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

[stavro#4]

What's fair value anyway? what's fair value if you happen to take Tom McCartin mortgaging 2 draft values worth of points and then he goes bust with concussions.

There is fair value and there is outrageous value which is what most of them are suggesting here. Oh take 2 years worth of firsts, trade your players, pillage your list to get within 5 picks - it's just looney town ideas for a brand new draft prospect who may or may not be successful in the end. He could be Daicos, Ashcroft or he could be Jack Watts.

THATS THE POINT!!!!!

If you value him that highly. You make the trade. That’s FAIR. What happens there after is irrelevant. That’s football.

See Paddy McCartin.

The entire issue is that clubs haven’t had to pay fair value for the access, the alternative right now is removing the access.


If your only option was to get pick 2 to draft Will, what do you think it would have cost you?

Multiple firsts and a good player

 

[mpal6]

THATS THE POINT!!!!!

If you value him that highly. You make the trade. That’s FAIR. What happens there after is irrelevant. That’s football.

See Paddy McCartin.

The entire issue is that clubs haven’t had to pay fair value for the access, the alternative right now is removing the access.


If your only option was to get pick 2 to draft Will, what do you think it would have cost you?

Multiple firsts and a good player

All of a sudden I need to find Pick 2 for Will, when prior to that Dogs didn't had to find pick 2 for Darcy or Pies needed to find pick 4 for Daicos. Mate, you just a have a big problem as the benefit suddenly started flowing our way as well - as long as we didn't get anything and it stayed Victoria centric like prior, you didn't have a problem with it.

 

[stavro#4]

No it's not. It's the same father son system which every single club has benefited from. We struck gold 3/3 in recent years in Ashrcrofts, Fletcher after 20 years of nothing prior to that and you want a knee jerk change.

I wonder why you didn't make any noise when Daicoses, Darcy, Libba, Cloke etc where all getting funneled through to Vic clubs. Why is this such a big issue now I wonder.

We have been complaining the entire time. It’s been a multi year issue that we have been on the front foot about.

Our presentation on the issue was how the current draft rules are creating a divide similar to the pre draft rules in the 80s involving zones.

My club would like it scrapped. My solution is a within 5 pick alternative that allows you to still take Ashcroft - but you would need to pay market value for the pick.

 

[Tom14]

Will was 2 and Levi was 5 in a live draft.

How did Adelaide go from bottom to top without any of these RORTS. Weird huh.

Croms have a first round father son rort, thank goodness. Inshallah the 20ish year streak of a rort team winnning the flag will continue

 

[Blackas87]

Unless you have another first round pick, say via compo and you can push that back.

Which is what you said.

So fair value is never paid. You just create a deficit that you can keep sliding back until you get to a draft and decided you have no interest (let’s say this year) and clear your deficit.

It doesn’t allow top talent back to struggling clubs and it doesn’t equate to say Brisbane giving up anything significant

Brisbane doesn’t get to decide when they have no interest though.

They could be bottom 4 next year and moving pick 4 to pick 18.

Struggling clubs are only moving 1 spot back, it’s not a significant step back especially when looking back at drafts it’s never a correct order. The best players could be Fyfe at pick 17 or Dangerfield at 7 ect…

The academies are just to allow NSW and Queensland clubs to acquire local talent where as Vic, SA and WA clubs can do much easier.

There has been plenty of times where Vic, SA and WA clubs have overlooked intestate talent to draft local, this is just allowing another player from another state to remain home.

 

[stavro#4]

Brisbane doesn’t get to decide when they have no interest though.

They could be bottom 4 next year and moving pick 4 to pick 18.

Struggling clubs are only moving 1 spot back, it’s not a significant step back especially when looking back at drafts it’s never a correct order. The best players could be Fyfe at pick 17 or Dangerfield at 7 ect…

The academies are just to allow NSW and Queensland clubs to acquire local talent where as Vic, SA and WA clubs can do much easier.

There has been plenty of times where Vic, SA and WA clubs have overlooked intestate talent to draft local, this is just allowing another player from another state to remain home.

The issue is the cost to access. All you are doing is letting them pick and choose when they access and making payment 12 months later.

Brisbane haven’t missed the finals since 2018 as an example. It’s likely they never pay fair value for the access to top 5 talents.

It has no impact on today.

 

[go_the_dockers]

Struggling clubs are only moving 1 spot back, it’s not a significant step back especially when looking back at drafts it’s never a correct order. The best players could be Fyfe at pick 17 or Dangerfield at 7 ect…

1 pick is not a big issue, it is when you have years like this when you have 5 of the top 10 not available to all clubs that it becomes a big problem.

The new point system is a lot better, and at least GC have multiple first round picks to match the 3 players they have.

If they keep those picks, and don't trade them for later picks then you know the point system is working.

 

[Tom14]

Croms have a first round father son rort, thank goodness. Inshallah the 20ish year streak of a rort team winnning the flag will continue

Finalists by RORTS:

Crows: Michalanney F/S; Tex under the dodgy NSW scholarship program that preceded the academies. An extra home game due to Gather Round.

