I can imagine massive gaming of that system so you end up with 1 point more than a rival to get pick 1.
Strategy How would you fix free agency?
- Thread starter dazedjosh
- Start date
- Tagged users None
IIs that a bad thing?
You still have to trade out to get points in. And all clubs would be able to do it.
What scenarios would be bad?
Which is why if a club needs to pay for a NGA with a first round pick and Compo is taken from the gaining club picks don't get pushed out at all.
I ask the question why is this an issue now? For 20 years SA and WA clubs have had to deal with Vic clubs getting repeated father/son picks.
Now that everyone has access to NGA's and father/son picks you want to change the rules again so Melbourne clubs are advantaged by pilfering lower clubs for Free Agency players without them getting compensation.
How about - The team that finished bottom, with very little trade capital to up its points tally ... End up with a worse draft hand than a number of top 8 clubs.
Don't leave me out, I had a similar idea a few years ago too 
www.bigfooty.com
I think it is safe to say though we are getting a theme with these ideas, and properly worked out by people smarter than us it could turn into a very good system, a very fair system.
AFL trading and drafting should become completely points based?
I know I created a thread similar to this a few days ago but based on some of the responses I got I have changed the idea so instead of teams being allocated picks based on where they finished that year they are instead allocated points. (PS I am using the AFL points system as a guide here...
www.bigfooty.com
I think it is safe to say though we are getting a theme with these ideas, and properly worked out by people smarter than us it could turn into a very good system, a very fair system.
If you look at the majority of picks trades, the team upgrading pay 30-50% more in points.
It's not just the games that counts into the points ie All Australian honors , club B&F, Brownlow votes etc.
Every AFL Draft Pick and Trade Ever - Draftguru
www.draftguru.com.au
If you go to the site, it has all the trades and calculator to see the points difference.
- Sep 11, 2016
- 758
- 3,791
- AFL Club
- Carlton
There are a few issues with the system that need to be rectified:
1) Compensation- Needs to be scaled way back so at least the first round is protected and the second round is only for top players. We cannot have situations where a compensation pick is worth more than the player leaving.
2) Free Agency/Trading- I don’t have a particular issue with Free Agency itself but it has predictably resulted in the top clubs ravaging the rest. The issue with the system is that any player whether in or out of contract, whether FA status has been acquired or not, they all basically have the power to request a trade to a specific club which is the concept of what free agency is supposed to be. So why do we need a separate set of Free Agency rules when the concept already exists?
3) Draft- Academies are a rort. They should be scrapped and run independently by the AFL. Father-son I like but it does somewhat compromise the draft too so I wouldn’t be totally against scrapping it just to stop the newer clubs whinging. No discounts should be applied either if these mechanisms stay. Neither should exist with live trading because clubs trade up and back for points which creates an uneven market.
4) Draftee contracts- We can’t have situations where promising draftees leave after two years. I suggest that a draftee contract should include an option for the club to trigger a one or two year extension at the end of the first two years. Obviously salary needs to be increased in years three and four.
5) Outside of cap payments- Sponsorship payments, benefits provided and ambassadorial payments need much stricter monitoring and policing. There needs to be heavy restrictions on this.
1) Compensation- Needs to be scaled way back so at least the first round is protected and the second round is only for top players. We cannot have situations where a compensation pick is worth more than the player leaving.
2) Free Agency/Trading- I don’t have a particular issue with Free Agency itself but it has predictably resulted in the top clubs ravaging the rest. The issue with the system is that any player whether in or out of contract, whether FA status has been acquired or not, they all basically have the power to request a trade to a specific club which is the concept of what free agency is supposed to be. So why do we need a separate set of Free Agency rules when the concept already exists?
3) Draft- Academies are a rort. They should be scrapped and run independently by the AFL. Father-son I like but it does somewhat compromise the draft too so I wouldn’t be totally against scrapping it just to stop the newer clubs whinging. No discounts should be applied either if these mechanisms stay. Neither should exist with live trading because clubs trade up and back for points which creates an uneven market.
4) Draftee contracts- We can’t have situations where promising draftees leave after two years. I suggest that a draftee contract should include an option for the club to trigger a one or two year extension at the end of the first two years. Obviously salary needs to be increased in years three and four.
5) Outside of cap payments- Sponsorship payments, benefits provided and ambassadorial payments need much stricter monitoring and policing. There needs to be heavy restrictions on this.
