List Mgmt. Trading all your picks for future picks and banking them.

[Furn2]

I seems to me that when teams trade future picks to get back into the current draft they most often have to pay overs and the deals seem to favour the team with current pick.

I'm basing that on the future pick being worth the same as that team current pick which of course is rarely the case but its as good as any other way to measure a future pick.

Anyway, I think the reason for this are 1.

1. teams prefer tp have something now rather than later (like everybody)
2. Teams generally think are going to improve or stay around the top.
3. future picks are unknown and so a known pick has more perceived value.

So heres my idea to take advantage of that.

You trade all your picks for future picks to bottom half sides for 3 years and just pick from the end of the draft.

Then in the 4th year when you have to use 2 1st rounders you clean out your list and use all 4 years of picks in a GWS/GC style year. The advantage being you can keep your leaders and good players and you get a crop of draftees all the same age and with a bit of luck you should move up the draft order overall because current picks are valued over future picks.

 

[tombomb]

I kind of agree with the premise that teams overvalue current picks and undervalue future picks.

The rest I really have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Furn2]

I kind of agree with the premise that teams overvalue current picks and undervalue future picks.

The rest I really have no idea what you are talking about.

Ok ill do an example its hard to explain.

lets assume our team finishes 10th every year and gets pick 9.

so year 1 you get picks 9,27,45,63. You now trade all those picks to teams in the bottom 6 since they want picks now and think they'll improve.

So lets say to make it easy the teams u trade with finish 14th.

year 2 you get your picks 9,27,45,63 plus picks 5,23,41,59. You now trade all these picks to lower teams for future picks .

now with a bit of luck the teams you trade with finish low and you get 3 sets of picks. the 8 you traded for and your 4.

say 9,27,45,63 plus 5,23,41,59 plus 4,22,40,58. you trade all these for future picks and in year 4 you get 16 picks. trade the hig ones down and you have a huge stack of picks to use in year 4 to draft or trade.

 

[LoungeLizard]

Ok ill do an example its hard to explain.

lets assume our team finishes 10th every year and gets pick 9.

so year 1 you get picks 9,27,45,63. You now trade all those picks to teams in the bottom 6 since they want picks now and think they'll improve.

So lets say to make it easy the teams u trade with finish 14th.

year 2 you get your picks 9,27,45,63 plus picks 5,23,41,59. You now trade all these picks to lower teams for future picks .

now with a bit of luck the teams you trade with finish low and you get 3 sets of picks. the 8 you traded for and your 4.

say 9,27,45,63 plus 5,23,41,59 plus 4,22,40,58. you trade all these for future picks and in year 4 you get 16 picks. trade the hig ones down and you have a huge stack of picks to use in year 4 to draft or trade.

I'm fairly sure there are rules to stop you doing this.

 

[tombomb]

Ok ill do an example its hard to explain.

lets assume our team finishes 10th every year and gets pick 9.

so year 1 you get picks 9,27,45,63. You now trade all those picks to teams in the bottom 6 since they want picks now and think they'll improve.

So lets say to make it easy the teams u trade with finish 14th.

year 2 you get your picks 9,27,45,63 plus picks 5,23,41,59. You now trade all these picks to lower teams for future picks .

now with a bit of luck the teams you trade with finish low and you get 3 sets of picks. the 8 you traded for and your 4.

say 9,27,45,63 plus 5,23,41,59 plus 4,22,40,58. you trade all these for future picks and in year 4 you get 16 picks. trade the hig ones down and you have a huge stack of picks to use in year 4 to draft or trade.

yeah ok. I kind of understand that. But there are many issues.

It is extraordinarily high risk. It is one of those things you could do in a video game where you can save and restart, but would be a catastrophe if you tried it in real life.

 

[Furn2]

I'm fairly sure there are rules to stop you doing this.

as your only trading out current picks I think its ok.

 

[LoungeLizard]

as your only trading out current picks I think its ok.

You have to turn your list over, it's in the rules.

And i'm fairly sure you cannot trade out 3 years in a row.

 

[Furn2]

yeah ok. I kind of understand that. But there are many issues.

It is extraordinarily high risk. It is one of those things you could do in a video game where you can save and restart, but would be a catastrophe if you tried it in real life.

It could definitely all go horribly wrong but plenty of teams have got it horribly wrong over the years.

The biggest risk is teams you trade with shooting up the ladder and you get worse picks than you traded out but if u trade with a few different teams and trade with the bottom sides you could with a bit of luck end up with much better picks than you had and don't have to tank to do so.

 

[Furn2]

You have to turn your list over, it's in the rules.

And i'm fairly sure you cannot trade out 3 years in a row.

yeh you take 3 picks at the end of the draft each of the 1st 3 years.

 

[LoungeLizard]

yeh you take 3 picks at the end of the draft each of the 1st 3 years.

Like i said, the rules stop you from doing this.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but you can't trade out your 1st round pick 3 years in a row.

 

[tombomb]

It could definitely all go horribly wrong but plenty of teams have got it horribly wrong over the years.

The biggest risk is teams you trade with shooting up the ladder and you get worse picks than you traded out but if u trade with a few different teams and trade with the bottom sides you could with a bit of luck end up with much better picks than you had and don't have to tank to do so.

what is the end game though? you end up in 2024 with 30 of the first 60 picks? You will quickly get to a point where no one has any future picks left to give you.

 

[longsuffreosupp]

We got lucky this year. We cant be s**t, trading out a gun, and have a rated NGA every year.

