Strategy List Management 101

(Log in to remove this ad.)

RW

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jan 11, 2003
Posts
14,773
Likes
15,148
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
I think our list management has been ok overall, but I wonder if we might be better off delaying some contract talks until the end of the season. I can understand wanting to get deals done quickly to ward off rival clubs who may be circling, but we might be in a better position to judge what a player is worth after a completed season?
 

Armo7

Debutant
Joined
Sep 29, 2011
Posts
73
Likes
69
AFL Club
Geelong

Heeney2Franklin

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Nov 20, 2007
Posts
25,111
Likes
14,718
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Posts
11,648
Likes
17,986
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
The Exers
Thread starter Moderator #158
Episode 6 - The 3 types of List Management currency and how to use them

Hello all, a long time between posts! I am going to write episode 7 as a review of the Swans' list but am writing this one first as it introduces a couple of new concepts, and I'm also holding out for the club to announce delistings to make the review a bit more complete.

Good List Management in the AFL, and most professional sport, is built on an understanding of this concept. There are 3 types of list management currency:

1) Salary cap

Pretty self explanatory. Each team has a salary cap of ~$12.45m, the Swans have a slightly higher total player payments due to the AFL's rental assistance policy. There are a couple of ways the salary cap can be manipulated including unequal distribution of salary across the years of a contract (front-ending or back-ending).

The AFL has a lot less salary cap flexibility than most leagues. This is due the AFLPA's disgusting position (and the AFL's ability to negotiate) that each team must may a minimum of 95% of the salary cap each year. There is no measure or rule in the AFL that contributes more to inequality than this garbage. It forces teams like Carlton and the Gold Coast to pay 95% of what the teams with the best lists, like Sydney and Richmond, have to pay. That limits their ability to have cap and list flexibility and to aggressively target players from other teams.

2) Draft picks

Each team each year is allocated unlimited draft picks across rounds depending on their finishing position. The AFL has recently introduced limited flexibility by allowing teams to trade future draft picks 1 season ahead (for example 2019 picks can be traded this year). In one of the previous episodes in this thread I posted stats and graphs showing the value of draft picks in the AFL. The TLDR for those who can't be bothered reading them is that low and rookie draft picks have a 10-20% chance of becoming a strong AFL player. Remember this because it is one of the most important things in this thread.

3) List size

Clubs have an up to 38 man primary list, and up to 6 Category A rookies and 3 Category B rookies. This is all a bit more complicated than it needs to be, all you need to know is we can have a squad of 44-46 players.

So what?

Yes, that's all pretty obvious to most of you, and there are probably a few people asking what the point is. So here's a few examples of how these currencies should be used.

The importance of player and position valuations

Episode 1 in this thread went into detail about the values of different positions. It is on page 1, and you should read it, but the TLDR is that key forwards are the most valuable players in the league whilst small forwards and small defenders are extremely low in value. This is very relevant to both (1) and (2) above. You should be prioritising your Salary Cap and Draft pick currency on the positions which are of the highest value. That's why the best small defenders in the league like Neville Jetta are worth far less than even a 7th or 8th best key forward like Tom Lynch. It is why Jake Lloyd should be paid a lot less than players like Lance Franklin and Luke Parker, because he's in one of the least valuable positions on the ground. While unfortunately salaries aren't public in the AFL, I do have some doubts that Lloyd is being paid at the appropriate level, his new contract may see him paid at a level which is only justified if he plays as a midfielder. Will he play as a midfielder next year and prove to be a bargain? Hopefully!

Player acquisition

The first key here is the above point about valuation. The second key is the interaction between (1) and (2). Every player we acquire has a total cost, made up of their salary, what we traded to get them, and the list spot they occupy. Free agents can, and do, command higher salaries because the club does not need to use (2) to acquire them. Again if you are a TLDR person I have bolded that line so it stands out for you. The Swans were able to acquire Lance Franklin and Kurt Tippett without having to spend other forms of currency, and this is often overlooked when reviewing the deals. Compare this to a player like Bryce Gibbs, who is definitely paid a lower salary (1) but cost a high trade price (2).

