Draft Day / Future trading

[SchuPie]

Long time reader, first time post starter…

This thread covers a range of issues to do with the draft.

With new free agency rules brought in, compensation draft picks for “poached” players and different views on player worth (as well as reflecting on the Judd trade saga) I often wondered why the AFL hasn’t brought in both future draft pick and draft day (NFL style) trading.

My personal view is that I would love to see last minute trades done on Draft Day when a club suddenly realises a player they want is slider, or that they need to “move up” to grab a certain player.

Further, I believe the introduction of being able to trade for future trade picks would also make it easier for players to move clubs – as well as for clubs to be adequately compensated for players – if a player is worth 2 first round picks and the club that wants him doesn’t have any, they could trade their following 2 years picks (say 2012/2013) – it’s their right to gamble and the player’s club right to hold out for these picks.
[If rumours were true, it was Collingwood’s lack of “pick power” that influenced Judd to choose Carlton, believing Collingwood couldn’t get the job done – imagine if we had have had the option of trading other first round picks – not saying it would have been the right thing to do, but at least it would have been an option]

What are other people’s thoughts?
Why haven’t the AFL gone down the path of Draft Day / future trading?


(Mods – I know prob better suited to Trading/Drafting Boards but I wanted to get "Collingwood only" thoughts as well…I might post there as well)

 

[Swooop]

Sounds a good idea the idea of trading future draft picks to me and can't see an immediate reason why it couldn't be considered.

Does bring more flexibility into draft day and that can only be good!

 

[Markfs]

Allowing clubs to hold on to draft picks for the future will result in clubs having stronger "swings" than they have now......as they use draft picks together to get a strong team assembled.

So overall, it will balance itself out so that 9 teams will be picking players in a particular year and the other 9 teams will be saving picks.

The end result will be a lot of uncompetitive games.

It will probably mean that team will spend even more time stooging at being bad so they get the best draft picks during the downside of the cycle...

Being able to trade for draft picks will only make peaks and troughs more extreme.

I dont think it will make AFL better to watch..

 

[Ed D]

The AFL actually considered bringing in future trading a couple of years ago but obviously chose against doing it. IIRC they changed the draft rules slightly to allow pick for pick swaps (no player had to be involved) and brought in free agency instead.

 

[TradeDraft]

I would love Draft Day Trades as Gives more Excitment on Draft Day and Teams can make a Big Splash.

Just Check out the Falcons did in the last NFL Draft by Moving up to Pick 6 from pick in the 20's to get Julio Jones as they think they needed a Gun WR

 

[mattys123]

Aren't there already teams who have "floating" draft picks for the next few years as part of compensation for a GC or GWS poach of one of their stars?

I know the OP is basically asking about trades done on draft day, but there are already floating picks out there, and there might be more when Free Agency kicks in at the end of the year.

The Free Agency rules to be introduced (as far as I understand them) compensates a club for losing a player to FA in a manner which is not dissimilar to the GWS or GC uncontracted player compensation.

While I don't think we'll ever have draft day trading (the AFL seem to be stuck on one trade week for the foreseeable future) we will have plenty of floating picks for years to come most likely.

 

[EB&W Pieman]

I suspect that the reason this is not part of ALF procedure is the fact that in the AFL contracted players have the right to veto a trade. Thus in the AFL the process is slowed down while the club tries to convince the player to go.

There was an amazing scene in the movie Moneyball where two players - one from each team were suited up to play, only to be told that they had been traded to the other team ie TODAY'S OPPONENTS.

Until we are ready to countenenace this sort of behaviour, we won't be doing any draft day trading.

The trading of future draft picks was probably banned to protect clubs from themselves. Now that they are more professionally run, I reckon this could -and in fact should - be introduced

 

[SchuPie]

The trading of future draft picks was probably banned to protect clubs from themselves. Now that they are more professionally run, I reckon this could -and in fact should - be introduced

Yep - fair call. What i also wanted to raise was that i thought at the time it was ridiculous that Carlton stated "it would not be trading it's first draft pick" (the one it wanted to use for Kruezer) in the trade for Judd (WCE in a way were stuck in a buyer's market) - it would have been a great opportunity for a club like Richmond / Melbourne to say to WCE "Ok, we'll give you our next 2 first round picks + ...." to try to prize Judd loose (and make a statement to the rest of the comp) or force Carlton to pony up pick 1.

 

[Baltimore Jack]

I'm not sure how this works in other competitions, but the problem I see is that a club in the lower half of the ladder may not be there for long.

So if say the Gold Coast traded its next 2 years first round picks, currently the team accepting the trade would be looking at say pick 4 overall.
But if Cold Coast suddenly moved into the top 4, that pick that was pick 4 when the deal was done gets changed to say pick 14 or worse when the draft is actually completed.

Or am I missing something in the translation?

 

[SchuPie]

I'm not sure how this works in other competitions, but the problem I see is that a club in the lower half of the ladder may not be there for long.

So if say the Gold Coast traded its next 2 years first round picks, currently the team accepting the trade would be looking at say pick 4 overall.
But if Cold Coast suddenly moved into the top 4, that pick that was pick 4 when the deal was done gets changed to say pick 14 or worse when the draft is actually completed.

Or am I missing something in the translation?

No - you're spot on (i think) - it's not the pick number, it's just the round
That's the risk - it may end up for better or worse (for both parties) - but a positive flow on effect may be, say we had traded w carlton a while back for it's first pick, when it got to that farcical game b/w them and Melbourne, can you imagine how hard Carlton would have been trying to win to stop having to give us the No. 1 pick!!

Another permutation is Oakland (i think) traded for a player they wanted and gave up future picks - at least 1 first round pick and then if they made the play offs, they had to give up another first round pick (or something like that)

 

[Baltimore Jack]

No - you're spot on (i think) - it's not the pick number, it's just the round
That's the risk - it may end up for better or worse (for both parties) - but a positive flow on effect may be, say we had traded w carlton a while back for it's first pick, when it got to that farcical game b/w them and Melbourne, can you imagine how hard Carlton would have been trying to win to stop having to give us the No. 1 pick!!

Another permutation is Oakland (i think) traded for a player they wanted and gave up future picks - at least 1 first round pick and then if they made the play offs, they had to give up another first round pick (or something like that)

Ok, thanks for the explanation