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

[LukeParkerno1]

It not that , SOS put a bid in to buy time for some other trade he was doing otherwise Henry would of been a bust @ pick 20 something not pick 9

He would have gone the next pick or the one after was a consensus top 8-15 pick that year. You got the access.

 

[thistimeforsure]

He would have gone the next pick or the one after was a consensus top 8-15 pick that year. You got the access.

Rubbish

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Rubbish

You can’t claim you haven’t benefited. You have. Every single club has. Don’t think he was worth the pick don’t match it. Simple

 

[Suma Magic]

They've just dramatically changed the DVI.
Why would they change it again without seeing how it plays out in practice?

And the 'discount' is built into the calculations of the DVI. It's not a real discount on an actual value.
People don't seem to realise that.

Because the new curve still over-values low picks. Even before the discount.

 

[Scotland]

Advantages and disadvantages in the draft balance out other disadvantages and advantages elsewhere in the competition.

No, they don't. This is complete nonsense.

There are 2 clubs in WA, 2 clubs in SA and 10 clubs in Victoria that operate under the same rules. They aren't a homogenous group that share the same advantages and disadvantages.

 

[thistimeforsure]

You can’t claim you haven’t benefited. You have. Every single club has. Don’t think he was worth the pick don’t match it. Simple

a lateish Freebie every now and again vs Rebuilding your midfield in 3 yrs with top 5 picks

Carry on like they are anywhere near the same thing

Scrap it all , help any club who needs it in other ways

Funny the people who argue all this development crap is more important than a comp that’s as fair as you can make it all have vested interests

Says it all really

Freo has some beast kid in the NGA next year ….. couldn’t give a shit

Scrap it all tomorrow

 

[Stamos]

Because the new curve still over-values low picks. Even before the discount.

I think you need to see it play out before making that claim.
Again, it has been changed dramatically. People are really underestimating the change.

 

[The Jack]

So have we all now agreed that Bassett is 100% correct? Seems the AFL have.

 

[Scotland]

I think you need to see it play out before making that claim.
Again, it has been changed dramatically. People are really underestimating the change.

Levi Ashcroft was pick 5.

This year that's 1795 points with 10% discount = 1616.

Picks 19 and 20 get that done. Pick 18 and some late seconds or thirds gets that done.

Not even close to market value. Gold Coast having to have a couple of firsts to take a couple of top 5 rated players might be an improvement but it's still not close to market value.

 

[Stamos]

Levi Ashcroft was pick 5.

This year that's 1795 points with 10% discount = 1616.

Picks 19 and 20 get that done. Pick 18 and some late seconds or thirds gets that done.

Not even close to market value. Gold Coast having to have a couple of firsts to take a couple of top 5 rated players might be an improvement but it's still not close to market value.

So if the new system was in place last year that would have wiped out all their natural draft picks and put them into deficit.
Seems pretty reasonable.

 

[Suma Magic]

I think you need to see it play out before making that claim.
Again, it has been changed dramatically. People are really underestimating the change.

I did a uni assignment on it. I looked at all the trades and calculated the market curve. The updated curve is still too flat.

 

[Lore]

I think you need to see it play out before making that claim.
Again, it has been changed dramatically. People are really underestimating the change.

If anyone would have an at least theoretical understanding it would be Suma Magic

But in general yes seeing how it plays out is important

 

[Stamos]

I did a uni assignment on it. I looked at all the trades and calculated the market curve. The updated curve is still too flat.

Fair enough.
What would your proposed DVI be?

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

I did a uni assignment on it. I looked at all the trades and calculated the market curve. The updated curve is still too flat.

I agree with this, getting rid of the 10% discount naturally makes higher picks more valuable and would be a simple change.

You could also make the points carried over that requires another pick to match get taxed say ~15%, than 75% etc. that atleast makes the value of high picks when matching worth more.

 

[Atomboy]

Just steepen the curve (again) and remove the discount.

Then teams won’t actually be able to match lots of high bids unless they trade quality players out.

Exactly.

You’d then see how important “retaining local players” would be.

 

[Scotland]

So if the new system was in place last year that would have wiped out all their natural draft picks and put them into deficit.
Seems pretty reasonable.

They won the flag, so having pick 5 isn't what most people would call reasonable. Their actual first pick ended up at 23.

If you are going to the draft with what used to be a round 2 pick and picking in the top 5 the system isn't working.

 

[Stamos]

They won the flag, so having pick 5 isn't what most people would call reasonable. Their actual first pick ended up at 23.

If you are going to the draft with what used to be a round 2 pick and picking in the top 5 the system isn't working.