A good list manager understands this concept of total cost. This will be the fascinating part of the Dan Hannebery deal, where the player will take up a large chunk of St Kilda's salary cap (1) and therefore is unlikely to cost as much in trade (2).

Filling the list

Episode 2 and 3A spoke about player utilisation. Again the TLDR is that the magic numbers are 28, 35, and 9.

We need a "best 28" of competent AFL players, because you must budget for 6 players to be unavailable on average. This extremely simple concept is something that Bigfooty posters struggle with, as they regularly bemoan the fact that their club has 3-4 somewhat decent players unavailable due to injury.

We need up to 35 players who will play at least 1 game during the AFL season. This is our average over the last decade, and again this year we used 36.

That means we have 9 list spots that will not get used over the course of the year.

You can now see even more examples of how these currencies all interact all the time. You should be paying the vast majority of your salary cap (1) to the best 28 because they are the ones that are actually doing the work. If someone is at the bottom of, our outside, your best 28 and has trade value to someone else (2) then it is probably worth getting rid of them. We have a limited number of spots on the list, and each one of them must be fulfilling a specific purpose.

Churning the list

As said above, low draft picks have a 10-20% chance of becoming strong AFL players. Sounds like a great use of that bottom 9 list spots, right? As I wrote back in episode 3A:

1) Go deep into the draft
2) Rapidly identify the players that cannot become above average quality at AFL level
3) Aggressively and quickly cut those players from your list
4) Go deep into the draft

Lets do a couple of quick case studies. Is Jordan Foote part of the 28, the 35, or the 9? He has been on the list for 3 years and played 6 games. Does he have a 10-20% chance of becoming a very good AFL player?

My verdict (feel free to substitute your own, these are examples only): He played 0 games this year, he's in the 9. Delist, take the draft pick, bring in a new player who is a 10-20% chance.

Is Dan Robinson part of the 28, the 35, or the 9? He has been on the list for 6 years and played 25 games. Does he have a 10-20% chance of becoming a very good AFL player?

My verdict (feel free to substitute your own, these are examples only): He played 9 games this year, he's in the 35, he doesn't have a 10-20% chance of becoming a very good AFL player. Delist, take another pick.

You should be cutting from the list very aggressively. If someone can at best become a best 35 player at AFL level, delist them and take another roll of the dice. Remember that you've got 10-20% odds! Those are bloody good, take as many swings as you can possibly get.

Summary

I hope that was interesting, it was a bit different from the previous posts but it sets up a few things in advance of the Swans list review. Dissect, praise, abuse, comment away!
 

Kirkswan

Premium Platinum
Joined
May 10, 2014
Posts
4,037
Likes
7,083
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Thanks! What makes you think that Lloyd is being overpaid? Surely his manager and our management would be aware of his worth? Do you not think that rather than overpaying him, we may have extended his contract for an extra year to keep him?

Will have to digest the rest before I have questions... but they will happen!
 
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Posts
11,648
Likes
17,986
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
The Exers
Thread starter Moderator #160
Thanks! What makes you think that Lloyd is being overpaid? Surely his manager and our management would be aware of his worth? Do you not think that rather than overpaying him, we may have extended his contract for an extra year to keep him?
I have no idea if he is being overpaid or not, I've said many times that I wish the AFL made salaries public, like they are in most sports, so I could actually make those judgments. I'm just worried about the possibility, which none of us will be able to know unless somebody leaks his pay. As for his manager? He wants Lloyd to be paid as much as possible.

As to the point about our management being aware of his worth, we make mistakes in salary and contract judgment all the time (other clubs do too). His value isn't only determined by the fact he comes top 2 in the B&F this year, it is also determined by the fact that half-back flankers are one of the least valuable positions in the league. Even if you're really a good one.
 

