Analysis Father Son and Academy players bidding system

Remove this Banner Ad

Forzaport

Brownlow Medallist
May 27, 2004
24,240
43,309
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
The exploits illustrated by GC & GWS in collecting shitpicks for bidding during this year's trade period are a great example of why this bidding system is broken as badly as FA compensation.
I still think the new bidding system is better than the system it replaces. The points allocation per pick is off though, needs to be a steeper curve as you go down the draft order.

Using the Heeney example, it's better that Syndey give up the points equivalent of pick 2 (which should include their first round pick) instead of drafting him at pick 17 as they did. Melbourne drafting at pick 3 instead of pick 2 doesn't change anything as either way, Heeney wouldn't be available to them once Sydney matched their bid.
 

Macca19

Moderator
Jan 14, 2001
63,241
79,852
Albertr0n
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
MUFC, Orlando Magic
The ability for clubs with Academy players to trade out middling picks for a mass of picks in second and third rounds is good for the club picking Academy players, and its good for the team trading up sh*t picks (a little, anyway), but the cost is paid by any team now effectively bumped down the draft order when Syd/Bris/GWS/GC make their counterbids - they lose first round placing.

You would be able to do this with a draft age raised to the early 20s. 18 year olds will always need development. Letting good sides claim draftees very cheaply only prolongs the time other sides will spend at the bottom.
I'm not sure I agree. The status quo essentially remains for other clubs.
 

demon inda sack

Team Captain
Jul 11, 2015
571
522
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Yeah, but it doesn't.

FA is simple; its easy to see two clubs co-ordinating to the detriment of the league (eg. when one club lets a compensation pick be generated, which is taken into account for the other club in a side trade). We were doing this as far back as 1996 when our claiming of Ian Downsborough (sorting West Coast into a #1 pick) got us a sweet side deal on Shane Bond and Brayden Lyle. Good for those clubs, but it comes at a cost to all teams - players are removed from the draft, and each player removed effectively bumps everyone else's picks down a spot...and that has different impacts at different points.

The Isaac Heeney example given is ok, but you know what happens that no-one really notices even in the revised scenario? Melbourne still ends up effectively getting pick #3 instead of pick #2 - that isn't corrected, and the value difference between picks 2 and 3 is significant.

The ability for clubs with Academy players to trade out middling picks for a mass of picks in second and third rounds is good for the club picking Academy players, and its good for the team trading up sh*t picks (a little, anyway), but the cost is paid by any team now effectively bumped down the draft order when Syd/Bris/GWS/GC make their counterbids - they lose first round placing.

You would be able to do this with a draft age raised to the early 20s. 18 year olds will always need development. Letting good sides claim draftees very cheaply only prolongs the time other sides will spend at the bottom.
Great post a couple of things I hadn't considered in there. The afl needs to scrap compensation and if they want to have it, make it a point system and the club gaining the player has to give 50% of the points in picks to the club losing the player. I agree on raising the draft age and I would like some form of what they have in america with colledge sports here. Are points locked in at the start of the draft, say if you have pick 16 and that gets pushed out to 18 during live bidding what value does that pick have? If the value is locked then I can't see how it affects other clubs. When the players that are picked up with points were never going to be drafted normally.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Portia

#DrewBlood
Oct 7, 2001
50,502
24,856
Fragile bastion of liberalism
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Muckbuckle Dolmens
I'm not sure I agree. The status quo essentially remains for other clubs.
No not really.

With the previous system, Sydney had to give up #18 for Heeney, which effectively bumped every pick from #2 to #17 down a spot. Now that Sydney have the opportunity to trade out pick #18 in trade period and turn it into more points later in the draft, to the benefit of one other club, you extend that bump down to late in the second round (or whenever Sydney's first pick is)...all of a sudden its pick #2 to #30ish being bumped down a spot.
 

demon inda sack

Team Captain
Jul 11, 2015
571
522
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
No not really.

With the previous system, Sydney had to give up #18 for Heeney, which effectively bumped every pick from #2 to #17 down a spot. Now that Sydney have the opportunity to trade out pick #18 in trade period and turn it into more points later in the draft, to the benefit of one other club, you extend that bump down to late in the second round (or whenever Sydney's first pick is)...all of a sudden its pick #2 to #30ish being bumped down a spot.
Which is good for other clubs right?
 

Portia

#DrewBlood
Oct 7, 2001
50,502
24,856
Fragile bastion of liberalism
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Muckbuckle Dolmens
Which is good for other clubs right?
The exact opposite..pick 2 is really only pick 3, pick 20 is only pick 21, etc.

And the more Academy/zone/FS players you add, the more inequitable it becomes - there's apparently three guys in first round contention this year that can get snapped up like this. How would you feel about your pick 12 suddenly becoming pick 15 because someone other happened to trade a couple of second and third rounders to GWS & Sydney for the first round pick they no longer have to surrender?

There's no way bidding in its current form can be extended to other clubs in its current form without breaking equalisation completely.
 

demon inda sack

Team Captain
Jul 11, 2015
571
522
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
The exact opposite..pick 2 is really only pick 3, pick 20 is only pick 21, etc.

And the more Academy/zone/FS players you add, the more inequitable it becomes - there's apparently three guys in first round contention this year that can get snapped up like this. How would you feel about your pick 12 suddenly becoming pick 15 because someone other happened to trade a couple of second and third rounders to GWS & Sydney for the first round pick they no longer have to surrender?

There's no way bidding in its current form can be extended to other clubs in its current form without breaking equalisation completely.
The whole point is that these players aren't really in the draft so it doesn't really change much like macca19 said the status quo stays the same.
 

PAFCsince1870

Premiership Player
Mar 13, 2006
3,592
3,001
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Orlando Magic
The whole point is that these players aren't really in the draft so it doesn't really change much like macca19 said the status quo stays the same.
It doesn't change anything for the clubs picking up father/sons and academy selections.

It changes a lot though for the rest of the clubs when GWS hand over a top 10 pick they would have had to use on an academy selection for a handful of second and third round draft picks as the club receiving the top 10 pick will then grab a highly rated player in the draft pool as opposed to GWS using the pick on someone who was an academy player anyway.
 

Forzaport

Brownlow Medallist
May 27, 2004
24,240
43,309
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
The exact opposite..pick 2 is really only pick 3, pick 20 is only pick 21, etc.
It's always been like that since the previous FS/Academy bidding system, just never properly acknowledged. In 2014, Melbourne may have drafted Petracca with pick 2, but since they bid pick 2 on Heeney, they really drafted Petracca at 3.

And the more Academy/zone/FS players you add, the more inequitable it becomes - there's apparently three guys in first round contention this year that can get snapped up like this. How would you feel about your pick 12 suddenly becoming pick 15 because someone other happened to trade a couple of second and third rounders to GWS & Sydney for the first round pick they no longer have to surrender?

There's no way bidding in its current form can be extended to other clubs in its current form without breaking equalisation completely.
I'm not sure this is a major issue - Sydney gave up their first round pick 14 to improve their points position by trading in picks 23 and 44. If they use those points on a player in round 1, they'll have to surrender picks 23 and 44, effectively keeping our pick 32 as is and moving our pick 49 up one position. While I do think the points weighing needs to be adjusted, I don't think we're overall more disadvantaged than previously.
 

Macca19

Moderator
Jan 14, 2001
63,241
79,852
Albertr0n
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
MUFC, Orlando Magic
It doesn't change anything for the clubs picking up father/sons and academy selections.

It changes a lot though for the rest of the clubs when GWS hand over a top 10 pick they would have had to use on an academy selection for a handful of second and third round draft picks as the club receiving the top 10 pick will then grab a highly rated player in the draft pool as opposed to GWS using the pick on someone who was an academy player anyway.
Mills will likely cost Sydney their first 4 picks, which pushes their 2nd, 3rd & 4th pick to the back of the queue, which also means that everyone else after that gets bumped forward 3 picks. So its quite possible that this year with Mills, Hopper, Hipwood, Kennedy & Keays all likely to be bid on earlyish, that our pick 49 could end up actually being pick 39 in reality, so there will be benefits later in the draft for pretty much all clubs.

There will also be a big depth hole for these Qld & NSW clubs in time. If they end up getting 1 or 2 good talents and then the last 3-4 players drafted, are they going to be all that better in the long run?
 

Portia

#DrewBlood
Oct 7, 2001
50,502
24,856
Fragile bastion of liberalism
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Muckbuckle Dolmens
There will also be a big depth hole for these Qld & NSW clubs in time.
Where? 20% of their academy players, and whatever bonus they can get from trading early selections for inflated 2nd/3rds. If the Academy is generous, which it is looking like it is, then its crazy.

If they end up getting 1 or 2 good talents and then the last 3-4 players drafted, are they going to be all that better in the long run?
If its happening every year, you will break the AFL.

I am all for a player auction, but for it to work you need to do away with the draft, which would probably be a good thing at this point.
 

PAFCsince1870

Premiership Player
Mar 13, 2006
3,592
3,001
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Orlando Magic
Mills will likely cost Sydney their first 4 picks, which pushes their 2nd, 3rd & 4th pick to the back of the queue, which also means that everyone else after that gets bumped forward 3 picks. So its quite possible that this year with Mills, Hopper, Hipwood, Kennedy & Keays all likely to be bid on earlyish, that our pick 49 could end up actually being pick 39 in reality, so there will be benefits later in the draft for pretty much all clubs.

There will also be a big depth hole for these Qld & NSW clubs in time. If they end up getting 1 or 2 good talents and then the last 3-4 players drafted, are they going to be all that better in the long run?
In a shallow draft is it preferable to have less talent available at pick 10 for example but your crapshoot picks bumped up a few spots?

Depth can always be addressed through free agency and the ramifications of the salary cap on other clubs.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

noffle

All Australian
Sep 2, 2008
771
748
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I think as an idea it works fine; you have taken too much value with the draft pick you have been given, so you must give back value to the draft. The problem is that late draft picks are waaaay overrated in the system, so when you trade your first rounder for a bunch of late picks you are creating value from nothing, which gives a huge advantage to the bidding team as they can get their gun players really cheap and also a huge advantage to the facilitating team as they can receive a first rounder for a few packets of chips. If there was a fairer weighting on later picks then we wouldn't be having this discussion as there would just be no way that a team could afford gun academy players year-after-year.
 

Portia

#DrewBlood
Oct 7, 2001
50,502
24,856
Fragile bastion of liberalism
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Muckbuckle Dolmens
The problem is that there's no way to have a fair weighting on later picks with draft quality that varies so much year by year.

By mixing systems like this, the AFL have introduced all of the hiccups that you get when you try to work free market economy into a strict regulatory regime. See also: oligarchs in Russia exploiting fall of communism.
 

Macca19

Moderator
Jan 14, 2001
63,241
79,852
Albertr0n
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
MUFC, Orlando Magic
Where? 20% of their academy players, and whatever bonus they can get from trading early selections for inflated 2nd/3rds. If the Academy is generous, which it is looking like it is, then its crazy.
Its touch & go whether Brisbane will be able to get both Hipwood & Keays. Its very possible they will have to overlook Keays if he is bid in the first round. Same story for GWS with Hopper & Kennedy. So at this point, we don't know if its being generous or not. They could have made all these trades for minimal gain at this point. It will depend on who bids on these players and when. The bonus for other clubs is they may be able to actually gain access to these players when previously they couldn't at all.

In a shallow draft is it preferable to have less talent available at pick 10 for example but your crapshoot picks bumped up a few spots?
I would much rather have pick 39 than pick 49 in a shallow draft.
 

Portia

#DrewBlood
Oct 7, 2001
50,502
24,856
Fragile bastion of liberalism
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Muckbuckle Dolmens
Its touch & go whether Brisbane will be able to get both Hipwood & Keays. Its very possible they will have to overlook Keays if he is bid in the first round.
If they choose to overlook, it means the club selecting them has paid 20% more than Brisbane would, on top of whatever percentage you work out for any points-collecting. Even in declining, it has been more than generous to Brisbane.

The bonus for other clubs is they may be able to actually gain access to these players when previously they couldn't at all.
Um, if you're still talking about differences between the previous system and the current system, this hasn't changed. All you've described here is that Brisbane may choose to overlook a player, which could have happened previously too.

I would much rather have pick 39 than pick 49 in a shallow draft.
On average, there would not be a great difference.

I'd also point out that in that example, pick #39 is effectively ~#42 when you remember the talent taken out of the draft pool by Academy clubs. #42 vs #49 in a shallow draft is insignificant.
 

Portology

Cheap, fast, safe: pick two, or juggle three.
Sep 27, 2007
8,885
8,798
Sydney
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Manchester United, Barcelona
Mills will likely cost Sydney their first 4 picks, which pushes their 2nd, 3rd & 4th pick to the back of the queue, which also means that everyone else after that gets bumped forward 3 picks. So its quite possible that this year with Mills, Hopper, Hipwood, Kennedy & Keays all likely to be bid on earlyish, that our pick 49 could end up actually being pick 39 in reality, so there will be benefits later in the draft for pretty much all clubs.

There will also be a big depth hole for these Qld & NSW clubs in time. If they end up getting 1 or 2 good talents and then the last 3-4 players drafted, are they going to be all that better in the long run?
Where? 20% of their academy players, and whatever bonus they can get from trading early selections for inflated 2nd/3rds. If the Academy is generous, which it is looking like it is, then its crazy.

If its happening every year, you will break the AFL.

I am all for a player auction, but for it to work you need to do away with the draft, which would probably be a good thing at this point.
GC and GWS were set up with wide but national concessions and we've seen the subsequent exodus and related issues.

