What They're Saying - The Bulldogs Media Thread

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/injury...e-new-afl-bidding-system-20151112-gkxg8b.html


Great article on the new draft system. It really explains why we loaded up on cheaps picks during trade period.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Is there some kind of a time limit on how long clubs have to decide their pick. It sounds that complicated with optional outcomes, you could see clubs forced to make hasty decisions, or the thing could finish up taking as long as the trade period.
 
Yeah you really do get the sense that it is going to be a slow slog this year, and not just St Kilda holding up the f****** process.
 
I tried reading through the article but about 3 quarters of the way through my brain actually exploded.

They didn't expect you to read that far. They put in all the content they want the reader to take away in the first few paragraphs, because in the majority of cases that is all the reader looks at. If they think it is important the first paragraph will be a synopsis of the important content, with subsequent paragraphs explaining details in an increasingly focused and precise way (look up 'reverse pyramid' - thats what they use).

In this case, they clearly thought that the reader would care only about the motivation for the system, and not the minutiae of its functions. This is fair enough - I was following it as I was reading it, and it was clear but it was to complex for me to learn, so the moment I finished the article, I lost all of the relevant details. Still they are intrinsically understandable (i.e. not a total cluster*), I think it would just take a bit of thinking to get it.

Either that or the editor gives Emma free reign to write in whatever way she deems appopriate. Likely given that Emma writes to a very specific, and usually more educated audience.
 
http://www.theage.com.au/afl/injury...e-new-afl-bidding-system-20151112-gkxg8b.html


Great article on the new draft system. It really explains why we loaded up on cheaps picks during trade period.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Can you explain to me in laymans terms why we loaded up on cheap picks?
Did we do it for next year? or do they have some relevance to us this year? I wouldn't have thought so seeing as we aren't nominating Darcy "Super' MacPherson.
 
Can you explain to me in laymans terms why we loaded up on cheap picks?
Did we do it for next year? or do they have some relevance to us this year? I wouldn't have thought so seeing as we aren't nominating Darcy "Super' MacPherson.

Hopefully we can at least pre-nominate to take him as a rookie, that way if nobody takes him in the main draft means he's ours as a rookie
 
How I understand it is all picks before 73 have a value. Pick 1 is 3000 pts down to 9pts at 73. When you bid for a father son or academy player you need to use up picks to the value of that player.


So instead of grabbing a awesome father son with your next best available pick, you need to use a number of picks that are worth as much as whoever bid for the player.






Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
 
Can you explain to me in laymans terms why we loaded up on cheap picks?
Did we do it for next year? or do they have some relevance to us this year? I wouldn't have thought so seeing as we aren't nominating Darcy "Super' MacPherson.

McCartney said we were loading up for next year, with the intention of trading them.
 
Anyone hear Simon Beasley on SEN today? I heard him say something about "Darcy" going to the Gold Coast ?????
That's exactly what he said, that GC were looking at drafting Darcy MacPherson.

About 4 mins in.

 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Can you explain to me in laymans terms why we loaded up on cheap picks?
Did we do it for next year? or do they have some relevance to us this year? I wouldn't have thought so seeing as we aren't nominating Darcy "Super' MacPherson.
I don't think they could have come up with a more complicated system if they tried.....in the end I'm not sure it achieves the fairness they are looking for. Seems to me that the system is being rorted again, as the clubs have found loop holes still. But, then I don't understand it fully, doubt I ever will lol.
 
Can you explain to me in laymans terms why we loaded up on cheap picks?
Did we do it for next year? or do they have some relevance to us this year? I wouldn't have thought so seeing as we aren't nominating Darcy "Super' MacPherson.

Our two trades were:
Carlton's picks 20 & 21 this year and 4th rounder next year for our pick 11 this year and 3rd rounder next year, and
Talia & our 4th rounder this year for Sydney's 4th rounder next year

The two picks we got for this year from the first trade we will use in the draft directly to pick players. It was just about having two rolls of the dice near that first round instead of just one. We must consider the talent pool pretty even in that area to think that 20 & 21 will give us a better result than just 11 and a 4th/5th rounder, DFA, PSD pick or Jarrad Grant to fill the last spot on the list. The exchange of next year's picks is just evening things up a little to make the trade fair for Carlton, but there may not be much difference between them anyway if they finish bottom 4 and we finish top 4

The second trade was about getting something, anything, for Talia. We weren't using our 4th round pick this year, but we might use their 4th round pick next year, even if it is in a trade or academy or F/S player bid

I don't think they could have come up with a more complicated system if they tried.....in the end I'm not sure it achieves the fairness they are looking for. Seems to me that the system is being rorted again, as the clubs have found loop holes still. But, then I don't understand it fully, doubt I ever will lol.

What they tried to do is create a system that assigns a number of points to each draft pick, so you can mathematically work out which picks are equivalent to others. To answer questions like is pick 1 better than picks 8 & 9 combined, is pick 5 better than picks 18 & 19 combined

Why? Because with so many academy players coming through now, it makes it really unbalanced to just let academy clubs match bids with their next pick like they were doing before this year. If you had 5 academy players that were all first round talents, you could take all of them and get 5 first rounders. Last year Sydney got Isaac Heeney for pick 18 when pick 2 was bid on him which was a huge advantage for them. Now, they make them find equivalent picks, just with a discount to still make it worth their while to run the academies

How? They tried not to make it subjective and used the salary data for players taken at those picks in the past to work it all out. Sensible enough, but the problem is they took an average of what has happened in the past. Drafts will vary year to year in the quality of players available to take at each pick, so recruiters who saw this year's draft as shallow could trade later picks for earlier picks to use on players, because the academy teams were happy with any trade that saw them win on points as they were only going to use the picks to pay for academy players

It's not the worst loophole, because there are 14 non-academy clubs all capable of negotiating with the academy clubs to get those sort of trades done. It gives the academy clubs a bit more of a legup than was intended, but still nothing like 18 for Heeney. If next year is considered a strong draft, clubs will be valuing their late picks and less willing to make those sort of trades
 
Last edited:
Anyone know how Tom Boyd is looking so far?
Is Bont back after Christmas ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top