Kirkswan

Premium Platinum
Joined
May 10, 2014
Posts
4,037
Likes
7,083
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
I have no idea if he is being overpaid or not, I've said many times that I wish the AFL made salaries public, like they are in most sports, so I could actually make those judgments. I'm just worried about the possibility, which none of us will be able to know unless somebody leaks his pay.

As to the point about our management being aware of his worth, we make mistakes in salary and contract judgment all the time (other clubs do too). His value isn't only determined by the fact he comes top 2 in the B&F this year, it is also determined by the fact that half-back flankers are one of the least valuable positions in the league. Even if you're really a good one.
Yeah, I get that it's not a valuable position (from which I read easily replaceable!), and I understand that FFs are the rarest beasts out there and therefore the most valuable. I just wondered why every is going on about him being overpaid.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

BruceFromBalnarring

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Posts
5,427
Likes
6,752
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
Don't necessarily agree with it all, but I like the analysis.

The 28 (2018) - 3, 4, 5, 7,9,10,11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 20, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29, 30, 34, 35, 36, 39, 40, 43, 44. That's only 26.

The next group includes 16, 22, and 27. Now I know 17 and 19 are there also but they are largely untried to this point. 19 not at all.

With 16 exiting (probably) and 4 I think it's reasonable to hold onto 22 and 27 noting we'll be adding Blakey which will only bring it to 27. Adding 17 and 19 only takes us one over your benchmark. I don't have 28 in the 28.
 
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Posts
11,648
Likes
17,986
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
The Exers
Thread starter Moderator #163
Don't necessarily agree with it all, but I like the analysis.

The 28 (2018) - 3, 4, 5, 7,9,10,11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 20, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29, 30, 34, 35, 36, 39, 40, 43, 44. That's only 26.

The next group includes 16, 22, and 27. Now I know 17 and 19 are there also but they are largely untried to this point. 19 not at all.

With 16 exiting (probably) and 4 I think it's reasonable to hold onto 22 and 27 noting we'll be adding Blakey which will only bring it to 27. Adding 17 and 19 only takes us one over your benchmark. I don't have 28 in the 28.
All fair comments. 28 is based on the last decade average for how many players play 5+ games in a year, it obviously changes a bit from year to year.

Just for the record, how many Swans played 5+ games in 2018? 28.
 

BruceFromBalnarring

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jan 13, 2007
Posts
5,427
Likes
6,752
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Sydney
All fair comments. 28 is based on the last decade average for how many players play 5+ games in a year, it obviously changes a bit from year to year.

Just for the record, how many Swans played 5+ games in 2018? 28.
I like it as a number. I've always used a rule of thumb 30. But if you're batting down to 30 you're not winning a flag. That's too many injuries or players out of form in a year.
 

BloodySwan

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 2, 2016
Posts
3,376
Likes
5,501
AFL Club
Sydney
Pretty self explanatory. Each team has a salary cap of ~$12.45m, the Swans have a slightly higher total player payments due to the AFL's rental assistance policy. There are a couple of ways the salary cap can be manipulated including unequal distribution of salary across the years of a contract (front-ending or back-ending).

The AFL has a lot less salary cap flexibility than most leagues. This is due the AFLPA's disgusting position (and the AFL's ability to negotiate) that each team must may a minimum of 95% of the salary cap each year. There is no measure or rule in the AFL that contributes more to inequality than this garbage. It forces teams like Carlton and the Gold Coast to pay 95% of what the teams with the best lists, like Sydney and Richmond, have to pay. That limits their ability to have cap and list flexibility and to aggressively target players from other teams.
I've always seen this as a good thing. It stops the less profitable clubs from underpaying their players but more importantly stops massive wage growth to the top tier players. For example, Carlton aren't performing, Cripps wants to leave and as their best player Carlton freak out. They're only using 80% of their cap so offer the remaining 20% to Cripps. Then Mitchell wins the Brownlow. Swans board melts and when Mitchell goes out of contract he asks Hawks for a pay rise from the 700k he's on to be closer to the 2mil which Carlton is paying Cripps. Hawks don't match it but Gold Coast say they'll offer 2.1mil because they need a top player. Then the next Mitchell wants a pay increase to be close to Mitchell's, etc, etc

