New academy bidding system

[chopperduck]

Don't see how the academies are related to 1st round draft picks we've lost in previous years.. If anything, points system or not, having the academies mean we still get the ability to take our home grown talent, which solves the go home factor.

It is interesting that in the examples, the player gets officially taken at the bidded pick. IE in the Heeney example, he ends up being taken by Sydney at pick 2. It is essentially a forced trade traded value which the clubs must give up. It would then mean that everyone has to shuffle back a spot in the draft essentially. As Melbourne would then be picking at pick 3.

 

[BigCat2]

At first i thought it was over kill to have to give up multiple picks for 1 player, but taking the Heeney example, you are essentially trading those picks for pick 2 to take that player. And i think if you were given that deal at trade time you'd take it. So why should it be treated any different now. If your academy turns over good quality players, you might only draft 1 or 2 players a year instead of 3 or 4, but those 1 or 2 are probably going to stay on the list. your 3rd and 4th players you'd normally take in a draft are usually low odds at making it.

I notice lots of people (including afl.com.au) using the Melbourne pick 2 scenario where Sydney matched it with pick 18. Melbourne did so, knowing Sydney would match the bid, so no skin off their nose.

However, under the new system, would they have bid? It would have come down to whether they were willing to give up one of Petracca/Brayshaw (even McCartin when Petracca was tipped to go 1) in order to secure a player who was of probably similar standard, but had been raised by the Swans academy for years? I'm not sure they would have.

I think the new system will stop teams putting in crazy bids with picks they're actually prepared to give up, knowing that the academy/father-son eligible club may not necessary match them. Let's say had Geelong bid with pick 10 instead (1395 points, or 1255 after 20% discount), then the discrepancy would not have been as large.

 

[chopperduck]

With it being a much higher price to match any bids, i don't think clubs will put in bids they aren't willing to pay. Heeney was rated good enough that Melb would have been happy to pay pick 2. Would Sydney have paid that much for Heeney is the question. TBH, when you are a team playing finals and you get the chance to take a top 3 player from the draft, you take it and run. If i was Sydney id be happy to give up a draft to land a player the quality of Heeney. Got a team full of guns already, don't need to try and pick the eyes out of the draft. Landing a sure fire hit is the way to go.

I actually think there will be less dud bids under this system.

 

[SizeMatters]

Wish it all just stayed how it was. Not like there have been many gun F/S or academy prospects running around at the frontier clubs. Heeney and most likely Mills are just a small % of top talent to come out of the academies so far. Not sure how many academy players have been drafted probably around 16 (rough guess) or so... Heeney is the closest you can get to a sure bet... 1/16 isn't a reason to change the whole drafting.

 

[pulpdriver]

I don't like the idea of taxing the first round pick from the following year at all but at the end of the day if we're able to keep top tier talent in the state it's a win for us.

 

[Nuggo]

So do the other clubs now help fund the academies?

 

[Sherrinator]

So do the other clubs now help fund the academies?

Nope. Eddie will argue that we are bankrolled by the AFL so we aren't paying anyway.

Personally, I would love to see FS scrapped as Vic teams are no doubt grooming young ex-player sons and making sure they become quality players at draft time (see Gary Ablett).

 

[whatboutbob]

I don't like the idea of taxing the first round pick from the following year at all but at the end of the day if we're able to keep top tier talent in the state it's a win for us.

How much 'top tier talent' has Queensland produced in the past decade?

 

[Sanchez365]

How much 'top tier talent' has Queensland produced in the past decade?

And how does a system that cannibalises our entire draft (and potentially our next one) allow us to retain them?

 

[Sanchez365]

Now they are saying that they are considering academies in all regions of the country including the already developed southern states. I'd essendon gets first pick on players from the Calder cannons the northern clubs might as well fold.

