List Mgmt. Draft and Academy Details

[Blue__Balls]

Plenty of questions in multiple threads about how the Draft is impacted by Academy and Father/Son selections. I've compiled a few posts that outline some of the weirder aspects, but thought it might be easier to put them all in one place.

DRAFT ORDER:
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-10-...ubs-provisional-picks-as-trade-period-unfolds

DRAFT POINTS SYSTEM:
http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/biddingsystemfeedback.pdf
(there have been amendments, but page 2 shows the correct points for each pick)

KEY DETAILS:
- Any player can be selected at any point of the draft, by any club.
- If an Academy or Father/Son prospect has nominated a club, that club can match a bid.

- A 20% discount is applied to the points attributed to the original bid if it has fallen in the first round.
- From the second round onwards, a 197 point discount applies instead.

- The matching club must pay the same amount of points, using one or more picks.
- The next available pick from the matching club moves up the draft to the place the original bid has occurred.
- Subsequent picks move to the back of the draft if their allocated points are used in entirety.
- Subsequent picks that have "leftover" points, moves back in the draft to match those remaining points.
- Any points they cannot pay are subtracted from the club's 2016 pick in the same round the bid has occurred.

- If a pick moves forward in the draft, all picks between it and it's destination move back to accommodate.
- If a pick moves backward in the draft, all picks between it and it's destination move forward to fill the gap.

HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO:
Callum Mills – bid at Pick 3 (2234 points) by Melbourne.
Sydney owes 1787 points after the discount.
Sydney have Picks 33, 36, 37, 44, 54 and 69.
Pick 33 (563 points) becomes Pick 3, pushing all picks between 3 and 32 back one place.
Deficit = 1224 points
Picks 36 (502 points) and 37 (483 points) move to the back of the draft.
Picks 38-43 move up two places (now 36-41).
Pick 44 (362 points) is partially used, with 123 points leftover, and moves back to pick 62 (123 points).
Picks 45-64 move up three places (now 42-61).
Pick 62 is now owned by Sydney.
Picks 65 onwards move up two places (now 63 onwards).

As Pick 33 has moved to Pick 3, all other picks between there are moved back one place. Melbourne now has Pick 4, Essendon has Picks 5 and 6, etc.

This means GWS's Pick 10 moves back to Pick 11, thereby reducing it's associated points.

Carlton's Picks 8, 11 and 19 move back one place, however picks 59 and 60 move up two places.

Once all Academy bids have come in, it is likely that our Picks 59 and 60 will have moved up as many as 10 places in the draft, providing Carlton with more points to match any bid on Jack Silvagni.

LATE PICKS vs EARLY PICKS:
For clubs with high value Academy or Father/Son targets, late picks are more valuable than their points would suggest. As mid-range picks are consumed/moved for other bids, late picks can move up the draft substantially.

Trading Pick 10 (1395 points) for Picks 44-47 (1356 points) could have actually improved GWS's position substantially.

Pick 10 will end up reducing in value to 1329 points after the Callum Mills bid, while if picks 44-47 move up even 1 place (43-46) their value increases to 1418 points.

A 39 point loss on the initial trade actually results in an 89 point gain. With the number of first round Academy picks his year it would have actually resulted in those picks moving up two or even three places (41-44), which would turn a 39 point loss into a 218 point gain.

TO BID OR NOT TO BID:
What if nobody selected one of GWS's Academy prospects before their first pick? Should GWS take their player with Pick 11 to avoid a points deficit carrying over to 2016, or should they take an extra 1st round player?

HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIO 2:
Nobody bids on Hopper or Kennedy before pick 11 (GWS's first given Sydney have moved up for Mills).
GWS take the non-academy player of their choice (let's say Burton).
Bids then come for Hopper and Kennedy at picks 12 and 13.
GWS have picks 34, 43, 51, 53, 56, 61, 63, 64 and 69 remaining.

Bid for Hopper at Pick 12 (1268 points) by Carlton.
GWS owes 1015 points after the discount.
Pick 34 (542 points) moves to Pick 12.
Pick 43 (378 points) moves to the back of the draft.
Pick 51 (259 points) moves to pick 59 (158 points).

As per the Callum Mills example above - lots of pick shuffling occurs to fill the gaps.

GWS now have Burton, Hopper, and picks 51, 54, 60, 62, 63, 68.

Bid for Kennedy at Pick 13 (1212 points) by Carlton.
GWS owes 970 points after the discount.
The sum of GWS's remaining picks is 919 points.
Pick 51 moves to pick 13.
All remaining picks are moved to the back of the draft.
GWS still owe 51 points, which carries over to 2016 Round 1.