With this scenario you end up in a position where 90% of the cap is used by 2-3 players with the remaining players paid the final 10% - this is currently what happens in the NHL
 
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Posts
16,919
Likes
25,882
Location
Australia
AFL Club
Sydney
Moderator #166
Episode 6 - The 3 types of List Management currency and how to use them

Hello all, a long time between posts! I am going to write episode 7 as a review of the Swans' list but am writing this one first as it introduces a couple of new concepts, and I'm also holding out for the club to announce delistings to make the review a bit more complete.

Good List Management in the AFL, and most professional sport, is built on an understanding of this concept. There are 3 types of list management currency:

1) Salary cap

Pretty self explanatory. Each team has a salary cap of ~$12.45m, the Swans have a slightly higher total player payments due to the AFL's rental assistance policy. There are a couple of ways the salary cap can be manipulated including unequal distribution of salary across the years of a contract (front-ending or back-ending).

The AFL has a lot less salary cap flexibility than most leagues. This is due the AFLPA's disgusting position (and the AFL's ability to negotiate) that each team must may a minimum of 95% of the salary cap each year. There is no measure or rule in the AFL that contributes more to inequality than this garbage. It forces teams like Carlton and the Gold Coast to pay 95% of what the teams with the best lists, like Sydney and Richmond, have to pay. That limits their ability to have cap and list flexibility and to aggressively target players from other teams.

2) Draft picks

Each team each year is allocated unlimited draft picks across rounds depending on their finishing position. The AFL has recently introduced limited flexibility by allowing teams to trade future draft picks 1 season ahead (for example 2019 picks can be traded this year). In one of the previous episodes in this thread I posted stats and graphs showing the value of draft picks in the AFL. The TLDR for those who can't be bothered reading them is that low and rookie draft picks have a 10-20% chance of becoming a strong AFL player. Remember this because it is one of the most important things in this thread.

3) List size

Clubs have an up to 38 man primary list, and up to 6 Category A rookies and 3 Category B rookies. This is all a bit more complicated than it needs to be, all you need to know is we can have a squad of 44-46 players.

So what?

Yes, that's all pretty obvious to most of you, and there are probably a few people asking what the point is. So here's a few examples of how these currencies should be used.

The importance of player and position valuations

Episode 1 in this thread went into detail about the values of different positions. It is on page 1, and you should read it, but the TLDR is that key forwards are the most valuable players in the league whilst small forwards and small defenders are extremely low in value. This is very relevant to both (1) and (2) above. You should be prioritising your Salary Cap and Draft pick currency on the positions which are of the highest value. That's why the best small defenders in the league like Neville Jetta are worth far less than even a 7th or 8th best key forward like Tom Lynch. It is why Jake Lloyd should be paid a lot less than players like Lance Franklin and Luke Parker, because he's in one of the least valuable positions on the ground. While unfortunately salaries aren't public in the AFL, I do have some doubts that Lloyd is being paid at the appropriate level, his new contract may see him paid at a level which is only justified if he plays as a midfielder. Will he play as a midfielder next year and prove to be a bargain? Hopefully!

Player acquisition

The first key here is the above point about valuation. The second key is the interaction between (1) and (2). Every player we acquire has a total cost, made up of their salary, what we traded to get them, and the list spot they occupy. Free agents can, and do, command higher salaries because the club does not need to use (2) to acquire them. Again if you are a TLDR person I have bolded that line so it stands out for you. The Swans were able to acquire Lance Franklin and Kurt Tippett without having to spend other forms of currency, and this is often overlooked when reviewing the deals. Compare this to a player like Bryce Gibbs, who is definitely paid a lower salary (1) but cost a high trade price (2).

