AFL trading and drafting should become completely points based?

[RUNVS]

I know I created a thread similar to this a few days ago but based on some of the responses I got I have changed the idea so instead of teams being allocated picks based on where they finished that year they are instead allocated points.

(PS I am using the AFL points system as a guide here http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/Points-draft-value.pdf )

Eg, and using the AFL points system

18th position - 4647 points
17th position - 4088 points
16th position - 3740 points
15th position - 3478 points
14th position - 3263 points
13th position - 3077 points
12th position - 2913 points
11th position - 2765 points
10th position - 2631 points
9th position - 2504 points
8th position - 2388 points
7th position - 2279 points
6th position - 2174 points
5th position - 2077 points
4th position - 1983 points
3rd position - 1894 points
2nd position - 1809 points
1st position - 1726 points

For trading it would be really really simple as clubs trade points and as a result every player is given a much fairer value since for instance if Fremantle wanted to, they would be able to get the Hogan deal done immediately, and they would not be reliant on waiting for picks they may receive from Brisbane. No, they could simply give 2500 points for instance to Melbourne in exchange for Hogan.

Then it comes to the draft, and I am sure some of you are wondering how that would work but for the draft the AFL sets up a blind auction. For those who don't know a blind auction is

In this type of auction, all bidders simultaneously submit sealed bids, so that no bidder knows the bid of any other participant. The highest bidder pays the price they submitted.

So the AFL sets up a day a few weeks before the draft, where all clubs are each in front of a laptop or something like that, and then the AFL calls for bids on pick 1. If a team wants to, they can blow all their points in an attempt to get pick 1, but if they do so it means having super super crappy picks afterwards.

So lets say for instance the bidding on pick 1 goes

Gold Coast - 6800
Carlton - 6500
Western Bulldogs - 6451

Gold Coast would win the bid, and pick 1 would be awarded to Gold Coast.

Gold Coast may have just blown all their points in an attempt to secure pick 1, but they got it, but it does mean their next draft pick will be super super crappy, something at least pick 74.

We could get down to pick 9 here, and Richmond decide that this is their time to strike, them spending half their points on pick 9, and then the other half to secure pick 10, but they have no points after that

Geelong may decide they want to go after pick 12, and when they secure it they have plenty of points left over, allowing them to pick up plenty of cheap picks in the 30's.

This goes all the way to pick 73, which is the last pick that has any points value. The teams with the more points obviously have massive advantages going into the draft auction, but even so, they still have to be strategic with how they use their points as they don't want to blow all their points on a single pick, and they also don't know what the other teams are doing either. It would be possible for a team to pay more for a later pick than an earlier one if they are very unlucky.

I know I came up with it, so I am more than a little biased but I love this idea as I think it would open up trading massively and it would also create a huge element of strategy in trading and drafting as well, allowing teams like Port Adelaide and Adelaide (this year) to target picks in an attempt to get the South Australians to their club, or allowing many other strategies for clubs based on where they think their ideal player is going to go in the draft.

So, what do people think of the idea?

 

[DanA]

I would give an extra 300 points to the bottom 4 and 150 points to the bottom 8 but otherwise think it’d be a great system other than creating a huge amount of work.

 

[Suma Magic]

It’s an interesting proposition.

I think there will be real issues with the combination of live pick trading an the academy f/s system. This would address that - get rid of the matching with low picks bullshit.

 

[iameviljez]

I know I created a thread similar to this a few days ago but based on some of the responses I got I have changed the idea so instead of teams being allocated picks based on where they finished that year they are instead allocated points.

(PS I am using the AFL points system as a guide here http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/Points-draft-value.pdf )

Eg, and using the AFL points system

18th position - 4647 points
17th position - 4088 points
16th position - 3740 points
15th position - 3478 points
14th position - 3263 points
13th position - 3077 points
12th position - 2913 points
11th position - 2765 points
10th position - 2631 points
9th position - 2504 points
8th position - 2388 points
7th position - 2279 points
6th position - 2174 points
5th position - 2077 points
4th position - 1983 points
3rd position - 1894 points
2nd position - 1809 points
1st position - 1726 points

For trading it would be really really simple as clubs trade points and as a result every player is given a much fairer value since for instance if Fremantle wanted to, they would be able to get the Hogan deal done immediately, and they would not be reliant on waiting for picks they may receive from Brisbane. No, they could simply give 2500 points for instance to Melbourne in exchange for Hogan.

