Make the draft an auction...

[Fastback]

While understanding the merits of the proposed system, the question I have is in how would you structure the order the players up for auction come out in or would you just have every player eligible for the draft on one big bid board.

You also then would probably need to put a minimum bid (across the board) for all players (this means that players can't be picked up for bugger all and all points go to the one star pick).

If each player was bidded on individually you would also then need to look at players who went through the system before more fancied options behind them get a second chance. In this case if everyone was waiting for player X who was going up for auction later and hence not bidding on player Y how will you allow clubs to come back to that player.

Its a concept that could work but you need to organise the structure of how bidding takes place before you could move forward.

The bidding could take place via the following.

16th place team starts the bidding on a player then the 15th placed side, 14th...etc

When there are no more teams wanting to bid, the remaining players are then select as they are now starting with the 16th placed side, then 15th..etc, there's no auction or points required. It's fair to assume that the top 40-50 players would have been sold at auction by this time.

Eg. Carlton are the first bidder and offer say 250 points for Kruezer, Richmond get the next bid and offer 300 points etc etc...aqll teams get a chance to bid then then it's back to Carlton who have to beat Geelong's offer which is now at say 1200 points.
Once this auction is finalised Richmond start the bidding on the next player of their choice.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

The bidding could take place via the following.

16th place team starts the bidding on a player then the 15th placed side, 14th...etc

When there are no more teams wanting to bid, the remaining players are then select as they are now starting with the 16th placed side, then 15th..etc, there's no auction or points required. It's fair to assume that the top 40-50 players would have been sold at auction by this time.

Eg. Carlton are the first bidder and offer say 250 points for Kruezer, Richmond get the next bid and offer 300 points etc etc...aqll teams get a chance to bid then then it's back to Carlton who have to beat Geelong's offer which is now at say 1200 points.
Once this auction is finalised Richmond start the bidding on the next player of their choice.

Draft picks are still better IMO. would work to have a draft lottery of all 16 teams, slightly weighted of corse

 

[Spermbird]

The bidding could take place via the following.

16th place team starts the bidding on a player then the 15th placed side, 14th...etc

When there are no more teams wanting to bid, the remaining players are then select as they are now starting with the 16th placed side, then 15th..etc, there's no auction or points required. It's fair to assume that the top 40-50 players would have been sold at auction by this time.

Eg. Carlton are the first bidder and offer say 250 points for Kruezer, Richmond get the next bid and offer 300 points etc etc...aqll teams get a chance to bid then then it's back to Carlton who have to beat Geelong's offer which is now at say 1200 points.
Once this auction is finalised Richmond start the bidding on the next player of their choice.

So basically the same system of draft pick order is maintained (ie laddder position), but other clubs have the option to outbid them for a player they desperately want.

*shrugs* The system could work

 

[SurreyBlue]

Remove the PRIORITY PICK. Problems solved.

 

[sydney eagle]

Remove the PRIORITY PICK. Problems solved.

I agree. The system as it is encorages clubs (e g Carlton) to not try for a few years so as to take advantage of the priority pick system. Have the draft rely entirely upon finsihing position, with all picks tradeable, and no "extra" picks because a team has been at the bottem for a few years, and I think that we'll see a reduction in the amount of "tanking" allegations that go on.

 

[macca69]

I like this idea a lot, kudos to you for thinking outside the square.

It would also make it easier for the AFL to create new clubs from scratch, but giving them x amount of points to use to trade for experienced players, or draft youngsters.

 

[lazy]

I know its not cool to bump your own thread but with trade week just around the corner thought this idea could get a run again to see what people think of it as when it was discussed last time trading was along way away.

 

[luthor]

I like it and with a bit of tweaking here and there, it could work well.

One question.......what if you have "left over" points from one year's draft?

Could you use them as "carry-overs" to the next year?

Without thinking about it too deeply, I can't think of a reason why not.

 

[doona]

One of the glaring issues i see with this system it will effect clubs that need to draft more players.

The minimum number of players that a club has to draft is 3 (i think). Therefore clubs that have a low turn over of players would be able to bid for the best player and then get two low picks.