- Jul 22, 2013
- 18,823
- 27,489
- AFL Club
- Carlton
The points system as it stands is an abomination which attempts to place a real world value on a number of artificial constructs. It is largely useless for any genuine value assessment of a given draft pick deal.
Each club in it's individual circumstances may have a different view of what a given draft pick is "worth", and what they would be happy to get for it if traded. If point allocations were substituted for draft order, you get to trade period and nobody has the faintest clue what a given number of points is actually worth in the draft.
The value of the points does not become evident until the bidding behaviour of clubs in the first and second rounds (at least) is demonstrated. How many clubs go in hard at the top 10? How many points are you going to have to save for your later picks?
I would assess it as inevitable that a points system as proposed would all but guarantee that the already strong clubs get stronger. They will trade their fringe players or duplicate types out for points, and spend it all lavishly on early picks. Who cares if the two or three extra players you need to fill your bottom three list spots come from the Siberia end of the draft? That is a luxury weaker sides don't have.
As the system stands, the low finishing team has the ability to say NO. I will not trade you my top 5 pick, I am investing in quality youth. Or they can decide they are better served to take two later first rounders in exchange.
In a points system the bottom finishing side has no guarantee that their hatful of extra points will even get them a player in the top 10.
Each club in it's individual circumstances may have a different view of what a given draft pick is "worth", and what they would be happy to get for it if traded. If point allocations were substituted for draft order, you get to trade period and nobody has the faintest clue what a given number of points is actually worth in the draft.
The value of the points does not become evident until the bidding behaviour of clubs in the first and second rounds (at least) is demonstrated. How many clubs go in hard at the top 10? How many points are you going to have to save for your later picks?
I would assess it as inevitable that a points system as proposed would all but guarantee that the already strong clubs get stronger. They will trade their fringe players or duplicate types out for points, and spend it all lavishly on early picks. Who cares if the two or three extra players you need to fill your bottom three list spots come from the Siberia end of the draft? That is a luxury weaker sides don't have.
As the system stands, the low finishing team has the ability to say NO. I will not trade you my top 5 pick, I am investing in quality youth. Or they can decide they are better served to take two later first rounders in exchange.
In a points system the bottom finishing side has no guarantee that their hatful of extra points will even get them a player in the top 10.
What?
Where did I say clubs shouldn't get compensation? I didn't.
I'm saying clubs who have no involvement in any NGA, FS or compo picks should not have their picks diluted because of other teams benefiting from the current system. Some clubs seem to benefit every year, Collingwood comes to mind. Every year they seem to be landing a FS or NGA kid and other clubs get pushed down the order. Darcy Moore, Kelly, Quaynor, T Brown, J Daicos, this year Reef McInness and another Daicos touted as a pick 1 next year.
Would be very interesting to add up the points value of each clubs FS and NGA's over the past 5 years and see which clubs are at the top and who is at the bottom. Gill and the AFL trot out the BS that it evens up over time but I would like that proven. It seems some clubs are naturally / historically better positioned to take full advantage of the system where others are handicapped.
Top eight teams would have to trade out serious talent to displace the bottom clubs. And even if that scenario did happen, I think it could still give the bottom-placed multiple good quality picks.
The top team that stockpiled all its points would have cashed out and the teams they obtained those points from would also be out of the picture.
You might miss pick one, but end up with picks two and three.
Would need to model it and see how it worked out.
So clubs sit and wait until a minute before cut-off to not show their hand on how many points they will have. So whoever is the last to lodge a trade has a massive advantage because they know how many points they need to get the pick they want. Everyone will hold out to the last moment it would end up a farce.
We are talking the AFL here. They do have some very smart people...they also had AFLX.Don't leave me out, I had a similar idea a few years ago too
AFL trading and drafting should become completely points based?
I know I created a thread similar to this a few days ago but based on some of the responses I got I have changed the idea so instead of teams being allocated picks based on where they finished that year they are instead allocated points. (PS I am using the AFL points system as a guide here...
I think it is safe to say though we are getting a theme with these ideas, and properly worked out by people smarter than us it could turn into a very good system, a very fair system.
I get your concerns there but I think in this instance it can be solved by having 18th getting sufficiently more points than 1st, so much so that 1st would need to trade away a lot of fringe players or one or two very good players to get to the same points total as 18th.
I'll make it much simpler (this is what I've come up with after examining a few different possibilities)
1. Eliminate compo for FA's, and replace with points value that must be paid by the club requesting a player - commensurate to their pay scale, age, and all the other crap we have right now. If clubs can't agree, or the requesting club tries to package a bunch of picks in the 40's together, just as it is now, player goes to the PSD or ND.