Then it comes to the draft, and I am sure some of you are wondering how that would work but for the draft the AFL sets up a blind auction. For those who don't know a blind auction is

In this type of auction, all bidders simultaneously submit sealed bids, so that no bidder knows the bid of any other participant. The highest bidder pays the price they submitted.

So the AFL sets up a day a few weeks before the draft, where all clubs are each in front of a laptop or something like that, and then the AFL calls for bids on pick 1. If a team wants to, they can blow all their points in an attempt to get pick 1, but if they do so it means having super super crappy picks afterwards.

So lets say for instance the bidding on pick 1 goes

Gold Coast - 6800
Carlton - 6500
Western Bulldogs - 6451

Gold Coast would win the bid, and pick 1 would be awarded to Gold Coast.

Gold Coast may have just blown all their points in an attempt to secure pick 1, but they got it, but it does mean their next draft pick will be super super crappy, something at least pick 74.

We could get down to pick 9 here, and Richmond decide that this is their time to strike, them spending half their points on pick 9, and then the other half to secure pick 10, but they have no points after that

Geelong may decide they want to go after pick 12, and when they secure it they have plenty of points left over, allowing them to pick up plenty of cheap picks in the 30's.

This goes all the way to pick 73, which is the last pick that has any points value. The teams with the more points obviously have massive advantages going into the draft auction, but even so, they still have to be strategic with how they use their points as they don't want to blow all their points on a single pick, and they also don't know what the other teams are doing either. It would be possible for a team to pay more for a later pick than an earlier one if they are very unlucky.

I know I came up with it, so I am more than a little biased but I love this idea as I think it would open up trading massively and it would also create a huge element of strategy in trading and drafting as well, allowing teams like Port Adelaide and Adelaide (this year) to target picks in an attempt to get the South Australians to their club, or allowing many other strategies for clubs based on where they think their ideal player is going to go in the draft.

So, what do people think of the idea?

On one hand, I like it - but its drawbacks are several.

1) Can you imagine how long deals would take to get done? You'd have some seriously shocking haggling over fifty points or so.
2) Slowest draft day in history.

I think that the system works well enough as things sit - not brilliantly, but well enough.

 

[Northernsoul74]

The problem with points are that they value a pick number not the actual player. Drafts vary wildly year to year as do teams needs so it’s a very very blunt instrument.

 

[sr36]

The AFL, stupidly in my opinion, want to make the trade and draft period a part of the entertainment industry. A system like this would work totally against that.

 

[Footypie32]

On one hand, I like it - but its drawbacks are several.

1) Can you imagine how long deals would take to get done? You'd have some seriously shocking haggling over fifty points or so.
2) Slowest draft day in history.

I think that the system works well enough as things sit - not brilliantly, but well enough.

Actually it would be super fast. He said all bidding would be done prior to draft day.

 

[Footypie32]

The problem with points are that they value a pick number not the actual player. Drafts vary wildly year to year as do teams needs so it’s a very very blunt instrument.

But the teams themselves would decide how many points to allocate to a player. There would probably be some weird numbers allocated at first, but it would work out after a couple of seasons.


Fwiw, I'm not saying this system would work, but it's an interesting idea.

 

[iameviljez]

Actually it would be super fast. He said all bidding would be done prior to draft day.

Makes no sense, then - because if you didn't manage to actually acquire the pick, you would have all these points left over and be none the wiser.

 

[Footypie32]

Makes no sense, then - because if you didn't manage to actually acquire the pick, you would have all these points left over and be none the wiser.

Yeah, I see your point. I guess teams would have to bid on 30 odd players. Leftover points can be used in the rookie draft or banked maybe?

 

[RUNVS]

Yeah, I see your point. I guess teams would have to bid on 30 odd players. Leftover points can be used in the rookie draft or banked maybe?

I was thinking possibly that any leftover points could go into next years draft, so if teams don't use all their points for 2018 those points would roll over into 2019.

