don't think we need a new thread at this point, but thanks Fitzy. I expect coaches to read all the ORFFA threads. Some have been bold enough to suggest the existing Lilacs are already better than a number of teams in the ORFFA. [span style='color: #ff0000;]I KNOW YOU ARE LOOKING AT ME. Sniggering behind my back will be reported to SnoZ.
TerryinBangkok wrote: So far, the mood seems to be leaning towards a yes for some form of compensation. Compensating for the loss of #7 with #7 in the mid-season is kind of a neat solution. But given that it is unlikely any two coaches would agree on the numbers, would we be happy to let this ride until closer to the mid-season trading/draft and make our decision then, given a much better idea of how the Lilacs are faring? Don't think we need a new thread at this point, but thanks Fitzy. I expect coaches to read all the ORFFA threads. Some have been bold enough to suggest the existing Lilacs are already better than a number of teams in the ORFFA. [span style='color: #ff0000;]I KNOW YOU ARE LOOKING AT ME. Sniggering behind my back will be reported to SnoZ. LOL (sniggering omitted/stifled)
chels wrote: am delighted that the discussion I hoped would arise when I suggested we talk about this to TiB is happening. I made the observation in the spirit of every subject being up for discussion and in akaizen (改善) sort of way. Hopefully everybody in ORFFA feels interested enough to raise any idea, no matter how weird, that might add to our shared experience / enjoyment. I am a consensus sort of guy (well today I am) and reckon we are getting somewhere by focussing on the lost opportunity rather than the sagacity of previous picks. (Sagacity rather than quality was inserted as Fitzy's word for the day.) The exact quantum is hard to agree on but worth discussing. I would prefer to see some real honesty in the points of view than a strict adherence to the middle (don't rock the boat) ground. Ok.....was going to keep 'mum' on this but myflightless friend has guilted me into letting my feelings known: <li class='ListCol-2] <p class='meta] <dl> <dd class='message' data-bind='text: Body]Hhmmmmmm............although I am pretty agreeable to everything, I cant say I'm a fan. Who is to say this squad is worse than a few others? Len couldnt field a team for Rd 1, I couldnt.....TiB has been pegged for the spoon. Its too.....what......arguable? What will stop someone else from crying poor? Who decides who has a worse squad? There really isnt a scientific formula for such decisions. The drafts are set to help thelower teams by giving them early draft picks. Thats how we have tried to help out & even the playing field so to speak. So.....with that being said.....I disagree. But I am a concensus dude.............tocontinuedpeace, of course I will go woth the majority with nary a hint of displeasure. </dd> </dl> </li>
I'm not a huge fan of this. When pick 7 was taken away from Far Kew I said that it should be reinstated after the teams second pick because it was a big disadvantage to lose a top pick. So what would of been around picks 26 and 27 became pick 101. You can't have your cake and eat it to,penalisingwith one hand and giving back with the other. If you think it's necessary to give an extra pick in the mid season draft then fine, but in no way do agree with it happening in the pre season draft. This comp is looking more like the AFL every day!
TerryinBangkok wrote: [span style='color: #ff0000;]I KNOW YOU ARE LOOKING AT ME. Hilarious, so true. /Portals/0/User%20Images/looking.jpg
Hey everyone - didn't realise this discussion was happening. I would have no issue with a compensatory pick in the mid-season draft for the Lilacs, and/or, if other coaches agree, two such picks - one at pick 7 and maybe one nearer the end of the draft. In looking at the Lilacs' list, I think there are going to be a few players on the block perhaps at mid year, which means there would be scope for Jen to have and make use of extra picks. The Lilacs' list has been hit hard by injury and selection issues - Wellingham, Whitecross, Corey, Bird all out at the moment. Daw and Watson not selected, Krakouer coming back from injury, Ballantyne hurt on the weekend. But I think an extra pick (or two) would not be because of the injuries, but because of the fact the Lilacs were unable to make use of their early pick. Having a number 7 pick and nabbing someone like Viney (who would've been there at pick 7) would've made a bit of a difference. However I do agree with a couple of esteemed fellow coaches above me in feeling that the Lilacs' list isn't the worst in the comp and that it is perhaps a bit premature to be talking compensatory picks in next pre-season's draft. Maybe we should wait on that one and make a decision there at an appropriate time. But yes, I wouldn't have an issue with an extra pick in the mid season draft, or even 2 extra picks. Those picks can be traded for players as well, meaning that Jen would have options in how she uses them - trade away picks for players or use them to draft players who are in the pool. This is a good discussion too. Great stuff everyone.