The first 15 picks in the draft have more than 51 points separating them - so this deficit will not make any difference to GWS's first pick in 2016 unless they end up with Pick 16, 17 or 18. In this case, it's worth them taking the extra player this year, as they will likely be unaffected by the carryover points at all, and even if they do they would only lose one place in the draft.


If anyone has any questions, feel free to pop them in this thread and I can include additional hypotheticals or details above as time permits.

 

[Aphrodite]

Excellent work Blue__Balls

 

[Blue__Balls]

Excellent work Blue__Balls

No worries.

Not expecting this one to get much traffic in terms of posts and comments - so feel free to sticky it for a few weeks until the draft is done and dusted. Hopefully it will help eliminate some of the repeat questions in the Draft/List/Rumour threads.

 

[Azul]

So what you're saying if 59 and 60 become 49 and 50 over the course of the night then we should be safe, so long as no one bids for Jack as high as, say Essendon's second round pick (they currently hold 24, 25 but could slide to 30)

i.e. if our later picks move up the order they inherit earlier, stronger, points values, while higher picks that slide downwards diminish in value?

I was never much good at snakes and ladders!

 

[Azul]

Academy picks attract 25% while F/S is only 15% - is that correct?

 

[Blue__Balls]

So what you're saying if 59 and 60 become 49 and 50 over the course of the night then we should be safe, so long as no one bids for Jack as high as, say Essendon's second round pick (they currently hold 24, 25 but could slide to 30)

i.e. if our later picks move up the order they inherit earlier, stronger, points values, while higher picks that slide downwards diminish in value?

I was never much good at snakes and ladders!

Yep, correct. With picks 50 and 51 we'd be covered for bids from Pick 25 onwards. Looking at the phantom drafts, we should be fine - and may even end up retaining one of those late picks of ours for a rookie upgrade.

Academy picks attract 25% while F/S is only 15% - is that correct?

I believe that was the original plan, but my understanding is that they've split the middle and called it 20% for both.

 

[Brettox]

How is it determined which players are bid on first? If a GWS kid is bid on before Mills, then wouldn't that move Sydney's first pick out further.

I would have though that tying the points to the picks original position would be fairer. The system works better then to tie into multiple lower picks as these can improve in points value, if that is what you are saying.

 

[Blue__Balls]

How is it determined which players are bid on first? If a GWS kid is bid on before Mills, then wouldn't that move Sydney's first pick out further.

I would have though that tying the points to the picks original position would be fairer. The system works better then to tie into multiple lower picks as these can improve in points value, if that is what you are saying.

You're absolutely correct.

Bids are placed live throughout the draft, so an early bid on Mills moves Sydney's Pick 33 into the top 5, pushing GWS' first pick back to 11.

That's about the only scenario where a pick will move backwards this year, but in most cases late picks will instead move forward, as clubs with Academy players have stockpiled multiple later picks which will be used in bulk to pay off early bids.

I think anything which encourages Academy clubs to trade out their high picks for multiple low picks is a good thing. It enables clubs without Academy/Father-Son players to move up the draft by packaging their late picks, and creates a market for fringe players because the modest returns (2nd round picks onward) can then be turned into higher picks.

 

[Brettox]

You're absolutely correct.

Bids are placed live throughout the draft, so an early bid on Mills moves Sydney's Pick 33 into the top 5, pushing GWS' first pick back to 11.

That's about the only scenario where a pick will move backwards this year, but in most cases late picks will instead move forward, as clubs with Academy players have stockpiled multiple later picks which will be used in bulk to pay off early bids.

I think anything which encourages Academy clubs to trade out their high picks for multiple low picks is a good thing. It enables clubs without Academy/Father-Son players to move up the draft by packaging their late picks, and creates a market for fringe players because the modest returns (2nd round picks onward) can then be turned into higher picks.

So on draft day, the AFL will ask each club if they wish to nominate a player at their certain pick rather than the old system where they would put for each player and clubs would nominate?

For example:
Pick 1 - Carlton - No nominations
Pick 2 - Brisbane - No nominations
Pick 3 - Melbourne - Nominate Mills

Sydney need to match the points for pick 3, then Melbourne get pick 4. I take it Melbourne would then be able to nominate Hopper or as many players they want at that point as well?

This is what I am taking as being the way it will operate

 

[Blue__Balls]

So on draft day, the AFL will ask each club if they wish to nominate a player at their certain pick rather than the old system where they would put for each player and clubs would nominate?

For example:
Pick 1 - Carlton - No nominations
Pick 2 - Brisbane - No nominations
Pick 3 - Melbourne - Nominate Mills

Sydney need to match the points for pick 3, then Melbourne get pick 4. I take it Melbourne would then be able to nominate Hopper or as many players they want at that point as well?

This is what I am taking as being the way it will operate

Kind of...

The draft proceeds as normal, and at any pick a club can select an Academy player if they rate them (or want to force another club's hand). It's not so much nominating a player as selecting them with your current pick.

