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

[The Tilt]

Can anyone advise a) which picks GC used to match bids on picks 2 and 5; and b) what their starting draft hand?

 

[Elixuh]

If it's about growing the game then you'll have no issues at all with all those academy players being available to the whole league.

Unless you're full of shit and it's just about growing your team.

Pay us

 

[My_Username]

A reminder for all those insisting that something must be done.

Something has been done that made it harder this year.
And more somethings are already on the books for next year that will make this year's result a lot harder (if not impossible) next year.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Can anyone advise a) which picks GC used to match bids on picks 2 and 5; and b) what their starting draft hand?

Their starting draft hand was 15, 18, 24, 28, 29, 36, 52

 

[Bostonian]

Pay us

The league already pays you millions over what other clubs receive.

Time you started paying the league back.

 

[dean33]

A reminder for all those insisting that something must be done.

Something has been done that made it harder this year.
And more somethings are already on the books for next year that will make this year's result a lot harder (if not impossible) next year.

You traded 2 x first Rd picks for petracca and then managed to snare 2 x top 5 picks and 4 x first Rd picks. All while ending the season in 6th place.
The above should never be able to happen.

 

[Bostonian]

Yes it is.

Father/Son is just as bullshit for the equality of the competition.

Brisbane should never be in a position to land the Ashcroft's, short of gutting their entire top end of their list if in a finals position.

Collingwood should not get bailed out by Daicos, Sam Darcy should have been available to the pool. ETC.

We get another one next year, which im sure is where your argument is coming from as a Carlton supporter.

Father Sons already have the toughest restriction on how a player is eligible to be one out of all the extended pathways.

 

[Elixuh]

All of the St Kilda conspiracy theorists were in a shambles last night when they were discussing that Dylan Patterson would be in the NRL if the academy didn’t exist.

 

[Purple Suit]

Their starting draft hand was 15, 18, 24, 28, 29, 36, 52

And it turned into

2, 5, 17, 18

I think they system might still be very broken.

 

[Purple Suit]

All of the St Kilda conspiracy theorists were in a shambles last night when they were discussing that Dylan Patterson would be in the NRL if the academy didn’t exist.

And he would still be in the AFL if the was selected by another team. He said he wanted to go number 1 and would be fine if GC didn't match it.

If the Northern clubs don't want to run academies to get Northern kids in for a fair draft, get the AFL to run it by cutting 20m from the Northern budgets and doing it themselves.

 

[Dockeroo]

Yes they did. Suns went in to the draft with 2 first round picks, they got from trading out players last year and this year.

They had a quiet draft last year, because they pushed most of their 2024 draft hand in to this year.

And they almost wiped out their 2026 draft hand.

Yes they traded in Petracca, but every team could have positioned themselves for such a trade. And everyone know JUH is damaged goods and a big gamble.

Bro says “they had a quiet draft last year”

*checks notes and sees they took Leo Lombard in the top 10.

You fools are high on your own delusion.

Check saints, pies, port last night.
THATS a quiet draft.

 

[Sonny Hayes]

Fringe?! They played 24 and 19 games plus both were in the two finals

Salty Vics will tell yourselves whatever story necessary to make you seem aggrieved!

Out of 25 kids that went last night 5 were academy kids. Is 20 of the top 25 kids not enough for you????? You want more than 80%? Dream on.

Vic has crapped on QLD with a higher than mighty attitude about how you guys are the "best" and QLD is rubbish, give it up blah blah blah. Then QLD has TWO bumper academy crops over a 10+ year period and you're up in arms carrying on like spoiled children.

If your state is so great then what are you so worried about, you'll keep producing A grade talent. The constant protesting says a lot that maybe you're not so confident in the VIC system.

It's pathetic and you should all be embarrassed for yourselves

What a stupid argument.

It isn’t 80% for vics it’s 80% for the entire league which still includes the Queensland teams who still have access to those players.

