Academy Watch

[Panthera]

Barrett has reported on the Footy Show that the worth of father/sons and academy players will be decided by a panel, rule to take effect now (farcical) and will affect this year's academy players. Eddie and co win again.

Moore is rated top 5 pick this draft; if somehow this new bidding process is changed less than three months out (HTF ?), how can the Pies take him with this new bidding system?

MB poster (so salt, grain, etc)

"Barrett was just saying that if "the panel" (which does not yet exist) deems Heeney to be worth more than our first pick (could be #18) , that we might have to give up our second pick as well."

The AFL is a complete farce these days.

How the f*** would an independent panel know what a player is exactly worth as a 17 year old when recruiters only get it right a certain % of the time and they study the kids for years

So, if Heeney for example, turns out to be a bit-part player, do the Swans get their 1st round pick back???

So many anomalies with this it's not even funny

 

[El_Scorcho]

There is no way they'll be making any player worth more than your first rounder, regardless if it's pick 5 or 18. If they start doing that you guys may as well wind up your academy because it's not worth the money.

This could potentially favour you in some occasions. You might get a guy who is probably rated as a 4th rounder who another club is all over and would bid you up to a higher pick, but now they can't.

 

[ZoBlitz]

Falls in line with the AFL's thinking about most decision-making processes: they are always much better when controlled by the AFL.

Having a system where clubs decide the value of a player by bidding is obviously too chaotic and democratic for the AFL to deal with.

 

[dlanod]

If true, I'm not sure they've thought this through....

I think that will be the most true thing written about this.

 

[The Flying Belgian]

+

 

[Swanny10]

+

Not a violent person but that a face I'd love to bloody up.

 

[Kevvo]

My money is on a two person panel: Callum Twomey and Dermott.

"While I have not heard of any of these players, I assume they are elite prospects. Where is my first rounder stamp?"

 

[SizeMatters]

It is definite knee-jerk reaction from the pompous bastard. I hope it all backfires on his beloved Collingwood and they are forced to pay their 2 first picks for the rights of Moore.

 

[JasRulz63]

My money is on a two person panel: Callum Twomey and Dermott.

"While I have not heard of any of these players, I assume they are elite prospects. Where is my first rounder stamp?"

Lucky our academy players aren't Victorian then, or we'd end up with 30 top 5 picks all which are Victorian.

 

[Kevvo]

It is definite knee-jerk reaction from the pompous bastard. I hope it all backfires on his beloved Collingwood and they are forced to pay their 2 first picks for the rights of Moore.

It would be magnificent, but the same clout that made this whole thing happen will stop it from inconveniencing Collingwood.

 

[WhiteLionFeva]

So what exactly do we get from the academy system if this goes through - apart from the trouble and expense of nurturing players for other teams who have sat on their fat arses to poach?

 

[KissKiss]

So what exactly do we get from the academy system if this goes through - apart from the trouble and expense of nurturing players for other teams who have sat on their fat arses to poach?

It might not change a thing. Or we might end up getting players for even cheaper. It all depends on how the committee rates them. So I guess it depends on who is on said committee and how they rate the players

 

[Kevvo]

It might not change a thing. Or we might end up getting players for even cheaper. It all depends on how the committee rates them. So I guess it depends on who is on said committee and how they rate the players

That is definitely true, but it's hard not to be cynical about the makeup of the committee.

It also doesn't sit well with the dismally congratulatory reaction to Chad Wingard effectively refusing to go to GWS. It seems like the AFL is only concerned about fair value when the core of big, Victorian clubs might lose out. When it is an expansion team that misses out, we pat the player on the back for his bravery in distorting the draft.

My biggest problem isn't the idea of this committee. It is the flagrant doublethink.

 

[Dan12]

I actually think the bidding process needs to be altered, but why on earth would there be some independent panel involved? Was putting the value of players in the hands of professional recruiters just too much to handle for them? Surely the people deciding players' value was not the issue.

 

[Old Den]

I actually think the bidding process needs to be altered, but why on earth would there be some independent panel involved? Was putting the value of players in the hands of professional recruiters just too much to handle for them? Surely the people deciding players' value was not the issue.

No....the issue is Sydney sitting on top of the ladder and looking nigh impregnable at full strength after landing Tippett and Franklin in the last 2 years and they will have their hooks into Heeney from their Academy this year for a late first round draft selection AND apparently having an outstanding prospect from their Academy next year.

There was always going to be reaction when Sydney,GWS and the Gold Coast and probably even humble Brisbane started getting dibs on top draft prospects IMO.

 

[jackess]

No....the issue is Sydney sitting on top of the ladder and looking nigh impregnable at full strength after landing Tippett and Franklin in the last 2 years and they will have their hooks into Heeney from their Academy this year for a late first round draft selection AND apparently having an outstanding prospect from their Academy next year.