Or, they’re paying a big price to draft their player, a lot more than anyone used to have to pay.

 

[Scotland]

Exactly.

You’d then see how important “retaining local players” would be.

Just put clubs on the clock. The draft is max 70-80 names being called out, it's not the NFL. It's also dragged out over two days now like it's the season final of The Block or something.

Pick 1 WC select some guy not tied to anyone. Great, next pick.

Pick 1 WC select Zeke Uwland. Gold Coast has 10 minutes to agree to a trade with WC (which would've been discussed for weeks ahead of the draft) or the clock times out and it's onto pick number 2.

Last year's first round was pretty stacked with players from the Talent League. Draper (4, SANFL), Lombard (9, QAFL), Allan (16, WAFL), Angove (24, WAFL) and Bowman (26, SANFL) were the only players not from the Talent League. Seven players out of the Talent League got drafted interstate. One of each of the two WAFL and SANFL players were drafted interstate. It's a national draft. That's the idea.

 

[Scotland]

Or, they’re paying a big price to draft their player, a lot more than anyone used to have to pay.

So instead of paying 20c on the dollar they are paying 40c? Great.

 

[Stamos]

So instead of paying 20c on the dollar they are paying 40c? Great.

No, more like paying your entire draft hand + for something that used to be free.

 

[Atomboy]

Just put clubs on the clock. The draft is max 70-80 names being called out, it's not the NFL. It's also dragged out over two days now like it's the season final of The Block or something.

Pick 1 WC select some guy not tied to anyone. Great, next pick.

Pick 1 WC select Zeke Uwland. Gold Coast has 10 minutes to agree to a trade with WC (which would've been discussed for weeks ahead of the draft) or the clock times out and it's onto pick number 2.

Last year's first round was pretty stacked with players from the Talent League. Draper (4, SANFL), Lombard (9, QAFL), Allan (16, WAFL), Angove (24, WAFL) and Bowman (26, SANFL) were the only players not from the Talent League. Seven players out of the Talent League got drafted interstate. One of each of the two WAFL and SANFL players were drafted interstate. It's a national draft. That's the idea.

Crazy idea: what if we also get NRL clubs to join the draft and if prospects from Qld or NSW didn’t want to play for West Coast, Collingwood or Adelaide they were then free to get drafted by Parramatta, Warriors, Townsville or some other irrelevant club ?.

It’s liable to happen by all accounts so let’s put it to the test.

 

[hammer180]

This is my proposal, feel free to rip it apart everyone.

Everyone in an open draft.
The main goal needs to be getting the bottom teams better whilst also having the academies running, in order to do this if you have a fatherson/academey kid, you need to trade for that pick with the lower team so that team can be compensated, if the club can't make that trade they need to use their own 1st round pick in the next 3 yrs of drafts to get them (almost as a matching system).

Why 3 that seems excessive?
Current first represents this current yrs draft, next yrs 1st represents moving up the draft board (and what the team with the pick would have rejected in a trade for you to get to this position) future future first represents the exclusive rights over the player that the bottom teams now can not draft even if they rejected it.
For example in last yrs draft if Richmond wanted Levi Ashcroft, lions would have to negotiate a fair trade that would satisfy both sides, if they couldn't they would then have the choice of giving up their next 3 yrs of 1st picks or letting him go to richmond, if they picked 3 yrs of firsts they would then have to find trades in order to get the capital to make a trade for annable in this yrs draft, so it's in brsibanes best interests to get trades done for ashcroft first, whether players or picks etc so they can facilitate annable the following yr.
Let's look at carlton and Harry dean in this yrs draft, as carlton have finished 10th, they could trade the tdk compo pick and lets assume they had their own pick still in this yrs draft, to wce to facilitate the trade to get Dean assuming wce wanted him at 1, carlton would be trading 10 and 11 to wce by doing this, next yr they would have their own first and the next 2yrs worth so they would use the next 3yrs worth of firsts starting 2026-2028 to get walker if say richmond finished last in 2026 and wanted him.

How does it make it fair on the bottom teams who missed out on the player though?
Richmond who missed out on walker in 2026 who may have wanted to pick him will then have carlton out of the following 2yrs worth of drafts (2027 2028) everyone will move up a spot in the draft, so the first round will only have 17 instead of 18 picks, which means the teams that finished lower then Carlton will pick twice (1st and 2nd round) before carlton would have their 1st pick in the 2027 and 2028 draft being a 2nd rounder.

I think this works really well as oppose to a bidding system as the clubs are forced to make trades with the lower teams if they have mutiple academy/fathersons in a 3 yr span as oppose to just using your own 3 firsts once, as you will struggle to get the picks in to get multiple academy/fatherson.

