Rumour 2024 Hypothetical trade and FA Thread

[Strapping Young Lad]

2024 Picks



2025 Picks

 

[killerspud]

The list still needs fattening with good players & depth.
He is a good player.
He is a best 22 player.
He is versatile.
We dont have to use draft capital.
We have more cash than a nigerian scammer

Those guys dont have nearly as much money as you think they have - if you dont believe me send $45 AUD to my friend in Lagos, Nwanko Mboupo and he will send you a copy of his bank account to show you exactly how much money they dont have

 

[theiaofseed]

Those guys dont have nearly as much money as you think they have - if you dont believe me send $45 AUD to my friend in Lagos, Nwanko Mboupo and he will send you a copy of his bank account to show you exactly how much money they dont have

Is this some sort of long game scam?

 

[theiaofseed]

Clubs were definitely notified . But the problem is the timing. Btw, why aren't the other 14-15 clubs speaking out about it?

Most clubs are muzzled by their bank account

 

[killerspud]

Most clubs are muzzled by their bank account

Because they've fallen victim to Nigerian Scammers, if you don't believe me send $45AUD......

 

[wahawk]

Hawthorn relocating to W.A.

I won’t complain

 

[Platten44]

Are you serious? Everyone should care. What's to stop the AFL introducing some new rule, without any notice, that will negatively affect us in the future? It's absolutely amateur.

Like penalising rushed behinds or changing the ruck rule to negate tall jumping rucks?

 

[hawkmang]

I won’t complain

Works for me too

 

[tommyk72]

Like penalising rushed behinds or changing the ruck rule to negate tall jumping rucks?

No no no. You don’t understand. They’re just changed the ‘interpretation’. Not the rule.

 

[Sonny Hayes]

So many over complicated methods to fix something that can be fixed so simply

Father son - piss off
Academies - run by the league not the clubs and no priority access
Priority picks - LMFAO Get outta here.

Just a clear open draft that isn't constantly being manipulated by an amateur organisation that is constantly trying to plug a hole that everyone saw coming that they couldn't see while 3 more pop up. Best talent goes to the teams that need it most, if clubs really care bout the 'romanticism' (they ****ing don't) let them trade for picks to get these players.

No matter the changes they make 0% chance they don't mess it up, heck they already are by trying to move it on the run instead of just announcing the change with enough time to allow clubs to prepare.

 

[Blackhawk42]

The academy issue is an easy fix IMO.

If you are Gold Coast last season with 3 kids you expect to go in the first round, then you decide if you value them that highly and do your due diligence at the trade table to ensure you have the picks to select them outright.

There is an argument that it wouldn't be worth developing these kids if you don't have get priority access to them.
Rubbish!

You'd have a greater idea of their talent and value, so all you'd need to do is ensure you're ready come draft night.

Alternatively, perhaps you could match a bid within 5 selections, but that shortens with each subsequent bid.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

Like penalising rushed behinds or changing the ruck rule to negate tall jumping rucks?

Or third man in rucks for the ball-ups/throw-ins (Lewis)
Or penalising players who dive on the loose ball to form a pack (Hodge, Mitchell, Sewell)
Or players who "duck" (when their only focus appears to be on who the media calls out - Puopolo, Sicily(!), Moore, now Ginnivan and Watson)
Or blocking trades, incidentally ending careers as a result (Ladson)
Or getting involved in player Salary negotiations (Coniglio) to stop a player leaving as FA.
Or telling clubs pick-purchasing is coming in "next year" - for three consecutive years
Or....lets not even start with MRP.

We have to accept that in the eyes of the AFL - whilst all clubs are equal, some are more equal than others.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Those guys dont have nearly as much money as you think they have - if you dont believe me send $45 AUD to my friend in Lagos, Nwanko Mboupo and he will send you a copy of his bank account to show you exactly how much money they dont have

Alaye mi.

 

[westhawk]

Shai Bolton - what would it take?

Will go to Freo.

 

[burger09]

Call me stupid but...

If a father son or acadamy kid is bid on in the first round.....

You have to pony up a first round pick. Same in the second round and so on.

Not this points bullsh!t.

Too simple?

 

[tl92]

Call me stupid but...

If a father son or acadamy kid is bid on in the first round.....

You have to pony up a first round pick. Same in the second round and so on.

Not this points bullsh!t.

Too simple?