There was always going to be reaction when Sydney,GWS and the Gold Coast and probably even humble Brisbane started getting dibs on top draft prospects IMO.

The problem is Heeney might end up being a dud and someone like Rockliff might be taken in the 7th round. It's very difficult to tell but I think the current system where the 17 other clubs recruitment teams decided a players worth is a good system and can't see how a panel could do a better job.

 

[iBeng]

The draft itself is, by very definition, a lotto.

Boyd and Patton are both Number 1 drafts but that doesnt mean they are the next Wayne Carey.

 

[Crimso]

The problem is Heeney might end up being a dud and someone like Rockliff might be taken in the 7th round. It's very difficult to tell but I think the current system where the 17 other clubs recruitment teams decided a players worth is a good system and can't see how a panel could do a better job.

Any panel could do a better job than a bunch of professional recruiters, all they need do is watch 3 - 5 mins of highlight reel & read BF! Shit easy!

 

[Old Den]

The problem is Heeney might end up being a dud and someone like Rockliff might be taken in the 7th round. It's very difficult to tell but I think the current system where the 17 other clubs recruitment teams decided a players worth is a good system and can't see how a panel could do a better job.

That's right...right from the start I have said other clubs will pick up good and even elite players later in the draft whether bidding on them or not in the auction.

 

[JasRulz63]

The problem is Heeney might end up being a dud and someone like Rockliff might be taken in the 7th round. It's very difficult to tell but I think the current system where the 17 other clubs recruitment teams decided a players worth is a good system and can't see how a panel could do a better job.

With the previous bidding system you had other clubs deciding values of players, and with free agency compensation you have contract size to use as a measure. This panel however has nothing to base their decisions on that have any sort of validity.

As an example, the panel would've decided Grundy was a top 5 pick (or higher) based on pretty much everything that was in the media, yet he fell to pick 18. If Grundy was a father/son or academy player for Sydney (as an example) under the new system, the panel would deem their first round pick not enough, yet with hindsight he was taken with a pick similar to what will be their first round pick.

 

[whatboutbob]

Do we know that the panel won't make their call only after their current bidding system?

eg GWS bids pick 5 for Heeney
Panel says to Swans: that'll cost you your first two picks
Sydney accepts and takes Heeney at that cost or
Sydney declines and GWS takes Heeney with pick 5

Still not saying that's great, but it makes marginally more sense.

 

[jackess]

Do we know that the panel won't make their call only after their current bidding system?

eg GWS bids pick 5 for Heeney
Panel says to Swans: that'll cost you your first two picks
Sydney accepts and takes Heeney at that cost or
Sydney declines and GWS takes Heeney with pick 5

Still not saying that's great, but it makes marginally more sense.

What if a team bids pick 16 for Dawson and another team bids pick 18; do we have to pay our 2nd, 3rd and 4th round picks for them or just the 2nd round pick for one?

 

[SizeMatters]

so the team that bids gets the better bargain?

 

[whatboutbob]

What if a team bids pick 16 for Dawson and another team bids pick 18 for Hammelman; do we have to pay our 2nd, 3rd and 4th round picks for them or just the 2nd round pick for one?

Did you forget to add the bit in bold?

Regardless, damned if I know. There's just too much we don't know atm. I'm guessing they won't factor in picks a club may use on other father/sons/academy kids though. So for the scenario above they'd say:

Use your 2nd round pick on either Dawson or Hammelmann, but you can't have both because your 3rd and 4th round pick doesn't come close to pick 18's value.

Where it would get super complicated (and again there are gonna be heaps of problems that will crop up with this "solution"), is where the club wants to take multiple academy kids. Can you bundle them? eg in your scenario above, could the club say "we want both so we'll just use our first round pick for both"...

 

[Dan12]

Did you forget to add the bit in bold?

Regardless, damned if I know. There's just too much we don't know atm. I'm guessing they won't factor in picks a club may use on other father/sons/academy kids though. So for the scenario above they'd say:

Use your 2nd round pick on either Dawson or Hammelmann, but you can't have both because your 3rd and 4th round pick doesn't come close to pick 18's value.

Where it would get super complicated (and again there are gonna be heaps of problems that will crop up with this "solution"), is where the club wants to take multiple academy kids. Can you bundle them? eg in your scenario above, could the club say "we want both so we'll just use our first round pick for both"...

If we want to get even more complicated we could trade next year's second round pick for one of them and this year's for the other.

I think the system should allow us to get as many academy kids as possible without getting bargains that are unfair, like getting a player bidded on in the first round for a 3rd or 4th round pick.