I have been reading what you have all been saying and thank you for thinking that it might be fair to let me have an early pick in the mid-season draft. If I had planned my team better over the two weeks of the first round I may have won, since I never put Scott Thompson or Kepler Bradley on the field in the first set of games last weekend. I was still getting used to who I actually had on my team which didn't help, and ended up confused - but that's all under control now. We don't have another big split round like that again. I have to say that, if it happens, the pick I'd get in the mid-season draft should wait until we know how my team is faring coming into mid-season. You never know I may be on top of the ladder by then. Well one can dream, can't they?
bama wrote: I'm not a huge fan of this. When pick 7 was taken away from Far Kew I said that it should be reinstated after the teams second pick because it was a big disadvantage to lose a top pick. So what would of been around picks 26 and 27 became pick 101. You can't have your cake and eat it to,penalisingwith one hand and giving back with the other. If you think it's necessary to give an extra pick in the mid season draft then fine, but in no way do agree with it happening in the pre season draft. This comp is looking more like the AFL every day! Bit harsh there bama, chels has made a suggestion, which has been made open for public discussion, and discussion has ensued, that's about all.. No one is giving or getting anything that I know about right now.
Lenh191 wrote: bama wrote: I'm not a huge fan of this. When pick 7 was taken away from Far Kew I said that it should be reinstated after the teams second pick because it was a big disadvantage to lose a top pick. So what would of been around picks 26 and 27 became pick 101. You can't have your cake and eat it to,penalisingwith one hand and giving back with the other. If you think it's necessary to give an extra pick in the mid season draft then fine, but in no way do agree with it happening in the pre season draft. This comp is looking more like the AFL every day! Bit harsh there bama, chels has made a suggestion, which has been made open for public discussion, and discussion has ensued, that's about all.. No one is giving or getting anything that I know about right now. Len, It's not harsh, all i'm saying is we can't keep on changing the rules. I was all up for putting the draft on hold, getting BB to take pick 7 or an extra second round pick, but it was decided to push on with the eventual owner getting disadvantaged. I'm just putting my opinion forward that if an extra 1 or 2 mid season picks are needed then that is fine, I just don't think it should be extended to the preseason draft.
Noworries, I must have misunderstood you, I am not a fan ofconcessionsbeing given for the pre-season draft either, I think a few have expressed the same.
Okay, we wait until mid-season and if the Lilacs are on top we call in the AFL Drug Squad. /Portals/0/User%20Images/Out%20of%20Bounds2.jpg
I'm not sure why we're having a time out. And not sure that I need to be sure about that :/ anyway... I don't see the need in putting the decision off. Almost everyone has suggested that the compensation should be because of what happened in the draft and not because of the current state of the team, so I can't see what relevance the performances of this team over the next couple of months has on the decision we are making. If anything, we should be making the decision now so that the coming months don't cloud our perception of whether the team deserves compensation. IMO. if we are wondering about whether it should be pick 1, 7, 19, whateva; why don't we just award Jen a pick immediately following her first actual pick, or something along those lines. That way, we get to determine what round the pick should be in, but what pick it is will be based on current season form. Sorry to break the time out, but I see this as important. I'm not really in favour of putting it off, but at the same time, it does not faze me that much if that's the way y'all want to roll.
For me it has nothing to do with the draft conducted, and is all about chel's concern for the state of Jen's list. If that list is doing very nicely any concessions are much less likely to be ticked by me and I suspect a number of others, for me the only valid reference to the last draft is the poetic elegance of pick 7, if required. chels suggested 3 picks initially, no doubt to get the conversation moving, but if you feel it's a faitaccompliant, what would you give, right now, as a means of assisting in equalisation? I am curious, as I would be next to put my hand out is all...
anthak wrote: I'm not sure why we're having a time out. And not sure that I need to be sure about that :/ anyway... I don't see the need in putting the decision off. Almost everyone has suggested that the compensation should be because of what happened in the draft and not because of the current state of the team, so I can't see what relevance the performances of this team over the next couple of months has on the decision we are making. If anything, we should be making the decision now so that the coming months don't cloud our perception of whether the team deserves compensation. IMO. if we are wondering about whether it should be pick 1, 7, 19, whateva; why don't we just award Jen a pick immediately following her first actual pick, or something along those lines. That way, we get to determine what round the pick should be in, but what pick it is will be based on current season form. Sorry to break the time out, but I see this as important. I'm not really in favour of putting it off, but at the same time, it does not faze me that much if that's the way y'all want to roll. Agree with this. I thought the compensation was for missing out on pick 7 and therefore the picks should be given now for the mid season draft (I suggest picks after the teamsinitialfirst 2 picks). If it's just for poor form then why not give all under performing teams extra picks at drafts (which I don't want to do)?