 

[dlanod]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-05-...introducing-recruiting-zones-for-all-18-clubs

No different to the "papers" you see published in politics designed to push someone's agenda. Make the news for a day or two, fool some easily outraged people into thinking it's an actual proposal by those in charge, disappears without a trace. When you've got the knee-jerking president of the Dogs saying there's issues with it, I think that says it all.

 

[WhiteLionFeva]

The academy system is absolutely essential to the game in the developing states, but one might query the relevance of the father/son rule these days. Why should the draft be further compromised just so an historical family tie with a club can be maintained? Most draftees have strong emotional ties to clubs (as supporters) as they grow up but don't get to pick and choose where they go. It's a fine romantic notion but it isn't as crucial to the development of the game as the academy system is. I just think giving essentially the same treatment to the two systems really understates the real importance of the academy system.

 

[dlanod]

Dawson - Richmond bid pick 32 - 584 points - 197 = 387 = we had pick 42 worth 395 points, so we downgrade that to pick 73 (9 points).
Andrews - North Melbourne bid pick 35 - 522 points - 197 = 325 = pick 61 is 135, pick 73 is 9, so 325 - 144 = 181 points that need to be taken off our first round pick the following year, or about one spot in the draft.

The latter changes if we picked up and held on to an extra pick at 57 or higher.

After some thought one issue I definitely see with this system in general is the addition of the FA compensation picks. There's been a bit of low level noise in the past about how they actually disadvantage every other club because they push everyone down the draft order, but now we have a quantifiable effect and it can screw with academy bidding.

The old system used to occur prior to addition of these picks, but now you'll see a Frawley-like compensation pick where a club bids a pick prior to the compensation pick resulting in teams having to rustle up extra value because all their picks have been downgraded.

At a purely self-interested level, using the post-compensation order from last year results in us not getting pick 73 back for Dawson (we actually come out slightly ahead on Andrews, but that's because pick 61 didn't move back due to teams already having used all their draft slots by that pick).

 

[jjami15]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-05-...introducing-recruiting-zones-for-all-18-clubs

No different to the "papers" you see published in politics designed to push someone's agenda. Make the news for a day or two, fool some easily outraged people into thinking it's an actual proposal by those in charge, disappears without a trace. When you've got the knee-jerking president of the Dogs saying there's issues with it, I think that says it all.

Eddies reaction was pretty knee-jerk and look what happened. If they do this then we should scrap all academies and F/S's.

 

[Panthera]

How much 'top tier talent' has Queensland produced in the past decade?

Apparently the Lions spend approximately 40% of what Sydney do on academies. Heeney came in as pretty much the finished product when looking at a junior, but from what I've seen, there may be a lot more upside for us to have our players come on a little slower (natural when we don't have the same standard and/or number of coaches) and and end up costing us very little when compared to a Heeney.

Case in point: Harris Andrews who looks a bank robbery type steal at pick #61

 

[Toffee Lion]

Might be a little over zealous with this statement but I think if the academies were scrapped entirely (Which I don't think will happen but just speaking hypothetically), we would float around in mediocrity for a very long time without tasting success due to our history of top end talent leaving the club.

Which would lead to continual losses off the field and eventually the chance of folding unless propped up, it's a chain effect that might take say 5,10,15 or 20 years to see the full effects of but it's something the AFL should think about before listening to Eddie's knee-jerk's.

Not sure if others see it that way and I'm in the minority but that's my take on it all.

I don't think the academies or the F/S is exactly doing anything wrong, they could have a look at ways to deal with the Isaac Heeney situation (Pick 2 to 18 is wrong) but leave everything else.

 

[piari]

After watching Harris give Ryder the touch up last week the Academy is essential for the survival of the interstate clubs.

He looked like a player who had been educated very well into the team and the culture of AFL football.

The rest of the backs knew who and where he was going to be for the majority of the time.

This didn't happen by chance - he was educated before he was drafted - the Lions knew what a person he was and what type of player he is and his strengths and have used him appropriately. Still can't get over the look on Ryder's face though when he turned around and a "15 year old" in features went to him and he was taller that him - priceless.