Pies: Pendles (priority pick was Dale Thomas, but the extra pick was pendles), Moore, Daicos x2, Quaynor.

Geelong: Best natural advantage due to fixture in the comp, COTTON ON and Rhys Stanley's farm. Notice no father sons left and none on the horizon so makes sense why C Scott is now anti Father son, their natural advantages will be untouched.

Lions: Andrews, Ashcroft x 2, Hipwood, Fletcher, Marshall.

GIANTS: Less than you would think - start up concessions still relevant for Toby Greene and Coniglio (I think), and Tom Green is the big academy player.

Hawks: Calsher Dear. They also RORTED the lions out of a draft pick for Brandon Ryan because Gunners needed a compassionate trade back to them.

Freo: Sandgroper chip on shoulder = biggest RORT of all. Brandon Walker NGA but isn't very good and hasn't played all year. Of course they got another big RORT this year - Norf sold them a home game so that got them in the 8. Counts as a RORT premiership imo.

Gold Coast and the bulldogs speak for themselves, perhaps the greatest rort accumulators in the game today.


We RORT-enjoyers can't lose this year

 

[Blackas87]

The issue is the cost to access. All you are doing is letting them pick and choose when they access and making payment 12 months later.

Brisbane haven’t missed the finals since 2018 as an example. It’s likely they never pay fair value for the access to top 5 talents.

It has no impact on today.

I disagree, they keep moving their position back in the draft.

They get one top 5 player but 3-4 years of getting pick 18 if they remain a finals side. 3-4 years of all 17 other clubs getting a preference over them.

 

[Elixuh]

1 pick is not a big issue, it is when you have years like this when you have 5 of the top 10 not available to all clubs that it becomes a big problem.

The new point system is a lot better, and at least GC have multiple first round picks to match the 3 players they have.

If they keep those picks, and don't trade them for later picks then you know the point system is working.

Pre-academies was this an issue?

 

[Tom14]

Pre-academies was this an issue?

On a totally different topic it is very funny that the Freo team of 2013-15 misses out on being a rort team because they traded away their 2001 priority pick to Hawthorn (missing out on Hodge/Ball/Judd).

 

[go_the_dockers]

Pre-academies was this an issue?

I don't think so. I think at worse it was 3 or 4 players in the top 20 but that was very rare.

Even with academies, it has only been a big issue since they started producing more talent.

 

[Blackas87]

1 pick is not a big issue, it is when you have years like this when you have 5 of the top 10 not available to all clubs that it becomes a big problem.

The new point system is a lot better, and at least GC have multiple first round picks to match the 3 players they have.

If they keep those picks, and don't trade them for later picks then you know the point system is working.

Top 10 players aren’t available to All clubs, Fremantle for example won’t have access to top 10 players this year.

But that’s why I said a maximum of 20 position deficit (this could be less or more) and then you lose a pick.

You lose a pick then you won’t have access to the 1st round. Won’t have access to academy players if you don’t have a pick.

Clubs would have to choose whether it’s worth taking all players in the top 10.

Just because a club bids on a player in the top 10 doesn’t mean the matching club agrees.

The draft isn’t an exact science, you can get great players outside the top 10, Fremantle getting Murphy Reid at 17 and Fyfe at 20 are great examples. The academy system is just to allow Northern state clubs to have local talent, there is no guarantee these players will end up the top 10 player from their respective draft years. These clubs will also move back their draft positions in following years.

 

[Elixuh]

I don't think so. I think at worse it was 3 or 4 players in the top 20 but that was very rare.

Even with academies, it has only been a big issue since they started producing more talent.

I thought I'd have to ask a few questions to get us there but we got there in one. Kudos my friend.

 

[longdonkey]

No it's not. It's the same father son system which every single club has benefited from. We struck gold 3/3 in recent years in Ashrcrofts, Fletcher after 20 years of nothing prior to that and you want a knee jerk change.

I wonder why you didn't make any noise when Daicoses, Darcy, Libba, Cloke etc where all getting funneled through to Vic clubs. Why is this such a big issue now I wonder.

The underlying reason for all this is. The A(V)FL are just telling the interstate clubs you can't have good things

 

[longdonkey]

Finalists by RORTS:

Crows: Michalanney F/S; Tex under the dodgy NSW scholarship program that preceded the academies. An extra home game due to Gather Round.

Pies: Pendles (priority pick was Dale Thomas, but the extra pick was pendles), Moore, Daicos x2, Quaynor.

Geelong: Best natural advantage due to fixture in the comp, COTTON ON and Rhys Stanley's farm. Notice no father sons left and none on the horizon so makes sense why C Scott is now anti Father son, their natural advantages will be untouched.

Lions: Andrews, Ashcroft x 2, Hipwood, Fletcher, Marshall.

GIANTS: Less than you would think - start up concessions still relevant for Toby Greene and Coniglio (I think), and Tom Green is the big academy player.

Hawks: Calsher Dear. They also RORTED the lions out of a draft pick for Brandon Ryan because Gunners needed a compassionate trade back to them.

Freo: Sandgroper chip on shoulder = biggest RORT of all. Brandon Walker NGA but isn't very good and hasn't played all year. Of course they got another big RORT this year - Norf sold them a home game so that got them in the 8. Counts as a RORT premiership imo.

