Past #26: Tarryn Thomas - Roo until end '24

[Tas]

To be fair, McDonald was bid on by the old system.

True, but if we must get him then what is stopping the spooner bidding pick #1 and forcing us to blow of ton of extra points to get him, it is not like they will lose pick #1 for bidding on him.

 

[MagicDaw]

No way in the world that would happen!
But in the very unlikely event a club would do that (don't think any club would be that stupid) they can have him.
Earliest possible bid might come around 8-9. More likely 10 to 16!

 

[Rockstar6]

True, but if we must get him then what is stopping the spooner bidding pick #1 and forcing us to blow of ton of extra points to get him, it is not like they will lose pick #1 for bidding on him.

Ok. Let's say the spooner bids (Carlton right now) #1 on TT, we let them have TT. Unless you rate TT as the clear #1 pick, you don't spend the picks/points.

 

[Moti]

I would look at trading up a couple of spots. Perhaps target WB pick. Ensure we get a good player plus TT.

 

[The Dingrel]

No reason that you can’t be an attacking weapon off HB. Whitfield, Brodie Smith and that Footscray bloke go all right.

David King, all australian dual premiership player, goalkicking half back!

 

[Heaps of fun]

True, but if we must get him then what is stopping the spooner bidding pick #1 and forcing us to blow of ton of extra points to get him, it is not like they will lose pick #1 for bidding on him.

What? Yes they will. We won't stump up 2400 (20% discount on pick 1 [3000 points] points for TT. That's the equivalent of pick 11 and pick 16. TT would just end up going pick 1. * thought about bidding on Setterfield but that didn't eventuate. Teams don't play games with top 3 picks.

 

[Tas]

Ok. Let's say the spooner bids (Carlton right now) #1 on TT, we let them have TT. Unless you rate TT as the clear #1 pick, you don't spend the picks/points.

That isn't the issue, I think the AFL only allows potential father/son or academy players to train and play with a club if they commit to taking him and not passing on him. When we allowed McDonald to train with us, we conceded we would have to use our first round pick on him. With the new bidding system, you could be expected to pay a lot more than just your first round pick. Pick #1 is worth 3k points, even with the 20% discount it is massive amount of points to gather given you are limited to 1 pick per vacancy on your list.

 

[Rockstar6]

That isn't the issue, I think the AFL only allows potential father/son or academy players to train and play with a club if they commit to taking him and not passing on him. When we allowed McDonald to train with us, we conceded we would have to use our first round pick on him. With the new bidding system, you could be expected to pay a lot more than just your first round pick. Pick #1 is worth 3k points, even with the 20% discount it is massive amount of points to gather given you are limited to 1 pick per vacancy on your list.

You still have the option of passing on an academy player don't you? I'm pretty sure you can refuse to match. Academies just give certain clubs first dibs on certain players. Didn't guys like Josh Williams train with GC, Wagner and Dec Watson with Brisbane and they were allowed to pass.

 

[Tas]

What? Yes they will. We won't stump up 2400 (20% discount on pick 1 [3000 points] points for TT. That's the equivalent of pick 11 and pick 16. TT would just end up going pick 1. * thought about bidding on Setterfield but that didn't eventuate. Teams don't play games with top 3 picks.

2400 is still a whole lot more that we would expect to pay if clubs didn't feel they had a free hit to hurt us via bidding. What did they have him atm in the phantom draft, pick 10? That is 1,116 points after discount. We would be prepared to float 1,284 points just to have him play a few VFL games? Seems silly to me, that is in effect a pick #12-13 equivalent we are flushing down the toilet in a superdraft.

 

[Heaps of fun]

2400 is still a whole lot more that we would expect to pay if clubs didn't feel they had a free hit to hurt us via bidding. What did they have him atm in the phantom draft, pick 10? That is 1,116 points after discount. We would be prepared to float 1,284 points just to have him play a few VFL games? Seems silly to me, that is in effect a pick #12-13 equivalent we are flushing down the toilet in a superdraft.

What are you talking about no club is going to bid with pick 1 a talent they don't rate as pick 1.

 

[Tas]

You still have the option of passing on an academy player don't you? I'm pretty sure you can refuse to match. Academies just give certain clubs first dibs on certain players. Didn't guys like Josh Williams train with GC, Wagner and Dec Watson with Brisbane and they were allowed to pass.

You do normally. Clubs typically have very limited access to academy or father son players, the type of access you have during pre-seasons or through VFL training/playing is vastly different and far beyond what the AFL normally allow and you need permission from the AFL to basically add the player to your club prematurely. From what I heard during the McDonald thing, it was basically an undertaking that we had to take him irrespective what someone bid to get early access to him. That was with the old system where you could at most be expected to pay your first pick and clubs were irritated by the Swans and Melbourne getting F/S and Academy players with second round picks so we copped it in the arse.

However, if that undertaking still exists, the potential cost is far more significant with the new bidding system, especially after they limited how many picks you can take to the draft to 1 per senior list vacancy. It may be why we haven't pulled the trigger with TT a long time ago.

Imagine if clubs do some invasive medical testing on players before they could draft them, it potentially opens up a can of worms, if TT was given a full medical and he had some kind of condition which we thought would ruin his ability to play footy long-term and we said no thanks, imagine the fall out...

 

[Rockstar6]

You do normally. Clubs typically have very limited access to academy or father son players, the type of access you have during pre-seasons or through VFL training/playing is vastly different and far beyond what the AFL normally allow and you need permission from the AFL to basically add the player to your club prematurely. From what I heard during the McDonald thing, it was basically an undertaking that we had to take him irrespective what someone bid to get early access to him. That was with the old system where you could at most be expected to pay your first pick and clubs were irritated by the Swans and Melbourne getting F/S and Academy players with second round picks so we copped it in the arse.

However, if that undertaking still exists, the potential cost is far more significant with the new bidding system, especially after they limited how many picks you can take to the draft to 1 per senior list vacancy. It may be why we haven't pulled the trigger with TT a long time ago.

Imagine if clubs do some invasive medical testing on players before they could draft them, it potentially opens up a can of worms, if TT was given a full medical and he had some kind of condition which we thought would ruin his ability to play footy long-term and we said no thanks, imagine the fall out...

We had officially committed to Luke McDonald a 18 months before he was drafted. We haven't done the same to TT, we probably have said we will do everything practical to secure you which is no guarantee if say a Carlton or GC bid on him at 1,2 or pick 3. I have 100% faith in the recruiting team that we will get Tarryn at a fair or even bargain price. Let's wait until the trade period is over before we lose our minds

 

[DarkPhoenix]

True, but if we must get him then what is stopping the spooner bidding pick #1 and forcing us to blow of ton of extra points to get him, it is not like they will lose pick #1 for bidding on him.

Say that happened. And we chose not to match, giving TT as the number 1 pick.

I reckon the AFL would then step in and create a system to try and prevent fake bids.

Which would convolute the system even more. And make things a tonne worse.

That isn't the issue, I think the AFL only allows potential father/son or academy players to train and play with a club if they commit to taking him and not passing on him. When we allowed McDonald to train with us, we conceded we would have to use our first round pick on him. With the new bidding system, you could be expected to pay a lot more than just your first round pick. Pick #1 is worth 3k points, even with the 20% discount it is massive amount of points to gather given you are limited to 1 pick per vacancy on your list.

TT Trained with us under NGA, theres no commitment yet.

Same as the Brisbane kids that regularly train there but don't get picked up

We never committed to taking Luke, we could have passed if we wanted to, but we laid all our cards out on the table early, it was a bad move.
It was like going all in and showing your opponent a hand of 2/3 post flop with 2, A, K on the table and 2 cards to come.

You're committed but theres so much there that can beat you. Gives every opponent at the table the upper hand.

 

[Tas]

We had officially committed to Luke McDonald a 18 months before he was drafted. We haven't done the same to TT, we probably have said we will do everything practical to secure you which is no guarantee if say a Carlton or GC bid on him at 1,2 or pick 3. I have 100% faith in the recruiting team that we will get Tarryn at a fair or even bargain price. Let's wait until the trade period is over before we lose our minds

I haven't lost my mind, just pointing out why we likely haven't gone to the effort to push him into the VFL.

 

[Tas]

Say that happened. And we chose not to match, giving TT as the number 1 pick.

I reckon the AFL would then step in and create a system to try and prevent fake bids.

Which would convolute the system even more. And make things a tonne worse.

I agree.

TT Trained with us under NGA, theres no commitment yet.

Same as the Brisbane kids that regularly train there but don't get picked up

We never committed to taking Luke, we could have passed if we wanted to, but we laid all our cards out on the table early, it was a bad move.
It was like going all in and showing your opponent a hand of 2/3 post flop with 2, A, K on the table and 2 cards to come.

You're committed but theres so much there that can beat you. Gives every opponent at the table the upper hand.

There are limitations in terms of what you can do with those types of kids, you need to get permission from the AFL to go beyond those limitations.

 

[Hootini]

I reckon the AFL would then step in and create a system to try and prevent fake bids.

Which would convolute the system even more. And make things a tonne worse.

You can always bet the farm on the AFL doing something convoluted that ends up making it worse.

 

[czero]

We would have to commit to taking him irrespective what others bid for him, it just opens the door for a McDonald-like bid which makes us pay way over for him.

How does it work now anyway. Back with McDonald they had a system where we picked in a pre-draft event where other teams said what pick they would use on him and if we would match (so all commitments were done early).

These days I thought it was the case that it was just done on the night as the draft went through.

 

[DarkPhoenix]

How does it work now anyway. Back with McDonald they had a system where we picked in a pre-draft event where other teams said what pick they would use on him and if we would match (so all commitments were done early).

These days I thought it was the case that it was just done on the night as the draft went through.

Player is able to nominate a team under F/S, Academy as before.

On the night all goes normally until a team decides to bid on said player.

The team that was nominated then has the option to match the bid (with a 20% discount) using their next available pick/picks.

Any excess points from matching this bid is shuffled down the order and becomes a new pick.

Say TT nominates us under NGA (pretty much a given with the academies, not even sure if they have to nominate in this regard tbh).

And Brisbane pick him at Pick X, where X has a point value of 1000.

We then are asked if we want to match with our next pick(s) totalling 800 (less 20%).

Say our next pick is worth 650, thats not enough, so we need to combine it with the next pick which is worth say 350, totalling 1000 pts. Which means we're paying an excess of 200 pts.

We pay 1000 pts at pick x and that 200 pts then gets turned into a new pick and gets slotted into the draft accordingly (200 pts being effectively pick 55).



In the above example, leaving the maths out of it, it becomes:

Brisbane select Tarryn Thomas at Pick 17.

North Melbourne, will you match?

Yes we match using our next available picks, 29 and 45.

North: pick 17, select Tarryn Thomas and gain a newly created pick 55 from excess points.

Brisbane then select again at 18.

 

[Tectonic]

Player is able to nominate a team under F/S, Academy as before.

On the night all goes normally until a team decides to bid on said player.

The team that was nominated then has the option to match the bid (with a 20% discount) using their next available pick/picks.

Any excess points from matching this bid is shuffled down the order and becomes a new pick.

Say TT nominates us under NGA (pretty much a given with the academies, not even sure if they have to nominate in this regard tbh).

And Brisbane pick him at Pick X, where X has a point value of 1000.

We then are asked if we want to match with our next pick(s) totalling 800 (less 20%).

Say our next pick is worth 650, thats not enough, so we need to combine it with the next pick which is worth say 350, totalling 1000 pts. Which means we're paying an excess of 200 pts.

We pay 1000 pts at pick x and that 200 pts then gets turned into a new pick and gets slotted into the draft accordingly (200 pts being effectively pick 55).



In the above example, leaving the maths out of it, it becomes:

Brisbane select Tarryn Thomas at Pick 17.

North Melbourne, will you match?

Yes we match using our next available picks, 29 and 45.

North: pick 17, select Tarryn Thomas and gain a newly created pick 55 from excess points.

Brisbane then select again at 18.

I wonder how well a system where, upon us matching the pick 17 bid, brisbane are then penalised by being pushed down to pick 19, and GCS or blues go to 18 would go.

Make the bidder really commit to the pick, ya know?

 

[DarkPhoenix]

I wonder how well a system where, upon us matching the pick 17 bid, brisbane are then penalised by being pushed down to pick 19, and GCS or blues go to 18 would go.

Make the bidder really commit to the pick, ya know?

That punishes fake bidders, but someone who genuinely wants the kid should not be punished.

 

[Bigeasy]

Thomas will not attract a first round bid.

 

[Page8383]

Thomas will not attract a first round bid.

I’m tending to think this too.
In such a dense top end draft there’s more likely to be sliders.

Clubs are taking a risk bidding with their first - you’d almost want the player more than the picks worth. You’re less likely to do this when there’s a lot of other options around

Anyway - it’s all hypothetical at the moment and who knows how clubs recruiters think

 

[Only Forwards]

Thomas will not attract a first round bid.

If this is the case then I'd honestly prefer to keep our first rounder in just about all circumstances bar 1.

If we could get Kelly with this year's and next year's first do it.

 

[shintemaster]

If this is the case then I'd honestly prefer to keep our first rounder in just about all circumstances bar 1.

If we could get Kelly with this year's and next year's first do it.

The problem with that - besides the obvious that GWS will want him next year to keep pushing for top 4 & flags - is that trading Kelly to us immediately devalues our 2019 pick for GWS. We saw what he did for their season.

 

[Tas]

Player is able to nominate a team under F/S, Academy as before.

On the night all goes normally until a team decides to bid on said player.

The team that was nominated then has the option to match the bid (with a 20% discount) using their next available pick/picks.

Any excess points from matching this bid is shuffled down the order and becomes a new pick.

Say TT nominates us under NGA (pretty much a given with the academies, not even sure if they have to nominate in this regard tbh).

And Brisbane pick him at Pick X, where X has a point value of 1000.

We then are asked if we want to match with our next pick(s) totalling 800 (less 20%).

Say our next pick is worth 650, thats not enough, so we need to combine it with the next pick which is worth say 350, totalling 1000 pts. Which means we're paying an excess of 200 pts.

We pay 1000 pts at pick x and that 200 pts then gets turned into a new pick and gets slotted into the draft accordingly (200 pts being effectively pick 55).



In the above example, leaving the maths out of it, it becomes:

Brisbane select Tarryn Thomas at Pick 17.

North Melbourne, will you match?

Yes we match using our next available picks, 29 and 45.

North: pick 17, select Tarryn Thomas and gain a newly created pick 55 from excess points.

Brisbane then select again at 18.

The only thing I would add to this is that you must use the next pick you have available after the one that is bid on the player, so if we end up with pick #10 and some other club bid's pick #8 for him, we must use our pick #10 on him... assuming we still have the pick. It has been largely why the club has said our first pick is up for trade earlier in the year, when TT was being billed as a top 3 player and possible #1.