List Mgmt. 2018 Trade, Free Agency & Draft thread MK II [Polec ✔️ Hall ✔️ Gaff ❓ Newman ❓]

[Thewlis Dish]

I mean if he’s umming and arring about staying or going I wonder what Simmo, Brady, Pratt and Drew would have to say on what they think of North?

This is actually a really underrated point and I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned more. Of course he would have spoken to some of these guys privately (maybe not Simmo but definitely the other three) when the offer came in. They're obviously not going to tell him to leave WC but would be able to say "if you do want to go, it's a good place to be" etc.

 

[ozzyoslo]

Too much of the same. At least Polec can hit a wing or a HBF... Shiel is too one dimensional for our list.

Kevin Sheedy has been quoted saying that Shiel is the best of them.....Im just saying.

 

[ozzyoslo]

I'm not going to comment, but I am more confident on Kelly than Gaff.

With all this Gaff/ Polec talk ....all Ive been focusing on is Josh Kelly, Im still freaking nervous that GWS are having a fire sale this year to throw an absolute boat load of coin Kelly's way.....much to a point it'll test our reserves. This also allows other teams to stash away some coin next year as well.

I will believe he plays for us when he runs out for us rd 1 in 2020.

 

[The Nostradamus]

Low profile player but Apparently Jack Lonie looking elsewhere

Could be a value get to fill a need, plays his 50th game this week

 

[The Other Dean]

Bigbellend's livened things up around here.

Harsh on the Ziebull.

Wait, no it's not.

 

[Snake_Baker]

AFL floats radical draft changes

The AFL has floated alternative models for the draft that would see the non-finalists given significantly better picks than the top eight teams.

The AFL has shown clubs two different systems that would see the bottom 10 sides given the lion's share of draft picks in the first 28 selections.
Both models would be annual, with no qualifications, and would redress the issue of lower teams only having one pick in the top 18-20 selections. Clearly, they have been floated - very hypothetically - as a result of concerns about free agents and mature players going only to contenders and strong teams.

While these radical models might not be introduced - and are unlikely for 2019, partly because of the future pick trading - that they have been put forward to the clubs demonstrates that the AFL is willing to change the current draft system to one that is skewed towards teams outside the finals and lower on the ladder.

Under the first model - which is unlikely to be in place even for 2019, though it has not been ruled out - the top 10 picks would remain in the current format of reverse ladder order, with selections 1-10 going to non-finalists. The eighth-placed team would receive pick 11, then the bottom side would receive pick 12, the seventh team would receive pick 13 and the 17th side pick 14.

Under this "alternating" model, the order of selections (after No.11) would continue to alternate - pick 15 to the sixth side, pick 16 to the 16th club - until pick 23, when the 12th placed side would have the choice, rather than the losing grand finalist. Teams that finished 11th, 10th and 9th would follow (picks 24, 25 and 26). The top two sides would end up with picks 27 and 28.

This order would continue for the whole draft.

Under the second model, the non-finalists would have all 20 of the first draft picks, in reverse ladder order, with the top eight filling picks 21-28.

So, instead of the 8th team getting pick 11, it would receive pick 21, while the wooden spooner would get picks 1 and 11, the 17th side picks 2 and 12, and so forth.



This system - the "10-10-8" draft model - would also continue for the entire draft, through to the last picks.
These models were presented to clubs at the recent retreat of AFL officials and the club chief executives and it was shown, briefly, at the competition committee meeting chaired by Steve Hocking. They were presented by AFL's head of competitions and player movement, Josh Vanderloo.

It is understood that the feedback was divided, but that the alternating model - which is less harsh on the top eight sides (excepting the grand finalists) - seemed to have more acceptance.

The purpose of displaying these models was to encourage a discussion about the future of the draft and of a system that gives the lower sides more assistance. If a system of this ilk was introduced, obviously there would be no need for priority draft picks, which would cease.

Sources said these models were unlikely to be considered for 2019, because the clubs could not trade 2019 selections this year without knowing the system. But some kind of change to the draft has not been ruled out for next year and is clearly on the agenda for the future.