- eg: Jeremy Cameron under this system this year is deemed as worth 3000 points (or some other random arbitrary number that the AFL payscale dreams up).
Cats offer Pick 13, a second, and a future 2nd, and deem this is enough based on points value.
GWS return and say, we want Pick 13 & 15, which is enough in points value.
It then plays out, and if no compromise is reached, player goes to the draft.
This system basically eliminates the possibility of players being requested in trades, that have nothing to do with the deal. Also allows academy sides dealing with other clubs to accept points value over picks. Finally, it makes every club have to pay something to get a player, meaning there's no manipulating the compo via increased salary/side deals. Also eliminates the need for a distinction between RFA and FA, as every club is paying something to get a player anyway.
Still a bit to work out, but it's the fairest and most uncomplicated way I can see FA being applied at this stage
I’m sure some clubs would try that, I’m sure some clubs would realise that a mad scramble would probably end up with some terrible decisions.
Perhaps it’s like a game of poker? The points are not revealed until everyone shows their hand at the end.
That would be really interesting, so trades are done using the points, but the points are not revealed to the end of the trade period. So when Geelong trades for Cameron, opposition clubs can guess for how many points, but they don't actually know until the trade period closes and the points are revealed.
- Jul 22, 2013
- 18,823
- 27,489
- AFL Club
- Carlton
How about we just give 18th pick 1 and let them use it as they see fit?
NGAs are a joke, FA compensation is a bad joke. Get rid of all the extra picks, including father son.
I would liken this conversation to the rolling Rules of the Game debacle. Until you strip off all the crapola that's been glued on over time, you don't know if the system actually works decently or not.
But as we have seen with the rules of the game debacle, shoving extra layers of complication is rarely constructive.
Because the current system makes trading ridiculously more difficult than it needs to be. You just don’t know any different and are used to it.
With the proposed system, come draft night no team is obligated to trade their picks. The team with the currently available pick is in full control, they can trade if they want to or they can just select a player as usual.
That's all a different issue.
Last edited:
I like NGA's and I like father/son and from the players point of view I like free agency although I think that 26yo is too early and should be 28yo so the drafting club has 10 years of service with 4 of those being prime years. I just don't like the AFL rules around them that allows the gaining clubs to still get first round draft choices when they get a player of that ability by one of these means. It's just a free kick to that team.
And what I object to the rules are most equitable as they have been for years and people want to change them all because the Crows are going to get a free kick for Crouch.
If people were fair about this they'd see that Ablett father/son and dodgy compensation was far worse than the Crouch situation.
And what I object to the rules are most equitable as they have been for years and people want to change them all because the Crows are going to get a free kick for Crouch.
If people were fair about this they'd see that Ablett father/son and dodgy compensation was far worse than the Crouch situation.
But a team won't have full control over its currently available pick. A team finishing on the bottom could lose its number 1 pick not because it has chosen to trade it but because some other club has accumulated more points by trading out players.
Thanks Chiz.
My immediate thoughts are that issues 1, 2 and 6 aren't such big problems with the current system; Issues 3,4 and 5 are very big problems but are better addressed in other ways:
On issue 3: You can stop (for example) Western Bulldogs manipulating the points system this year simply by making a rule that says if they trade out of the first round then they forfeit the right to match a bid on an NGA in the first round.
On issue 4: The shambles that is the FA compensation system is dealt either by getting rid compensation altogether, or by drastically lowering the compensation rate and making the destination club pay for it. This would deal with issue 5 also.
- Jul 22, 2013
- 18,823
- 27,489
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Do me a favour and don't speak down to me for failing to agree with your pet idea.
Ideas are like bums. Everybody has one.
The amount of points deficit teams are willing to go in to when moving up in the draft tells me teams don't really value it. Or at least clubs don't think you can add multiple picks together to create the value of a top pick which seems to be the biggest weakness. Some of that is clubs being silly and overrating their drafting ability rather than trusting the maths, but it happens too often to be just dumb clubs I think.
Pick 18 might be half as valuable as pick 5. But no club is accepting picks 18 and 19 for pick 5. And they certainly aren't accepting picks 18, 40, 50 and 55.
I don't think it properly weighs the chance of a superstar. Even if it's only 50/50 chance of a really good player, that chance is worth something more than multiple later picks.
Yeah a poor choice of words, soz, didn't mean it to come across that way. "We don't know any different"
Teams have live trading now on draft night.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky
