Analysis Improving the bidding system

Remove this Banner Ad

AlibiMonday

I'm sorry, Dave.
Sep 21, 2006
1,485
1,015
London
AFL Club
Sydney
The good old swings and roundabout!

To be used when you know something is to your advantage
Don’t disagree that Sydney benefit from the academy, but let’s not entirely fool ourselves that there’s not a huge structural disadvantage. One example, we lost the best F/S we’ve ever had, who ended up at your club, due to being in a non-football state.
 

Suma Magic

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 22, 2009
23,298
25,372
AFL Club
West Coast
I think northern academies are warranted and necessary.

But there is no need for the significant draft day discounts that currently exist.

If you reduce these by:
- aligning the points index to reality
- reducing/removing/limiting the discount

then northern clubs can still get priority access to local talent at market rates.

The only issue most people have with it is the draft day discount, which affords a significant advantage.
 

JasRulz63

Norm Smith Medallist
May 26, 2007
9,115
8,679
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
I think northern academies are warranted and necessary.

But there is no need for the significant draft day discounts that currently exist.

If you reduce these by:
- aligning the points index to reality
- reducing/removing/limiting the discount

then northern clubs can still get priority access to local talent at market rates.

The only issue most people have with it is the draft day discount, which affords a significant advantage.
I'm not a fan of being able to use multiple low picks to match bids for these players, especially the ones that end up first rounders. Perhaps a rule that says you can only use the points value of a maximum of two picks or something along those lines.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Suma Magic

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 22, 2009
23,298
25,372
AFL Club
West Coast
I think the best way to improve fairness would be to cap the discount ( measured in points) could receive over a moving period.

That way clubs who get heaps of priority access would only get as much points discount as clubs who get very little.
 

LukeParkerno1

Post-Human
Sep 23, 2005
125,722
49,629
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Sydney Swans
I think northern academies are warranted and necessary.

But there is no need for the significant draft day discounts that currently exist.

If you reduce these by:
- aligning the points index to reality
- reducing/removing/limiting the discount

then northern clubs can still get priority access to local talent at market rates.

The only issue most people have with it is the draft day discount, which affords a significant advantage.
Are you planning on getting rid of the other “inequalities” too though? Can’t screw some and not others.
 

Suma Magic

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 22, 2009
23,298
25,372
AFL Club
West Coast
I'm not a fan of being able to use multiple low picks to match bids for these players, especially the ones that end up first rounders. Perhaps a rule that says you can only use the points value of a maximum of two picks or something along those lines.
If you make the points curve match reality then this will mitigate the issue. Because clubs who are looking to improve points will be just as likely to be able to do it by trading up as trading down.

If the long term average fair trade (by teams ignoring points) is say pick 20 for picks 30 and 40, then the points system would reflect this. This would mean an academy team looking to trade out picks for picks of higher points value would have limited scope to do so.
 

Suma Magic

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 22, 2009
23,298
25,372
AFL Club
West Coast
So GF goes to highest seed? Same changes to FS..

There are a million inequalities
Yeah definitely same changes to f/s. It’s not about the avenue for priority access, it’s about the total draft day discounts teams get.

Limiting to an average around the lower quartile of the long-term all-team annual discount would ensure that clubs could continue to get the significant benefits of priority access to academy and father son players.
 

JasRulz63

Norm Smith Medallist
May 26, 2007
9,115
8,679
Melbourne
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
If you make the points curve match reality then this will mitigate the issue. Because clubs who are looking to improve points will be just as likely to be able to do it by trading up as trading down.

If the long term average fair trade (by teams ignoring points) is say pick 20 for picks 30 and 40, then the points system would reflect this. This would mean an academy team looking to trade out picks for picks of higher points value would have limited scope to do so.
I think the current points index overvalues later picks, so I think moving up to improve points is more difficult than moving down. In your example, there's only the value of pick 60 difference between the two sides of the trade (e.g. pick 20 + 60 = 30 + 40).

You could scale the discount depending on where in the draft they are bid on (with the least discount for top 10 picks, increasing for pick 11-20 etc.). It's the high academy picks such as Mills, JUH etc. that seem to upset opposition supporters.

I may be biased though because Brisbane have only ever had one academy player end up a top 20 pick (Hipwood; pick 14, 2015), and we ended up essentially using our pick 17 on him (which we traded out for picks in the 30s).
 

LukeParkerno1

Post-Human
Sep 23, 2005
125,722
49,629
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Sydney Swans
Yeah definitely same changes to f/s. It’s not about the avenue for priority access, it’s about the total draft day discounts teams get.

Limiting to an average around the lower quartile of the long-term all-team annual discount would ensure that clubs could continue to get the significant benefits of priority access to academy and father son players.
The fact that Victorian sides get to ply big games including potential GF’s is a worse inequality than any Academy though. That’s the thing that needs to change first
 

Obeanie1

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 26, 2007
23,205
18,445
Darwin
AFL Club
West Coast
You really might be onto something huge there.

If everybody does it your way nobody even has to think about it at all. We can say "Essendon walked out of the draft with three top ten draftees. It is therefore obvious that they drafted better than anyone else."