And yes people will be upset when clubs are given a huge list management advantage that can genuinely set them up for a decade

 

[TheTassieHawk]

Wasn't publicised in either the Fox or AFL coverage or in the tracker.

Great governance and oversight for the league.

Im sure the clubs see it.

However it's clearly been removed for that reason, we don't see Gold Coast land their fourth first rounder for 55, 57, 59, 61, 68.

The matching of bids is hard to track down. Each match should be listed or linked to the picks used in the list of players picked on the AFL draft site, which will explain far more and far more quickly what has gone on in the flurry of matches and trades than is currently the case.

 

[Maybe Tomorrow]

It’s almost like GCS positioned themselves last year, this year (including trading out players) and next year to take the academy guys.

Equally WCE bid on a guy who was projected at 25-35 range at 18 to make a point because they knew GCS had committed to this fellow.

Don't let the facts get in the way here, where is the fun in that?

WCE clearly went early on 3 Suns players but it's the end of modern civilization apparently that the Suns traded well for years to be ready.

 

[dean33]

All of the St Kilda conspiracy theorists were in a shambles last night when they were discussing that Dylan Patterson would be in the NRL if the academy didn’t exist.

Its not about the academies, it's what clubs pay to get access. Last night was a rort.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

And it turned into

2, 5, 17, 18

I think they system might still be very broken.

Keep in mind that the raw points discount they got 10% x4 all together adds to gaining another early-mid 20's pick.

Clubs get enough advantages being able to arbitrage according to different currency rates (depending on the quality of the draft, points are fixed and therefore can be worth more/less than pick in reality, you gain the arbitrage).

Clubs get enough advantages being able to manipulate points values by being able to trade up/down knowing where a bid will come (GC able to incrementally trade up 15 to 14 with the Dogs for more points, the Dogs' talent available to them does not change given they know GC is using it as a bid either way, clubs can attempt to trade for a pick one above where they expect a bid will come, live take a player and push back the reality bid for the player 1. If Port have the pick next year, they are obviously not going to bid on Cochrane pick 1).

Clubs get enough advantages with the right to match (GC could have theoretically rated all 4 of their prospects as the best 4 talents in the draft, if they had uncertainty of whether they would slip, they would be forced to trade up with real picks of value to take them to avoid other clubs maybe taking them. They don't get to "wait and see" the fact that other clubs didn't rate them as late as pick 17/18)

Clubs get enough advantages through the information advantage for the player itself, having been developed by club staff (you understand his character, work ethic, personality etc. that in an open draft pool is part of the process of being a good interviewer. Carlton famously passed over Ed Richards because he was stuck in traffic and was late to his interview. If Carlton had known what an aberration and not assumed it reflected something about his work ethic as an AFL footballer, they wouldn't have passed on him).

We don't need to stack another 10% discount on top of that. Gold Coast weren't going to fail to match any of those bids if they were forced to execute other trades to somehow find the value of a pick 24 somehow in the past draft process, it would have just made it closer to fair value and balance the whole equalisation purposes of the draft in the first place.

Get rid of the 10% discount, it's far too advantageous, as by the above examples, even if people don't disagree with the academies in principle.

 

[Purple Suit]

Don't let the facts get in the way here, where is the fun in that?

WCE clearly went early on 3 Suns players but it's the end of modern civilization apparently that the Suns traded well for years to be be ready.

You traded out your high 1st and 2nd for a player yet still managed to get a top 10 pick and set-up this year so you got 4 first rounders (within pick 18 too, not the 30 pick rounds we're use to). It's laughable how much advantage the Northern clubs are continuing to get when it comes to the draft, even though one of them just won back to back flags. The ironic thing is that Brisbane getting so much talent also is probably go to stuff your run.

 

[juss]

And it turned into

2, 5, 17, 18

I think they system might still be very broken.

They also had 2 first rounders to acquire Petracca.

The Suns will be on their way to a flag quality list, the expertise in it coming about is questionable though.