Another possibility, though this would be more confusing I feel, is that teams can use a blind auction in draft day. So lets say Gil called pick 1

Each team then has 2 minutes to put in a bid for a player and the price they are willing to pay for that player. So for instance

Adelaide - Lukosius (4000 points)
Brisbane - Walsh (4500 points)
Carlton - Walsh - (4650 points)
Gold Coast - Walsh (4100 points)
Port Adelaide - Rankine (5000 points)
Fremantle - M.King (4600 points)

So every team puts in their selections and Port Adelaide wins, having the highest points. So as a result they get their choice of Rankine.

Then Gil calls pick 2, and a whole new set of bids for pick 2 and so on.

It would take longer but I think that idea would work as well, and it might give teams more flexibility when it comes to selecting players they really want.

PS This would still be a blind auction, so all the other teams will see is that Port got Rankine and the amount Port paid for Rankine. They would not see who the other teams bid for.

 

[melanChronic]

I was thinking possibly that any leftover points could go into next years draft, so if teams don't use all their points for 2018 those points would roll over into 2019.

Another possibility, though this would be more confusing I feel, is that teams can use a blind auction in draft day. So lets say Gil called pick 1

Each team then has 2 minutes to put in a bid for a player and the price they are willing to pay for that player. So for instance

Adelaide - Lukosius (4000 points)
Brisbane - Walsh (4500 points)
Carlton - Walsh - (4650 points)
Gold Coast - Walsh (4100 points)
Port Adelaide - Rankine (5000 points)
Fremantle - M.King (4600 points)

So every team puts in their selections and Port Adelaide wins, having the highest points. So as a result they get their choice of Rankine.

Then Gil calls pick 2, and a whole new set of bids for pick 2 and so on.

It would take longer but I think that idea would work as well, and it might give teams more flexibility when it comes to selecting players they really want.

PS This would still be a blind auction, so all the other teams will see is that Port got Rankine and the amount Port paid for Rankine. They would not see who the other teams bid for.

I think this would be interesting but ultimately it would take the draft away from being an equalisation tool. Currently, bottom clubs can stand firm on wanting first access to the best talent regardless of what kind of obscene offers other clubs make for picks. If they do trade a pick, they will get way overs. In this auction situation, a club like Port this year can accrue points and either force the spooners to way overbid on pick one, or trump them for the best talent (without the bottom club getting the overs in return).

I think we need to remember the importance of the draft in helping struggling clubs, and that the discrete pick system we have at the moment is more in their favour.

 

[RUNVS]

I think this would be interesting but ultimately it would take the draft away from being an equalisation tool. Currently, bottom clubs can stand firm on wanting first access to the best talent regardless of what kind of obscene offers other clubs make for picks. If they do trade a pick, they will get way overs. In this auction situation, a club like Port this year can accrue points and either force the spooners to way overbid on pick one, or trump them for the best talent (without the bottom club getting the overs in return).

I think we need to remember the importance of the draft in helping struggling clubs, and that the discrete pick system we have at the moment is more in their favour.

I accidentally picked Carlton when writing my last post, but I changed it to Port so thanks for catching it.

As for your concern I think it is all about being strategic. Yes a team can blow most of their points on a top player, but they will get punished for that because it means they do not have enough points to bid on any other good picks/players.

If a lower ranked team is smart they will avoid bidding in the first few picks, allow the desperate teams to bid first (like Port Adelaide and Adelaide who both really want those South Australian players) and then the lower ranked teams can load up on players in the 8 to 18 range as a team like Carlton or Gold Coast would have twice as much, maybe even 300% more points than a team like West Coast, Richmond or Collingwood. Those clubs would not even be able to start thinking about bidding for players until the late teens as they would not be able to afford anyone until then since all the bids would be out of their range points wise.

 

[RUNVS]

Borrowed from the user "Lore" here is the current points

So a team like Gold Coast could make a killing in the blind auction draft scenario, but a team like Melbourne would not even be able to enter the draft until the 20's most likely.

 

[iameviljez]

There is one more reason why I don't like this, to be honest - it will stop the movement of players left on the outer at better clubs, because such trades would then jeopardise top draft choices.

