News AFL overhauls Academy and FS bid matching, discussing draft lockout

[Keystone agony]

Imo FA is killing melbourne based sides just about as much as anything FS/Academies are

Although they do need to be altered

It would just be hard to see say Carlton pick up Nick Daicos and then clubs not putting in as many resources to academies

I think the AFL needs to run the academies though, probably just thoae in NSW/QLD and then those players are in the open pool of the draft

 

[Miller1971]

Collingwood have drafted something like 16 father sons in 33 years. basically one ever 2 years. granted most of them aren't going to be superstars but I wonder if you asked the list manager at Collingwood if he would prefer discounted and loyal draftees every 2 years or if he would prefer to draft normally which one he'd choose.

I'm not collingwood apologist, but that probably just shows they got a little caught up in nostalgia as opposed to any huge advantage.

Players they have taken F/S and Games played

Shephard -16
Hug - 0
Oborne - 5
Davis - 71
R.Shaw - 94 (Pick 18)
J.Cloke - 76 (Pick 19)
C.Cloke - 21
B.Shaw - 0 (Pick 32, widely touted as a Top 5 pick!)
H.Shaw - 173
T.Cloke - 246
Barham - 7
Moore - 190 (Pick9)
C.Brown - 70(!)
T.Brown - 27
J.Daicos - 148 (Pick 57, no bids)
Kelly - 5
N.Daicos - 92 (Pick 4)

17 players drafted - 8 complete busts, 2 went on to better careers elsewhere. 5 Premiership players in Collingwood colours and 3 x Best & Fairests

I don't recall the circumstances of why R.Shaw and J.Cloke were taken so early in the draft (?)

Weirdly, out of 17 of them 10 came from 4 families

 

[Keystone agony]

There’s just no need for compensation it’s enough getting a guy off your books that’s your compensation

Most players the clubs want to keep

GWS with Jezza GC with Lynch and May

Gold coast wouldve been in a hole had they not been compensated

It will just kill the ordinary clubs even more, youll have a 2 tier comp with maybe 1-2 melb clubs in the top tier

 

[Dogflogger]

There’s just no need for compensation it’s enough getting a guy off your books that’s your compensation

wouldn't having my money on your books as a poorly run club with bad players actually be a negative since you still have to pay 95% of the salary cap to your players? I can see the positive of having cap space if your team can actually trade someone in without completely overpaying or having to just choose a player looking for one more contract before retiring.

 

[Dogflogger]

I'm not collingwood apologist, but that probably just shows they got a little caught up in nostalgia as opposed to any huge advantage.

Players they have taken F/S and Games played

Shephard -16
Hug - 0
Oborne - 5
Davis - 71
R.Shaw - 94 (Pick 18)
J.Cloke - 76 (Pick 19)
C.Cloke - 21
B.Shaw - 0 (Pick 32, widely touted as a Top 5 pick!)
H.Shaw - 173
T.Cloke - 246
Barham - 7
Moore - 190 (Pick9)
C.Brown - 70(!)
T.Brown - 27
J.Daicos - 148 (Pick 57, no bids)
Kelly - 5
N.Daicos - 92 (Pick 4)

17 players drafted - 8 complete busts, 2 went on to better careers elsewhere. 5 Premiership players in Collingwood colours and 3 x Best & Fairests

I don't recall the circumstances of why R.Shaw and J.Cloke were taken so early in the draft (?)

Weirdly, out of 17 of them 10 came from 4 families

so do you think from a list managing point of view having these discounted draftees helps them manage a list?

 

[MPMonkeys]

It shouldn’t happen at all, and that’s why there’s a need for academies as vic players can just do this rubbish

It doesn't happen. Perkins is just one example out of thousands of draftees from the past decade. But even then, he was never really tested.

There has not been one single instance of a player not going to his drafted club because he didn't want to leave his home state. Thats from 100 draftees (inc PSD and Rookie) per year over the past 20 years.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

It doesn't happen. Perkins is just one example out of thousands of draftees from the past decade. But even then, he was never really tested.

There has not been one single instance of a player not going to his drafted club because he didn't want to leave his home state. Thats from 100 draftees (inc PSD and Rookie) per year over the past 20 years.