 

[Purple Suit]

Keep in mind that the raw points discount they got 10% x4 all together adds to gaining another early-mid 20's pick.

Clubs get enough advantages being able to arbitrage according to different currency rates (depending on the quality of the draft, points are fixed and therefore can be worth more/less than pick in reality, you gain the arbitrage).

Clubs get enough advantages being able to manipulate points values by being able to trade up/down knowing where a bid will come (GC able to incrementally trade up 15 to 14 with the Dogs for more points, the Dogs' talent available to them does not change given they know GC is using it as a bid either way, clubs can attempt to trade for a pick one above where they expect a bid will come, live take a player and push back the reality bid for the player 1. If Port have the pick next year, they are obviously not going to bid on Cochrane pick 1).

Clubs get enough advantages with the right to match (GC could have theoretically rated all 4 of their prospects as the best 4 talents in the draft, if they had uncertainty of whether they would slip, they would be forced to trade up with real picks of value to take them to avoid other clubs maybe taking them. They don't get to "wait and see" the fact that other clubs didn't rate them as late as pick 17/18)

Clubs get enough advantages through the information advantage for the player itself, having been developed by club staff (you understand his character, work ethic, personality etc. that in an open draft pool is part of the process of being a good interviewer. Carlton famously passed over Ed Richards because he was stuck in traffic and was late to his interview. If Carlton had known what an aberration and not assumed it reflected something about his work ethic as an AFL footballer, they wouldn't have passed on him).

We don't need to stack another 10% discount on top of that. Gold Coast weren't going to fail to match any of those bids if they were forced to execute other trades to somehow find the value of a pick 24 somehow in the past draft process, it would have just made it closer to fair value and balance the whole equalisation purposes of the draft in the first place.

Get rid of the 10% discount, it's far too advantageous, as by the above examples, even if people don't disagree with the academies in principle.

So get rid of the discount and GC would have had to pass in the pick 18 kid and only had 3 first rounders for a team that finished 6th and recruited a superstar in Petracca. It is a much bigger probably than that and the AFL are deliberately moving at a snails pace to fix it while they try and stock up GC.

For a code that just changed 7 on field rules in one go, they seem to take far too long to fix up the draft.

 

[threenewpadlocks]

So get rid of the discount and GC would have had to pass in the pick 18 kid and only had 3 first rounders for a team that finished 6th and recruited a superstar in Petracca. It is a much bigger probably than that and the AFL are deliberately moving at a snails pace to fix it while they try and stock up GC.

For a code that just changed 7 on field rules in one go, they seem to take far too long to fix up the draft.

I don't disagree it's a problem and there are some significant advantages, but I'm just making the point that some of the in-built advantages are unremovable.

You can't stop GC knowing the value of a player that they themselves have developed more than the 17 other clubs. That's inherent in the academy system.

You can't stop GC rating a player but being able to effectively 'pass' on him and wait until another club rates them - that's inherent on a right-to-match bidding system that isn't going away.

But what you can do with complete ease and zero fuss is get stop the 10% discount.

GC would still have an advantage, and people would still complain about GC, but we can still make changes on the small amounts on the margins that make a difference. Sure, GC would still get Petracca and 3 top 18 players for finishing top 6, but it's a more fair outcome than Petracca and 4 top 18 players for finishing top 6.

 

[Maybe Tomorrow]

You traded out your high 1st and 2nd for a player yet still managed to get a top 10 pick and set-up this year so you got 4 first rounders (within pick 18 too, not the 30 pick rounds we're use to). It's laughable how much advantage the Northern clubs are continuing to get when it comes to the draft, even though one of them just won back to back flags. The ironic thing is that Brisbane getting so much talent also is probably go to stuff your run.

There are inequities throughout the AFL system, the Suns are just making the most here of one that (currently) favours them. But there isn't much point starting that conversation again right now as folk want to vent about last nights draft.

Ironically Brisbane's flags have been based on good trading and father son selections, not high academy picks.