A good list manager understands this concept of total cost. This will be the fascinating part of the Dan Hannebery deal, where the player will take up a large chunk of St Kilda's salary cap (1) and therefore is unlikely to cost as much in trade (2).

Filling the list

Episode 2 and 3A spoke about player utilisation. Again the TLDR is that the magic numbers are 28, 35, and 9.

We need a "best 28" of competent AFL players, because you must budget for 6 players to be unavailable on average. This extremely simple concept is something that Bigfooty posters struggle with, as they regularly bemoan the fact that their club has 3-4 somewhat decent players unavailable due to injury.

We need up to 35 players who will play at least 1 game during the AFL season. This is our average over the last decade, and again this year we used 36.

That means we have 9 list spots that will not get used over the course of the year.

You can now see even more examples of how these currencies all interact all the time. You should be paying the vast majority of your salary cap (1) to the best 28 because they are the ones that are actually doing the work. If someone is at the bottom of, our outside, your best 28 and has trade value to someone else (2) then it is probably worth getting rid of them. We have a limited number of spots on the list, and each one of them must be fulfilling a specific purpose.

Churning the list

As said above, low draft picks have a 10-20% chance of becoming strong AFL players. Sounds like a great use of that bottom 9 list spots, right? As I wrote back in episode 3A:

1) Go deep into the draft
2) Rapidly identify the players that cannot become above average quality at AFL level
3) Aggressively and quickly cut those players from your list
4) Go deep into the draft

Lets do a couple of quick case studies. Is Jordan Foote part of the 28, the 35, or the 9? He has been on the list for 3 years and played 6 games. Does he have a 10-20% chance of becoming a very good AFL player?

My verdict (feel free to substitute your own, these are examples only): He played 0 games this year, he's in the 9. Delist, take the draft pick, bring in a new player who is a 10-20% chance.

Is Dan Robinson part of the 28, the 35, or the 9? He has been on the list for 6 years and played 25 games. Does he have a 10-20% chance of becoming a very good AFL player?

My verdict (feel free to substitute your own, these are examples only): He played 9 games this year, he's in the 35, he doesn't have a 10-20% chance of becoming a very good AFL player. Delist, take another pick.

You should be cutting from the list very aggressively. If someone can at best become a best 35 player at AFL level, delist them and take another roll of the dice. Remember that you've got 10-20% odds! Those are bloody good, take as many swings as you can possibly get.

Summary

I hope that was interesting, it was a bit different from the previous posts but it sets up a few things in advance of the Swans list review. Dissect, praise, abuse, comment away!
Awesome stuff SF51. Love reading these.

One thing I would say is the value of players like Foote and Robbo might not be initially easy to identify & could actually be more than just based on senior games played or possession stats etc. It could be their value at training or with the NEAFL kids etc. Occasionally I think to myself "why don't we just delist XYZ" then it occurs to me that the club is run by professional list managers who have managed our list remarkably well (& above average IMO) the past decade or so... As such, I'm sure that sometimes a player I/we see as a "list clogger" might have value beyond that which we can identify from the outside looking in.

Perhaps, to help develop the new "10-20% chances" (from the draft for eg), we need those players who may initially seem of little value in comparison?

I do like the idea however that there is a % risk value attached to each draft pick which isn't linear. E.g. Generally (not always of course) but I'd argue that it's likely that a club would often have just as good an outcome having picks 10, 15 & 25 than having pick 1, 3 & 30 (for example).
 

