List Mgmt. 2021 List Management: Draft, Trade, Free Agency and Academy

[Joose]

For the umpteenth time...just draft and develop our own FFS

With Treacy, Amiss, Roy and Sturt we have the foundations in place. Add Erasmus and we should be sweet.

 

[Ge3ks]

Yeah I'm peeved we didn't grab Horne-Francis.

And Nick Daicos. Not good enough, Belly. No feather for you. Come back, one year.

 

[DragoDelph]

Huh. did not know that.

But under these new rules, clubs with selections in the pre-season draft could take these players and there would be no opportunity for Freo to match with a bid.

“Essendon had a pick in the pre-season draft and had interviewed Roy twice, had they picked him in that pre-season draft, we would have had no ability to match,” Walls said.

Behind the draft part 3: A 196cm forward/ruck from the country

Read how the NAB AFL Draft unfolded from behind the scenes in our four part series

www.fremantlefc.com.au

 

[Joose]

Huh. did not know that.

But under these new rules, clubs with selections in the pre-season draft could take these players and there would be no opportunity for Freo to match with a bid.

“Essendon had a pick in the pre-season draft and had interviewed Roy twice, had they picked him in that pre-season draft, we would have had no ability to match,” Walls said.

Behind the draft part 3: A 196cm forward/ruck from the country

Read how the NAB AFL Draft unfolded from behind the scenes in our four part series

www.fremantlefc.com.au

Smart move by the club. Why the list management team are paid the dollars.

 

[Ge3ks]

Yeah it was good that they knew the Bombers had interviewed him a couple of times. Without that knowledge he would have been sniped from under our nose. Now that would have sucked.

 

[eastfreo75]

Yeah it was good that they knew the Bombers had interviewed him a couple of times. Without that knowledge he would have been sniped from under our nose. Now that would have sucked.

Also, if you rate the kid and believe he deserves a spot on the main list you don’t stuff around.

 

[freodog]

Huh. did not know that.

But under these new rules, clubs with selections in the pre-season draft could take these players and there would be no opportunity for Freo to match with a bid.

“Essendon had a pick in the pre-season draft and had interviewed Roy twice, had they picked him in that pre-season draft, we would have had no ability to match,” Walls said.

Behind the draft part 3: A 196cm forward/ruck from the country

Read how the NAB AFL Draft unfolded from behind the scenes in our four part series

www.fremantlefc.com.au

What a stupid rule. You can match in the main draft, everyone overlooks them then another team can pick them up unopposed even though they have overlooked them. Stupid rule!

 

[Purple Jesus]

He's going to be so good.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

What a stupid rule. You can match in the main draft, everyone overlooks them then another team can pick them up unopposed even though they have overlooked them. Stupid rule!

So to be clear, for NGA you now can match a bid from about 40-60 (which is pretty much a crapshoot), that really limits your list space and draft plans, however, for ‘Northern Academies’ they have access to anyone and everyone so the only planning they have to do is figuring how they can get a top 5 player for 5 picks after 30.

Seemsgood

 

[Van_Dyke]

So to be clear, for NGA you now can match a bid from about 40-60 (which is pretty much a crapshoot), that really limits your list space and draft plans, however, for ‘Northern Academies’ they have access to anyone and everyone so the only planning they have to do is figuring how they can get a top 5 player for 5 picks after 30.

Seemsgood

those 5 picks in the 40’s are clearly more preferable then Sam Darcy or Nick Daicos, jeez snuff

 

[s_wd6]

So to be clear, for NGA you now can match a bid from about 40-60 (which is pretty much a crapshoot), that really limits your list space and draft plans, however, for ‘Northern Academies’ they have access to anyone and everyone so the only planning they have to do is figuring how they can get a top 5 player for 5 picks after 30.

Seemsgood

There's really no advantage to the academies if you're just spending the resources to develop your best kids for other clubs and getting left with essentially your cat b type. If they wanted to reduce the influence of NGAs then matching a bit from 20 onwards is a fine compromise. 40 onwards and the whole rural/metro indigenous is just a huge pisstake

 

[WaywardSonSon]

"Do what you want, do what you want, do it! Ohhhhhhh, ahhhahhhahhhahhhhh!"

Jeepers media team, you've been knocking it out of the park lately, so what was your rationale here?
Why do you hate my ears so?!

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

There's really no advantage to the academies if you're just spending the resources to develop your best kids for other clubs and getting left with essentially your cat b type. If they wanted to reduce the influence of NGAs then matching a bit from 20 onwards is a fine compromise. 40 onwards and the whole rural/metro indigenous is just a huge pisstake

It was the easiest solution to the ‘problem’ that was also the worst solution because it contradicts the whole point of the thing - which is to incentivise clubs to spend resources to help talented kids from remote communities or different cultural backgrounds make the translation to a professional environment (ie Josh Simpson) or just to choose footy over other sports.

