2019 Non-Crows AFL Chat #3 - the off-season

Elite Crow

Premium Platinum
Mar 21, 2008
54,873
75,405
adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Using 29 on Mead is irrelevant.

They either were using that pick to match the bid, or trading it. Either way it wasn't a live pick for Port.

The big question is why did they spend their 2020 first to upgrade pick 29?

Their 2020 1st alone will likely be worth MORE than they received for the entire deal. Then they gave 29 on top of that!

Usually you give up two later picks to move up the order. Not a pick ahead of the pick you get back
They are trying to trade into the top 10
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

ShadeyP

Premiership Player
Jul 1, 2017
3,719
4,370
AFL Club
Adelaide
Port posters think this deal is about Jackson Mead. There won't be a bid on Mead before 16, so Port get to use that on another player. But there could be a bid before 29, and if that happened they'd have to use 29 to match. If they haven't got 29, they match with points from the lower picks, possibly going into deficit for 2020 by a small amount.

So they get a player at 16 + Mead instead of having to use 29 on Mead. Which makes sense. Of course the value of that depends on where their 2020 1st lands.
Finally someone who understands this .
 

Carmo

Premiership Player
Apr 15, 2011
4,067
3,263
SA
AFL Club
Adelaide
Ports trade means it would be good for us to get another first rounder for next year, no SA competition for what's on offer, so would be good to have a couple of goes at it.
 

Pea Nut

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 9, 2013
10,412
12,394
AFL Club
Adelaide
Ports trade means it would be good for us to get another first rounder for next year, no SA competition for what's on offer, so would be good to have a couple of goes at it.
Depends on where our father/son and academy players are tipped to go. It would need to be high end first rounders, or we might be better off trading out of the first round completely.
 

1970crow

Hall of Famer
Jun 7, 2011
30,223
31,696
alice springs
AFL Club
Adelaide
Using 29 on Mead is irrelevant.

They either were using that pick to match the bid, or trading it. Either way it wasn't a live pick for Port.

The big question is why did they spend their 2020 first to upgrade pick 29?

Their 2020 1st alone will likely be worth MORE than they received for the entire deal. Then they gave 29 on top of that!

Usually you give up two later picks to move up the order. Not a pick ahead of the pick you get back
Are you effectively saying they could already get Mead by going into deficit, so in reality all they’ve done is swap 2020 first for 16? In which case, assuming even draft years, they’d need to finish pretty high to be worthwhile. How does paying back the deficit incurred work?
 

Rabman

Club Legend
Nov 22, 2016
1,837
2,319
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
North Adelaide, Arsenal, Inter.
Next years draft is the most compromised draft ever. The 2020 draft is riddled with father/sons or academy players. Will be interesting how we go next year and were it puts us.
 

Scorpus

The Boys Are Sacked!
Apr 16, 2014
34,243
76,536
AFL Club
Adelaide
Are you effectively saying they could already get Mead by going into deficit, so in reality all they’ve done is swap 2020 first for 16? In which case, assuming even draft years, they’d need to finish pretty high to be worthwhile. How does paying back the deficit incurred work?
Let's assume Mead gets bid on the very next pick after their current 18. So pick 19.

That's worth 948 points. With a 20% discount, Port are on the hook for 758 points. Pick 29 is worth 653, add in their picks 67 and 68 and suddenly they have enough to pay for him.

So even if they received a bid as early as 19 they would have been able to match with pick 29 and two picks in the 60s.

The entire value of the trade hinges on Port valuing pick 16 more than their 2020 1st
 

GrommoT

Norm Smith Medallist
Aug 7, 2015
6,666
10,327
AFL Club
Adelaide
Next years draft is the most compromised draft ever. The 2020 draft is riddled with father/sons or academy players. Will be interesting how we go next year and were it puts us.
It might not be as bad as many think it will be.

Normally, with a few FSs/Academy tied players (FSAs) , if clubs bid on them at the appropriate picks, the pool of players available to other clubs remain the same and the order of picks is still just as valuable as if there were no FSA players.

