Fixing the draft systems inadequacies

Do you like this draft idea?

  • Great idea

  • Horrible... I am a GWS fan

  • Stop Tinkering with the Game

  • Needs some changes but better than now

  • Close...but....


Results are only viewable after voting.

Remove this Banner Ad

Glitch

Team Captain
Sep 12, 2008
539
363
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
Golden State Warriors
Sorry this is a bit complex. But the draft system is already complex.
To try to be fair - this is my proposal - if you like it - them maybe forward it on to AFL head brass!

I am sure there are a few things that can be improved - I came up with it over about an hour...


How about a much fairer draft system where :-

  • Each pick is weighted as per now. Pick 1 is 3000, Pick 2 2517 Pick 10 1395, Pick 55 207 etc…

  • You get points depending on where you finish on the ladder – example
    • Last place gets Pick 1 points = 3000 + Pick 19 = 948 + Pick37 = 483 + Pick 55 207 = 4647

    • First place gets Pick 18 = 985 + 502 + 220 + 19 = 1646
  • F/Sons and Academy players are at a 25% COST in the first round – but are guaranteed to get to that club. (This fixes the GWS advantage but they can still choose a player)

  • You can forward trade picks as per now.

  • You do not have to use all your points in one year – you can carry them over to the next year if you think the next draft pool suits you better.

  • You can go into a loan situation – which costs you 25% extra per year and must be repaid the next year and not permanently carried forward.

  • Anyone can nominate a bid on every player… example : if 3 clubs nominate for a pick then it is based on ladder/(pick held) position to see who gets the player of choice

  • If a player is desperate to go to a club and nominates a certain club, they would be a 30% penalty to that club and a 1% salary cap disadvantage….

  • If a player wants a state then the club choosing them is hit with a 20% penalty

  • NO FREE AGENCY (it is always available in part). Players can nominate a price and a club and enter the draft again at any time
    • A Club can match a bid for a player of less than 6 years’ service without the loss of points or salary cap.

    • A Club that loses a player gets the Points that the player was taken + 10% + 5% salary cap relief.

    • A Club matching a player after 6 years for 25% of Points. 7 years 35%. +8 years – option not available
  • Each team has a button to press, saying they want to exercise the right to use the current pick.
    • If nobody nominates, the pick decreases in value by 10% but then each team that nominates is put into an equal opportunity draw to get that pick with the lowest ladder position team voiding their rights to select first. …repeat as long as necessary.
  • Clubs do not know in advance if other teams have pressed the button to select a pick.


How it would work by example….



Pick 1.

Essendon presses the button to say it wants to use pick 1

Brisbane says it also wants to use pick 1

Richmond says it also wants to use pick 1


Thoughts???


Viable players for pick 1. (Using real names only as an example)

Treloar wants Collingwood, Prestia wants Victoria and a GWS Zoned Player Fred BigTallNFast who wants GWS.



Essendon will pick first as they finished bottom of those 3.

Essendon nominates the GWS Zoned Player – but – GWS matches because of the Zone. They pay 3000 – discount



Pick 2.



Viable players for pick 2. (Using real names only as an example)

Treloar wants Collingwood, Prestia wants Victoria and Dodgy ButMayComeGood



Essendon no longer wants use a pick 2 at 2900 points and opt out of this pick

Brisbane says it also wants to use pick 2 (they value Dodgy ButMayComeGood)

Richmond says it also wants to use pick 2 (they value prestia)



Brisbane pick Dodgy ButMayComeGood cost 2900



Pick 3.

Viable players For Pick 3

Treloar wants Collingwood, Prestia wants Victoria and a bunch of others

Richmond says it also wants to use pick 2 (they value treloar then prestia)



Richmond Nominate Terloar – but Collingwood match costing them 2800 + 30% + 5% of Treloars nominated salary.



Pick 4.

Richmond press the button and nominate Prestia. Costing them 2700 + 20%



Pick 5.

Nobody presses the button

The pick is decrease by 10%



Pick 6

Richmond Eagles GWS all press

They go into a hat at equal odds to get that pick.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

What about a Dutch Auction?

Teams still get their points allocation based on ladder position, then all 18 clubs sit with a "Sale of the Century" style buzzer.

Big Screen shows the Points value of the pick (lets say starts at 5000), and starts counting down.

Whoever pushes the button first gets the pick, and their points total is deducted.

You could still have academy/zone discounts if you must, but at least those clubs would pay a "fairer" value.

As an added bonus, trade period can be eliminated completely with points directed to the player's former team.
 
Ok - so either most of you don't understand it's simplicity - how it fixes the current problems or that there are big injustices in the current system. You may not like complex ...fine - I challenge you to come up with a better simpler system!
 