Now clubs have close to zero incentive. Sensible solutions:
- Be stricter with the kids in the academy’s (lol at sons of AFL player being allowed in academy’s and kids who have lived in Aus and played footy their whole life)
- Remove discounts
- Maximum of two picks can be used to match a bid
- Top 8 clubs can’t match top 10 bids

I truly hate the idiots running the AFL sometimes

 

[Van_Dyke]

Remove discounts
- Maximum of two picks can be used to match a bid

I truly don’t understand why discounts occur in the first place, the entire concept of having the rights to a player who another club has chosen at their pick should be considered enough of a good deal as is.

have they gone back to the rule of only bringing in as many picks to the night as you have list spots? that kinda helped for a bit.

I truly hate the idiots running the AFL sometimes

I think the dumbest thing for me is that the clubs who will have profited the most from this with high picks (Thomas, quaynor for example) will have spent (relatively) less time actually developing these kids before hand. North only had Thomas as part of their system for 2 years or so, and was seemingly on track to make it anyway, but with the changes will disincentivise clubs trying to develop the Josh Simpson types over a longer time frame

 

[Alfonz]

It was the easiest solution to the ‘problem’ that was also the worst solution because it contradicts the whole point of the thing - which is to incentivise clubs to spend resources to help talented kids from remote communities or different cultural backgrounds make the translation to a professional environment (ie Josh Simpson) or just to choose footy over other sports.

Now clubs have close to zero incentive. Sensible solutions:
- Be stricter with the kids in the academy’s (lol at sons of AFL player being allowed in academy’s and kids who have lived in Aus and played footy their whole life)
- Remove discounts
- Maximum of two picks can be used to match a bid
- Top 8 clubs can’t match top 10 bids

I truly hate the idiots running the AFL sometimes

It is beyond ridiculous. Most of the stupid things the AFL does (e.g. Carlton v Richmond to open every season) aren't really that important. But this is one where it really makes me mad. The NGA's were supposed to be a means to help out kids who really needed it.

I reckon the powerful clubs like WC and Collingwood are the ones who have squashed it. WC's history with indigenous players is nowhere near that of Freo's. They clearly don't put in the effort, nor do they want to, with the NGA. Our NGA kids always smash them, and their effort with the NGA is so poor that they let someone like Arthur Jones slip through. If the AFL simply put in the better solutions like you listed, then clubs like WC are still going to complain.

I hope we just keep putting in as much effort as possible, even if we unearth talents that are too good for us to draft. Build up a strong rapport and they will come back once their contract is up. Let's see what happens with Motlop. Should also be hiding players somehow. Easier said than done, because game time is crucial to assess them. At the very least we should get them to tank their combine testing and interviews.

 

[Taylor]

NGAs don't exist to direct new talent groups towards the AFL. They are the direct response to Northern clubs having priority access to AFL talent and people like McGuire, love him or hate him, kicking up a massive stink over it not being fair to potentially give an extra first round pick to the likes of GWS, Sydney, GCS each year.

Well he is gone now so the system goes back to what it was intended to do, add extra talent to the Northern teams to boost their competitiveness while they haemorrhage non local players.

Every time we talk about it the AFL reacts with a change that makes the advantages clubs have already received stronger and future opportunities lesser.

Stop being upset about it.

There isn't actually a reason for us to have access to any players except to keep up with other clubs having access to players.

The side effect of us getting worked up over losing out on our equalisation method will be that our father son picks will lose their advantage in the future.

The solution isn't to manipulate how the system is corrupted to make the corruption more fair, its to fix the need for it. Clubs like GWS, Port, Freo, GCS should have had priority access to players for 30 years until their father son pool was at the level of the rest of the league but then disappear.

I might work out how many players each club has in the Father Son production age range, which will be roughly 40 to 60 and over 100 games, to demonstrate where each club sits.

 

[theGav56]

NGAs don't exist to direct new talent groups towards the AFL. They are the direct response to Northern clubs having priority access to AFL talent and people like McGuire, love him or hate him, kicking up a massive stink over it not being fair to potentially give an extra first round pick to the likes of GWS, Sydney, GCS each year.

Well he is gone now so the system goes back to what it was intended to do, add extra talent to the Northern teams to boost their competitiveness while they haemorrhage non local players.

Every time we talk about it the AFL reacts with a change that makes the advantages clubs have already received stronger and future opportunities lesser.

Stop being upset about it.

There isn't actually a reason for us to have access to any players except to keep up with other clubs having access to players.

The side effect of us getting worked up over losing out on our equalisation method will be that our father son picks will lose their advantage in the future.

The solution isn't to manipulate how the system is corrupted to make the corruption more fair, its to fix the need for it. Clubs like GWS, Port, Freo, GCS should have had priority access to players for 30 years until their father son pool was at the level of the rest of the league but then disappear.