So a bid comes in at Pick 17 for a father son. You have to trade with whoever has pick 18? They’ll hold you to ransom.

 

[Platten44]

So a bid comes in at Pick 17 for a father son. You have to trade with whoever has pick 18? They’ll hold you to ransom.

No, if you rate the father son draft him with your first rounder or really pony up for pick 18 as your getting two first rounders.

 

[Suntory Boss Coffee]

Just make it that you have to have the pick (or better) rather than the pick value. Happy with the discount or whatever.
Walter bid on pick 2 last year. Cool. 20% discount but Gold Coast need pick 4. Not 3 picks in the 20s.

 

[tl92]

No, if you rate the father son draft him with your first rounder or really pony up for pick 18 as your getting two first rounders.

What if your first rounder is pick 1? The simplicity of some of the ideas sound nice but in reality, don’t work.

 

[Bardo State]

I think picks having point values and using them to match is fine...

There were just a few factors which weren't accounted for when giving the picks their values.

One big factor is that the size of draft classes shrunk after they were brought in. The 45-60 portion of the draft has gone from a legitimate place to find players to almost completely unused. Clubs now have more pathways outside the national draft to add players and the value of the back of the draft has been wiped out. Picks need to have their value taper to 0 at like ~40-45, because after that range, it's rare that the next guy on your board won't get through to your next pick, because team values and needs are so differentiated at that point.

Another is that it wasn't factored that the values of picks aren't linear when you add them up. A pick which averages a 100 game player is not equivalent to 4 picks which average 25 game players because you use up 3 extra list spots on speculative players. Each extra pick used to match has an additional cost of a list spot, which should be accounted for, but isn't. I think it would be better if you could have your first matched pick at 100% of it's 'value', the second at 80-85% of it's value and so on. This instantly solves junk pick hoarding.

I actually think it's a shame that the AFL made it so academy selections can only be matched after 40 now. And it will be more of a shame if they make the top 10 'pure'. I like that these kids have these connections to clubs. I like that the Gold Coast will be able to build a club of players who might actually stick around because the local game has been so strong. I think if you stop rewarding pick hoarding by making each additional matched pick reduce in value, remove pick values after 40-45 and reduce the discount (to like ~10% or even 0%, but I prefer a discount), you get a very fair system which still celebrates the development and connection to clubs.

 

[FB19]

I don’t know why people keep complicating it. No discount 2 picks to match max is so simple. For example if Walter is bid on at pick 4, the latest pick you can use is 17 but you would also need pick 18 to have enough points. So it forces a decent first and second round pick to match early bids which is much fairer than a lot of junk picks.
The problem with things like a pick in the same round is the arbitrary nature of round boundaries and what do you need to match pick 18? The above solution is clean and simple.

 

[burger09]

So a bid comes in at Pick 17 for a father son. You have to trade with whoever has pick 18? They’ll hold you to ransom.

Future first
Clubs would have to be well organised in positioning their matching bids.

 

[Mercy Seat]

It is difficult to prove. Even if the AFL did investigate, which is highly unlikely, they would manage to find nothing.

So I know of no hard evidence or proof, but there is an awful lot of smoke. From a wide variety of sources.

Loose lips Izzy Smith even mentioned on radio when he went to Cats the “land deals”, as part of his decision to leave, then had an instagram story about a month later looking for architects who specialised in regional developments.

 

[Judd2Sewell]

Just make it that you have to have the pick (or better) rather than the pick value. Happy with the discount or whatever.
Walter bid on pick 2 last year. Cool. 20% discount but Gold Coast need pick 4. Not 3 picks in the 20s.

That would be impossible to really work around.

I like that teams can stockpile picks and can move out of their draft position, as this encourages trades that can really work in everyone's favour.

It's been said plenty of times in here - but if they just remove the discount then that would solve a huge issue.

Making Academies / NGA system fairer for everyone (in terms of accessing the elite talent) is another matter.

 

[Platten44]

What if your first rounder is pick 1? The simplicity of some of the ideas sound nice but in reality, don’t work.

Then trade pick 19 and something for pick 18

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

Call me stupid but...

If a father son or acadamy kid is bid on in the first round.....

You have to pony up a first round pick. Same in the second round and so on.

Not this points bullsh!t.

Too simple?

Sydney got heeney that way. He was bid on early and they just used pick 18. It's why the system was overhauled in the first place

Sent from my SM-G990E using Tapatalk