It happens every year there’s a fair portion of draftees that indicate they will seek a trade as soon as possible if drafted. Northern clubs are limited who they can take unlike Vic clubs

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Most players the clubs want to keep

GWS with Jezza GC with Lynch and May

Gold coast wouldve been in a hole had they not been compensated

It will just kill the ordinary clubs even more, youll have a 2 tier comp with maybe 1-2 melb clubs in the top tier

Works fine in other sports not having “compensation” it’s Free agency for a reason. They have done their due at that club they get to go and your club gets a spare x in your cap to spend

 

[Dogflogger]

Works fine in other sports not having “compensation” it’s Free agency for a reason. They have done their due at that club they get to go and your club gets a spare x in your cap to spend

How exactly is that making a team down the bottom of the ladder better?
what are they spending that spare cap space on?

 

[Keystone agony]

Works fine in other sports not having “compensation” it’s Free agency for a reason. They have done their due at that club they get to go and your club gets a spare x in your cap to spend

How are Carlton going to be when TDK and Silvagni leave with no compensation?

How are eagles going to be with Allen and no compensation

Draper at the dons with no compensation

Its already taking longer from bottom to top for melb sides. This will only mean it takes even longer, these players are leaving mostly for successful sides (Only TDK is money)

Scrap FA entirely, PA wont allow it

 

[bluebaggerjuls]

How exactly is that making a team down the bottom of the ladder better?
what are they spending that spare cap space on?

Because teams are being encouraged to let mature age players leave because they are getting a pick in return which values them much higher than they are

 

[Keystone agony]

Because teams are being encouraged to let mature age players leave because they are getting a pick in return which values them much higher than they are

You guys want to keep both Silvangi and TDK

Essendon want to keep Draper

All have been offered deals by their current clubs

So that just isnt true

Stkilda wanted to keep Battle, offered him, the best deal he couldve got

 

[threenewpadlocks]

Yes, we got Dunkley the same year as Ashcroft and Fletcher, but we had pushed picks from 2021 in to 2022 to help achieve this, as well as trading our future first and second round picks from 2023 back in to 2022.

There is a hell of a lot of handwaving away?

You can't just say "oh we pushed back picks" when the inherent arbitrage of an exchange rate between live pick value and DVI pick value is precisely the criticism here

And being accused of bias I want to recognise we did the exact same thing with e.g. JUH and Treloar trade.

"but we had pushed picks from 2021 in to 2022 to help achieve this" is by its very nature the thing being criticised here.

Lets try and look at this objectivel.

What you ended up with vs. the natural draft position if no trades or no bidding element.

2021-2023 you came top 6, top 4 and top 2.

So you would have had three 1st round draft picks in the late teens and four 2nd round draft picks in mid 30's (McStay compensation).

All we can do is do a comparison if you had never made a trade or had any bidding eligible players

2021: Pick 16 (Wilmot). Ignoring Lohmann pick 20 as that was due to trading out a similar pick from 2020
2022: Pick 2, Pick 12, Dunkley (taking what you traded out as its reality worth and not its DVI worth, his trade value in a straight about pick 12 as well. I think objectively as a footballer he was worth more than that but we had a market of 1, out of contract, supply/demand etc. so take that pick 12 for what it is.)
2023: Pick 31: Morris

Lets cancel out one of the 1st round pick (Wilmot) and one of the best 2nd round picks (Morris, though you still upgraded this from your "natural" mid 30's 2nd round pick from being a finals team to pick 31, which is a non-finals team 2nd round pick value).

TL;DR

So in effect, for the price of:

2 late teens picks
3 mid 30's picks:

You were able to get pick 2, pick 12, and pick 12.

That's it. that's the reality.

You can hand wave it away but what occurred vs. the natural operation of the draft where you have your natural picks being bad as you finished top 6, top 4 and top 2 and shouldn't be getting good players anyway naturally if the draft operated 'purely' is kind of incredible.

 

[maskmcgee]

The problem is free agency is supposed to be all about money but its only used to get success. So fix this, the player declares they want to become a free agent, and how many years contract they want, every club can then bid for the player, and the highest bid automatically gets them for that length of time. And its enforced to be accurate, so Allen can't go to Brisbane and say 'To make sure nobody else bids I'll say I want a 12 year contract but I'll retire after 6', that money will be on their salary cap for the entire length of the contract.

 

[mpal6]

2021: Pick 16 (Wilmot). Ignoring Lohmann pick 20 as that was due to trading out a similar pick from 2020
2022: Pick 2, Pick 12, Dunkley (taking what you traded out as its reality worth and not its DVI worth, his trade value in a straight about pick 12 as well. I think objectively as a footballer he was worth more than that but we had a market of 1, out of contract, supply/demand etc. so take that pick 12 for what it is.)
2023: Pick 31: Morris

Lets cancel out one of the 1st round pick (Wilmot) and one of the best 2nd round picks (Morris, though you still upgraded this from your "natural" mid 30's 2nd round pick from being a finals team to pick 31, which is a non-finals team 2nd round pick value).

TL;DR

So in effect, for the price of:

2 late teens picks
3 mid 30's picks:

You were able to get pick 2, pick 12, and pick 12.

That's it. that's the reality.

You can hand wave it away but what occurred vs. the natural operation of the draft where you have your natural picks being bad as you finished top 6, top 4 and top 2 and shouldn't be getting good players anyway naturally if the draft operated 'purely' is kind of incredible.

I wouldn't worry about Dunkley scenario, it's a trade and players always go unders/overs/par. Dawson got traded for unders from Swans, Suns got unders many times for a long list of players who've exited their club - it happens.

Pick 2 and 12 for Ashcroft and Fletcher - both father sons. Of course that's the system we had and if we don't trade down to accumulate points to match the 2 players, we need to get our heads read. I don't understand your teeth gnashing, are we supposed to somehow not use the system/points/pick match that's on offer to get the talent that wanted to join our club and just let them go?

It's the same bloody system that netted
pick 1 2020 - Jamarra Ugle-Hagan
pick 2 2021 - Sam Darcy
pick 15 2023 - Jordan Croft

All KPPs, you kept picking away for late points gathering picks as well.

 

[maskmcgee]

As for bids here's an idea. Last year Melbourne bid on Ashcroft at pick 5. Brisbane then have to trade to get either pick 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9. And for every pick off they have to give up another draft pick. They get 5 they can obviously just draft him. They get pick 6, they also need to give up a 4th round pick. 7, a 3rd round pick, up til 9, they have to also give up another first round pick. If they can't get one of those 5 picks, they can't get him. So in a situation where a club has pick 1 and a father son who is expected to go at the top of the draft, they better think carefully weather they want to get the son or try double dipping and lose.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

I wouldn't worry about Dunkley scenario, it's a trade and players always go unders/overs/par. Dawson got traded for unders from Swans, Suns got unders many times for a long list of players who've exited their club - it happens.

Pick 2 and 12 for Ashcroft and Fletcher - both father sons. Of course that's the system we had and if we don't trade down to accumulate points to match the 2 players, we need to get our heads read. I don't understand your teeth gnashing, are we supposed to somehow not use the system/points/pick match that's on offer to get the talent that wanted to join our club and just let them go?

It's the same bloody system that netted
pick 1 2020 - Jamarra Ugle-Hagan
pick 2 2021 - Sam Darcy
pick 15 2023 - Jordan Croft

All KPPs, you kept picking away for late points gathering picks as well.

I'm still making the point that you were able to use the arbitrage of draft point systems over a three year period with a mixture of current and future picks going back and forth to trade in Dunkley. For the sake of argument if you were forced to use a single pick for Dunkley you would have found a way to get a single pick just after pick 10ish for a similar net draft position, then traded that to us.

I think Dunkley as a footballer was worth more than that pick ~12 (having just come off winning our B&F that very season). But I'm just making the point you outlaid picks worth pick 12 yet still had the points to match 2+12 that very same season.

Nobody is saying that Brisbane shouldn't attempt within the system to maximise talent or recruit in such a way that maximises future wins. Every club would think the same way, and that just proves that for 10 years the DVI points curve was wildly incorrect in the true valuation of draft picks. Just that with more top-end F/S and Academy players, especially when considering matching Hipwood and Keays for junk picks in one year before and the other Ashcroft since, Brisbane were able to benefit probably the most of any club (with Dogs probably second).

And for our picks: Yes, I made clear in that post that I recognise thatthat:

And being accused of bias I want to recognise we did the exact same thing with e.g. JUH and Treloar trade.

 

[longdonkey]

It happens almost every year.

We specifically draft Vic Country guys to avoid the Melbourne go home factor and the media sprouts it as the Hinkley factor.

 

[Elixuh]

We specifically draft Vic Country guys to avoid the Melbourne go home factor and the media sprouts it as the Hinkley factor.

Yup. Brisbane has a draft criteria and strategy which was formalised by David Noble (albeit we had already started down that track post-Schache) which is centred around the fact that every year we can’t draft best available because some prospects don’t want to go interstate.

 

[longdonkey]

I'm not collingwood apologist, but that probably just shows they got a little caught up in nostalgia as opposed to any huge advantage.