I might work out how many players each club has in the Father Son production age range, which will be roughly 40 to 60 and over 100 games, to demonstrate where each club sits.

One of the guiding principles the AFL must use to underpin it's rules and regulations is equalisation. F/S undermines this, and while Academies may also do this, they can be regulated.

F/S begins with an unequal playing field and makes only a gesture towards mitigating that.

Finding the means to support f/s and Academy initiatives without creating significant advantage of disadvantage is core to the principles of sport.

 

[apuchar]

I just think if you stop allowing clubs to get rid of high picks and use junk picks on academy f&S it wouldn't be such an ssue. I don't care if a northern state gets priority access to a local lkd or a club gets priority access to a F&S, it is the price they pay that. I have a problem with. They should be required to pay a fair price, not be able to manipulate it to get 2 first round talents because of it. The fact that it happens most years in the northern states, is the problem

 

[Taylor]

The points wouldn't matter if clubs could trade in as many picks at the draft as they wanted.


We could trade bulk late picks to an academy club for their first round pick, benefits flow.

 

[Lach72]

You could fix this easily.
Clubs must use a pick within a maximum of 5 picks of where a bid is taken.

So Collingwood must use a pick no later than 9 to get access to Daicos.
Darcy must have pick 7 used on him.

If we wanted Motlop we must use pick 32 on him.
That values the kid within a fair range of where he is bid on and the club can make a choice whether to match.

The priority access is the benefit, not the discount.
This then applies to father son, and all academy bids

If you wanted to restrict it, do it for picks below 36...then have points or something

 

[kuepper]

It is beyond ridiculous. Most of the stupid things the AFL does (e.g. Carlton v Richmond to open every season) aren't really that important. But this is one where it really makes me mad. The NGA's were supposed to be a means to help out kids who really needed it.

I reckon the powerful clubs like WC and Collingwood are the ones who have squashed it. WC's history with indigenous players is nowhere near that of Freo's. They clearly don't put in the effort, nor do they want to, with the NGA. Our NGA kids always smash them, and their effort with the NGA is so poor that they let someone like Arthur Jones slip through. If the AFL simply put in the better solutions like you listed, then clubs like WC are still going to complain.

I hope we just keep putting in as much effort as possible, even if we unearth talents that are too good for us to draft. Build up a strong rapport and they will come back once their contract is up. Let's see what happens with Motlop. Should also be hiding players somehow. Easier said than done, because game time is crucial to assess them. At the very least we should get them to tank their combine testing and interviews.

Interesting anecdote re: NGA zones, direct from past management. - when this originally raised there were 2 in WA - Pilbara and Kimbeley allocated by AFL to WA clubs.

To decide who got which one, was left to clubs to decide - and quite clearly Kimberley had the playing stocks and heritage, vs Pilbara with neither. If the clubs couldnt agree, a coin toss would be made as fairest option.

Fremantle walked into the meeting with WAFC/West Coast - and they were asked preference, and West Coast nominated they preferred Pilbara - as great marketing opportunities with major sponsor BHP. Fremantle, barley containing glee "reluctantly'' agreed.

Fast forward a few years and the realistion of what occurred - and the impact to playing list, and yes those campaigners down the road bleated and demanded reform.

I guess that's the difference between a football club and a football business.

 

[Taylor]

You could fix this easily.
Clubs must use a pick within a maximum of 5 picks of where a bid is taken.

So Collingwood must use a pick no later than 9 to get access to Daicos.
Darcy must have pick 7 used on him.

If we wanted Motlop we must use pick 32 on him.
That values the kid within a fair range of where he is bid on and the club can make a choice whether to match.

The priority access is the benefit, not the discount.
This then applies to father son, and all academy bids

If you wanted to restrict it, do it for picks below 36...then have points or something

I still want to be able to pick up Pavs and Mundys for half a decade with junk picks though. That's when it's our turn to be fair.

 

[Daddoo]

For the umpteenth time...just draft and develop our own FFS

With Treacy, Amiss, Roy and Sturt we have the foundations in place. Add Erasmus and we should be sweet.

100%

Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

Without checking, I’d be pretty positive no club has ever won a GF with purely drafted players. You need a core of players you’ve drafted (I’d argue we have that considering the talent on the list under 25), then you need to top up with players that fill a need.

Dee’s had May, Lever and Brown
Tigers had Lynch and Prestia
WC came must have been close I think but they didn’t draft Kennedy

 

[Bender571]

Without checking, I’d be pretty positive no club has ever won a GF with purely drafted players. You need a core of players you’ve drafted (I’d argue we have that considering the talent on the list under 25), then you need to top up with players that fill a need.

Dee’s had May, Lever and Brown
Tigers had Lynch and Prestia
WC came must have been close I think but they didn’t draft Kennedy

WC had Redden, Yeo, Cripps, Kennedy, Vardy, and Jetta. Hutching was re-drafted