Resource 2020 AFL Draft Order

[Lore]

See OP for details: click here

If you would like to embed this spreadsheet elsewhere on the forum please copy and paste the following

[MEDIA="googlespreadsheetnew"]1qZalgdA8pyGSTpXQxIcEGm8ZVacZOJNmHYs6YTQhbl8[/MEDIA]

 

[Giant Strides]

Ok so we get 9. Nice.

Yes, still a very solid result from your trade.

[Well, pick 9 until you pay a truckload of $ for Zac Williams, and the FA compo comes in between.]

It’s a big whack not having a 1st rounder. Pick 28 becomes pick 40!

Think of it as an installment payment to get Tom Greene.

 

[Wild Bill]

Yes, still a very solid result from your trade.

[Well, pick 9 until you pay a truckload of $ for Zac Williams, and the FA compo comes in between.]


Think of it as an installment payment to get Tom Greene.

If we pick up a free agent what does that do to our pick?

 

[Giant Strides]

If we pick up a free agent what does that do to our pick?

My point was that if North picks up Williams as a Free Agent from GWS, then GWS will get FA compensation pick. That compo doesn't impact Norths' pick directly - it only affects GWS' pick. However, in the case of Williams, presuming he attracts first round compensation (which going by the speculated contract $ he would) then it comes after GWS first round pick. Although that's in the hands of Adelaide, the compo pick nevertheless should slot in afterwards i.e. at 9, pushing the subsequent picks backwards. In this case, Norths - courtesy of Melbourne's first round selection and Fremantle's points penalty - holds pick 9 and is immediately pushed back.

 

[Wild Bill]

My point was that if North picks up Williams as a Free Agent from GWS, then GWS will get FA compensation pick. That compo doesn't impact Norths' pick directly - it only affects GWS' pick. However, in the case of Williams, presuming he attracts first round compensation (which going by the speculated contract $ he would) then it comes after GWS first round pick. Although that's in the hands of Adelaide, the compo pick nevertheless should slot in afterwards i.e. at 9, pushing the subsequent picks backwards. In this case, Norths - courtesy of Melbourne's first round selection and Fremantle's points penalty - holds pick 9 and is immediately pushed back.

Ok - so won’t the FA compo have the deficit points added to it?

 

[Giant Strides]

Ok - so won’t the FA compo have the deficit points added to it?

My understanding is no. Penalty points are the first things applied to the draft order once finalised after the GF. However, I'd never completely claim anything is 100% solid with the AFL penchant for making up new or changing existing rules at the drop of a hat.

 

[Lore]

My understanding is no. Penalty points are the first things applied to the draft order once finalised after the GF. However, I'd never completely claim anything is 100% solid with the AFL penchant for making up new or changing existing rules at the drop of a hat.

That’s correct. Deficit gets applied first.

The FA compensation if you were to get band 1, 3, 5 goes directly after where your pick should have been even if you’ve traded it or had a deficit applied to the actual pick too (band 2&4 comp is at the end of a round regardless).

 

[briztoon]

Ok - so won’t the FA compo have the deficit points added to it?

No. Draft deficits are paid for before trade period starts.

So, as mentioned, GWS’s second round pick will pay the deficit and move back.

If Williams attracts band 1 compensation, GWS will receive what looks likely to be pick 9.

 

[Wild Bill]

No. Draft deficits are paid for before trade period starts.

So, as mentioned, GWS’s second round pick will pay the deficit and move back.

If Williams attracts band 1 compensation, GWS will receive what looks likely to be pick 9.

GWS might be ok with that. They have history of letting players go to get 1st round picks.

 

[Giant Strides]

GWS might be ok with that. They have history of letting players go to get 1st round picks.

I think more the point is that we won't want to (or perhaps can't without serious list repercussions) overspend within the salary cap to keep Zac - unfortunately. A pick around 9 is at least reasonable compensation.

We don't want to lose him - both his on-field skills but he's also one of our first academy guys - but I can't begrudge him getting a mega payday if the reports are anywhere in the correct vicinity.

 

[The Inbetweener]

Thanks for keeping this up to date, often refer to it. Think there is an error with North though, they have 2 first rounders but the graph only references one?

 

[Lore]

Thanks for keeping this up to date, often refer to it. Think there is an error with North though, they have 2 first rounders but the graph only references one?

Looks like I buggered something up last night with freo’s deficit being applied, thanks I’ll fix it shortly.

 

[Rooboy 96]

Looks like I buggered something up last night with freo’s deficit being applied, thanks I’ll fix it shortly.

oh that is good, was thinking we had given our Melbourne pick away

 

[RedmanWasHere]

What's the draft order now Lore?

 

[Lore]

What's the draft order now Lore?

Haha I was about to post it and got side tracked.

 

[Lore]

Round 18:



So this is taking into account Fremantle's deficit, which has been applied according to Twomey's tweet (thanks to giantroo for posting it in the deficit thread):



There are also deficits for Port Adelaide and GWS that haven't been applied yet, but will presumably be applied to their second rounders once they bomb out of finals (or win the thing )

 

[RedmanWasHere]

How does that look vertically?

 

[Lore]

How does that look vertically?

... vertically?

 

[RedmanWasHere]

... vertically?

As a list.

 

[Lore]

As a list.

Tab 3 of the embed in the pinned post ^^

 

[RedmanWasHere]

Tab 3 of the embed in the pinned post ^^

Thank you Lore.

 

[Dockeroo]

Lore really informative thread.
A question on port adelaides deficit of 115 odd points. Their first pick in the draft will be 26 but it’s not actually their own second rounder. According to Mitch clearys article in AFL.com.au today on the draft order, port will not pay this deficit till pick 37?
Can you explain why it wouldnt be paid on their first pick of the second round at pick 26?
Is Cleary incorrect here?

 

[Lore]

I have cross-checked my draft order against the AFL's provisional draft order that was published today. Everything matches, which means we got all the live trade stuff right last year.

Fremantle's first rounder dropped to pick 10 with the deficit applied, as already noted above.

The order also confirms that GWS and Port Adelaide's OWN second round picks will move back with the deficits mentioned earlier in the thread, not the first pick that they happen to have in the order that they may have traded in last year (Port have two other second rounders from other clubs before their own).

There is still an unanswered hypothetical question about what happens if they do not have the pick tied to their own finishing position. I have no idea, and don't think we will find out until it happens and the AFL decides what should be done about it.

Deficits are officially applied only once the season is done, before the trade period, but I have applied the deficit to Fremantle (above) and GWS's picks (now) since their ladder positions are finalised and we have clarity on how it is supposed to work.

This means that the only deficit not yet applied to my draft order is Port's, which I will apply to their second round pick once their ladder position is also finalised. If they win the grand final and therefore finish first on the ladder, where they sit currently, pick 36 will slide back to 42. If they bomb out of finals earlier, then the pick will not slide as far because it starts out being worth more points in the first place.

Indicative draft order: Your club's picks as they stand

Check out your club's draft picks for 2020

www.afl.com.au

Please let me know if I've stuffed anything up lol. I'm pretty sure it's right but it is late, and I'm tired.

 

[perplexed]

I have cross-checked my draft order against the AFL's provisional draft order that was published today. Everything matches, which means we got all the live trade stuff right last year.

Fremantle's first rounder dropped to pick 10 with the deficit applied, as already noted above.

The order also confirms that GWS and Port Adelaide's OWN second round picks will move back with the deficits mentioned earlier in the thread, not the first pick that they happen to have in the order that they may have traded in last year (Port have two other second rounders from other clubs before their own).

There is still an unanswered hypothetical question about what happens if they do not have the pick tied to their own finishing position. I have no idea, and don't think we will find out until it happens and the AFL decides what should be done about it.

Deficits are officially applied only once the season is done, before the trade period, but I have applied the deficit to Fremantle (above) and GWS's picks (now) since their ladder positions are finalised and we have clarity on how it is supposed to work.

This means that the only deficit not yet applied to my draft order is Port's, which I will apply to their second round pick once their ladder position is also finalised. If they win the grand final and therefore finish first on the ladder, where they sit currently, pick 36 will slide back to 42. If they bomb out of finals earlier, then the pick will not slide as far because it starts out being worth more points in the first place.

Indicative draft order: Your club's picks as they stand

Check out your club's draft picks for 2020

www.afl.com.au

View attachment 970817
Please let me know if I've stuffed anything up lol. I'm pretty sure it's right but it is late, and I'm tired.

That afl indicative draft order you linked to seems to have applied pa's deficit to a third round pick instead of a second. As a result the gws pick is showing as pick 39 instead of 40.

 

[Lore]

That afl indicative draft order you linked to seems to have applied pa's deficit to a third round pick instead of a second. As a result the gws pick is showing as pick 39 instead of 40.

GWS's pick is in the right spot, after Brisbane and before Hawthorn in the third round. It is one of about 6-7 picks that are all out by 1 spot because I haven't applied Port's deficit yet.

When their ladder position is finalised, it will come off the second round pick that is tied to their own finishing position. The AFL's version currently assumes that Port will win the premiership and acts accordingly, which works because it's a static document that they update and publish once in a while.

My spreadsheet is live and self-updating, but the downside of that is that I can't apply deficits to live picks without breaking it. Ultimately, 6-7 picks being out by one position isn't enough of a reason to make multiple hours of work for myself.

 

[perplexed]

GWS's pick is in the right spot, after Brisbane and before Hawthorn in the third round. It is one of about 6-7 picks that are all out by 1 spot because I haven't applied Port's deficit yet.

When their ladder position is finalised, it will come off the second round pick that is tied to their own finishing position. The AFL's version currently assumes that Port will win the premiership and acts accordingly, which works because it's a static document that they update and publish once in a while.

My spreadsheet is live and self-updating, but the downside of that is that I can't apply deficits to live picks without breaking it. Ultimately, 6-7 picks being out by one position isn't enough of a reason to make multiple hours of work for myself.

What you have done all makes sense. It's the afl's list that doesn't. They seem to have applied PA's deficit to the wrong pick.
Why not their girst secknd round pick?