News Port Adelaide's Next Generation Academy

[MrChow]

It's going to do a bit of damage to clubs with just one player. It is in all practicality a lockout.

Does our draft strategy now change to trying to get North or West Coast future future 1st.

Oh hang on, no one wants to go there.

Oh, and they might not finish bottom 2, they may finish 13-14th and you still wont get your player.

This to me basically says - let it go there is no chance we get these players - and all we can do as a club is halt development and encourage future father-sons and academy players to have a gap year in their draft year.

Academies are dead lol.

 

[PortAdelFC1997]

How is it even remotely possible to plan for what 2 picks you’ll need when you don’t know when the bids will come.

You have 5 minutes to acquire the picks or have to go into the draft holding something like picks:

5, 8, 12, 15, 22, 25 to have a chance at acquiring say Pilot, Salopek, Rodan assuming none went top 2 but all were top 20 picks ha.

Guess we have to wait to at least Wednesday when Gettable airs its latest episode and get the details from Callum himself.

Don’t rate Jon Ralph’s “reporting”.

 

[Addy23]

This is brutal. So if you have a number 1 pick, and you finish say 15th bottom 4, you still have to trade away a star to get another top 10/12 pick to get your player.

You’re better off giving a player to each of the teams above you on the ladder to not bid on your player.

Not particularly, you can trade your future firsts and bring it into the year that you're matching a bid too.

 

[Duckimus Prime]

Not particularly, you can trade your future firsts and bring it into the year that you're matching a bid too.

With 5 minutes of negotiation. Yeah so its going to cost your next 2 first rounders to do it.

 

[Addy23]

With 5 minutes of negotiation. Yeah so its going to cost your next 2 first rounders to do it.

Yeah well, it is what it is. I have been saying for a while that the system is broken so while it hurts us now you just have to take it on the chin for the greater good of the wider competition. Although, I do believe that they have overcompensated and the AFL don't really seem to have an idea of where to make things harder for teams.

I'd make it harder to match F/S as clubs have far less investment in that compared to NGA. Those two shouldn't be equal.

 

[TazD]

I saw C4 mention a sliding scale. Welcome back, tanking.

 

[ctpower]

Apart from Cochrane i don’t think any of our father sons or academy players are a top 5.
Maybe Zemes but thats still a fair way off.
Trading this years first rounder is looking worse by the day.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Doing it in 2 picks makes a 1st pick bid effectively impossible to match most of the time, and there really is no need to make the restrictions so tight.

As Young Gun #6 says, you might be expecting a bid at pick 5 and get a bid at pick 2 and you then have what, 5 minutes to scramble through another trade to get the picks where an opponent has you over a barrel?

It's just a lockout with a different name.

 

[MrChow]

Doing it in 2 picks makes a 1st pick bid effectively impossible to match most of the time, and there really is no need to make the restrictions so tight.

As Young Gun #6 says, you might be expecting a bid at pick 5 and get a bid at pick 2 and you then have what, 5 minutes to scramble through another trade to get the picks where an opponent has you over a barrel?

It's just a lockout with a different name.

Yeah it’s a lockout. Perhaps they will adjust the points value now, as it reflected the older system, so that it can be more practical for top end of the draft.

Like does Pick 1 really equate to 3000 points if Pick 7 is half of that? That point system was designed for using any picks.

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Yeah it’s a lockout. Perhaps they will adjust the points value now, as it reflected the older system, so that it can be more practical for top end of the draft.

Like does Pick 1 really equate to 3000 points if Pick 7 is half of that? That point system was designed for using any picks.

Whatever they do, you can be sure they will **** it up until it affects a club like Collingwood.

 

[philthy05]

If Jon Ralph is correct, we're completely rooted.

Following years pick.

That’s not going to be near enough.

For example Cochrane gets bid on pick 2, we finish the year with pick 8, our pick gets pushed to 9/10 cause of compo picks , so we need to trade our next years first for a top what? 5? That’s impossible.

That’s all they need to do. You need to give up 2 good draft picks to get a top end talent. I don’t think anyone would complain about this.
Also brings clubs without FS/academies up the order if clubs have to use 1st and second round picks to match a bid.
Restrictions on top 4 and 8 can get in the bin though. Thats going to encourage tanking.

Of course we would and should. It’s essentially locking us out of top talent unless we finish bottom 4, while we watch teams loaded with f/s and ngas that picked up for 3rd and 4th rounders run around in grand finals.

This is brutal. So if you have a number 1 pick, and you finish say 15th bottom 4, you still have to trade away a star to get another top 10/12 pick to get your player.

You’re better off giving a player to each of the teams above you on the ladder to not bid on your player.

If butters leaves and we force a trade. He picks a finals playing team and we ask and get two first rounders..

..that’s not even close to matching a bid in the top 3. In fact say pick 10 (ours) 15 (butters) and 16 (butters) likely isn’t enough to trade up to two picks high enough for a top 3 bid.

How do you know what picks you need to trade for when its a bidding system? You don't know the pick the bid will be at...you dont know what the picks you trade for will become?

Teams that want to be ruthless (ie not us with a leash held by the vfl) can absolutely put teams over a barrel knowing they need to trade with them.