Pick 1 - Carlton - "Weitering"
Pick 2 - Brisbane - "Schache"
Pick 3 - Melbourne - "Mills"
"Sydney, would you like to match the bid"
"Yes, we'll take him using points from picks 33, 43, 50-odd etc. etc."
Pick 3 - Sydney - "Mills"
Pick 4 - Melbourne - "Parish"
Etc.

Theoretically, if Sydney felt the offer was too steep a price to pay, they'd refuse to match and Melbourne would be stuck with Mills. However considering these clubs have traded out of the first round, they'd then be giving up a Round 1 quality player for a handful of 2nd and 3rd round players. As such, we could safely pick Mills with Pick 1, knowing that Sydney aren't going to refuse to match the bid and miss out on their gun kid, and force them to cough up more points. We won't, because we'd be encouraging another club to do the same to us with SOSOS, but the potential is there.

 

[Mezzoculo]

Kind of...

The draft proceeds as normal, and at any pick a club can select an Academy player if they rate them (or want to force another club's hand). It's not so much nominating a player as selecting them with your current pick.

Pick 1 - Carlton - "Weitering"
Pick 2 - Brisbane - "Schache"
Pick 3 - Melbourne - "Mills"
"Sydney, would you like to match the bid"
"Yes, we'll take him using points from picks 33, 43, 50-odd etc. etc."
Pick 3 - Sydney - "Mills"
Pick 4 - Melbourne - "Parish"
Etc.

Theoretically, if Sydney felt the offer was too steep a price to pay, they'd refuse to match and Melbourne would be stuck with Mills. However considering these clubs have traded out of the first round, they'd then be giving up a Round 1 quality player for a handful of 2nd and 3rd round players. As such, we could safely pick Mills with Pick 1, knowing that Sydney aren't going to refuse to match the bid and miss out on their gun kid, and force them to cough up more points. We won't, because we'd be encouraging another club to do the same to us with SOSOS, but the potential is there.

That's the interesting part. By bidding on a highly talented academy/F-S player, other clubs are forcing GWS/SYD/BRL/STK to package multiple picks to get their player. This has the effect of pushing the second round (and third, if required) packaged picks down the draft order, essentially pushing clubs with no academy players but lots of 2nd or 3rd round picks up the draft order. I think we could see some strategic academy 'bids' being placed for this very reason...

 

[Azul]

I think we could see some strategic academy 'bids' being placed for this very reason...

Would it backfire though if a biddee decided not to match?

e.g. Saints have pick 45.

Hawthorn says at pick 15, "HAHA, we'll bid on Bailey!"

St Kilda say, "oops, we were hoping he'd not get bid on until pick 25. Besides, he's a Carlton supporter. Pass".

Hawthorn are then saddled with a player they didn't want.

 

[Mezzoculo]

Would it backfire though if a biddee decided not to match?

e.g. Saints have pick 45.

Hawthorn says at pick 15, "HAHA, we'll bid on Bailey!"

St Kilda say, "oops, we were hoping he'd not get bid on until pick 25. Besides, he's a Carlton supporter. Pass".

Hawthorn are then saddled with a player they didn't want.

Haha. You mean Hawthorn the footy club or Hawthorn the Big Footy board? I can see only one making that mistake...

 

[Blue__Balls]

Would it backfire though if a biddee decided not to match?

e.g. Saints have pick 45.

Hawthorn says at pick 15, "HAHA, we'll bid on Bailey!"

St Kilda say, "oops, we were hoping he'd not get bid on until pick 25. Besides, he's a Carlton supporter. Pass".

Hawthorn are then saddled with a player they didn't want.

Would probably only be worth the risk with clubs like Sydney and Brisbane this year - Sydney's first pick isn't until 33, so they're not going to pass on Mills (top 5 talent) and get stuck having to grab a late second rounder instead. Ditto Brisbane, nothing between 2 and 38. As long as they've got the points to match, they won't pass on Keays/Hipwood anywhere in the first round and miss out on quality players.

 

[Mezzoculo]

Would probably only be worth the risk with clubs like Sydney and Brisbane this year - Sydney's first pick isn't until 33, so they're not going to pass on Mills (top 5 talent) and get stuck having to grab a late second rounder instead. Ditto Brisbane, nothing between 2 and 38. As long as they've got the points to match, they won't pass on Keays/Hipwood anywhere in the first round and miss out on quality players.

Clubs would take the risk on the the GWS kids too - they're both top end talent.

 

[ShanDog]

That's the interesting part. By bidding on a highly talented academy/F-S player, other clubs are forcing GWS/SYD/BRL/STK to package multiple picks to get their player. This has the effect of pushing the second round (and third, if required) packaged picks down the draft order, essentially pushing clubs with no academy players but lots of 2nd or 3rd round picks up the draft order. I think we could see some strategic academy 'bids' being placed for this very reason...

That's exactly what would happen, which is why clubs will only pick academy players where they actually rate them.

 

[BluesRule]

Would probably only be worth the risk with clubs like Sydney and Brisbane this year - Sydney's first pick isn't until 33, so they're not going to pass on Mills (top 5 talent) and get stuck having to grab a late second rounder instead. Ditto Brisbane, nothing between 2 and 38. As long as they've got the points to match, they won't pass on Keays/Hipwood anywhere in the first round and miss out on quality players.

Great analysis, if the Hawks bid on SOSOS at #15?

It would really hurt as a CFC supporter but SOS would probably have to
a) let SOS go so CFC get a quality player like Gresham who can have more impact in 2016. Then let SOS develop for 2 years at Hawks before trading him back; or
b) pay overs using #19, making our later picks of little value and hurting us in the rebuild.

Very interesting scenarios

 

[ShanDog]

Great analysis, if the Hawks bid on SOSOS at #15?

It would really hurt as a CFC supporter but SOS would probably have to
a) let SOS go so CFC get a quality player like Gresham who can have more impact in 2016. Then let SOS develop for 2 years at Hawks before trading him back; or
b) pay overs using #19, making our later picks of little value and hurting us in the rebuild.

Very interesting scenarios

If Hawks say 'J. Silvagni' at 15, we say 'all yours'.

 

[Mezzoculo]

That's exactly what would happen, which is why clubs will only pick academy players where they actually rate them.

Well, obviously
But it will also mean that those clubs with 2nd/3rd round picks will bid on these guys with no expectation of landing them as the bid alone will see them 'jump' the academy club's later pick (if said academy club packages picks to meet the point requirements).

 

[ShanDog]

Well, obviously
But it will also mean that those clubs with 2nd/3rd round picks will bid on these guys with no expectation of landing them as the bid alone will see them 'jump' the academy club's later pick (if said academy club packages picks to meet the point requirements).

Yeah that's right. Didn't mean to be Captain Obvious there lol. It benefits everyone else if academy players are picked/bid for early and result in later picks being brought forward. Would be pretty silly if everyone let the academy boys slide!

 

[Blue__Balls]

Clubs would take the risk on the the GWS kids too - they're both top end talent.

Which is why it's not a risk.

Picking Hopper at 3 or 4 is probably about right - it's a slight stretch, but it's not a SOSOS@15 stretch. Comes down to whether the matching club thinks they can get an equal/better player at their next pick rather than paying overs.

If Carlton or Brisbane went at Hopper early (1 or 2), I'd expect GWS to screw with us on SOSOS at some point in return. As such, we won't do it.

 

[Mezzoculo]

Which is why it's not a risk.

Picking Hopper at 3 or 4 is probably about right - it's a slight stretch, but it's not a SOSOS@15 stretch. Comes down to whether the matching club thinks they can get an equal/better player at their next pick rather than paying overs.

If Carlton or Brisbane went at Hopper early (1 or 2), I'd expect GWS to screw with us on SOSOS at some point in return. As such, we won't do it.

Yep. I wasn't specifically talking about the Blues as our 1st pick is #1 and we don't have any picks in the 20s, 30s or 40s.

 

[ferrisb]

I love how this thread has turned into Blue__Balls holding court.

He's sitting there at his desk, godfather style, as a stream of people line up to ask questions.

Poster after poster come in with their tale of whoa about how they can't calculate how we will be able to match a bid for SOSOS.

BB tells them not to worry, he will 'take care of it'. They kiss his hand, bless his family and leave relieved.

But not before BB tells them in a husky voice 'someday, and that day may never come, I will call upon you to answer a question for me. But until that day, take my OP as a gift'.

two burly mods stand either side of BB, leering at the posters. An unspoken threat passes of what will happen if they refuse Don Carlteone....

* violins are heard playing in the background

 

[Blue__Balls]

I love how this thread has turned into Blue__Balls holding court.

He's sitting there at his desk, godfather style, as a stream of people line up to ask questions.

Poster after poster come in with their tale of whoa about how they can't calculate how we will be able to match a bid for SOSOS.

BB tells them not to worry, he will 'take care of it'. They kiss his hand, bless his family and leave relieved.

But not before BB tells them in a husky voice 'someday, and that day may never come, I will call upon you to answer a question for me. But until that day, take my OP as a gift'.

two burly mods stand either side of BB, leering at the posters. An unspoken threat passes of what will happen if they refuse Don Carlteone....

* violins are heard playing in the background

That's the glamorous version.

Reality:

 

[ferrisb]

That's the glamorous version.

Reality:

If you could just answer all these questions, that'd be greeeaaat.

Oh and let me just grab that from you.........