6yearsold

Club Legend
Joined
Nov 23, 2016
Posts
1,681
Likes
1,115
AFL Club
Sydney
I've always seen this as a good thing. It stops the less profitable clubs from underpaying their players but more importantly stops massive wage growth to the top tier players. For example, Carlton aren't performing, Cripps wants to leave and as their best player Carlton freak out. They're only using 80% of their cap so offer the remaining 20% to Cripps. Then Mitchell wins the Brownlow. Swans board melts and when Mitchell goes out of contract he asks Hawks for a pay rise from the 700k he's on to be closer to the 2mil which Carlton is paying Cripps. Hawks don't match it but Gold Coast say they'll offer 2.1mil because they need a top player. Then the next Mitchell wants a pay increase to be close to Mitchell's, etc, etc

With this scenario you end up in a position where 90% of the cap is used by 2-3 players with the remaining players paid the final 10% - this is currently what happens in the NHL
i find your assumptions fanciful.
 

Bloodied52

Premium Platinum
Joined
May 24, 2017
Posts
5,759
Likes
5,496
Location
Old South Grandstand
AFL Club
Sydney
Really interesting work. Some players move from category to category. Cunningham is now firmly in the 28. Sinkers too.

Players such as Hanners and Rohan slipped out tho both got more games than deserved. Doubt Deano is top 28.

From the nine most are young developing players who have the opportunity to move. Ronke being one example
.
 

replicant

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Posts
3,981
Likes
8,120
Location
New Plymouth, NZ
AFL Club
Sydney
Episode 6 - The 3 types of List Management currency and how to use them

Hello all, a long time between posts! I am going to write episode 7 as a review of the Swans' list but am writing this one first as it introduces a couple of new concepts, and I'm also holding out for the club to announce delistings to make the review a bit more complete.

Good List Management in the AFL, and most professional sport, is built on an understanding of this concept. There are 3 types of list management currency:

1) Salary cap

Pretty self explanatory. Each team has a salary cap of ~$12.45m, the Swans have a slightly higher total player payments due to the AFL's rental assistance policy. There are a couple of ways the salary cap can be manipulated including unequal distribution of salary across the years of a contract (front-ending or back-ending).

The AFL has a lot less salary cap flexibility than most leagues. This is due the AFLPA's disgusting position (and the AFL's ability to negotiate) that each team must may a minimum of 95% of the salary cap each year. There is no measure or rule in the AFL that contributes more to inequality than this garbage. It forces teams like Carlton and the Gold Coast to pay 95% of what the teams with the best lists, like Sydney and Richmond, have to pay. That limits their ability to have cap and list flexibility and to aggressively target players from other teams.

2) Draft picks

Each team each year is allocated unlimited draft picks across rounds depending on their finishing position. The AFL has recently introduced limited flexibility by allowing teams to trade future draft picks 1 season ahead (for example 2019 picks can be traded this year). In one of the previous episodes in this thread I posted stats and graphs showing the value of draft picks in the AFL. The TLDR for those who can't be bothered reading them is that low and rookie draft picks have a 10-20% chance of becoming a strong AFL player. Remember this because it is one of the most important things in this thread.

3) List size

Clubs have an up to 38 man primary list, and up to 6 Category A rookies and 3 Category B rookies. This is all a bit more complicated than it needs to be, all you need to know is we can have a squad of 44-46 players.

So what?

Yes, that's all pretty obvious to most of you, and there are probably a few people asking what the point is. So here's a few examples of how these currencies should be used.

The importance of player and position valuations

Episode 1 in this thread went into detail about the values of different positions. It is on page 1, and you should read it, but the TLDR is that key forwards are the most valuable players in the league whilst small forwards and small defenders are extremely low in value. This is very relevant to both (1) and (2) above. You should be prioritising your Salary Cap and Draft pick currency on the positions which are of the highest value. That's why the best small defenders in the league like Neville Jetta are worth far less than even a 7th or 8th best key forward like Tom Lynch. It is why Jake Lloyd should be paid a lot less than players like Lance Franklin and Luke Parker, because he's in one of the least valuable positions on the ground. While unfortunately salaries aren't public in the AFL, I do have some doubts that Lloyd is being paid at the appropriate level, his new contract may see him paid at a level which is only justified if he plays as a midfielder. Will he play as a midfielder next year and prove to be a bargain? Hopefully!