 

[philthy05]

The other thing no one is talking about is the difficulty getting high picks is going to be heavily multiplied when there’s several highly rated kids being bid on early.

Like next year walker and Cochrane are both considered top 3 bids.

So port and Carlton are expected to obtain four of the top 10 draft picks to match these guys?

That’s not difficult, it’s impossible. Nearly half the top ten aren’t going to trade out.

 

[Visenfest]

Get Dougie to spud it up next year, and Zemes to do the same or play basketball until we can get him as a Cat B.

 

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

I suspect the changes to the bidding system will spark a wave of unofficial “alliances” between clubs with something to lose. Think Carlton, Port and Essendon quietly agreeing not to drop early bids on each other’s prospects (or on Syd/GWS/GC/Bris Academy kids) and they return the favour.

On top of that, we’ll probably see plenty of trade deals with unspoken conditions attached: an implied understanding that part of the exchange is, “don’t bid on our players”

 

[powermacs]

That’s not going to be near enough.

For example Cochrane gets bid on pick 2, we finish the year with pick 8, our pick gets pushed to 9/10 cause of compo picks , so we need to trade our next years first for a top what? 5? That’s impossible.




Of course we would and should. It’s essentially locking us out of top talent unless we finish bottom 4, while we watch teams loaded with f/s and ngas that picked up for 3rd and 4th rounders run around in grand finals.




If butters leaves and we force a trade. He picks a finals playing team and we ask and get two first rounders..

..that’s not even close to matching a bid in the top 3. In fact say pick 10 (ours) 15 (butters) and 16 (butters) likely isn’t enough to trade up to two picks high enough for a top 3 bid.






Teams that want to be ruthless (ie not us with a leash held by the vfl) can absolutely put teams over a barrel knowing they need to trade with them.

Dougie is in the 26 draft. He won’t count under this new system.

I’m sure the system will be different than the current set up so I doubt you would have to trade for pick 2 and 12 to get access. Guess we’ll find out by the end of the week.

 

[Addy23]

Dougie is in the 26 draft. He won’t count under this new system.

I’m sure the system will be different than the current set up so I doubt you would have to trade for pick 2 and 12 to get access. Guess we’ll find out by the end of the week.

This new system is for the 2026 draft onwards......?

 

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

If Cochrane gets bid on at #2, pick 8 and 15 get it done (depending on the discount applied)

 

[theouthouse]

Kinda stupid. You're better off as a club taking two high draft picks than 1 in the majority of draft years. They both work out and you trade one out for the missed NGA. Just ****s over the players and under-age development.

Surely if you match with a bunch of latter draft picks you lose out and can only select players that don't get drafted/not academy or are mature ages and not that good so your depth suffers.

Or you have a points system in place where the maximum number of draft points you can use in a year relate to your ladder position. The lower you finish the more points you can spend. Same with free agency. Sort of like player points in local leagues.

 

[Young Gun #6]

If Cochrane gets bid on at #2, pick 8 and 15 get it done (depending on the discount applied)

And let’s hope the club mantra stays as it has been pretty much the whole way through other than the JUH year…

‘We didn’t want to bid on him with pick 1 as we wanted to make sure the guy we got knew we had him as the no.1 player in the draft’.

Even though it’s bullshit 99% of the time I’d love for that to continue.

As well as the AFL continuing on with the 50k or 100k cash bonus (or whatever it was) for being the no.1 pick.

 

[powermacs]

This new system is for the 2026 draft onwards......?

Ah, yep. Read that wrong.

 

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

And let’s hope the club mantra stays as it has been pretty much the whole way through other than the JUH year…

‘We didn’t want to bid on him with pick 1 as we wanted to make sure the guy we got knew we had him as the no.1 player in the draft’.

Even though it’s bullshit 99% of the time I’d love for that to continue.

As well as the AFL continuing on with the 50k or 100k cash bonus (or whatever it was) for being the no.1 pick.

Agree, I don’t think we’ll ever see a #1 pick that’s an NGA or F/S again for those reasons. Still have no idea why the Crows bid on JUH.

 

[JimmyBC]

I suspect the changes to the bidding system will spark a wave of unofficial “alliances” between clubs with something to lose. Think Carlton, Port and Essendon quietly agreeing not to drop early bids on each other’s prospects (or on Syd/GWS/GC/Bris Academy kids) and they return the favour.

On top of that, we’ll probably see plenty of trade deals with unspoken conditions attached: an implied understanding that part of the exchange is, “don’t bid on our players”

More salary dumps & nudge nudge wink wink skulduggery. Yay!!

 

[Enviable Tradition]

Agree, I don’t think we’ll ever see a #1 pick that’s an NGA or F/S again for those reasons. Still have no idea why the Crows bid on JUH.

The story was that they wanted to use up the Bulldogs picks so that they could get Jimmy Rowe later.

Which is all sorts of funny.

 

[Lefti93]

Maybe the crows could join in, but they're always too scared of us getting better.

Weak little bitches.

 

[rumoursofwinter]

Seriously, how do you plan to match bids when you dont know where the bids are coming and what your picks are worth? Without knowing the details it seems like it would encourage collusion (and tanking)...suppose that is the afl way.