Players they have taken F/S and Games played

Shephard -16
Hug - 0
Oborne - 5
Davis - 71
R.Shaw - 94 (Pick 18)
J.Cloke - 76 (Pick 19)
C.Cloke - 21
B.Shaw - 0 (Pick 32, widely touted as a Top 5 pick!)
H.Shaw - 173
T.Cloke - 246
Barham - 7
Moore - 190 (Pick9)
C.Brown - 70(!)
T.Brown - 27
J.Daicos - 148 (Pick 57, no bids)
Kelly - 5
N.Daicos - 92 (Pick 4)

17 players drafted - 8 complete busts, 2 went on to better careers elsewhere. 5 Premiership players in Collingwood colours and 3 x Best & Fairests

I don't recall the circumstances of why R.Shaw and J.Cloke were taken so early in the draft (?)

Weirdly, out of 17 of them 10 came from 4 families

So that is 1241 games - just to show how historically this has favoured Vic based sides I'll compare it to Port and I'd say we have done better than most non-Vic teams with father son picks

Brett Ebert - 166 games
Jackson Mead - 63 games
Trent Burgoyne - 0 games
Taj Schofield - 0 games
Jase Burgoyne - 56 games

So that is a total of 285 games. Tom Hawkins played 342 games himself.

This has been a massive advantage to Vic based teams.

 

[mpal6]

As for bids here's an idea. Last year Melbourne bid on Ashcroft at pick 5. Brisbane then have to trade to get either pick 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9. And for every pick off they have to give up another draft pick. They get 5 they can obviously just draft him. They get pick 6, they also need to give up a 4th round pick. 7, a 3rd round pick, up til 9, they have to also give up another first round pick. If they can't get one of those 5 picks, they can't get him. So in a situation where a club has pick 1 and a father son who is expected to go at the top of the draft, they better think carefully weather they want to get the son or try double dipping and lose.

As long as that system is applicable for every single scenario out there - Father Son, NGA, Academy etc. I'm all for it. Clubs will refuse to gamble or mortgage their future picks that far so the system will become archaic and die at some point.

Also, the same system should be extended to priority picks allocation as well. If you lose a player, you'll get a % boost in your salary cap - feel free to use it to attract talent from elsewhere. No more band 1/2/3 picks for any club for losing their restricted/unrestricted free agents. It's free agency after all so clubs can't in turn pollute the draft.

 

[Keystone agony]

So that is 1241 games - just to show how historically this has favoured Vic based sides I'll compare it to Port and I'd say we have done better than most non-Vic teams with father son picks

Brett Ebert - 166 games
Jackson Mead - 63 games
Trent Burgoyne - 0 games
Taj Schofield - 0 games
Jase Burgoyne - 56 games

So that is a total of 285 games. Tom Hawkins played 342 games himself.

This has been a massive advantage to Vic based teams.

Its partly the reason why the cats and pies have been successful in the last decade or so

Dont think the dons, north, blues, saints, dees have had as much quality

Its the sole reason its propped up the dogs

If your a vic club and dont get the quality in FS your in big trouble


Port are in a bit of trouble for a bit now. Mainly because the cross town rivals are about to be considered a destination/future success club, which will have players more often than not and most of the time pick adelaide over port (Draper and Ah Chee) could be examples this year, both are free draft capital wise. Also Butters loss

 

[Dogflogger]

So that is 1241 games - just to show how historically this has favoured Vic based sides I'll compare it to Port and I'd say we have done better than most non-Vic teams with father son picks

Brett Ebert - 166 games
Jackson Mead - 63 games
Trent Burgoyne - 0 games
Taj Schofield - 0 games
Jase Burgoyne - 56 games

So that is a total of 285 games. Tom Hawkins played 342 games himself.

This has been a massive advantage to Vic based teams.

But you gotta remember not all of them are superstars so the effect is heavily exaggerated
i mean its not like even the duds are discounted right?

 

[longdonkey]

But you gotta remember not all of them are superstars so the effect is heavily exaggerated
i mean its not like even the duds are discounted right?

Every team will have their duds and even more have many players that will never get close to making an AFL list so its a matter of luck and development. But to be speaking about stopping the ability to nominate father/son picks now after 20 years where nearly every team has the ability to have players eligible borders on a conspiracy.

 

[Dogflogger]

Every team will have their duds and even more have many players that will never get close to making an AFL list so its a matter of luck and development. But to be speaking about stopping the ability to nominate father/son picks now after 20 years where nearly every team has the ability to have players eligible borders on a conspiracy.

It really depends on if you wanna keep watching a league where success is heavily linked to genetic luck. How many father sons have won premierships in the last 20 years? and if those teams didn't get those players on discount could they have built the list they won with?