Player acquisition

The first key here is the above point about valuation. The second key is the interaction between (1) and (2). Every player we acquire has a total cost, made up of their salary, what we traded to get them, and the list spot they occupy. Free agents can, and do, command higher salaries because the club does not need to use (2) to acquire them. Again if you are a TLDR person I have bolded that line so it stands out for you. The Swans were able to acquire Lance Franklin and Kurt Tippett without having to spend other forms of currency, and this is often overlooked when reviewing the deals. Compare this to a player like Bryce Gibbs, who is definitely paid a lower salary (1) but cost a high trade price (2).

A good list manager understands this concept of total cost. This will be the fascinating part of the Dan Hannebery deal, where the player will take up a large chunk of St Kilda's salary cap (1) and therefore is unlikely to cost as much in trade (2).

Filling the list

Episode 2 and 3A spoke about player utilisation. Again the TLDR is that the magic numbers are 28, 35, and 9.

We need a "best 28" of competent AFL players, because you must budget for 6 players to be unavailable on average. This extremely simple concept is something that Bigfooty posters struggle with, as they regularly bemoan the fact that their club has 3-4 somewhat decent players unavailable due to injury.

We need up to 35 players who will play at least 1 game during the AFL season. This is our average over the last decade, and again this year we used 36.

That means we have 9 list spots that will not get used over the course of the year.

You can now see even more examples of how these currencies all interact all the time. You should be paying the vast majority of your salary cap (1) to the best 28 because they are the ones that are actually doing the work. If someone is at the bottom of, our outside, your best 28 and has trade value to someone else (2) then it is probably worth getting rid of them. We have a limited number of spots on the list, and each one of them must be fulfilling a specific purpose.

Churning the list

As said above, low draft picks have a 10-20% chance of becoming strong AFL players. Sounds like a great use of that bottom 9 list spots, right? As I wrote back in episode 3A:

1) Go deep into the draft
2) Rapidly identify the players that cannot become above average quality at AFL level
3) Aggressively and quickly cut those players from your list
4) Go deep into the draft

Lets do a couple of quick case studies. Is Jordan Foote part of the 28, the 35, or the 9? He has been on the list for 3 years and played 6 games. Does he have a 10-20% chance of becoming a very good AFL player?

My verdict (feel free to substitute your own, these are examples only): He played 0 games this year, he's in the 9. Delist, take the draft pick, bring in a new player who is a 10-20% chance.

Is Dan Robinson part of the 28, the 35, or the 9? He has been on the list for 6 years and played 25 games. Does he have a 10-20% chance of becoming a very good AFL player?

My verdict (feel free to substitute your own, these are examples only): He played 9 games this year, he's in the 35, he doesn't have a 10-20% chance of becoming a very good AFL player. Delist, take another pick.

You should be cutting from the list very aggressively. If someone can at best become a best 35 player at AFL level, delist them and take another roll of the dice. Remember that you've got 10-20% odds! Those are bloody good, take as many swings as you can possibly get.

Summary

I hope that was interesting, it was a bit different from the previous posts but it sets up a few things in advance of the Swans list review. Dissect, praise, abuse, comment away!
These posts are excellent. I wish most of BF would read them, not just the Swans board, because they take a lot of the emotion and hype out of list managment and replace it with some great logic and strategy.

You should email these to SOS, he obviously hasn't read them, but really should.
 

AG

BigFooty Gun
Joined
May 24, 2008
Posts
29,123
Likes
5,626
Location
Sydney
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
Arsenal
Always a good read. Crazy that all clubs have to spend 95% of their cap. If Lynch and May leave GC, following Ablett last year, there will be some seriously overpaid players for GC.

GC would almost be better off keeping May's salary to give them more negotiating power for more picks.
 