It also works well because if you finish say 2nd last and the team with pick 1 wants to bid on your father-son/academy kids, you can trade your first and then a future pick so they are better compensated and you get your player.
If you finish 1st and your player is pick 1, you can attempt to make the trade for pick 1 but if you can't you can use your own 3 firsts to pick that player up, in doing this you are out of the first round the next 2 yrs though. So all other 17 clubs will have picked twice before you pick once at pick 35 in the next 2 consecutive drafts.

How does this support fatherson and academies?
It works in a similar way to a bidding system, where you can match as a once off every 3yrs if there is a player you desperately want priority access too or if you have multiple through the period you are forced to make trades to get the players.

 

[WeeBlake]

No, more like paying your entire draft hand + for something that used to be free.

Yeah but it should never have been free, that’s how the problem started.

No one would ever trade pick 1 for pick 18, 36, 54 and 72. So if the premiers get pick 1 through academy or f/s it should wipe out more than a year of picks. It should wipe out a whole year plus another first rounder, at least. Top 5 picks are that valuable.

 

[Elixuh]

This is my proposal, feel free to rip it apart everyone.

Everyone in an open draft.
The main goal needs to be getting the bottom teams better whilst also having the academies running, in order to do this if you have a fatherson/academey kid, you need to trade for that pick with the lower team so that team can be compensated, if the club can't make that trade they need to use their own 1st round pick in the next 3 yrs of drafts to get them (almost as a matching system).

Why 3 that seems excessive?
Current first represents this current yrs draft, next yrs 1st represents moving up the draft board (and what the team with the pick would have rejected in a trade for you to get to this position) future future first represents the exclusive rights over the player that the bottom teams now can not draft even if they rejected it.
For example in last yrs draft if Richmond wanted Levi Ashcroft, lions would have to negotiate a fair trade that would satisfy both sides, if they couldn't they would then have the choice of giving up their next 3 yrs of 1st picks or letting him go to richmond, if they picked 3 yrs of firsts they would then have to find trades in order to get the capital to make a trade for annable in this yrs draft, so it's in brsibanes best interests to get trades done for ashcroft first, whether players or picks etc so they can facilitate annable the following yr.
Let's look at carlton and Harry dean in this yrs draft, as carlton have finished 10th, they could trade the tdk compo pick and lets assume they had their own pick still in this yrs draft, to wce to facilitate the trade to get Dean assuming wce wanted him at 1, carlton would be trading 10 and 11 to wce by doing this, next yr they would have their own first and the next 2yrs worth so they would use the next 3yrs worth of firsts starting 2026-2028 to get walker if say richmond finished last in 2026 and wanted him.

How does it make it fair on the bottom teams who missed out on the player though?
Richmond who missed out on walker in 2026 who may have wanted to pick him will then have carlton out of the following 2yrs worth of drafts (2027 2028) everyone will move up a spot in the draft, so the first round will only have 17 instead of 18 picks, which means the teams that finished lower then Carlton will pick twice (1st and 2nd round) before carlton would have their 1st pick in the 2027 and 2028 draft being a 2nd rounder.

I think this works really well as oppose to a bidding system as the clubs are forced to make trades with the lower teams if they have mutiple academy/fathersons in a 3 yr span as oppose to just using your own 3 firsts once, as you will struggle to get the picks in to get multiple academy/fatherson.

It also works well because if you finish say 2nd last and the team with pick 1 wants to bid on your father-son/academy kids, you can trade your first and then a future pick so they are better compensated and you get your player.
If you finish 1st and your player is pick 1, you can attempt to make the trade for pick 1 but if you can't you can use your own 3 firsts to pick that player up, in doing this you are out of the first round the next 2 yrs though. So all other 17 clubs will have picked twice before you pick once at pick 35 in the next 2 consecutive drafts.

How does this support fatherson and academies?
It works in a similar way to a bidding system, where you can match as a once off every 3yrs if there is a player you desperately want priority access too or if you have multiple through the period you are forced to make trades to get the players.

Under your scenario do you have to guess where the player will fall and trade for a pick prior to then or you’re saying the team with pick 3 picks and then the academy club has an opportunity to trade with them for the player?

 

[hammer180]

Under your scenario do you have to guess where the player will fall and trade for a pick prior to then or you’re saying the team with pick 3 picks and then the academy club has an opportunity to trade with them for the player?

Honestly hadn't thought that far ahead. Once the team picks the player then there's a time frame on trying to facilitate the trade on the draft night, perhaps both sides get the additional extensions they are allowed to try and work a trade out?