Analysis Has player movement diminished the worth of a draft pick?

Remove this Banner Ad

Enviable Tradition

Enviable Tradition

Professional Procrastinator
Veteran 30k Posts 10k Posts Bring Back the Bars
Oct 12, 2007
30,718
52,464
The Hills
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
I was just thinking this as I considered all of the player moves this off season. With so many players and especially young players moving so soon, and often for unders, how much has it diminished the value of a draft pick?

And how does this impact the equalization value of the draft?

And yes , before you say it, part of what led me down this line of thinking is Ports diminished hand at this and next draft. So I am definitely biased here.

On SM-G960F using
BigFooty.com mobile app
 
I think of picks as the currency, and players the product. Draft picks vary in value according to the quality of the draft year.

Value of a player is a function of their projected performance and age, their age, and salary expectations/commitments.

The trade cost of acquiring a player is influenced by contract status, a team's position in the PSD and ND, the demand for the player from their current club. The ability to get players without giving up picks (free agency, DFAs) also impacts the trade cost of players.

A few random thoughts off the top of my head:
- A really high salary cap makes it more difficult to have a list that is good enough to max out the salary cap. If a salary cap is small it's relatively easy to have a list that deserves to be paid the full TPP. So when salary is tighter, players with high salary commitments will have smaller trade values.
- If it's relatively easy to get free agents, then other players are then relatively cheaper via trade. However, the tight salary cap can negate this as the increased salary cost of free agents is a higher relative disadvantage.
- If its easy to get f/s and academy players at a discount, then clubs have less need for draft picks. This can make clubs more willing to hold out for actual player value, which increases the price but also increases the chance of players then going through drafts if deals fall though.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Draft picks are garbage, or a lottery if you want to use a nicer term.

Clubs are just catching up on the lack of success rate, the resources required to develop the player, and the time needed for the player to get there.

I'd probably want 4-5 1st round picks to trade out a younger/prime Hawkins/Cameron/Kennedy. Out of Ugle-Hagan/Mcdonald/Thilthorpe I think it's likely only 1 of them will reach the heights people are expecting them to. And even then that's generous, and only because they are better than your top KPF draftees in most years.
 
Draft picks are highly, highly overrated by clubs and fans.

Which clubs have the most high draft picks on their list?

Which clubs have the least? Then look at the ladder, any correlation?

The only caveat here is that a club if they pick the right players with those very high (top 5) draft picks can set themselves up for a decade or more of competitiveness. Nick Reiwoldt, Pendlebury, Franklin/Roughhead, Martin, NN (by TOG) - and although FS I would count Tom Hawkins here as he would have gone top 5.
 
The 747 said:
Draft picks are highly, highly overrated by clubs and fans.

Which clubs have the most high draft picks on their list?

Which clubs have the least? Then look at the ladder, any correlation?

The only caveat here is that a club if they pick the right players with those very high (top 5) draft picks can set themselves up for a decade or more of competitiveness. Nick Reiwoldt, Pendlebury, Franklin/Roughhead, Martin, NN (by TOG) - and although FS I would count Tom Hawkins here as he would have gone top 5.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Although my point was more about high-pick KPFs (hence why I strongly discourage any club to sell the farm to get Mcdonald/Thilthorpe).

Top 5/10 pick have a much higher success rate when it came to midfielders.
 
The 747 said:
Draft picks are highly, highly overrated by clubs and fans.

Which clubs have the most high draft picks on their list?

Which clubs have the least? Then look at the ladder, any correlation?

The only caveat here is that a club if they pick the right players with those very high (top 5) draft picks can set themselves up for a decade or more of competitiveness. Nick Reiwoldt, Pendlebury, Franklin/Roughhead, Martin, NN (by TOG) - and although FS I would count Tom Hawkins here as he would have gone top 5.
Click to expand...

Hawks for a very long time have used draft picks to either get the best player(s) they can from trade or draft. So its not that they are overrated, its that they are merely a currency to be used as best fits.

Some clubs do it well, some do it badly. We have a few fails but far more successes.
 
Prochard123 said:
I mean just off the top of my head...

Schache, Wright, Mccartin, Boyd, Patton...

Probably easier to list the ones that did work,
Click to expand...

The Pies were a beneficiary of this with Grundy, in the years before there were a lot of dud rucks taken very high and it made the other clubs wary of picking a ruck in the first round, leaving Grundy to be available at the Pies first pick......
 
Suma Magic said:
To prove the “draft picks are over-rated” argument, someone could just analyse trades of players for picks to assess which side produced the more games/votes/value.
Click to expand...
Exactly, and the clubs probably have, assuming it's a direct position comparison (KPF vs KPF or Mid vs Mid).

Think it's almost a certainty the club with the established player wins out, which is why clubs are slowly coming to terms that "draft picks are over-rated"
 
Prochard123 said:
Exactly, and the clubs probably have, assuming it's a direct position comparison (KPF vs KPF or Mid vs Mid).

Think it's almost a certainty the club with the established player wins out, which is why clubs are slowly coming to terms that "draft picks are over-rated"
Click to expand...

I just did a quick analysis of 27 simple trades from 2008-2011.

The players traded in had a median of 19 games played, and an average of 38 games played.

The draft picks had a median of 81 games played and an average of 90 games played.

So from that quick look it suggests that draft picks are significantly under-valued.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Suma Magic said:
I just did a quick analysis of 27 simple trades from 2008-2011.

The players traded in had a median of 19 games played, and an average of 38 games played.

The draft picks had a median of 81 games played and an average of 90 games played.

So from that quick look it suggests that draft picks are significantly under-valued.
Click to expand...
Ok but did you consider how many years they had to play those games?...

E.g. a 28 year old with 3 years left would obviously play less than a 18 year old rookie with 13 years left
 
Prochard123 said:
Ok but did you consider how many years they had to play those games?...

E.g. a 28 year old with 3 years left would obviously play less than a 18 year old rookie with 13 years left
Click to expand...

Games played is a useful but flawed metric. It doesn’t account for how well they play. But the differences in games played still suggest that picks were under-rated in the sample size.
 
Suma Magic said:
I just did a quick analysis of 27 simple trades from 2008-2011.

The players traded in had a median of 19 games played, and an average of 38 games played.

The draft picks had a median of 81 games played and an average of 90 games played.

So from that quick look it suggests that draft picks are significantly under-valued.
Click to expand...

Thanks for doing that - most draft picks take up to 70 games to become productive players and earn a spot on merit though......a player traded in is usually AFL standard from day 1.
 
HairyO said:
Hawks for a very long time have used draft picks to either get the best player(s) they can from trade or draft. So its not that they are overrated, its that they are merely a currency to be used as best fits.

Some clubs do it well, some do it badly. We have a few fails but far more successes.
Click to expand...

Hawthorn have used draft picks to get the best players they can, whether it be from trade or draft.

Astute take.

I mean, come on, seriously? Sure, their development, player management, and coaching is excellent, but what do you think other clubs do - yep, the reason bottom clubs are bottom is because they aim to pick the worst players and they actually are successful at what they do?
 
No, they are not.

You just need to target particular drafts. Port sacrificed a lot to make a target of Rozee and co in the 2018 draft. The senior core of Hawthorn, Collingwood, Geelong premiership wins were largely built on 2 drafts each.
 
And picks like 1, 2, 3 - clubs would absolutely trade them if a gun prime aged senior player was available and willing to go to that club.

But how often does a prime aged player want to go to a club with those picks? You need a club immediately on the rise, like say Lachie Neale to Brisbane. Writing was on the wall that Brisbane were on the up. But would he go to North in 2021 now? No. He's worth pick 2. And every club would trade out pick 2 for him. But he's not coming to North, hence why the top couple of picks always now stay with the club.
 
Also incredibly hard to predict the impact of a kid playing TAC transitioning into AFL. Most sports the players debut far later, and I don't think the AFL have really thought out making the state leagues a feeder league over relying on underage footy to produce quality draftees. Still think the AFL has a long way to go in finding the balance between bringing quality mature agers into the league, but guys like Tim Kelly and Tom Stewart are showing those kind of picks can really pay dividends.
 
HTPunter said:
Hawthorn have used draft picks to get the best players they can, whether it be from trade or draft.

Astute take.

I mean, come on, seriously? Sure, their development, player management, and coaching is excellent, but what do you think other clubs do - yep, the reason bottom clubs are bottom is because they aim to pick the worst players and they actually are successful at what they do?
Click to expand...

Bad coaches and recruiters making bad decisions.

Carlton had how many top 5 picks even just a couple of years ago? They were not trading a lot.

Now they are trading top picks for half back flankers.
 
The 747 said:
The Pies were a beneficiary of this with Grundy, in the years before there were a lot of dud rucks taken very high and it made the other clubs wary of picking a ruck in the first round, leaving Grundy to be available at the Pies first pick......
Click to expand...
Imagine if SOS had have pulled the trigger on Grundy a couple picks earlier than Collingwood?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lore
Confirmed Key Dates & Terms for AFLW Season 2023 Supplementary Draft Player Movements
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
Ticky009
Ticky009
Enviable Tradition
Pick 4 on the table?
29 30 31 32 33
Replies
804
Views
32K
Keystone agony
Keystone agony
Miguel Sanchez
Analysis How many live picks will your team take to the 2023 draft>
2
Replies
46
Views
4K
pK75
pK75
DEESNUTSRBIG
  • Poll
Does the AFL need live Draft Day Trading?
Replies
14
Views
1K
Vindicater
Vindicater
C
Free Agency and Special Assistance Picks should be with No Detriment
Replies
5
Views
536
Scrads
Scrads
Keystone agony
  • Locked
Connor Osullivan Offer at Pick 9
Replies
16
Views
1K
Lore
Lore
elbarton
Analysis “Required player”
Replies
2
Views
542
Orange crush
Orange crush

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top