Take Gold Coast, for example. They have topped up with a few players in the trade period who were on the outer at Richmond - so GC got Anthony Miles and Corey Ellis, for a trade-up of what you'd expect to be 12 places, in the third round of next-year's draft.

This means that Gold Coast's high-end picks this year will remain completely unaffected.

However, if they had traded for *points*, then suddenly, they have fewer points to spend early in the draft, and thus their access to top-end talent is diluted.

Clubs will take a punt on lower-value players through the trade period for late picks, but they won't do it if it means the difference between getting (say) Lukosius or not.

 

[RUNVS]

There is one more reason why I don't like this, to be honest - it will stop the movement of players left on the outer at better clubs, because such trades would then jeopardise top draft choices.

Take Gold Coast, for example. They have topped up with a few players in the trade period who were on the outer at Richmond - so GC got Anthony Miles and Corey Ellis, for a trade-up of what you'd expect to be 12 places, in the third round of next-year's draft.

This means that Gold Coast's high-end picks this year will remain completely unaffected.

However, if they had traded for *points*, then suddenly, they have fewer points to spend early in the draft, and thus their access to top-end talent is diluted.

Clubs will take a punt on lower-value players through the trade period for late picks, but they won't do it if it means the difference between getting (say) Lukosius or not.

A low value player, or someone who another club just wants off the books won't cost much though. I mean I doubt Richmond would have asked for more than 100 points for Miles and Ellis all up, which is nothing considering Gold Coast would in theory have about 7000 points going into this draft this year.

 

[iameviljez]

A low value player, or someone who another club just wants off the books won't cost much though. I mean I doubt Richmond would have asked for more than 100 points for Miles and Ellis all up, which is nothing considering Gold Coast would in theory have about 7000 points going into this draft this year.

Yes, but then GC would be completely stupid to trade BEFORE they know what Lukosius etc might cost.

I mean, you would hate to miss out on the number one pick by fifty points or so, because you brought in some backup ruckman or similar.

What would probably wind up happening is that nobody would trade for low-value players, who would then have to get delisted and nominate for the draft. They'd then wait till well into the late picks for clubs to pick them up for pennies if they so wish.

I prefer it the current way - less stressful for the players, and clubs would receive some value for their trades.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Not a bad idea, but instead of bidding for picks I'd just bid for players directly and have bidding open rather than secret. Perhaps listing the highest bid as they go on a big electronic board like the ASX. Have a first round with academy and father son prospects and once bidding has ended, the club with the rights can choose to match. After that have a general auction along the same lines. Clubs can bid on whoever they want up to their points inventory.

 

[RUNVS]

Not a bad idea, but instead of bidding for picks I'd just bid for players directly and have bidding open rather than secret. Perhaps listing the highest bid as they go on a big electronic board like the ASX. Have a first round with academy and father son prospects and once bidding has ended, the club with the rights can choose to match. After that have a general auction along the same lines. Clubs can bid on whoever they want up to their points inventory.

To be honest I also like that idea. I feel like moving to a purely points based system would add a lot of flexibility that is not currently present in the system.

Yes, but then GC would be completely stupid to trade BEFORE they know what Lukosius etc might cost.

I mean, you would hate to miss out on the number one pick by fifty points or so, because you brought in some backup ruckman or similar.

What would probably wind up happening is that nobody would trade for low-value players, who would then have to get delisted and nominate for the draft. They'd then wait till well into the late picks for clubs to pick them up for pennies if they so wish.

I prefer it the current way - less stressful for the players, and clubs would receive some value for their trades.

The flip side to that though is that more trades could get done on the basis of fair compensation.

Say for instance that West Coast really really wanted Jesse Hogan, they don't, but lets say they do, and they only have pick 19. Now pick 19 is not going to get it done, so the trade probably would not happen, but under the points system there are very good odds West Coast would be able to scrounge up enough points for Hogan.

So many trades fall through because a team doesn't have picks in the proper range for a player, so they have a pick to high for that player (eg Carlton have pick 1 but they would have never used pick 1 on McGovern) or picks that are to low. Points minimise this issue, and increase two teams chances of negotiating a fair value, a value that the team trading can afford as well.