Biasing access to the top local talent for those two states eliminates "homesickness" and makes it easier for them to combat FA for "stars" in time. I know "the H word" is sometimes a covering excuse for "money" but not always. I suspect it will be used less so now that freer and easier player movement is the norm. Why hide it anymore? If it's real it's real and if it's just a deal, well, big deal. The rest is all about who is allowed to trade and when to balance it all out. If expansion teams come to have a few home grown top end talents + a larger fraction of spuds vs other teams more balanced lists it all works itself out on the footy field. If the expansion academies products of "high" and "AFL standard" quality turn out to have a higher "hit rate" than draftees, well that's a matter for exchange rates, ie points values. No one can afford all of them. I admit I don't quite "get" Sydney's Franklin deal nor the AFL's subsequent imposition of trade restrictions on them. If anything, the Franklin deal in isolation should have been kyboshed on the grounds of cynically breaking the rest of the economic system of AFL player movement, but it's a blind spot for me. For some reason my brain doesn't get it lol.

You could turn the draft into an almost pure points auction, but it's still going to be a draft, part of "socialist football" if you like, because a central bank of AFL controls total money supply, the points, the "exchange rates" and deliberately re-distributes a significant fraction of the wealth generated according to the alleged "need" of fairness. In other words, Melbourne will probably continue to piss its welfare payments up against the wall for a while yet, and North will probably continue to spend them on second hand packets of cigarettes.
 

noffle

All Australian
Sep 2, 2008
771
748
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
The problem is that there's no way to have a fair weighting on later picks with draft quality that varies so much year by year.

By mixing systems like this, the AFL have introduced all of the hiccups that you get when you try to work free market economy into a strict regulatory regime. See also: oligarchs in Russia exploiting fall of communism.
You're right, it can never be truly fair, but I feel like the way the weightings stand at the moment that even in the strongest of drafts it would be worthwhile shipping off a bunch of 3rd and 2nd rounders in order to land a high pick.

Maybe a possible solution would be to limit the number of picks involved to two. Then if there was a bid at #5 and you had #8 you could make up the difference with your next pick and everyone is happy, but there would be no way to access the player if you didn't enter the draft until pick #20.
 

Portia

#DrewBlood
Oct 7, 2001
50,502
24,856
Fragile bastion of liberalism
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Muckbuckle Dolmens
How would you like fee agency and the draft to work Portia?
Outline the key goals you want for the system to achieve and I'll tell you.

My primary interest is in a consistent system that is fair whenever possible, than in any specific system. This bidding system has a lot of randomness but very little equity - much like other modifications to the draft (eg. all those Geelong father-sons they got for virtually nothing).
 

Portology

Cheap, fast, safe: pick two, or juggle three.
Sep 27, 2007
8,885
8,798
Sydney
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
Manchester United, Barcelona
The problem is that there's no way to have a fair weighting on later picks with draft quality that varies so much year by year.

By mixing systems like this, the AFL have introduced all of the hiccups that you get when you try to work free market economy into a strict regulatory regime. See also: oligarchs in Russia exploiting fall of communism.
Said oligarchs exploited the *corrupted* poor valuations of the equivalent of high draft picks, not so much the "pick 40 and above" ones.

It would be like having Eddie set the points value while an AFL bureaucrat then walking away with a ridiculously cheap asset for his private Collingwood empire.

Putin is your Andrew Demetriou equivalent. Jail a few oligarchs, bully a few, negotiate with a couple, piss everyone off and leave the stage with the country simultaneously richer, poorer, and more feared than respected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

demon inda sack

Team Captain
Jul 11, 2015
571
522
Adelaide
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Outline the key goals you want for the system to achieve and I'll tell you.

My primary interest is in a consistent system that is fair whenever possible, than in any specific system. This bidding system has a lot of randomness but very little equity - much like other modifications to the draft (eg. all those Geelong father-sons they got for virtually nothing).
I want a national draft
I want free player movement with limited restrictions
clubs having some form of development squad linked with zones that play against each other nation wide
 

Macca19

Moderator
Jan 14, 2001
63,241
79,852
Albertr0n
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Other Teams
MUFC, Orlando Magic
Um, if you're still talking about differences between the previous system and the current system, this hasn't changed. All you've described here is that Brisbane may choose to overlook a player, which could have happened previously too.
Under the prior system, Brisbane could have taken Hipwood & Keays for their first two picks in the draft. Now, they will take Hipwood and may not be able to afford Keays. Its compeltely different. And thats not even bringing up later Academy players that they wont be able to afford either.

It must also be remembered that the only reason both Brisbane & GWS have been able to stockpile picks is due to the exodus of players experienced by both clubs this year. In a normal year, neither will be able to end up with a stack of 2nd & 3rd round picks to do what they've been able to this year.
 

Remove this Banner Ad