We can even come to that conclusion before the draft actually happens. Makes things so much simpler.
Can a north fan explain to me why you didn’t go tall at pick 3?

There was always going to be mids available at pick 13, and north already have a few mids takin inside the top 15, and next years top 5 will probably be mids. You may not get a better chance to a high end tall.
I know north fans like Comben, but that’s a awful lot of faith for someone taken in 2nd rd, who hasn’t debut yet.
At a guess I'd suggest Norths went mids as they don't take as long to repay the investment. Club needs to show improvement ASAP to sell hope to its fans.

Also the top ranked talls were from interstate and they possibly were wary of losing them in two years as they are rebuilding.
 

Suma Magic

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 22, 2009
23,298
25,372
AFL Club
West Coast
The fact that Victorian sides get to ply big games including potential GF’s is a worse inequality than any Academy though. That’s the thing that needs to change first
I think it would be a poor approach to link the two. Because if you did then WA and SA would get academies like nsw/qld, which would be silly.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Suma Magic

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 22, 2009
23,298
25,372
AFL Club
West Coast
I think the current points index overvalues later picks, so I think moving up to improve points is more difficult than moving down. In your example, there's only the value of pick 60 difference between the two sides of the trade (e.g. pick 20 + 60 = 30 + 40).

You could scale the discount depending on where in the draft they are bid on (with the least discount for top 10 picks, increasing for pick 11-20 etc.). It's the high academy picks such as Mills, JUH etc. that seem to upset opposition supporters.

I may be biased though because Brisbane have only ever had one academy player end up a top 20 pick (Hipwood; pick 14, 2015), and we ended up essentially using our pick 17 on him (which we traded out for picks in the 30s).
Yeah in reality maybe 20 actually gets 28 and 35 or something. Whatever the actual market curve is, just change the points to suit it.

When you've got a points curve where you're equally likely to be able to improve points by trading up or trading down, then the points curve is accurate. Not this current nonsense where you can always trade high picks for multiple low picks of a greater points value.

I think if the policy objective was to give draft day discounts/benefits to northern clubs, a better approach would be to give them priority picks every year. But as we know, this isn't the objective.

Maybe if clubs were limited to a 1,000 points discount over a trailing five year period (for example) it would get rid of the issue of certain clubs getting a massive draft day benefit due to the northern academies or father-son system.
 

Suma Magic

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 22, 2009
23,298
25,372
AFL Club
West Coast
They are linked and I’d have no issue with WA/SA getting one either anyway.
Let's agree to disagree.

Personally i think a policy with the stated objective of affording recruiting and draft-day advantages to non-victorian clubs due to the grand final arrangements is a poor proposal. The WA and SA clubs would get crazy draft hauls every year. No one would support it.
 

Nutjob

Club Legend
Oct 23, 2014
1,363
2,570
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Nutjob - NFI
Jones -- Publicly said he wanted to get home to Victoria, get to know his nephews etc. Loved the Swans and declined a long-term contract.
Here's one article...

Plenty of others for all the other players, but I'm not doing your homework for you Nutjob.
Jones gave you what 8 years of service? Hardly a retention factor when he spent so long in Sydney. It sounds like he enjoyed his time there, otherwise he would have left 6 years ago.

The fact still remains that apart from the odd player here and there, the players that have left is for a better contract or more opportunity. The Franklin deal is a big factor in players leaving in recent history also.

Plenty of players have left Victorian clubs to head back to SA and WA, purely because they’re homesick.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Last edited:

JayJ20

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 28, 2016
13,852
19,395
AFL Club
Essendon
Let's not pretend Sydney are even remotely close to GWS and Gold Coast's situation. Let's take GWS as an example.

GWS struggle to retain or attract talent because:
- They are a new franchise with no history
- GWS are stacked full of first round talent to the point where first rounders are playing in the twos/playing out of position
- They are the smaller club in a two club city representing a specific NRL dominated area of Sydney (as opposed to Sydney representing the whole city).
- They are not from a traditional football state

Sydney also don't struggle to retain or attract talent because of their history. They are literally a Victorian club that moved interstate.
They had Tippett and Buddy come, two of the most high-profile recruits in recent history.
For Sydney to be treated the same as GWS from an academy perspective is downright ludicrous. Why do they deserve to receive more talent than North and Adelaide? They get to select McDonald in addition to Campbell just because?

If you compare North Melbourne and Sydney, I'd say Sydney is easily better placed to attract and retain talent. North as a small Melbourne club has to compete with 10 other clubs for Victorian talent, including the big clubs with better facilities and more success.

If North can be treated like every other Vic club, then so can Sydney. The Northern academy needs to be changed.
 

Laphroaig

I Hate You
Jul 22, 2013
16,281
23,768
AFL Club
Carlton
I think northern academies are warranted and necessary.

But there is no need for the significant draft day discounts that currently exist.

If you reduce these by:
- aligning the points index to reality
Can't be done.

It's a problem that those who champion the idea of a points system for ALL draft selections can't or won't see.