There's almost a new employment opportunity in itself to be able to trade picks into the first round. I'd start with really analysing what other clubs need/could be doing, and pounce when the time is right. Port got 2 future second rounders for jam, which could be turned into something low next year.

 

[spudmaster]

The flaw in that idea? AFL handing out priority picks willy-nilly based on how s**t their little fluffy bunnies are performing.
That and them changing the goalposts each and every year making any kind of future planning strategy a rather pointless exercise.

 

[Furn2]

Like i said, the rules stop you from doing this.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but you can't trade out your 1st round pick 3 years in a row.

you can, you just have to use 2 every 4 years and this uses 4 in the 4th year.

 

[Furn2]

what is the end game though? you end up in 2024 with 30 of the first 60 picks? You will quickly get to a point where no one has any future picks left to give you.

Then you hit the draft with the advantage of having all your recruits the same age but unlike GWS/GC they come into a ready made team. You would also be able to bank salary having so many first year players at once.

 

[Kwality]

I seems to me that when teams trade future picks to get back into the current draft they most often have to pay overs and the deals seem to favour the team with current pick.

I'm basing that on the future pick being worth the same as that team current pick which of course is rarely the case but its as good as any other way to measure a future pick.

Anyway, I think the reason for this are 1.

1. teams prefer tp have something now rather than later (like everybody)
2. Teams generally think are going to improve or stay around the top.
3. future picks are unknown and so a known pick has more perceived value.

So heres my idea to take advantage of that.

You trade all your picks for future picks to bottom half sides for 3 years and just pick from the end of the draft.

Then in the 4th year when you have to use 2 1st rounders you clean out your list and use all 4 years of picks in a GWS/GC style year. The advantage being you can keep your leaders and good players and you get a crop of draftees all the same age and with a bit of luck you should move up the draft order overall because current picks are valued over future picks.

Recipe for short term pain, followed by the years to get the kids into the 100 game window, 10 years & then you're a chance unless you are lucky.

 

[Furn2]

definitely short term pain but geez the Lions just swapped a future 2nd to move up 1 spot from 23 to 22. GWS gave a 1st to go 2 spots.

There's so much value there for the team giving up the current picks.

 

[B4Bear]

You may be on to something. Rhys Shaw seems to think future picks are more worthy than what this year has to offer.

If they do the same thing next year, you can dub yourself a genius.

 

[Marcel Proust]

yeah ok. I kind of understand that. But there are many issues.

It is extraordinarily high risk. It is one of those things you could do in a video game where you can save and restart, but would be a catastrophe if you tried it in real life.

high risk high rewards

AD, Paul George

 

[Art OF war]

This year we saw a lot of clubs overpay for picks when live trading during the draft. I’d say the eveness of this draft crop meant that people saw someone they rated top 10 still available in the 20’s (GC) and decided to pounce. Not sure if that over valuing of current picks will will happen every year, but as you say, clubs do rate current picks more than future picks.

I actually like your idea but would I limit it to 1 pick only - either a first or second rounder that you trade out. See what currency you can get for a future pick/s and then continually upgrade it until your happy with the pick or player.

 

[TedDougChris]

Like i said, the rules stop you from doing this.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but you can't trade out your 1st round pick 3 years in a row.

I’m pretty sure there is a rule stating you can’t trade out your future first and second of the same year - ie you couldn’t trade a 2021 first and second rounder.

 

[La Dispute]

12 months extra development is actually pretty underrated.

Gold Coast undoubtedly overpaid to get Sharp in, but I can kind of see the logic, and factoring that in there’s not as big a discrepancy as it appears on paper.

By 2021 Sharp should basically be a mainstay on their defence (or wing, depending), compared to a first round pick who’d be on the fringe at that point in time.

 

[Eagleboy2011]

12 months extra development is actually pretty underrated.

Gold Coast undoubtedly overpaid to get Sharp in, but I can kind of see the logic, and factoring that in there’s not as big a discrepancy as it appears on paper.

By 2021 Sharp should basically be a mainstay on their defence (or wing, depending), compared to a first round pick who’d be on the fringe at that point in time.

GCS know they can just end up bottom and the AFL will give them more. Its surprising Eddie and Kennet are not whinging more. They usually do.

 

[vozzon]

definitely short term pain but geez the Lions just swapped a future 2nd to move up 1 spot from 23 to 22. GWS gave a 1st to go 2 spots.

There's so much value there for the team giving up the current picks.

The Brisbane one was a surprise. Also was mentioned on another forum that port had 8 offers for that pick 22. Brisbane must have really rated the player.

The GWS one is fair enough on there behalf, crows got lucky as well, a good win win trade. GWS gave up a most likely late 2020 1st rounder for a top 4 pick this year as they had an academy player. Essentially getting 2 top 5-10 players in 2019 draft.

 

[JasRulz63]

definitely short term pain but geez the Lions just swapped a future 2nd to move up 1 spot from 23 to 22. GWS gave a 1st to go 2 spots.

There's so much value there for the team giving up the current picks.

I think it's because we view trades involving picks through a lens of the opportunity to draft a certain player with no certainty you get that player (except the early picks).

However with live trading and when trades involving the ability to draft specific players are involved, it becomes more dependent on what a team rated a specific player. If Brisbane rated Robertson as say the 8th best player in the draft and the next one available down in the mid teens, then it's sort of like trading a pick in the teens and a future second for pick 8.

We've seen it before prior to live pick trading when GWS traded 3 and 16 to Brisbane for pick 2 (plus later picks).