Strategy Points trading idea?

[RUNVS]

I am sure there will be flaws in this idea but I have decided to go with it and see what people think.

Right now a team trades for picks, since picks is all teams have to really trade (as well as players of course) but now that the AFL have introduced a points system for each draft pick why don't we use it?

Eg. In 2017 Gold Coast traded Adam Saad to Essendon for Essendon's 2018 2nd round draft pick. Now this is a messy thing to do because Gold Coast didn't know how Essendon were going to go, so they could have been getting pick 19 for Saad, but at the same time they could have been getting pick 36 for Saad as well. That is a wide gap.

http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL Tenant/AFL/Files/Points-draft-value.pdf

So what if, instead of agreeing to a pick, clubs agree to points. What if in 2017 both Essendon and Gold Coast determined that Saad was worth exactly pick 21 (878 points). That was his worth. Of course neither Gold Coast or Essendon could be assured of getting pick 21.

So instead of trading for Essendon's second round pick the next year, Gold Coast were trading for 878 points from Essendon to be collected from the second round onwards. Other times a trade can be specified as 1200 points from the first round onwards and such, or the third round onwards.

So this would have been the draft order from the second round before trades done last year

ROUND TWO
19. Carlton
20. Gold Coast
21. St Kilda
22. Brisbane
23. Fremantle Sydney
24. Western Bulldogs
25. Adelaide
26. Essendon
27. Port Adelaide
28. North Melbourne
29. Geelong
30. Sydney
31. GWS
32. Hawthorn
33. Melbourne
34. Richmond
35. Collingwood
36. West Coast


ROUND THREE
37. Carlton
38. Gold Coast
39. St Kilda
40. Brisbane
41. Fremantle
42. Western Bulldogs
43. Adelaide
44. Essendon
45. Port Adelaide
46. North Melbourne
47. Geelong
48. Sydney
49. Greater Western Sydney
50. Hawthorn
51. Melbourne
52. Richmond
53. Collingwood
54. West Coast

Essendon need to trade 878 points in value to Gold Coast.

Now Essendon have pick 26 which is 729 points so pick 26 goes to the Suns. That means Essendon have 149 points to go.

Essendon have pick 44 which is 362 points. If you take 149 points from that which Essendon owes the Gold Coast you are left with 213 points.

So Gold Coast have pick 26, plus 149 points which equals pick 60, leaving Essendon with 213 points from pick 44, which turns into pick 55.

So the Saad deal would end up being

Essendon get Saad and pick 55
Gold Coast get pick 26 and pick 60

I hope that isn't too confusing but what do people think of the general idea?

 

[G Mus]

Would make sense if there was unlimited list space

 

[Mitchell54]

I get your point but at the end of the day they’ll work with what they have and what each teams needs are and they’ll work through the value of each asset in that circumstance instead of using any AFL created points system.

 

[RUNVS]

I just realised I probably made a mistake. Perhaps instead of the 149 points Gold Coast got equalling pick 60, instead the 149 points could be added to their pick 39, so pick 39 (446 points) would become 595 points or pick 32.

Then we have Essendon who have 213 points, so we go to their next pick after 44 which is a pick in the 3rd round, so you add the 213 points to that pick to get a new draft pick.

 

[EB&W Pieman]

Great idea and quite innovative BUT
unless the rule is worded carefully clubs will use this feature to advance their draft pick to a specific place in the order.
eg, Adelaide have Pick 10; Port have Pick 9 (74 points difference). They both want to select Under 18 South Australian starlet Sturt Torrens. So Adelaide do a deal whereby they trade the homesick Carlton Richmond to a Victorian club for Pick ?? and 75 points. They then don't have to negotiate their way into the top 9, they merely add the 75 points to their Pick 10 and poor old Port lose their place (and Sturt Torrens).
BTW, the Victorian club just subtracts the 75 points from pick 65 which they were never going to use anyway

 

[Buzzasto DaSilva]

It's very complicated and would take years for the likes of Wallace and Barrett to get their head around, but I actually really like it. Great idea!

 

[GUMBLETRON]

I just realised I probably made a mistake. Perhaps instead of the 149 points Gold Coast got equalling pick 60, instead the 149 points could be added to their pick 39, so pick 39 (446 points) would become 595 points or pick 32.

Then we have Essendon who have 213 points, so we go to their next pick after 44 which is a pick in the 3rd round, so you add the 213 points to that pick to get a new draft pick.

The issue with adding (or subtracting) points to existing picks is it privileges or punishes non-participants in the trade.

 

[RUNVS]

Great idea and quite innovative BUT
unless the rule is worded carefully clubs will use this feature to advance their draft pick to a specific place in the order.
eg, Adelaide have Pick 10; Port have Pick 9 (74 points difference). They both want to select Under 18 South Australian starlet Sturt Torrens. So Adelaide do a deal whereby they trade the homesick Carlton Richmond to a Victorian club for Pick ?? and 75 points. They then don't have to negotiate their way into the top 9, they merely add the 75 points to their Pick 10 and poor old Port lose their place (and Sturt Torrens).
BTW, the Victorian club just subtracts the 75 points from pick 65 which they were never going to use anyway

I definitely agree the idea would need some work, and some tweaking to prevent situations like that where teams are just using trading in order to add points to a pick to improve that pick. To be honest I am not sure what the solution would be but I know that smarter men and women than me could come up with a workable solution.

 

[blitzer]

My initial thought is I like it but it should only be applicable to the second round onwards. First rounders are the life blood of clubs and its not fair to have your picks moved down the order because 2 other clubs did a deal.

 

[Johnny Bananas]

I'd rather just dispense with picks altogether, have clubs get allocated points based on position and percentage and have an auction instead of a draft. If that happened, trading for points would be much more intuitive.

 

[RUNVS]

I'd rather just dispense with picks altogether, have clubs get allocated points based on position and percentage and have an auction instead of a draft. If that happened, trading for points would be much more intuitive.

To be honest I really like the idea of a blind auction in allocating draft picks as well. Some club could really want pick 1 and essentially bid every single point they have on pick one. Also of course teams that finished 18th are awarded a lot more points than a team that finished 1st.