Personally I think the current system (Drafts, FA etc) could be improved by:
-Removing salary floor altogether, allowing clubs (especially down the bottom) to freely find the most efficient way to pay their players, they can then bank these savings and use them over a rolling x-year period.
-RFA eligibility at 6 years, UFA at 8. No compensation. This encourages teams that have lost players to stay in the market. With a larger pool of players now in the market, and lower teams building huge war chests, top clubs will likely be hugely outpriced and multiple gun players could potentially make their way to lesser clubs.
-Priority picks for teams 3, 5, 7 years out of the finals.
Maybe:
-2nd round pick for 3 years out
-End of 1st round pick for 5 years out
-End of 1st and 2nd round pick for 7 years out

These are just some basic thoughts, but I think they could definitely help clubs make quicker recoveries and a more interesting competition.
 
Personally I think the current system (Drafts, FA etc) could be improved by:
-Removing salary floor altogether, allowing clubs (especially down the bottom) to freely find the most efficient way to pay their players, they can then bank these savings and use them over a rolling x-year period.
-RFA eligibility at 6 years, UFA at 8. No compensation. This encourages teams that have lost players to stay in the market. With a larger pool of players now in the market, and lower teams building huge war chests, top clubs will likely be hugely outpriced and multiple gun players could potentially make their way to lesser clubs.
-Priority picks for teams 3, 5, 7 years out of the finals.
Maybe:
-2nd round pick for 3 years out
-End of 1st round pick for 5 years out
-End of 1st and 2nd round pick for 7 years out

These are just some basic thoughts, but I think they could definitely help clubs make quicker recoveries and a more interesting competition.


So many of your suggestions will lead to the smaller clubs becoming feeder clubs.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Personally I think the current system (Drafts, FA etc) could be improved by:
-Removing salary floor altogether, allowing clubs (especially down the bottom) to freely find the most efficient way to pay their players, they can then bank these savings and use them over a rolling x-year period.
-RFA eligibility at 6 years, UFA at 8. No compensation. This encourages teams that have lost players to stay in the market. With a larger pool of players now in the market, and lower teams building huge war chests, top clubs will likely be hugely outpriced and multiple gun players could potentially make their way to lesser clubs.
-Priority picks for teams 3, 5, 7 years out of the finals.
Maybe:
-2nd round pick for 3 years out
-End of 1st round pick for 5 years out
-End of 1st and 2nd round pick for 7 years out

These are just some basic thoughts, but I think they could definitely help clubs make quicker recoveries and a more interesting competition.

I am not sure that allowing war chests is a good idea. Whist clubs who manage themselves well will be rewarded, so will those who are successful. Abolishing the compensation ... well it just needs to be fixed.

I don't mind the priority picks - but I would prefer it to be all 2nd rounders. Eg a 2nd rounder for 4 years out 2 for 6.
 
So many of your suggestions will lead to the smaller clubs becoming feeder clubs.

Agreed. The problem with that concept is assuming that players only change clubs for money. There's a reason that the big winners of free agency so far have been the top sides. With the exception of probably Daisy Thomas, most other free agents have left for a better chance at success or more playing opportunity.

If Nat Fyfe decides to leave Freo at the end of the year and he has 2 options on the table:
Option 1: Go to Brisbane for $1.5mil a season. Barely has sufficient training facilities, revolving door of coaches, will probably be lucky to play a final whilst still in the peak of his career, not likely to win a premiership.
Option 2: Go to Essendon for $800k a season (this does actually hurt me to type). A team with a proven coach, who have been able to stockpile some great young kids from bottoming out with the drug penalties, as well as some top notch established talent. State of the art training facilities (just don't cross the road for any vitamin regime) and a real chance to catapult back into a top 4 contender in the next couple of seasons.

Which do you think he picks?

Now I'm not so worried about Freo losing out on any potential compensation, but what if he played for Brisbane, or St Kilda or any of the other perennially struggling clubs. Where would the Bulldogs have been without compensation for Callan Ward? (the wouldn't have Jackson Macrae). Without compensation for losing elite talent at the peak of their career, some clubs will never have the opportunity to get off the bottom of the ladder.
 
Agreed. The problem with that concept is assuming that players only change clubs for money. There's a reason that the big winners of free agency so far have been the top sides. With the exception of probably Daisy Thomas, most other free agents have left for a better chance at success or more playing opportunity.

If Nat Fyfe decides to leave Freo at the end of the year and he has 2 options on the table:
Option 1: Go to Brisbane for $1.5mil a season. Barely has sufficient training facilities, revolving door of coaches, will probably be lucky to play a final whilst still in the peak of his career, not likely to win a premiership.
Option 2: Go to Essendon for $800k a season (this does actually hurt me to type). A team with a proven coach, who have been able to stockpile some great young kids from bottoming out with the drug penalties, as well as some top notch established talent. State of the art training facilities (just don't cross the road for any vitamin regime) and a real chance to catapult back into a top 4 contender in the next couple of seasons.