Gold Coast and the bulldogs speak for themselves, perhaps the greatest rort accumulators in the game today.


We RORT-enjoyers can't lose this year

Why are Academy players considered a rort while Free Agency or picks acquired through free agency aren't? I would consider the pick that Geelong got given for Steven Motlop every bit as much of a rort as any Academy player.

Also isn't there a Bews still running around Cardigan Park?

 

[Elixuh]

Why are Academy players considered a rort while Free Agency or picks acquired through free agency aren't? I would consider the pick that Geelong got given for Steven Motlop every bit as much of a rort as any Academy player.

Also isn't there a Bews still running around Cardigan Park?

At the end of the day every club in the league is rorting. Its just that like 2 or 3 of them, we all know who, aren't very good at it and so complain.

 

[Tom14]

Why are Academy players considered a rort while Free Agency or picks acquired through free agency aren't? I would consider the pick that Geelong got given for Steven Motlop every bit as much of a rort as any Academy player.

Also isn't there a Bews still running around Cardigan Park?

RORTS are a big tent - so if you want to include free agents or free agent compo picks then please do.

The more RORTS recognition the better!

 

[Tom14]

Why are Academy players considered a rort while Free Agency or picks acquired through free agency aren't? I would consider the pick that Geelong got given for Steven Motlop every bit as much of a rort as any Academy player.

Also isn't there a Bews still running around Cardigan Park?

Bowes and pick 7 for a second rounder equals a rort too imo.

 

[longdonkey]

At the end of the day every club in the league is rorting. Its just that like 2 or 3 of them, we all know who, aren't very good at it and so complain.

The academies are only there in the first place to stop the flow of players out of Victoria into the Northern States but the moment that you get good players they want to shut you down.

I've got no issue with it being more difficult, the rort is manipulating draft picks and trading for players and then getting the academy players as well. But of course the AFL will go down the you can't have first round players route instead.

 

[Tom14]

The academies are only there in the first place to stop the flow of players out of Victoria into the Northern States but the moment that you get good players they want to shut you down.

I've got no issue with it being more difficult, the rort is manipulating draft picks and trading for players and then getting the academy players as well. But of course the AFL will go down the you can't have first round players route instead.

Biggest rort by a mile is letting clubs do more trades on draft night to get more picks than they have list spots. It is genuinely ridiculous - you go in with your number of picks being limited by list spots and then on the night they let you trade for more picks and it becomes piss easy to match bids.

We ended up with too many third rounders after matching the Levi and Marshall bids that we then traded for future thirds which will help with Annable.

 

[Coach_Required]

All of a sudden I need to find Pick 2 for Will, when prior to that Dogs didn't had to find pick 2 for Darcy or Pies needed to find pick 4 for Daicos. Mate, you just a have a big problem as the benefit suddenly started flowing our way as well - as long as we didn't get anything and it stayed Victoria centric like prior, you didn't have a problem with it.

You have to draw the line in the sand at some point, if you keep going back to what previously happened then it will never change. ATM its oh they got Darcy, they got Daicos, they have Ashcroft, tomorrow it will be they got Walker, they got Bewick.

Enough is enough. I'm glad the AFL are finally willing to address the rort. Top 5 kids in the draft is where the AFL should be targeting. That way clubs still have incentives to develop F/S or academies but those kids who are the cream at the top should be available to the bottom sides struggling.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

All of a sudden I need to find Pick 2 for Will, when prior to that Dogs didn't had to find pick 2 for Darcy or Pies needed to find pick 4 for Daicos. Mate, you just a have a big problem as the benefit suddenly started flowing our way as well - as long as we didn't get anything and it stayed Victoria centric like prior, you didn't have a problem with it.

But by this logic no team should have ever had to pay more because Geelong got Hawkins top 3 prospect with a third-round pick or that Sydney got Heeney top 3 prospect with pick 18. Why try to improve things because it's been less perfect in the past?

 

[jdstorm]

My concern isn’t the players at pick 20+. Every club at this point has had a chance to grab them.

It’s the absolute top end talent that go to finals sides when clubs at the bottom desperately need them.

Imagine North with Naicos or Darcy right now. They would be significantly better.

The cost to acquire a top 5 pick is usually astronomical. The saving grace is that if the player somehow falls to you at 5. You could trade back to 10 for some assets and still get your kid.

From memory Top 3 picks have about a 33% chance to make AA top 10 about 10% so you have a better chance at the top but it’s still far from certain.

I’m fine with clubs getting access to these players for the right price as you said the cost of a top 5 pick is astronomical and you’d essentially need to pay that twice to get a player bid on at pick 1

 

[Duckimus Prime]

The cost to acquire a top 5 pick is usually astronomical. The saving grace is that if the player somehow falls to you at 5. You could trade back to 10 for some assets and still get your kid.

Really? Because Port managed to get one in a superdraft with trading that started with giving up Jared Polec, Jasper Pittard and a bunch of late crap.

And eventually got pick 5 and a guy who was a top 10 selection, for pick 6, pick 35 and a future third.