For what it's worth (and I've posted this before in this thread) I don't think there should be any matching in the first round of any kind.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

I think it's pretty silly to try to paint F/S and academies as different. One is "romantic", one "grows the game" but both have the same issue, getting elite young talent for dirt cheap. It becomes a much bigger issue when it's contending teams getting that talent because that completely destroys any equalisation from the draft. FA also further ****ed it up where now contending teams get elite young talent and elite established talent for cheap.

Maybe, finally the points process will be fixed next year because we got pretty strong evidence the revised points changes didnt do nearly enough this year. It just so happens to be after a few Northern teams set themselves up for a decade already...

Final point, I think the greatest example of how useless the AFL is was limiting how many picks a team can take in based on list spots but then letting them do whatever they want in live trades. A bunch of monkeys could run that place better

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

I can't work it out - the way it was brushed over just made it seem very scam-mish.

GC turned 15, 18, 24, 28, 29, 36, 52 into 2, 5, 17, 18.

EDIT: Just found an article about draft pick trades. GC actually started drafting with:

#14, 18, 24, 28, 33, 35, 36, 46, 47, 52 and 53 (4345 points)

and selected

#2, 5, 17, 18 (5991 points). Less their 10% discount (600) they are still over 1000 points short.

Each trade matching brought their picks in, but I'm doubtful that would have raised over 1000 points.

Is there anywhere with the official match/trades yet?

 

[jumperfan]

All of the St Kilda conspiracy theorists were in a shambles last night when they were discussing that Dylan Patterson would be in the NRL if the academy didn’t exist.

It's incredible the degree to which Andrew Bassat has managed to shatter your brain

 

[Sphynx]

Keep in mind that the raw points discount they got 10% x4 all together adds to gaining another early-mid 20's pick.

Clubs get enough advantages being able to arbitrage according to different currency rates (depending on the quality of the draft, points are fixed and therefore can be worth more/less than pick in reality, you gain the arbitrage).

Clubs get enough advantages being able to manipulate points values by being able to trade up/down knowing where a bid will come (GC able to incrementally trade up 15 to 14 with the Dogs for more points, the Dogs' talent available to them does not change given they know GC is using it as a bid either way, clubs can attempt to trade for a pick one above where they expect a bid will come, live take a player and push back the reality bid for the player 1. If Port have the pick next year, they are obviously not going to bid on Cochrane pick 1).

Clubs get enough advantages with the right to match (GC could have theoretically rated all 4 of their prospects as the best 4 talents in the draft, if they had uncertainty of whether they would slip, they would be forced to trade up with real picks of value to take them to avoid other clubs maybe taking them. They don't get to "wait and see" the fact that other clubs didn't rate them as late as pick 17/18)

Clubs get enough advantages through the information advantage for the player itself, having been developed by club staff (you understand his character, work ethic, personality etc. that in an open draft pool is part of the process of being a good interviewer. Carlton famously passed over Ed Richards because he was stuck in traffic and was late to his interview. If Carlton had known what an aberration and not assumed it reflected something about his work ethic as an AFL footballer, they wouldn't have passed on him).

We don't need to stack another 10% discount on top of that. Gold Coast weren't going to fail to match any of those bids if they were forced to execute other trades to somehow find the value of a pick 24 somehow in the past draft process, it would have just made it closer to fair value and balance the whole equalisation purposes of the draft in the first place.

Get rid of the 10% discount, it's far too advantageous, as by the above examples, even if people don't disagree with the academies in principle.

I've argued in the past it should be a 10% or 20% tax.

Payment for the fact you get priority access to the player.

The fact you have developed them so well is pay back in itself for the quality of player you are getting with sole access.


Again, no club is allowed to talk to a kid before their draft year, they aren't allowed to train with an AFL club outside of sanctioned programs like the AFL Academy.

Yet, you can apparently pump a 12 year old full of elite training when you get the sole, priority benefit (with a discount) at the other end. LOL