For instance this year, if Green is bid on at pick 3 and is where he's rated - and if GWS is forced to match, the players available at 4,5, 6, ... are still available to other clubs - and it takes GWS out of the picture in r1. It's only if GWS manage to get an extra player before Green (by trading in pick 3) that it then compromises it for other clubs.

So normally, if clubs keep clubs with FSAs honest, the compromising shouldn't be too bad.

In addition, clubs having FSAs could also bid on other clubs with FSAs - say we have Edwards as a FS candidate next but we have a pick before WB so we make a bid on their Ugle-Hagan player, WB would match and this would chew up their r1 pick. Ugle-Hagan was never going to be available to other clubs anyway and this takes out WB in r1 - again leaving other players in the available pool still there.

But... if there are too many clubs with FSAs like next year is looking like, the chance of them getting to double dip increases and so compromise the draft.

So the draft next year might not be as compromised and many are fretting as it will be.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

arrowman

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 27, 2004
10,386
10,163
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Let's assume Mead gets bid on the very next pick after their current 18. So pick 19.

That's worth 948 points. With a 20% discount, Port are on the hook for 758 points. Pick 29 is worth 653, add in their picks 67 and 68 and suddenly they have enough to pay for him.

So even if they received a bid as early as 19 they would have been able to match with pick 29 and two picks in the 60s.

The entire value of the trade hinges on Port valuing pick 16 more than their 2020 1st
The way I see it - and maybe I've missed something:

Before the trade, Port had 12+18+29+scraps. A bid on Mead between 19 and 28 forces them to use 29 (plus some scraps) on Mead.

After, they have 12+16+18+scraps. They get a player, plus they can match a bid on Mead with scraps, admittedly going into a small deficit on 2020. Basically a bonus player at the high end in 2019, on top of Mead.

Now of course if they crash and burn in 2020 that would be costly. But I disagree that "the whole value of the trade" depends on their 2020 first. IMO it's a fair gamble, given they get a guaranteed extra pick on top of Mead in 2019.
 

Scorpus

The Boys Are Sacked!
Apr 16, 2014
34,243
76,536
AFL Club
Adelaide
The way I see it - and maybe I've missed something:

Before the trade, Port had 12+18+29+scraps. A bid on Mead between 19 and 28 forces them to use 29 (plus some scraps) on Mead.

After, they have 12+16+18+scraps. They get a player, plus they can match a bid on Mead with scraps, admittedly going into a small deficit on 2020. Basically a bonus player at the high end in 2019, on top of Mead.

Now of course if they crash and burn in 2020 that would be costly. But I disagree that "the whole value of the trade" depends on their 2020 first. IMO it's a fair gamble, given they get a guaranteed extra pick on top of Mead in 2019.
The bonus player at the high end in 2019 has directly cost them their 2020 first

How did they upgrade from 29 to 16? It cost them that 2020 1st.

It's not a bonus pick given they had a 2020 1st and now they don't.
 

Apsaalooke

Club Legend
Sep 23, 2012
2,478
3,595
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Sturt, Ozark Mountain Daredevils
Next years draft is the most compromised draft ever. The 2020 draft is riddled with father/sons or academy players. Will be interesting how we go next year and were it puts us.
Do they have a highly ranked father son next year so are trying to get rid of their 1st round pick then?
 

Pea Nut

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 9, 2013
10,412
12,394
AFL Club
Adelaide
Do they have a highly ranked father son next year so are trying to get rid of their 1st round pick then?
Schofield, but unless their first round pick next year is very late teens then unlikely he goes that high at this stage. Not that it matters now anyway.
 

Elite Crow

Premium Platinum
Mar 21, 2008
54,873
75,405
adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
I don't think they are ... they will back in their 3 picks from 12 to 18 .
They have identified that this is the sweet spot in a strong draft .
I agree it’s a good spot to be but that Carlton Cat man yesterday says they are trying to get in the top 10 and today this goes down and he reckons it’s part of the plan.
 

kirky

Brownlow Medallist
Dec 29, 2000
11,106
7,934
AFL Club
Adelaide
The bonus player at the high end in 2019 has directly cost them their 2020 first

How did they upgrade from 29 to 16? It cost them that 2020 1st.

It's not a bonus pick given they had a 2020 1st and now they don't.
If Lukosis wants to return to SA next year, they don’t have a first round pick either.
 

arrowman

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 27, 2004
10,386
10,163
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
The bonus player at the high end in 2019 has directly cost them their 2020 first

How did they upgrade from 29 to 16? It cost them that 2020 1st.

It's not a bonus pick given they had a 2020 1st and now they don't.
Oh sure, not denying that. I guess I'm looking at it from the point of view of overall value.

Pick 29 holds/held little value for them, if they were going to use it on Mead and they can get Mead with points from later picks. As for the first - OK, they've effectively upgraded 29 to 16 at the cost of their 2020 first, while (sort of) keeping 29 in "value" terms.

So if their 2020 first is, say in the range of about 9, then it's cost them 9 for 16, which is a loss purely in terms of draft position, yes. And it's very unlikely their 2020 first will be in the 16 range, so yes, it's very likely to be a loss in those terms. But I can see the logic in going for some extra "cream" in 2019 depending on their views on the 2020 draft and the players they have their eye on in both drafts.

You can't make much of a case that it's a good trade in terms of raw draft positions, and maybe if it was me I wouldn't make that trade. But in terms of strategy over a couple of years... maybe.

I don't know if that makes any sense :)
 

ad victoriam

Norm Smith Medallist
Jan 2, 2016
7,506
6,463
Barossa
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
CDFC
Using 29 on Mead is irrelevant.

They either were using that pick to match the bid, or trading it. Either way it wasn't a live pick for Port.

The big question is why did they spend their 2020 first to upgrade pick 29?

Their 2020 1st alone will likely be worth MORE than they received for the entire deal. Then they gave 29 on top of that!

Usually you give up two later picks to move up the order. Not a pick ahead of the pick you get back
They would also be hoping Taj Schofield or Lachie Jones improve giving them a free hit in the 1st rd next year.
 

Scorpus

The Boys Are Sacked!
Apr 16, 2014
34,243
76,536
AFL Club
Adelaide
Oh sure, not denying that. I guess I'm looking at it from the point of view of overall value.

Pick 29 holds/held little value for them, if they were going to use it on Mead and they can get Mead with points from later picks. As for the first - OK, they've effectively upgraded 29 to 16 at the cost of their 2020 first, while (sort of) keeping 29 in "value" terms.

So if their 2020 first is, say in the range of about 9, then it's cost them 9 for 16, which is a loss purely in terms of draft position, yes. And it's very unlikely their 2020 first will be in the 16 range, so yes, it's very likely to be a loss in those terms. But I can see the logic in going for some extra "cream" in 2019 depending on their views on the 2020 draft and the players they have their eye on in both drafts.

You can't make much of a case that it's a good trade in terms of raw draft positions, and maybe if it was me I wouldn't make that trade. But in terms of strategy over a couple of years... maybe.

I don't know if that makes any sense :)
Yeah that's fair. As I said, the value comes from whether Port believe pick 16 this year is better than their 2020 1st.

I suspect Port believe they will make finals next year, which could see their 1st in the 12-14 range. Swapping 14 for 16 is a much of a muchness.

But I have Port missing the finals again, which could have their 2020 1st more around the 6-8 mark. Even with the compromised draft next year, that's a big downgrade
 

Thetrader15

Brownlow Medallist
Oct 16, 2015
14,206
15,500
AFL Club
Adelaide
Finally someone who understands this .
The only issue is they have about 4 later picks they want to use (66, 67, 68, 71), but won't be able to unless they have the space on their list. This would mean they have to have 33 (max) on their list when it comes to the draft so they can use 7 picks at the draft.

They removed Broadbent, Johnson, Frampton, Howard, Ryder and Gray, and added Buzza, so if they started with 38, now have 33, so are in a good spot unless they add someone else to the list.

I like their strategy - 3 kids + Mead then go into the season with 38 unless they like a DFA
 

Top Bottom