This would create a situation in which less players will get drafted because clubs would be unwilling to delist players because it would mean that they wouldn't be able to get the gun young player.

eg. You would have to look at this after the draft but geelong will probably only draft 3 players.

Melbourne this year will prob have to draft more because of all the retirements and delistings they have had.

Therefore even though Melbourne would have more points then Geelong, Geelong would prob have an average of more points to spend per player.

If you then increase the points to the lower teams on the ladder it would become more like the draft we have now.

I think this system would create some advantages but it i think would severely reduce the amount of players drafted.

 

[RUNVS]

Watching the Indian auction for players made me think that this could work well for the AFL draft and also reduce tanking.

Why dont teams accrue auction points for drafting.

ie.. Premiers get 1000 points
Runners up get 1100 points
3rd gets 1200 points

etc.

16th spot gets 3000 points.

(They would have to do some thinking on the maths side to get this fair but that wouldnt be hard)

Then we have one draft at the start of the season and teams use their points to auction for players. Points could also accrue from year to year so teams could save some of their points for the following year if they dont want to use their points on "expensive" players.

There would be easy ways to tweak the system as well...

You could also award 500 points for teams that do not win 5 games or more.
Father and son selections could mean that the club has a 500 point start on getting that player but he would still be up for auction but other teams would have to pay through the nose.
Salary cap penalties could mean loss of auction points.
Teams could also trade players for auction points rather than players if they dont want players. ie. WC could have traded Judd this past year for 2000 auction points to use when they wanted to use them. Rather than hoping Carlton had players or picks they wanted.

This would make great viewing and teams would get very interested on how they went in the auction and how many points they still have in the bank for next year. etc.

I like it but i would want a sealed first-price auction instead of the standard auction type.

A sealed first-price auction is a form of auction where bidders submit one bid in a concealed fashion. The submitted bids are then compared and the person with the highest bid wins the award, and pays the amount of his bid to the seller. This differs from a standard English auction in that bids are not open or called; bidders must submit valuations based upon supposed market value and their own willingness to pay — as opposed to engaging in competition through relative prices with other bidders.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealed_first-price_auction

 

[Hollow Knight]

Making the draft an auction would be an excellent option.
Which means collingwood (who are the richest club would pick up most of the prize recruits) Essendon,west coast and freo will also pick up a few and the rest would miss out.
Yeah let's go for it.
Bye ,bye to the tankers.

Fail.

Read the post next time champ.

 

[Nasma]

It's a brilliant idea, like all good ones you're left wondering why no-one thought of it earlier.

 

[thesmallprint]

Great idea! So many possibilities. I'm not sure if it would be possible to do it like the IPL (player by player) though but that might be something exciting to watch.

 

[Hollow Knight]

How would you deal with father/son selections... would you just give the nominated club a 50 percent discount on the points they bid?

 

[thesmallprint]

How would you deal with father/son selections... would you just give the nominated club a 50 percent discount on the points they bid?

Something like that. There is more flexibility IMO with this method so you could probably work out a fairer system than the current one.

OP suggests 500 pt head start.

 

[sblack]

I like it but i would want a sealed first-price auction instead of the standard auction type.

A sealed first-price auction is a form of auction where bidders submit one bid in a concealed fashion. The submitted bids are then compared and the person with the highest bid wins the award, and pays the amount of his bid to the seller. This differs from a standard English auction in that bids are not open or called; bidders must submit valuations based upon supposed market value and their own willingness to pay — as opposed to engaging in competition through relative prices with other bidders.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealed_first-price_auction

This is better...would eliminate clubs just bidding to increase the price of a player if a club is hell bent on getting him at no cost.

 

[RUNVS]

I really like this idea and with the draft getting very near i thought i would bump this thread.

 

[lazy]

I really like this idea and with the draft getting very near i thought i would bump this thread.

In regards to your sealed auction - not a bad way to go - probably fairer BUT I wouldnt mind seeing clubs try and make other teams waste their auction points and then get caught with their hands in the cookie jar

 

[RUNVS]

In regards to your sealed auction - not a bad way to go - probably fairer BUT I wouldnt mind seeing clubs try and make other teams waste their auction points and then get caught with their hands in the cookie jar

So to sum this idea up

- Points are assigned by the position your team finishes (the worse you finish the more points you get).
- In trade week teams can trade points for players
- All teams go into a sealed auction to "buy" draft picks (obviously the more points your team has the more buying power they have aswell)
- Points which are not used in one year carry over to the next year

 

[Furn]

Should do a fantasy draft using this system wiht one person being each team to see how it would work out.

Be interesting to see who gets who.

 

[soupaman]

One of the glaring issues i see with this system it will effect clubs that need to draft more players.

Yeah, I think this is the biggest issue. Compare Geelong and Fremantle this year. Geelong would have 1100 points to spend on 3 kids, (366.66 each), compared to Freo who have 1300 points to spend on 7 (?) picks (185.71 each). That hurts Freo alot, and it can't be solved by increasing the points furthermore for the bottom teams because then West Coast, who currently are sitting on 1400 points for 4 kids (350 each) would be even more advantaged.

What would end up happening is that Geelong would get the good players, and thus would have a better list, with very few players being worthy of delisting. This means that every year Geelong has a minimum of 1000 points to spend on 3 kids, (333 each), which is a big advantage. Compare this to Fremantle, who have a below average list, with 7 average draftees, 3 or 4 of which will likely not be good enough, thus meaning their turnover will continue to be bigger than Geelongs without them being able to pick it back up.

 

[shintemaster]

Yeah, I think this is the biggest issue. Compare this to Fremantle, who have a below average list, with 7 average draftees, 3 or 4 of which will likely not be good enough, thus meaning their turnover will continue to be bigger than Geelongs without them being able to pick it back up.

I think there would be ways around this too. Perhaps extra points for each player delisted or moved on, there would be ways of doing this which would also improve the movement of players and hence make the AFLPA a bit happier. I would assume with this auction system that the PSD, draft & trade week could all be combined together in some fashion.

 

[lazy]

As I stated getting the maths right for awarding auction points would have to be well thought out.

Delistings would also have to receive auction points to be used on players to fill holes on clubs lists.

The trade week is just so useless now. Ryan Okeefe and co could have gotten to the home they wanted too if other clubs could have given Sydney auction points to use in this draft.

This is a better alternative than paul Roos idea of trading away future draft picks.

It solves the pending legal problem of free trade as clubs will now be able to trade quite freely with every other club because they now have credit other than picks and players.

It would be like early man discovering the medium of money for the first time rather than trading their goods.

 

[beatlesmith]

i like it.
You would have to place a minimum amount of players a team can draft; say 2 or 3.
The points trading system also makes trading more flexible, more deals would be made as there is middle ground, instead of some of the stalemates teams face over which round the pick is from.
Maybe give each team 200 or so points for each retiree they have, over a certain amount of games (100 or so), so replenishing a list is easier, and 1600 or so points doesn't have to spread over 5+ players.
Also make the minimum point cost 100 points or so, to prevent high finishing clubs from using 998 points on a top draftee, then spending 1 point each on a little known player.

 

[beatlesmith]

Delistings would also have to receive auction points to be used on players to fill holes on clubs lists.

I don't think delistings (non-retirements) should warrant points as it is by the choice of the club, but retirements should. Maybe 200 points per retirement for the club, and 300 for one on the vets list?
And make it so retirement points are only available for use in the draft, not for trading.
If a minimum price was introduced, say 100 points per player, then maybe delistments could warrant a 100 point bonus, so as to not give them an advantage.

Have the points as:
16th:3500
15th:3350
14th:3200
13th:3050
12th:2900
11th:2750
10th2600
9th:2450
(200 point gap distinguishing between finals and non finals)
8th:2100
7th:1950
6th:1800
5th:1650
4th:1500
3rd:1350
2nd:1200
1st:1000

Have priority pick as +500, and the 2 years in a row priority pick as +1000
Might set up a game?