Which do you think he picks?

Now I'm not so worried about Freo losing out on any potential compensation, but what if he played for Brisbane, or St Kilda or any of the other perennially struggling clubs. Where would the Bulldogs have been without compensation for Callan Ward? (the wouldn't have Jackson Macrae). Without compensation for losing elite talent at the peak of their career, some clubs will never have the opportunity to get off the bottom of the ladder.
Fyfe would most likely choose $1.5m at Brisbane because they have salary cap room. Fyfe going to Brisbane would lift Brisbane off the bottom.
 
Fyfe would most likely choose $1.5m at Brisbane because they have salary cap room. Fyfe going to Brisbane would lift Brisbane off the bottom.

Doubtful. There have been countless players who could get more money going to teams like Brisbane, but they don't, because they want success. Free Agency basically allows players to chase a Premiership. Fyfe will get a packet wherever he plays next year. He'll probably earn close to a million if he stays at Freo, and could push higher if going to a bottomed out side like the Lions, but if he leaves, I doubt very highly that he'll go to any team that isn't in Premiership contention in the next 2-3 years.

Maybe your Dees should have a crack, could be the icing on the cake and the difference between making the 8 and being a contender for the flag.
 
Doubtful. There have been countless players who could get more money going to teams like Brisbane, but they don't, because they want success. Free Agency basically allows players to chase a Premiership. Fyfe will get a packet wherever he plays next year. He'll probably earn close to a million if he stays at Freo, and could push higher if going to a bottomed out side like the Lions, but if he leaves, I doubt very highly that he'll go to any team that isn't in Premiership contention in the next 2-3 years.

Maybe your Dees should have a crack, could be the icing on the cake and the difference between making the 8 and being a contender for the flag.


When Phlil Davis left Adelaide for GWS a start up club, it had to be for the $$$$$, but now he is looking at a premiership
 
When Phlil Davis left Adelaide for GWS a start up club, it had to be for the $$$$$, but now he is looking at a premiership

Different circumstances though, Phil Davis had only been in the system a couple of years and had plenty of time to achieve success with a young group. All post expansion FA's have been in the system 8 or more years and are either in their peak or starting to decline, therefore time is a much more pertinent issue.
 
Doubtful. There have been countless players who could get more money going to teams like Brisbane, but they don't, because they want success. Free Agency basically allows players to chase a Premiership. Fyfe will get a packet wherever he plays next year. He'll probably earn close to a million if he stays at Freo, and could push higher if going to a bottomed out side like the Lions, but if he leaves, I doubt very highly that he'll go to any team that isn't in Premiership contention in the next 2-3 years.

Maybe your Dees should have a crack, could be the icing on the cake and the difference between making the 8 and being a contender for the flag.
Your 2 options were $1.5M or $800k, thats a huge difference. I'd doubt there are too many players knocking back that sort of money regardless of which club they are going to. Maybe if it was $1M or $800k the players will look at the smaller option.
 
There is no doubt the draft system has to go completely ...

the restriction of movement is legally dubious & there is no mathematically evidence to say it has any equalising effect.

In fact all evidence points the other way.

But a "draft system" is a good AFL money spinner .... so it wont be changed for a while yet.

One goal at a time ... there is many other more pressing issues.
 
There is no doubt the draft system has to go completely ...

the restriction of movement is legally dubious & there is no mathematically evidence to say it has any equalising effect.

In fact all evidence points the other way.

But a "draft system" is a good AFL money spinner .... so it wont be changed for a while yet.

One goal at a time ... there is many other more pressing issues.

That is the stupidest thing I have ever read.
 
That is the stupidest thing I have ever read.
Why? The NRL and A League don't have drafts. Why does the AFL need one?

What if a bottom club like Brisbane recruited 4 or 5 of the top 20 talented 18 year olds instead of just taking 1 first round pick in the draft, it would speed up the rebuilding process. Currently if you want a few top 20 18 year olds you have to trade away best 22 players for draft picks which weakens your team.
 
Why? The NRL and A League don't have drafts. Why does the AFL need one?

What if a bottom club like Brisbane recruited 4 or 5 of the top 20 talented 18 year olds instead of just taking 1 first round pick in the draft, it would speed up the rebuilding process. Currently if you want a few top 20 18 year olds you have to trade away best 22 players for draft picks which weakens your team.
How would a bottom team recruit the 4 or 5 top 20 talented 18 year olds? They are struggling to keep the ones they have now.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Fixing the draft systems inadequacies

Back
Top