The academy and father-son bidding is another complication, given that it involves "points," which are used to move selections down the order. There is also an argument that the academies and next generation academies have compromised the draft already and given some lower teams less access to players.

AFL boss Gillon McLachlan has been concerned about the time it takes clubs to rebuild from the bottom and of the impact of free agency and trading on lower teams. He mentioned that the English Premier League had lost television rights revenue in the last deal, in making the argument to CEOs that the poor teams could drag down the financial health of the competition.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-floats-radical-draft-changes-20180823-p4zzf7.html

 

[King Hansen]

^great idea if the AFL wants to welcome back tanking..

 

[Only Forwards]

AFL floats radical draft changes

The AFL has floated alternative models for the draft that would see the non-finalists given significantly better picks than the top eight teams.

The AFL has shown clubs two different systems that would see the bottom 10 sides given the lion's share of draft picks in the first 28 selections.
Both models would be annual, with no qualifications, and would redress the issue of lower teams only having one pick in the top 18-20 selections. Clearly, they have been floated - very hypothetically - as a result of concerns about free agents and mature players going only to contenders and strong teams.

While these radical models might not be introduced - and are unlikely for 2019, partly because of the future pick trading - that they have been put forward to the clubs demonstrates that the AFL is willing to change the current draft system to one that is skewed towards teams outside the finals and lower on the ladder.

Under the first model - which is unlikely to be in place even for 2019, though it has not been ruled out - the top 10 picks would remain in the current format of reverse ladder order, with selections 1-10 going to non-finalists. The eighth-placed team would receive pick 11, then the bottom side would receive pick 12, the seventh team would receive pick 13 and the 17th side pick 14.

Under this "alternating" model, the order of selections (after No.11) would continue to alternate - pick 15 to the sixth side, pick 16 to the 16th club - until pick 23, when the 12th placed side would have the choice, rather than the losing grand finalist. Teams that finished 11th, 10th and 9th would follow (picks 24, 25 and 26). The top two sides would end up with picks 27 and 28.

This order would continue for the whole draft.

Under the second model, the non-finalists would have all 20 of the first draft picks, in reverse ladder order, with the top eight filling picks 21-28.

So, instead of the 8th team getting pick 11, it would receive pick 21, while the wooden spooner would get picks 1 and 11, the 17th side picks 2 and 12, and so forth.

View attachment 548166

This system - the "10-10-8" draft model - would also continue for the entire draft, through to the last picks.
These models were presented to clubs at the recent retreat of AFL officials and the club chief executives and it was shown, briefly, at the competition committee meeting chaired by Steve Hocking. They were presented by AFL's head of competitions and player movement, Josh Vanderloo.

It is understood that the feedback was divided, but that the alternating model - which is less harsh on the top eight sides (excepting the grand finalists) - seemed to have more acceptance.

The purpose of displaying these models was to encourage a discussion about the future of the draft and of a system that gives the lower sides more assistance. If a system of this ilk was introduced, obviously there would be no need for priority draft picks, which would cease.

Sources said these models were unlikely to be considered for 2019, because the clubs could not trade 2019 selections this year without knowing the system. But some kind of change to the draft has not been ruled out for next year and is clearly on the agenda for the future.

The academy and father-son bidding is another complication, given that it involves "points," which are used to move selections down the order. There is also an argument that the academies and next generation academies have compromised the draft already and given some lower teams less access to players.

AFL boss Gillon McLachlan has been concerned about the time it takes clubs to rebuild from the bottom and of the impact of free agency and trading on lower teams. He mentioned that the English Premier League had lost television rights revenue in the last deal, in making the argument to CEOs that the poor teams could drag down the financial health of the competition.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-floats-radical-draft-changes-20180823-p4zzf7.html

So teams just getting a handle on points and academies with free agency compensation.

They introduce live pick trading and we're yet to see what that does.

Already they are forecasting more change.

I know it would ruin the romantic side of F/S but how's about an unadulterated randomized draft.

The administration of this 'sport' are f***ed in the head.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

AFL floats radical draft changes

The AFL has floated alternative models for the draft that would see the non-finalists given significantly better picks than the top eight teams.

The AFL has shown clubs two different systems that would see the bottom 10 sides given the lion's share of draft picks in the first 28 selections.
Both models would be annual, with no qualifications, and would redress the issue of lower teams only having one pick in the top 18-20 selections. Clearly, they have been floated - very hypothetically - as a result of concerns about free agents and mature players going only to contenders and strong teams.

While these radical models might not be introduced - and are unlikely for 2019, partly because of the future pick trading - that they have been put forward to the clubs demonstrates that the AFL is willing to change the current draft system to one that is skewed towards teams outside the finals and lower on the ladder.

Under the first model - which is unlikely to be in place even for 2019, though it has not been ruled out - the top 10 picks would remain in the current format of reverse ladder order, with selections 1-10 going to non-finalists. The eighth-placed team would receive pick 11, then the bottom side would receive pick 12, the seventh team would receive pick 13 and the 17th side pick 14.

Under this "alternating" model, the order of selections (after No.11) would continue to alternate - pick 15 to the sixth side, pick 16 to the 16th club - until pick 23, when the 12th placed side would have the choice, rather than the losing grand finalist. Teams that finished 11th, 10th and 9th would follow (picks 24, 25 and 26). The top two sides would end up with picks 27 and 28.

This order would continue for the whole draft.

Under the second model, the non-finalists would have all 20 of the first draft picks, in reverse ladder order, with the top eight filling picks 21-28.

So, instead of the 8th team getting pick 11, it would receive pick 21, while the wooden spooner would get picks 1 and 11, the 17th side picks 2 and 12, and so forth.

View attachment 548166

This system - the "10-10-8" draft model - would also continue for the entire draft, through to the last picks.
These models were presented to clubs at the recent retreat of AFL officials and the club chief executives and it was shown, briefly, at the competition committee meeting chaired by Steve Hocking. They were presented by AFL's head of competitions and player movement, Josh Vanderloo.

It is understood that the feedback was divided, but that the alternating model - which is less harsh on the top eight sides (excepting the grand finalists) - seemed to have more acceptance.

The purpose of displaying these models was to encourage a discussion about the future of the draft and of a system that gives the lower sides more assistance. If a system of this ilk was introduced, obviously there would be no need for priority draft picks, which would cease.

Sources said these models were unlikely to be considered for 2019, because the clubs could not trade 2019 selections this year without knowing the system. But some kind of change to the draft has not been ruled out for next year and is clearly on the agenda for the future.

The academy and father-son bidding is another complication, given that it involves "points," which are used to move selections down the order. There is also an argument that the academies and next generation academies have compromised the draft already and given some lower teams less access to players.

AFL boss Gillon McLachlan has been concerned about the time it takes clubs to rebuild from the bottom and of the impact of free agency and trading on lower teams. He mentioned that the English Premier League had lost television rights revenue in the last deal, in making the argument to CEOs that the poor teams could drag down the financial health of the competition.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-floats-radical-draft-changes-20180823-p4zzf7.html

All about that last paragraph - design everything for the broadcasters. And FFS, Gillon, the AFL, like the EPL, will not stop being financially very healthy indeed, but there are almost no other parallels between them. A competition with a relegation model can't be compared to a static membership league in either the effect of or solution to "poor teams", for a start.

 

[GS WARRIORS]

AFL floats radical draft changes

The AFL has floated alternative models for the draft that would see the non-finalists given significantly better picks than the top eight teams.

The AFL has shown clubs two different systems that would see the bottom 10 sides given the lion's share of draft picks in the first 28 selections.
Both models would be annual, with no qualifications, and would redress the issue of lower teams only having one pick in the top 18-20 selections. Clearly, they have been floated - very hypothetically - as a result of concerns about free agents and mature players going only to contenders and strong teams.

While these radical models might not be introduced - and are unlikely for 2019, partly because of the future pick trading - that they have been put forward to the clubs demonstrates that the AFL is willing to change the current draft system to one that is skewed towards teams outside the finals and lower on the ladder.

Under the first model - which is unlikely to be in place even for 2019, though it has not been ruled out - the top 10 picks would remain in the current format of reverse ladder order, with selections 1-10 going to non-finalists. The eighth-placed team would receive pick 11, then the bottom side would receive pick 12, the seventh team would receive pick 13 and the 17th side pick 14.

Under this "alternating" model, the order of selections (after No.11) would continue to alternate - pick 15 to the sixth side, pick 16 to the 16th club - until pick 23, when the 12th placed side would have the choice, rather than the losing grand finalist. Teams that finished 11th, 10th and 9th would follow (picks 24, 25 and 26). The top two sides would end up with picks 27 and 28.

This order would continue for the whole draft.

Under the second model, the non-finalists would have all 20 of the first draft picks, in reverse ladder order, with the top eight filling picks 21-28.

So, instead of the 8th team getting pick 11, it would receive pick 21, while the wooden spooner would get picks 1 and 11, the 17th side picks 2 and 12, and so forth.

View attachment 548166

This system - the "10-10-8" draft model - would also continue for the entire draft, through to the last picks.
These models were presented to clubs at the recent retreat of AFL officials and the club chief executives and it was shown, briefly, at the competition committee meeting chaired by Steve Hocking. They were presented by AFL's head of competitions and player movement, Josh Vanderloo.

It is understood that the feedback was divided, but that the alternating model - which is less harsh on the top eight sides (excepting the grand finalists) - seemed to have more acceptance.

The purpose of displaying these models was to encourage a discussion about the future of the draft and of a system that gives the lower sides more assistance. If a system of this ilk was introduced, obviously there would be no need for priority draft picks, which would cease.

Sources said these models were unlikely to be considered for 2019, because the clubs could not trade 2019 selections this year without knowing the system. But some kind of change to the draft has not been ruled out for next year and is clearly on the agenda for the future.

The academy and father-son bidding is another complication, given that it involves "points," which are used to move selections down the order. There is also an argument that the academies and next generation academies have compromised the draft already and given some lower teams less access to players.

AFL boss Gillon McLachlan has been concerned about the time it takes clubs to rebuild from the bottom and of the impact of free agency and trading on lower teams. He mentioned that the English Premier League had lost television rights revenue in the last deal, in making the argument to CEOs that the poor teams could drag down the financial health of the competition.

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-floats-radical-draft-changes-20180823-p4zzf7.html

Both options are a joke but in 2, teams would never want to sneak into the finals again. 8 plays 9 in round 23 and they are tanking. Great idea brains trust. 12ish teams taking hard. Most games will be even more unwatchable.

Future picking trading will die. A 1st round pick could be 1-40. Image if the Doggies traded their 1st in 2016 under this model thinking it will be a late 30's pick and it ended up top 10.

Will help kill off fans that the rules changes and free agency has been slowing turning them off the game. The game it self is becoming unwatchable and the draft keeps a lot of fans intrested. Let stuff that up also.

 

[Long Live the King]

So the AFLs logic is to facilitate greater access to young talent to accelerate the rebuilds of lower clubs where the reality is the lower clubs in an effort to rebuild faster will trade those pics to the stronger clubs to attract mature talent.....well done AFL

 

[giantroo]

http://aflnation.com.au/2018/08/24/mcgovern-set-to-play-last-game-with-crows-says-mcclure/

 

[Thewlis Dish]

You'll never find a flawless solution to tanking that also retains some measure of equalisation. It's always going to come with any sort of draft order that is tied to finishing position and the sooner people accept this, the better.

 

[Horizons_00]

http://aflnation.com.au/2018/08/24/mcgovern-set-to-play-last-game-with-crows-says-mcclure/

They cant keep a player even if they tried

 

[Pykie]

So Hawthorn abuse the **** out the first round PP system, so much so it's abolished.

They go on and win 4 flags from it, what happens when the draft system finally takes it's course?

They introduce rules that might see them rise back up quickly again.

 

[benbanjo]

Just a random thought. Hypothetically we get Gaff, Polec and Hall. Have we done better than *'s acquisition of Smith, Stringer and Saad last year?

Considering what they gave up i would say that got the better deal, some tipped essendon for the flag after their recruiting, if stringer gets it together(which is questionable) then he is the best player of the lot at his peak, inconsistent though as we know.

 

[FloozyRoozy]

Considering what they gave up i would say that got the better deal, some tipped essendon for the flag after their recruiting, if stringer gets it together(which is questionable) then he is the best player of the lot at his peak, inconsistent though as we know.

Cause he's too busy thinking about 16yo girls.

 

[Tiberius]

http://aflnation.com.au/2018/08/24/mcgovern-set-to-play-last-game-with-crows-says-mcclure/

So if I'm understanding it correctly, his source is himself and he's basing his story on a rumour he himself made up earlier in the year.

 

[The Brady Bunch]

Both options are a joke but in 2, teams would never want to sneak into the finals again. 8 plays 9 in round 23 and they are tanking. Great idea brains trust. 12ish teams taking hard. Most games will be even more unwatchable.

Future picking trading will die. A 1st round pick could be 1-40. Image if the Doggies traded their 1st in 2016 under this model thinking it will be a late 30's pick and it ended up top 10.

Will help kill off fans that the rules changes and free agency has been slowing turning them off the game. The game it self is becoming unwatchable and the draft keeps a lot of fans intrested. Let stuff that up also.

I actually think it's not a bad concept at all and any suggestion that a team would tank to avoid finals is utterly ludicrous.

 

[archereleven]

Horrible idea. The Afl need to be patient (LOL) and wait until free agency, trading live picks etc takes its course. They also need to hand the clubs power in regards to trading players wherever they want once the average salary reaches 500k imo

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[TruRoos7]

Under the above system, let's use JK as an example.
We trade 1st rounder 2019 and first rounder 2020 to gws for JK, so I'm assuming in 2019 our pick is say 9 again (yeah we miss out on Gaff to the Dawks and Zeeeeebull was right Polec sucks).
So then JK comes to us and we pull off a FA coup and snag Shiel as well (dreaming but hear me out) so in 2020 we trot into the finals and end up 2nd (gaff and the Dawks beat us for that first spot).
So under the brainstrust new idea we have coughed up pick 9 and pick 36 for JK....
#Northwinningattrading

 

[Tiberius]

Horrible idea. The Afl need to be patient (LOL) and wait until free agency, trading live picks etc takes its course. They also need to hand the clubs power in regards to trading players wherever they want once the average salary reaches 500k imo

On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app

I'm not sure if the AFL are aware that the reason teams are currently taking so long to rebuild is that they themselves created two new teams and gave them all the top draft picks for 5 years, and then allowed them to trade their excess of players to gain more top draft picks. So now Head Office appear to be trying to change the whole system to fix a problem that they created themselves. Once the influence of GWS and Gold Coast is diluted in a few years the system should return to its non compromised state and the problem should solve itself.

 

[Shermanator]

I'm not sure if the AFL are aware that the reason teams are currently taking so long to rebuild is that they themselves created two new teams and gave them all the top draft picks for 5 years, and then allowed them to trade their excess of players to gain more top draft picks. So now Head Office appear to be trying to change the whole system to fix a problem that they created themselves. Once the influence of GWS and Gold Coast is diluted in a few years the system should return to its non compromised state and the problem should solve itself.

If you keep making sense and exposing the AFL for the corrupt muppets they are, they will send out Denzel Washington to Equalize you..

 

[NorthLane]

Housmate is from WA and is a mad WCE supporter with Gaff as his favourite player. Has connections and is convinced that Gaff's missus has landed a job in Melbs, so is resigned to the fact that Gaff won't be at the eagles next year

 

[The Filth Wizard]

Housmate is from WA and is a mad WCE supporter with Gaff as his favourite player. Has connections and is convinced that Gaff's missus has landed a job in Melbs, so is resigned to the fact that Gaff won't be at the eagles next year

This is true.