Joined
Jun 3, 2007
Posts
11,648
Likes
17,986
AFL Club
Sydney
Other Teams
The Exers
Thread starter Moderator #172
Swansfan51, great read. In your system how long does a player have to reach a certain criteria in years from recruitment?
Great question. Its less about how fast they become part of the best 28 and more about how fast you can identify that they won't become a good AFL player. In an ideal world you would be able to make this call in their 1st year (for someone in the rookie draft) and their 2nd year (for someone in the national draft) as that is the minimum contract length. There's no right or wrong answer, just ditch them as fast as possible.

As an example of why you want to be delisting these guys as fast as possible, here's a look back at the 2008 rookie draft. I picked it because it was 10 years ago and we've had lots of time to watch their careers pan out. 2008 was a stronger draft, so this is going to be a better than average strike rate

2008 rookie draft
85 total selections

Jeff Garlett
Ricky Henderson
Matt De Boer
Jarryd Blair
Liam Picken
Luke Breust
Mike Pyke
Greg Broughton
Sam Jacobs
Matt Suckling

Then players who had solid careers of 100+ games

Robin Nahas
Zac Dawson (I would personally have put him in the above list but there would have been too many complaints)
Clancee Pearce

2009 to show this wasn't a fluke
78 total selections

Michael Barlow
Majak Daw (if you are feeling particularly generous, but he had a transformed 2018 and will definitely be here if that form continues)
Mark Hutchings
Matthew Wright
Stewart Crameri
Levi Casboult
James Podsiadly
Zach Tuohy

(Didn't even include players like Jaensch, Howlett, Silvagni)

Well over a 10% strike rate in both years. Remember that's the rookie draft, the players left over after 60+ picks in a national draft. You don't need high picks, you just need lots of them.
 

Corpuscles

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jul 3, 2006
Posts
7,419
Likes
147
Location
Lunatic Park
AFL Club
Sydney
Great question. Its less about how fast they become part of the best 28 and more about how fast you can identify that they won't become a good AFL player. In an ideal world you would be able to make this call in their 1st year (for someone in the rookie draft) and their 2nd year (for someone in the national draft) as that is the minimum contract length. There's no right or wrong answer, just ditch them as fast as possible.

As an example of why you want to be delisting these guys as fast as possible, here's a look back at the 2008 rookie draft.

…[snip for brevity]

Well over a 10% strike rate in both years. Remember that's the rookie draft, the players left over after 60+ picks in a national draft. You don't need high picks, you just need lots of them.
SF51

I really enjoyed reading these posts (went back read the lot). Great contribution regardless of any disagreement, you ought feel they are worth your considerable effort. Looking forward to your list review and comments.:thumbsu:

You are obviously a statistics /probability man (Actuary? or Gambler? Recruiter?).:)

Could you comment on how you think (opinion valued) it is possible to determine in 1 or two years whether they will make it? What is your criteria
(Brett Kirk???? …. H Grundy showed lots of skills but took long time to find his place? etc)

IOW how to avoid throwing the baby out with the bathwater?

The numbers game has the extra problem of having to settle young blokes into a new city, professional environment , and teaching them. Surely all that prelim effort down the drain unless absolutely certain they are a dud? Some need time for bodies to mature etc so that slows down capacity to implement the high rotation strategy?.


Wondering if you have the details in your example list (deleted for brevity) of how many of those 10%ers regularly played seniors inside 2 yrs?

Cheers
 

Number37

Premium Platinum
Joined
Oct 5, 2013
Posts
14,246
Likes
14,053
AFL Club
Sydney
All fair comments. 28 is based on the last decade average for how many players play 5+ games in a year, it obviously changes a bit from year to year.

Just for the record, how many Swans played 5+ games in 2018? 28.
SF51,

Based on your theory would it not be a wise list management plan to only have 30 AFL ready players on your list at any one time?
That way you can try out more rookies.
On the assumption that should you need to play the 31st player on your list your season is probably shot.
 
Top Bottom