The dynamics of any draft is different to the dynamics of any other draft. There is a whole raft of variables which change the demand / value.

Which means it is impossible to set a meaningful value on points. Until the draft is over, we actually have no idea what the correct value of a point is for that draft.

Anyhoo, the last thing the system needs is more complication.

  • Keep the Northern Academies, but tighten up the pick required.
  • Kill the NGA's completely. They are nothing but a rort and do nothing to develop pathways. It's not player development, it's more like winning a lottery.
  • Crack down hard on father / son rules while we're at it to stop the ridiculous situation of Clubs trading themselves out of the sharp end of the draft. Perhaps require a Club to spend their (original) first rounder to get priority on a F/S. If they don't want him enough to do that, they don't want him enough to be given privileged access.
 

Kreuuuzeurns

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 25, 2013
5,339
8,294
AFL Club
Carlton
So GF goes to highest seed? Same changes to FS..

There are a million inequalities
If the main argument for an academy is that Victoria hosts the grand final then you shouldn’t have academy.

I’m sure you weren’t complaining about all those Victorian players who wanted to move away from the football spotlight (including the greatest forward of our generation?).

Academy’s are required but need to be changed. I’m not sure how that can be disputed after yet another year of picking up one of the best kids for effective peanuts.
 

LukeParkerno1

Post-Human
Sep 23, 2005
125,722
49,629
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Sydney Swans
If the main argument for an academy is that Victoria hosts the grand final then you shouldn’t have academy.

I’m sure you weren’t complaining about all those Victorian players who wanted to move away from the football spotlight (including the greatest forward of our generation?).

Academy’s are required but need to be changed. I’m not sure how that can be disputed after yet another year of picking up one of the best kids for effective peanuts.
There are plenty of reasons to keep the academies. Don’t pretend Victorian sides don’t get heavy advantages overall. It’s a small even up basically not that it will ever be totally even
 

reincarnated

Club Legend
Apr 29, 2008
1,301
884
Epping
AFL Club
Essendon
You really might be onto something huge there.

If everybody does it your way nobody even has to think about it at all. We can say "Essendon walked out of the draft with three top ten draftees. It is therefore obvious that they drafted better than anyone else."

We can even come to that conclusion before the draft actually happens. Makes things so much simpler.
Not necessarily...imagine if Essendon picked up three Durdin like hacks....Or traded their picks or decided to pass.

I understand why this b-u-t-t hurt from Carlton fans...lol...your list manager coughed up pick 8 for a half back flanker....after brave talking. Got schooled by Dodoro.

Now some how you want to carry that b-h into Essendon's draft assessment.
 

Kreuuuzeurns

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 25, 2013
5,339
8,294
AFL Club
Carlton
There are plenty of reasons to keep the academies. Don’t pretend Victorian sides don’t get heavy advantages overall. It’s a small even up basically not that it will ever be totally even
It’s not about who gets more or less advantages. Advantages need to be ironed out for a fair competition. Heeney, Mills, Blakey and now Campbell for stuff all is half a rebuild done, hardly a “small even up”.
 

LukeParkerno1

Post-Human
Sep 23, 2005
125,722
49,629
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Sydney Swans
It’s not about who gets more or less advantages. Advantages need to be ironed out for a fair competition. Heeney, Mills, Blakey and now Campbell for stuff all is half a rebuild done, hardly a “small even up”.
Stuff all? Apart from Heeney (and it's better than Hawkins going for a 3rd rounder) what other one didn't we pay fair price? Two of those we paid the equivalent of a top 5 pick. Blakey wasn't bid till 10 so blame the clubs there and we paid the price.

If you want to iron out that advantages, that's fine, how about ironing some that Victorian clubs get too. Should work both ways.
 

Suma Magic

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 22, 2009
23,298
25,372
AFL Club
West Coast
Can't be done.

It's a problem that those who champion the idea of a points system for ALL draft selections can't or won't see.

The dynamics of any draft is different to the dynamics of any other draft. There is a whole raft of variables which change the demand / value.

Which means it is impossible to set a meaningful value on points. Until the draft is over, we actually have no idea what the correct value of a point is for that draft.

Anyhoo, the last thing the system needs is more complication.

  • Keep the Northern Academies, but tighten up the pick required.
  • Kill the NGA's completely. They are nothing but a rort and do nothing to develop pathways. It's not player development, it's more like winning a lottery.
  • Crack down hard on father / son rules while we're at it to stop the ridiculous situation of Clubs trading themselves out of the sharp end of the draft. Perhaps require a Club to spend their (original) first rounder to get priority on a F/S. If they don't want him enough to do that, they don't want him enough to be given privileged access.
The aim isn’t perfection, its improvement and basing it off evidence.

That could be easily done. At the moment there is systematic over-valuing of lower picks. A tweak would improve things significantly.

Edit: I’m not sure you understood my suggestion. All I’m saying is that it’s been possible to create a heavily flawed points index that over-values lower picks. So of course it’s possible to adjust it to align to the market value deemed by actual trades. You simply feed all historical pick for pick trades into an equation which spits out the line of best fit, then smooth it a bit.
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad