Analysis Fremantle's point deficit - What happens if they get pick 1..?

[Mego Red]

Nor will Adelaide though (if they finish 17th).

This makes no sense. Not saying it's wrong, but in this situation Freo don't have 3000 points, but nor does the team who finished 17th - or anyone else for that matter.

Do we just hover around in space waiting for some points to magically appear so that the draft can start?

I've been dubious about the points system for a while, this confirms how stupid it is.

But the points only matter for Freo, who don't have enough for pick one and need to drop down.

Adelaide don't have points, they have pick two. And when Freo drop down, they are moved up.

The points only are factored in when they're needed to, doe to circumstances, such as a NGA bid.

 

[perplexed]

Are you nuts.

What do you think the purpose of the draft point index is where they literally assign points to each pick, if it is not to "associate points to the picks"

And your argument is they don't have enough points for 1?

Any technicality around the points being attached to the picks rather than simply a value index is classic hair splitting.

The purpose of the index is obvious, and it should be obvious how it works. Fremantle finishes any where but last and it is going to work exactly as we are saying it should, they slot in after the pick they don't have enough points for and before the next pick..plus some later pick

Points aren't assigned to each pick. They are only used to locate a pick when it needs to be relocated.
A pick could start at 6. Move to 4 because of two other teams's deficits. Drop to 5 because of fa compo. Drop to 7 because of fs and academy bid matching. The pick's point value isn't relevant with any of these moves.
Points don't count except for the picks being relocated. Sometimes picks move up, sometimes they move down.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

I believe perplexed is right, counter-intuitive as it may seem.

Any time a pick slides, the intervening picks are moved up despite the other clubs not nominally holding the point value of their new position. Likewise, whenever a pick is exhausted matching a bid (or stripped through sanctions), every pick below it moves up a notch, regardless of point value.

If Fremantle finish 17th, with pick 2 (2517 points), their 265 point deficit deflates that to 2252 and slides them to pick 3 (2234 points) plus a small surplus. We all agree on that.

But what happens to the clubs holding picks 2 and 3? They now hold picks 1 and 2, despite not having "earned" those points, and despite the 16th placed club still nominally having fewer points than Fremantle.

A more logical way of understanding this in regard to pick 1 is that Fremantle wouldn't actually have 2735 points after accounting for the deficit (3000 minus 265). They would have 2517 points plus a 218 point surplus. The existing holders of pick 2 are bumped up due to the evaporation of the pick ahead of them, the 2517 points buys Fremantle a new pick 2 below the new pick 1, and the surplus then either creates a later pick or is carried over to match future deficits (I don't remember).

 

[WilloTree]

Sometimes picks are worth points, sometimes picks are just picks, sometimes points are 20% less, sometimes points are irrelevant, sometimes points are traded, sometimes you need 3000 points for pick 1, sometimes you don't.

Surely we can all see how the system fails the equity test.

 

[WilloTree]

You are missing the point. Picks get moved forward and back throughout the trade and draft period. Points are only relevant in placing the pick being relocated in the order.

I know. That's why I wrote "not saying it's wrong". My point is it's a crap system.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Relax, Adelaide won't finish above Freo.

 

[briztoon]

Are you nuts.

What do you think the purpose of the draft point index is where they literally assign points to each pick, if it is not to "associate points to the picks"

And your argument is they don't have enough points for 1?

Any technicality around the points being attached to the picks rather than simply a value index is classic hair splitting.

The purpose of the index is obvious, and it should be obvious how it works. Fremantle finishes any where but last and it is going to work exactly as we are saying it should, they slot in after the pick they don't have enough points for and before the next pick..plus some later pick

I believe you’re both missing the point, and both are partly correct in what you’re saying, but you’re both partly being pig headed as well.

 

[Giant Strides]

Yes, I've come to agree with GUMBLETRON and the first part of WilloTree 's comments, as counterintuitive as it might seem. (Noting that since the AFL have not provided concrete advice on this matter, it's factually still a matter of conjecture.)

Sometimes picks do have points, and sometimes they are just picks. The points aren't required to 'buy' a position - as we've seen when matching a bid several picks can effectively evaporate, and later picks move up several places without having the greater number of points required to 'buy' the higher position. But they do indicate where a revised pick fits into the pick order after it's been impacted by a change.

If we look at an alternative example in detail it might illustrate the point - let's presume that GWS didn't trade up their original picks #12 & #18 last year but retained them, and Adelaide bid on Tom Green at pick #4.

#4 is 2034 points, at 20% academy discount it required 1627.2 point for GWS to match.

#12 (1268 points) goes entirely in the match. #18 (985 points) completes the match with 625.8 points remaining & those points becoming a revised pick.

Giants take pick #4 for Green, and original picks #4 to #11 move back one place to become #5 to #12 (#11 moving into the slot vacated by the GWS pick used to move up).

Hence, picks #13 to #17 remain extant, while pick #18 is now pushed back: 625.8 points is below pick #30 but more than pick #31, so slots in at pick #31.

Looking then at that series of picks, I would opine that picks #19 to #31 all move forward one to become #18 to #30 to allow the GWS former pick #18 to slot in at pick #31. In that case, the former pick #31 has actually jumped ahead of the higher points value of the remnant of pick #18, because it filled in a gap.

Arguably the same would be taken to be in play in the Freo case. With the points penalty, they no longer hold the points for #1, so move down - the remaining points are sufficient for pick #2. The old pick #2 moves up to #1 to fill in the gap, and Freo's pick can slot into a vacant gap which is pick #2.

Similarly, if Freo hold pick #2, that 2517 points minus 265 points deficit becomes 2252 points (between picks #2 & #3). Pick #3 moves up to become pick #2 - because it fills in a gap - and the Freo pick slots into pick #3 because it holds sufficient points to do so.

[The one thing that's unclear is whether there are any residual points allocated to Freo in case they are matching a bid at the revised pick.]

Convoluted - yes. But also logical if explained clearly. Wish AFL could clarify the matter with clear instructions.

Best if Freo just don't finish last, and the situation is easier to understand.

 

[Lore]

Yes, I've come to agree with GUMBLETRON and the first part of WilloTree 's comments, as counterintuitive as it might seem. (Noting that since the AFL have not provided concrete advice on this matter, it's factually still a matter of conjecture.)

Sometimes picks do have points, and sometimes they are just picks. The points aren't required to 'buy' a position - as we've seen when matching a bid several picks can effectively evaporate, and later picks move up several places without having the greater number of points required to 'buy' the higher position. But they do indicate where a revised pick fits into the pick order after it's been impacted by a change.

If we look at an alternative example in detail it might illustrate the point - let's presume that GWS didn't trade up their original picks #12 & #18 last year but retained them, and Adelaide bid on Tom Green at pick #4.

#4 is 2034 points, at 20% academy discount it required 1627.2 point for GWS to match.

#12 (1268 points) goes entirely in the match. #18 (985 points) completes the match with 625.8 points remaining & those points becoming a revised pick.

Giants take pick #4 for Green, and original picks #4 to #11 move back one place to become #5 to #12 (#11 moving into the slot vacated by the GWS pick used to move up).

Hence, picks #13 to #17 remain extant, while pick #18 is now pushed back: 625.8 points is below pick #30 but more than pick #31, so slots in at pick #31.

Looking then at that series of picks, I would opine that picks #19 to #31 all move forward one to become #18 to #30 to allow the GWS former pick #18 to slot in at pick #31. In that case, the former pick #31 has actually jumped ahead of the higher points value of the remnant of pick #18, because it filled in a gap.

Arguably the same would be taken to be in play in the Freo case. With the points penalty, they no longer hold the points for #1, so move down - the remaining points are sufficient for pick #2. The old pick #2 moves up to #1 to fill in the gap, and Freo's pick can slot into a vacant gap which is pick #2.

Similarly, if Freo hold pick #2, that 2517 points minus 265 points deficit becomes 2252 points (between picks #2 & #3). Pick #3 moves up to become pick #2 - because it fills in a gap - and the Freo pick slots into pick #3 because it holds sufficient points to do so.

[The one thing that's unclear is whether there are any residual points allocated to Freo in case they are matching a bid at the revised pick.]

Convoluted - yes. But also logical if explained clearly. Wish AFL could clarify the matter with clear instructions.

Best if Freo just don't finish last, and the situation is easier to understand.

Agree with this, it's stupid that they don't make stuff like this transparent. It's not like it's difficult, they did manage to communicate it to the clubs after all.

I think the missing link is that they update the draft order in the middle of the process, before re-inserting the re-valued pick. So as you said, everything moves up into the gap.

The other thing is, technically picks don't evaporate entirely when used to match. If you enter the draft with five picks, you will still be able to take 5 players if you want to. The ones that are used to match a bid have 0 points remaining, and are re-inserted at the end of the draft – they don't slide to after pick 73 or whatever the last one is with points attached, but the actual end of the draft, in rounds, in reverse ladder order.

 

[Giant Strides]

The other thing is, technically picks don't evaporate entirely when used to match.

Yes, you are 100% correct. Just a bit of hyperbole on my behalf!

 

[perplexed]

And just when I thought I understood the system, I find this.
In 2017 , St Kilda bid on Chris Naish at 34. Richmond matched with 53 and 55. According to my maths, 55 should have moved back to 65, instead it went to 64. They should have been put after the gws pick not before it.

Anyone want to check this?

Out of interest, that gws pick started at 15, dropped to 63 after the 1000 point Whitfield penalty deficit and then dropped to 65 after two compo picks were awarded.

 

[Lore]

And just when I thought I understood the system, I find this.
In 2017 , St Kilda bid on Chris Naish at 34. Richmond matched with 53 and 55. According to my maths, 55 should have moved back to 65, instead it went to 64. They should have been put after the gws pick not before it.

Anyone want to check this?

Out of interest, that gws pick started at 15, dropped to 63 after the 1000 point Whitfield penalty deficit and then dropped to 65 after two compo picks were awarded.

That’s what I was saying before, they seem to put it ahead of the original pick of the same number. But then some examples they put it after. It’s like Schrödinger’s pick.

Who the **** knows anymore.

 

[Giant Strides]

That’s what I was saying before, they seem to put it ahead of the original pick of the same number. But then some examples they put it after. It’s like Schrödinger’s pick.

Who the fu** knows anymore.

Schrödinger.

And maybe his ****ing cat, depending on whether it's dead or alive!

 

[Banshee23]

How a little known clause could give Crows two top-five picks

They appear destined for their first wooden spoon. But this is how Adelaide could take two picks inside the top five

www.afl.com.au

Mentions the Freo point deficit.

 

[GWS Goose]

How a little known clause could give Crows two top-five picks

They appear destined for their first wooden spoon. But this is how Adelaide could take two picks inside the top five

www.afl.com.au

Mentions the Freo point deficit.

The more amusing thing is they refer to it as a little known clause, I'd think even the most casual observer is aware of the deficit component of the bidding system. Granted, not many would follow who is in deficit.

 

[Dockeroo]

The more amusing thing is they refer to it as a little known clause, I'd think even the most casual observer is aware of the deficit component of the bidding system. Granted, not many would follow who is in deficit.

It’s more amusing that they think someone would be willing (stupid enough) to pay a salary to Brad Crouch large enough to get the crows a free agency compo pick at band 1 level.

 

[briztoon]

It’s more amusing that they think someone would be willing (stupid enough) to pay a salary to Brad Crouch large enough to get the crows a free agency compo pick at band 1 level.

North.

 

[Johnny Rutten]

It’s more amusing that they think someone would be willing (stupid enough) to pay a salary to Brad Crouch large enough to get the crows a free agency compo pick at band 1 level.

Do we know what sort of offer that would need to be for the band 1 level to kick in? Or is it up to whichever way the wind blows at AFL house that day?

FWIW, I don't rate Brad as band 1 myself, but am hoping some dumb-arse club does!!

 

[GWS Goose]

Do we know what sort of offer that would need to be for the band 1 level to kick in? Or is it up to whichever way the wind blows at AFL house that day?

FWIW, I don't rate Brad as band 1 myself, but am hoping some dumb-arse club does!!

It was complicated and somewhat opaque from memory
Someone will know exactly but I think I heard it was an average of $700K or more for first round and $600K for for end of first round. There was some other parts to the metric I think age and length of next contract maybe.

 

[GUMBLETRON]

Do we know what sort of offer that would need to be for the band 1 level to kick in? Or is it up to whichever way the wind blows at AFL house that day?

FWIW, I don't rate Brad as band 1 myself, but am hoping some dumb-arse club does!!

The AFL's secret formula for free agency compensation

Length of contract is largely irrelevant, but a one-year age gap can make a big difference.

www.theage.com.au

Top 5% of contracts, with a bonus for being younger.

 

[Pedantic]

What an interesting question and thread. Clear as mud by the AFL as usual.

 

[Mjs94]

North.

No chance, I'd be shocked if we were evening looking at him, but thanks for your input Tom Browne.

 

[Mego Red]

It’s more amusing that they think someone would be willing (stupid enough) to pay a salary to Brad Crouch large enough to get the crows a free agency compo pick at band 1 level.

Fremantle are rumoured.

 

[more_of_bito]

Fremantle are rumoured.

IMO Zero chance.i believe Rumour was generated by podcast hypothetical.

Brad would move back to Victoria not to WA and unlikely to be considered with Freos primary targets ex WA players as well as his perceived mercenary approach to a deal ( ie shopping to Gold Coast last year).

My thought would be Pies. Cap might be bursting but strong ties with Sanderson from Adelaide coaching days. If any of Pies big name players leave (Moore /Degoey) consider it a lock in my humble opinion.

 

[Joao]

IMO Zero chance.i believe Rumour was generated by podcast hypothetical.

Brad would move back to Victoria not to WA and unlikely to be considered with Freos primary targets ex WA players as well as his perceived mercenary approach to a deal ( ie shopping to Gold Coast last year).

My thought would be Pies. Cap might be bursting but strong ties with Sanderson from Adelaide coaching days. If any of Pies big name players leave (Moore /Degoey) consider it a lock in my humble opinion.

Doubt Pies would target mids if they had cap space. KPP stocks aren't great.