bama wrote:anthak wrote:I'm not sure why we're having a time out. And not sure that I need to be sure about that :/ anyway... I don't see the need in putting the decision off. Almost everyone has suggested that the compensation should be because of what happened in the draft and not because of the current state of the team, so I can't see what relevance the performances of this team over the next couple of months has on the decision we are making. If anything, we should be making the decision now so that the coming months don't cloud our perception of whether the team deserves compensation. IMO. if we are wondering about whether it should be pick 1, 7, 19, whateva; why don't we just award Jen a pick immediately following her first actual pick, or something along those lines.  That way, we get to determine what round the pick should be in, but what pick it is will be based on current season form.  Sorry to break the time out, but I see this as important. I'm not really in favour of putting it off, but at the same time, it does not faze me that much if that's the way y'all want to roll.   Agree with this. I thought the compensation was for missing out on pick 7 and therefore the picks should be given now for the mid season draft (I suggest picks after the teams initial first 2 picks). If it's just for poor form then why not give all under performing teams extra picks at drafts (which I don't want to do)? Exactly. Len is already licking his lips haha
Yep - my attitude on this is exactly the same as Bama's. If I recall correctly we both were rather strong in wondering why the current owner of the Lilacs (at the time, the Frogs) franchise was being disenfranchised by being stopped from selecting her own players in the pre-season draft. Personally I have had to walk a fine line in talking about the Lilacs given the rather obvious potential conflict of interest that exists for me on such matters. But my viewpoint now is the same as the viewpoint I had during pre-season - that the Lilacs should have been able to make their own draft selections ... and that possibly included pick 7. Given that it wasn't the case, any compensation that should be offered shouldn't be because of injuries or players' poor form, but directly due to what I saw as the unfair loss of pick/s in the pre season. Let's face it, at least two other teams are going to struggle to field full line ups this week (including myself). So injuries alone can't be the reason behind any compensatory picks. Ultimately the consideration of whether the Lilacs get extra picks needs to be based solely on whether we believe Jen not being able to make use of her picks in the pre-season draft properly was/is fair. I don't believe it was, therefore I support compensatory measures.
anthak wrote: I'm not sure why we're having a time out. And not sure that I need to be sure about that :/ anyway... I don't see the need in putting the decision off. Almost everyone has suggested that the compensation should be because of what happened in the draft and not because of the current state of the team, so I can't see what relevance the performances of this team over the next couple of months has on the decision we are making. If anything, we should be making the decision now so that the coming months don't cloud our perception of whether the team deserves compensation. IMO. if we are wondering about whether it should be pick 1, 7, 19, whateva; why don't we just award Jen a pick immediately following her first actual pick, or something along those lines. That way, we get to determine what round the pick should be in, but what pick it is will be based on current season form. Sorry to break the time out, but I see this as important. I'm not really in favour of putting it off, but at the same time, it does not faze me that much if that's the way y'all want to roll. Yes, you do need to be sure. Certain in fact. 'I have to say that, if it happens, the pick I'd get in the mid-season draft should wait until we know how my team is faring coming into mid-season. You never know I may be on top of the ladder by then.'
TerryinBangkok wrote: anthak wrote: I'm not sure why we're having a time out. And not sure that I need to be sure about that :/ anyway... I don't see the need in putting the decision off. Almost everyone has suggested that the compensation should be because of what happened in the draft and not because of the current state of the team, so I can't see what relevance the performances of this team over the next couple of months has on the decision we are making. If anything, we should be making the decision now so that the coming months don't cloud our perception of whether the team deserves compensation. IMO. if we are wondering about whether it should be pick 1, 7, 19, whateva; why don't we just award Jen a pick immediately following her first actual pick, or something along those lines. That way, we get to determine what round the pick should be in, but what pick it is will be based on current season form. Sorry to break the time out, but I see this as important. I'm not really in favour of putting it off, but at the same time, it does not faze me that much if that's the way y'all want to roll. Yes, you do need to be sure. Certain in fact. 'I have to say that, if it happens, the pick I'd get in the mid-season draft should wait until we know how my team is faring coming into mid-season. You never know I may be on top of the ladder by then.' How the Lilac's perform over the next 10 weeks should have no bearing on the selection they receive, the extra selection is for being dudded in the preseason draft, not for injuries or lack of form of current players. I think that selection should be put on the table now whether it's pick 1, 7 or the pick following the first i'm not fussed. I think that is what Chris, Ant and myself are getting it is totallyirrelevantto the teams performance.
I am not in favour of just handing over pick 7. All my responses have been in regard to the supposition that the Lilacs had a crap squad and needed help, if that were the case than pick 7 works. Given the only team they beat was mine and I had to bandage players to play chels is probably correct. The existence of the pick between now and Round 10 is completely irrelevant to how the comp is run and played, so why act now. If at R10 the Lilacs are where they are now I have no doubt the rest of us will be happy to provide assistance, but I see no reason to shoot the horse running last (or second last in this case) when they have just left the gates.