 

[Viceregal]

Isn't there a rule saying you have to take x kids in the draft each year (which forces us to delist at least some to make room etc)...

If you have pick *shrug* 10 and someone bids for your academy gun at pick 1 ... if you end up spending all of your picks on making up the value do they just tack on to the end eg you effectively get pick 1 and picks 70 71 and 72 (assuming everyone else has finished by now)?

 

[Fatcat08]

After some thought one issue I definitely see with this system in general is the addition of the FA compensation picks. There's been a bit of low level noise in the past about how they actually disadvantage every other club because they push everyone down the draft order, but now we have a quantifiable effect and it can screw with academy bidding.

The old system used to occur prior to addition of these picks, but now you'll see a Frawley-like compensation pick where a club bids a pick prior to the compensation pick resulting in teams having to rustle up extra value because all their picks have been downgraded.

At a purely self-interested level, using the post-compensation order from last year results in us not getting pick 73 back for Dawson (we actually come out slightly ahead on Andrews, but that's because pick 61 didn't move back due to teams already having used all their draft slots by that pick).

I hadn't thought about that, its an interesting point. As picks get pushed back live i'm guessing the values we have to match with don't remain at the pick we would have had but where we are now. Its a side affect that would be interesting to see explained how it will work.

 

[Fatcat08]

Isn't there a rule saying you have to take x kids in the draft each year (which forces us to delist at least some to make room etc)...

If you have pick *shrug* 10 and someone bids for your academy gun at pick 1 ... if you end up spending all of your picks on making up the value do they just tack on to the end eg you effectively get pick 1 and picks 70 71 and 72 (assuming everyone else has finished by now)?

Theoretically yes as the number of picks available in the draft is unlimited (ok not technically but its equivalent to the numbers of players on ever list). You see it some years when a team picking late in the draft may be using what was pick 100 at pick 70 odd to take a player.

 

[Viceregal]

If I end up 295 points in the hole after using all of my draft picks this year on someone(s) exceptional ... do I get to pick how that affects next year or does it *have* to come off of my first pick ... and since I won't know what picks I have until around draft time next year ...

 

[dlanod]

Isn't there a rule saying you have to take x kids in the draft each year (which forces us to delist at least some to make room etc)...

If you have pick *shrug* 10 and someone bids for your academy gun at pick 1 ... if you end up spending all of your picks on making up the value do they just tack on to the end eg you effectively get pick 1 and picks 70 71 and 72 (assuming everyone else has finished by now)?

Yes, that's right. You still have to fill those spots on your list.

 

[dlanod]

If I end up 295 points in the hole after using all of my draft picks this year on someone(s) exceptional ... do I get to pick how that affects next year or does it *have* to come off of my first pick ... and since I won't know what picks I have until around draft time next year ...

It has to come off your first pick.

 

[Viceregal]

It has to come off your first pick.

So if I wooden spoon it the following year I take 295 off of my pick number 1 which would make it 2705 which is still higher than pick 2 at 2517 ... if I am just spending my number one pick as a pick do I get free points or do I have to make up 295 from further down?

Are they planning on coming up with better system than average salary per pick over the last x years for assigning points or do they plan on staying with the current dodgy brothers paradigm?

God help any club whose star KPF spawns boy triplets sometime in the future!

 

[dlanod]

So if I wooden spoon it the following year I take 295 off of my pick number 1 which would make it 2705 which is still higher than pick 2 at 2517 ... if I am just spending my number one pick as a pick do I get free points or do I have to make up 295 from further down?

You get free points.

Are they planning on coming up with better system than average salary per pick over the last x years for assigning points or do they plan on staying with the current dodgy brothers paradigm?

I'm sure they're willing to listen to suggestions, but given salary is both easily quantifiable and also (in the collective) correlated with talent and playing ability I'm not sure what issues you were planning on raising?