Moved Thread What is a Draft Pick worth??

[HairyO]

What I should have said is his "perceived" value has dropped. You feel and probably rightly so that he is worth a number 1 pick, the kid is a proven gun BUT would you get that? No because Raynor "could be anything"

Assuming the Roos cant use their pick 1 on Kelly, you really think they would turn down Burton and instead take a punt? With the most valued pick there is?

Really?

As said above, the value people some place on draft picks is just delusional. The draft is littered with top picks who have been "good" or "great" without being "brilliant" or even "champion".

Pies didnt blink at offering 2 1st rounders for Treloar. And it was a great deal. Even though GWS only had to use a single pick on him.

 

[El bastino]

Assuming the Roos cant use their pick 1 on Kelly, you really think they would turn down Burton and instead take a punt? With the most valued pick there is?

Really?

As said above, the value people some place on draft picks is just delusional. The draft is littered with top picks who have been "good" or "great" without being "brilliant" or even "champion".

Pies didnt blink at offering 2 1st rounders for Treloar. And it was a great deal. Even though GWS only had to use a single pick on him.

I'm not sure if we are arguing or not? Because I agree that the value of picks is ridiculous. But yes I do think they would turn down Burton and take a chance on the draft, I can't tell you why the would, but I fully believe they would. That's just my opinion and if kangaroos or any other supporters disagree please correct me

 

[MF]

Most big footy posters and football followers are dumb as dog shit and severely overrate the value of draft picks.

There were posters claiming pick 13 was more than adequate for Mitchell when it was obviously unders.

The method i always use when I hear a certain draft pick being mentioned as a potential trade is to go back 4 or 5 seasons and take a look at the previous 7 or 8 players taken with that pick. If you wouldn't be happy swapping the player in question for a random draw of those 7 or 8 players then the pick isn't valuable enough.

 

[HairyO]

I'm not sure if we are arguing or not? Because I agree that the value of picks is ridiculous. But yes I do think they would turn down Burton and take a chance on the draft, I can't tell you why the would, but I fully believe they would. That's just my opinion and if kangaroos or any other supporters disagree please correct me

If true, then the Roos should offer pick 1 for McGrath or Curnow or Burton or SPP or SPS (the top Rising Star kids this year). Any club would accept the deal.

Right?

Most big footy posters and football followers are dumb as dog shit and severely overrate the value of draft picks.

There were posters claiming pick 13 was more than adequate for Mitchell when it was obviously unders.

The method i always use when I hear a certain draft pick being mentioned as a potential trade is to go back 4 or 5 seasons and take a look at the previous 7 or 8 players taken with that pick. If you wouldn't be happy swapping the player in question for a random draw of those 7 or 8 players then the pick isn't valuable enough.

Not just that draft pick. But the picks either side going back.

 

[El bastino]

If true, then the Roos should offer pick 1 for McGrath or Curnow or Burton or SPP or SPS (the top Rising Star kids this year). Any club would accept the deal.

Right?



Not just that draft pick. But the picks either side going back.

I'm really not sure of the point you are trying to make

 

[Cobbler]

It's a fair question.

Personally I'd rather a glut of early picks over a stand alone top 10 pick.

Example Freo have pick 5 currently, but I'd trade that for 2 picks inside 18 every day of the week if I could.

I think you need a few picks inside 30 to 'get it right' when drafting. If you only have 1 or 2 shots at it... I think you're going to fail more often then you succeed.

Also depends on where your team is currently.

Example Adelaide or GWS would hold picks between 20-60 with less desire then a team rebuilding.

If you offered me pick 1 as a stand alone pick versus say pick 15, 20 and 25? Again I think i'd take the 3 selections rather then the 1.

Then again I follow Fremantle, so my idea of what constitutes good trading is somewhat blurred due to our past.

I DO KNOW Mayne for a second rounder was the steal of the century!

 

[blitzer]

The method i always use when I hear a certain draft pick being mentioned as a potential trade is to go back 4 or 5 seasons and take a look at the previous 7 or 8 players taken with that pick. If you wouldn't be happy swapping the player in question for a random draw of those 7 or 8 players then the pick isn't valuable enough.

Personally I think top picks are worth a bit more than the random draw as you've suggested above. I reckon most teams would put on a premium on the chance to get an elite talent even if historically that pick hasn't been that good. There are many different reasons draft picks fail - eg injuries, poor development or just lack of talent or application.

Additionally the random pick method fails due to luck at times as well. eg Pick 7 has been better than Pick 6 historically. If you had pick 6 would you trade it for pick 7?

One of the other advantages of draft picks over players is the age of the players. If you strike gold with an 18 year old its worth a fortune if they play out their career at your club (quite a few if's but the value is high).

 

[The 747]

But Burton doesn't have the mystery anymore, we know he is good, we know he is gonna be good, he could become a top 10 player of the league...but we know that and thus his value has dropped...its like if I gave you two boxes, one was filled with 100k and cost $10 to open, or the other box COULD have 1million in it and costs $20 to open....the mystery is what's valuable

This poster has it right.

 

[Anja_Nees]

In short it's worth less than most clubs think.

By the time the pick is in the 20s a player is less than a 50% chance of becoming a long term best 22 player. Giving up pick 14 for a player of Mitchell's calibre is an absolute no brainer.

 

[Seb78]

Yep, and so was Daniel Gorringe.

Your point?

Take it easy champ it was clearly a cheeky tongue in cheek post. My point was pick 10s can sometimes be better than pick 1s.

 

[MF]

Personally I think top picks are worth a bit more than the random draw as you've suggested above. I reckon most teams would put on a premium on the chance to get an elite talent even if historically that pick hasn't been that good.

Why do they though? As you've said, many things can go wrong with a draft pick which is why they often don't work out better than what they're traded for in return.

On bigfooty in particular people act like all 1st round picks are gold when the data clearly says otherwise.

Additionally the random pick method fails due to luck at times as well. eg Pick 7 has been better than Pick 6 historically. If you had pick 6 would you trade it for pick 7?

Agreed. It's not intended to be a definitive measure, just a very good guide, and as HairyO pointed out earlier, you should also look at the couple of picks around that one as well.

One of the other advantages of draft picks over players is the age of the players. If you strike gold with an 18 year old its worth a fortune if they play out their career at your club (quite a few if's but the value is high).

Agreed. The age of the established player and how many seasons they would have left obviously comes into play as well.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to argue that trading established players for draft picks is wrong, it's an essential part of good list management, my point is that many people severely overrate the potential value of a draft pick.

 

[captain cotch 9]

Pick 1 is the most over rated thing in football IMO.
Not many #1 picks end up being the best player of their draft.
There could be numerous factors that affect it like that they are going to a shit club.
Lets go back to 2010
#1-David Swollow Best player #11 Tom Lynch
2011
#1 Patton Best player #21 Tom Mitchell/ #2 Steven Conligio
2012
#1 Whitfield Best Player #7 Wines/ #10 Daniher
2013
#1 T.Boyd Best Player #4 The Bont
2014
#1 Mcartin Best Player #14 Lever/#2 Petracca

I could go on and on.

 

[RUNVS]

Hard to tell, apparently a peak Buddy Franklin is only worth pick 19.

Imagine if Hawks got fair value for him.

Well the Hawks got a priority pick in the Buddy and Roughead draft that the Hawks really did not need and probably did not deserve so you had 2 of those guys when you probably should have only had 1 of them.

 

[bungwahl]

In a trade between two clubs, how much value does a draft pick hold? I did some maths, and figured out that Sydney received enough points in the trade with Hawthorn for Tom Mitchell, that equals to pick 13. In my opinion Tom Mitchell is worth more than pick 13, but the question is, what do you guys think a draft pick is worth?? I guess you have to take in the risk of the pick not working out and everything like that as well. Another question, does a future draft pick hold less, more or the same currency as a current pick?

Tom Mitchell in contract is worth more than pick 13. Tom Mitchell out of contract is worth whatever you can get for him. Luckily for Sydney we were dealing with a club who we have a good trading relationship with so we got reasonable value.

 

[nickrebellious]

Well the Hawks got a priority pick in the Buddy and Roughead draft that the Hawks really did not need and probably did not deserve so you had 2 of those guys when you probably should have only had 1 of them.

Probably would have never have drafted Lewis if that were the case

 

[Bostonian]

Depends on how the draft crop is rated.

Some years pick 5 might be seen as a can't miss type player, other years pick 5 could be a raffle within a weaker draft.

 

[Randy Campbell]

A pick is used to pick a player.
A player is a person.
Every person is different.
The value of a pick is different every time.

 

[B4Bear]

I hear the value of a number 1 pick is worth a Dusty or a Kelly.

 

[Dr Tigris]

What is "A" draft pick worth vs what are draft picks worth.

Any single draft pick is not worth what teams are willing to pay. Because there is no certainty in any pick.

But, to rebuild a list you will find draft picks cheaper than trading (except in the special case of players improving after trading). So when you look at it as a portfolio over time draft picks as a totality are worth a lot.

Most people find looking at a system hard, and prefer lookin gat individual instances. The question in this thread is framed as a single instance. Easy answer, picks (single) are overrated. But, once you look at the system picks (multiple) are the key resource for the club's future. So, depending on your timeline and POV you get very different answers.

 

[yoodooright]

about 3 fiddy

 

[TiggerMan22]

Picks are basically


Unlimited potential. Yet it rarely works out.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

any draft pick up to about pick 53 is far more promising then a best 22 mainstay.

In that order?

 

[Wesley2]

Well the Hawks got a priority pick in the Buddy and Roughead draft that the Hawks really did not need and probably did not deserve so you had 2 of those guys when you probably should have only had 1 of them.

Well the Swans had access to 2 top 10 picks due to an academy which they did not really need and probably did not deserve so you have 2 of those guys when you probably should only have 0 of them.

Easy to type out, isn't it?

Would be very interested in what metrics you used to decide what "did not need" and "did not deserve" entails.

I've used zero metrics, only sarcasm.

 

[vozzon]

Pick 1 is the most over rated thing in football IMO.
Not many #1 picks end up being the best player of their draft.
There could be numerous factors that affect it like that they are going to a shit club.
Lets go back to 2010
#1-David Swollow Best player #11 Tom Lynch
2011
#1 Patton Best player #21 Tom Mitchell/ #2 Steven Conligio
2012
#1 Whitfield Best Player #7 Wines/ #10 Daniher
2013
#1 T.Boyd Best Player #4 The Bont
2014
#1 Mcartin Best Player #14 Lever/#2 Petracca

I could go on and on.

I get your point but the fact is that pick 1 gives you best chance of picking those players. Up to the clubs to make the right call with the resources they have.

Danniher was F/S so pick 10 was generous, Ollie only slipped due to GWS/Melb having access to multiple picks and Dee's had viney (F/S) so ddint want another inside mid. The drafts recently have been compromised so wasnt a true draft. Saints needed a fwd with there list management and roo retiring.

Those Fwds were picked at #1 because there so hard to get (port having to trade 2 first rounders for dixon). Collingwood now are struggling to find a fwd, should they have picked Peter Wright over Degoey?

Just so many variables as to why players are drafted at certain positions etc.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

The method i always use when I hear a certain draft pick being mentioned as a potential trade is to go back 4 or 5 seasons and take a look at the previous 7 or 8 players taken with that pick. If you wouldn't be happy swapping the player in question for a random draw of those 7 or 8 players then the pick isn't valuable enough.

That's not how you should assess the value of a draft pick. It doesn't take account of the value of opportunity attached to the pick.

For example, if you had a sequence of drafts wherein the players taken at pick 6 turned out to be better than the players taken at pick 5, would that mean pick 6 was in fact more valuable than pick 5?

Of course not. It would mean only that the clubs with pick 5 in those drafts chose relatively poorly.

It demonstrates nothing about the relative value of the picks involved.