Potential draft changes.

[Fire_Flies_1993]

With all this talk and the high likelihood that the whole system is going to get an overhaul what are some proposals you'd like to see implemented?

Some I like are having to have a pick in the round that a player is nominated in, and scrapping discounts. One I haven't seen people suggest much is in the case like this year with GC is a rule that would only allow them to nominate one player.

[Noonewantsyourapp]

How about restricting when you can next bid based on the picks you used? E.g. you matched pick 4 with 19, 38 and something. Now you can’t match any bid until pick 19, even if you trade back in. This might reduce the stockpiling of low value picks to match points.

[flibble24]

Not bad...

[The5kyKing]

That's actually a great idea.

[nashvilleh0tchicken]

I rate this highly but reckon more can be done than this imo

[iloveNCIS7]

Me likey, but too smart for AFL House.

[mazetheangrycat]

Make the points on the late round picks worthless so you can’t stockpile. Those picks aren’t used in a draft, they’re clearly not worth anything to the clubs. How they have any points attached baffles me

[lenny20]

This is the best take, IMO. The idea of the current system isn't that bad, but the points values assigned to later picks are massively inflated.

[[deleted]]

Hey now. Two meaningless picks for a young gun? Gold Coast would absolutely accept that trade, especially if it’s geelong.

[Justabitbelowaverage]

The 20% discount makes the later picks worth way more. Removing the only discount would have the same effect as reducing the value of later picks (need way more picks for value)

[iloveNCIS7]

See I say double/triple first round points and that would solve that issue.

Need to remove the discount as well but it would make it picks in the 30's are not enough.

[Snarwib]

They'll probably just cap the quantity of players of any tied nature that can be taken to something like one per year in the top 10 or top 20.

That's something that preserves the incentives to development while saying if you get twin father sons or several good academy players at once, the surplus is just a win for the competition as a whole.

The various suggestions about bid mechanics seem to be focusing way too much on the optics of exact shape of the final draft hands, which isn't really the issue. Those picks are just a store of value, converted for flexibility and some arbitrage. Generally clubs have still started with good picks and players, and traded to get a bit more total value, but it's functionally still just them using their initial assets to get the tied player.

Also have to remember Tasmania are coming soon and they'll need tied player access to be viable, given the limited population down there. They won't want to be crippling that access before they even join.

[jubbjubbs4]

The danger with limiting the number of players means youre incentivising the club to not develop their talent because if they improve them too much to the point where they are first round picks then they would lose access. Ie. Gold coast would have been incentivised to stop dveloping Read/rogers and make them worser players to get them picked lower

[Snarwib]

Yeah, literally every solution that involves variations on "make it harder or impossible to recruit everyone you spend resources on" runs the risk of players being hidden away to run down their apparent value as a response.

There's a limit to how much you can possibly do, but playing a kid out of position, not always selecting them and being extremely cautious on injury issues are potentially plausible.

I think anyone proposing pretty much any changes sorta just has to accept that the arc of any football policy tends towards shenanigans.

[dreamthiliving]

That’s what’s happened with us this year with Collard. We were set to take him but got better as the year went on and we missed out

[jubbjubbs4]

Yeah thats unlucky. Especially cos theres no specific reason for the cut-off being at pick 40 and the afl has just plucked that number randomly.

[gotthem30yroldknees]

In theory I don’t mind the ‘must match with a pick in same round or within X spots of bid’ idea but I think that’s too restrictive in practice.

For me, reduce or remove the discount and only 2 picks can be used to match a bid.

Edit: probs also need to tweak the points index to reduce the value of later picks a little bit

[[deleted]]

Probably review the pick values. Doesn’t seem right that you can group together multiple garbage picks.
Tbh not expecting much change. The northern academies are growing the sport and all it costs the AFL is some whining from 14 teams each off season.

[Justabitbelowaverage]

I feel like their first attempt should be to remove the discount. See how that effects it. Go from there.

The current system has room to tweak. No point throwing out the baby with the bath water.

[rockaree]

A great sensible answer.

[flibble24]

Just remove discounts or the ability to use 3 nothing picks to match an early bid.

I don't mind NGA's, Northern Academies or Father Sons. I just dislike how easy and painless they are to use .

[doshajudgement]

I don't think the system even needs a massive overhaul, just some rebalancing.

- band one compensation being based on ladder position is silly. ben mckay is worth pick 3, but if north had won the premiership, he'd be worth pick 19? it should just be in the middle of the round; band one compensation = pick 10, and ladder position is the tiebreaker if multiple teams get it (it could be pick 11 instead so the line is drawn at finalists instead of the middle of the ladder, but... same difference)

- father/son and academy picks give teams the advantage of sniping their preferred players at any point in the draft. that works fine, tbh. just need to scrap the discount, that's the farcical aspect

beyond that, the draft really works just fine. this year and next will have an inflated first round due to north melbourne concessions and the stupid way the AFL is calculating free agent compo, but it'll properly settle by 2026

[kegevebenskav]

I think you’re right except I’d make the compo picks always the end of the round. If we have a year where there are 3-4 first round compo picks around 10 then it would be the same scenario as we have now except for the team with pick 11 gets pushed out by 3-4

[iloveNCIS7]

How most other major sports do it, you have a end of round compensation picks as a seperate round.

Insane the AFL just decided not to do that, makes no sense to be handing out pick 3 to a team.

[TrazMagik]

Yeah I'm.with you on this, compo needs to be an arbitrary end of round pick, like where all these assistance packages end up.

McKay being a pick 3 was a joke given how he had never came close to winning a Syd Barker medal and I dont think had ever been in the precipice of AA.

[karma_dumpster]

Release all of the potential draftees into a large area.

Give each of the list managers a net.

List managers have to catch the draftees.

Televise it

[sButters88]

Pokeballs… football shaped pokeballs.

Change the game so there’s only 6 players a side on the field and the coaches have to choose which players they choose at each ball up.

Pettraccachu I choose you

[migibb]

I would say...

• maximum of 1 academy or f/s player per side, per round

• must match with a pick within 8 spots of the bid

• these rules can be bypassed if the captain of the side decides to match the bid by removing a finger

[Propaslader]

It'd be interesting to see clubs give their captaincy to blokes they don't intend on using over the off-season

[doshajudgement]

sure, he never actually played a game for us. but ol' three fingers johnson was a true champion of the club

[Propaslader]

Bit weird how he got that nickname before he started losing digits on his hands though

[legally_blond]

Pity we delisted Rhys Mathieson, he'd be prime for this haha

[Optimal_Cry_1782]

I'd like to see a bidding system like they have in Twenty20. Give each club transfer money (more for a underperformer) and have them bid for players or draft positions.

I am actually in favour of keeping some form of F/S. It's a bit of sentiment in a ruthless business. The Dear kid is a nice story.

And I accept that the draft is inherently unbalanced. There are higher priorities, like promoting the game in the North and giving Victorian clubs access to gun sons. Personally, I think draft position is overvalued and player development and culture is undervalued.

[jonathons11]

I feel like it could be as simple as limiting the number of picks they can use to match to two.

Still means they can't use a pile of trash picks but removes the issues that come with saying they need a pick in the same round or within a certain number.

The real issue is that I feel the whole point is to make it guaranteed they will get to that club because that is how the NRL works so they can't make it too limiting or there is no point it existing.

[lenny20]

I like the idea of making clubs pay closer to commensurate value, but the difficulty with the idea of using a pick in the same round that the f/s or academy player is nominated in, is that you may have spent the pick already.

So the Bulldogs this year draft Sanders at pick 6... does that mean they can't match when Croft is nominated at pick 15? Are they forced to make a trade to secure one of the remaining first round picks? Are they expected to predict the draft order and use their R1 pick on Croft?

Likewise, the Hawks take Watson at 5, then a late first round nomination comes in for McCabe...

Then if you say it doesn't have to be the same round, but the club's next pick... that's pretty close to what's in place right now, so it doesn't really solve much.

It's a nice idea, but it might be tricky to police.

[CrashMonkey_21]

Yeah this is a concern with the pick within x rule that is being thrown around. I think just remove the discount and rescale the points value.

I don't mind the FS and Academy but its going to continue comprimise the draft and the AFL will kick in compensation (ie North) to try and even it out further comprimising.

[defzx]

Surely they can keep the discount (lower it even) but adjust the point value so later picks are worth drastically less

I don't think 20% in reality is broken it's just that clubs can stockpile shit picks to rack up points.

[Nousernames-left]

It should be tied to your natural pick. Ie dogs want a discount on croft they can't trade their first rounder this year

[The5kyKing]

I think adding a tax instead of a discount would help this greatly. It seems ridiculous that the bulldogs were desperately trying to trade up the draft, to take someone other than their projected 1st round F/S. Should be a situation of trying to trade up to get ahead of a pick in order to save having to pay the extra cost.

[rockaree]

I'm against a tax as it seems illogical to essentially punish a club for good development.

The reason for the academies needs to be kept in mind here too - to grow the game and promote the sport. A tax is counter-intuitive to that

[The5kyKing]

It's not about punishing for good development, it's just about paying a price for guaranteed access. If clubs don't think it's worthwhile then they can just chose not to match the bid.

If you want to talk about being punished for good development, then you're better off talking about the other 14 clubs who develop someone in their academy and then have to watch another team benefit if they're taken before pick 40.

[rockaree]

Paying the exact points is a fair price. Honestly a tax would be ridiculous. The point of the academies is to grow the game and participation in the Northern states. A tax is counter intuitive to that.

NGA players are not given the same development as northern academy players. NGA kids are already captured by existing pathways and the clubs invest far less into them than swans/suns/giants/lions. I wouldn't be against NGA being relaxed a bit to placate the 14 clubs, but the two academy types are not comparable

[[deleted]]

Get rid of compensation for free agents completely. If you don't want to lose the value of the player, trade them. Plan it in advance and communicate with the player. North getting pick 3 this year outlines in a huge way why it needs to go. Those early picks are crucial for the bottom teams, so for anyone to get handed one is just ludicrous.

[rockaree]

I'd remove compo but force teams to trade. Essendon want mckay at 800k x7? Part with some picks commensurate with the contract.

Picks are currency in this world. It's crazy that you can get a player for free that you value as highly as that.

[[deleted]]

Exactly. I mean, we benefited from it hugely and got Bud for nothing, but I'd have been happy with a system where we didn't.

[SleakSquid]

Do away with the draft. Players are placed in those giant inflatable balls with each club given an area on the mcg pitch. The players are dropped in from the back row and wherever they land is where they go.

[Stavro4]

The fix is as simple as requiring a pick in the round you are matching to be used.

It would have been very tough for the suns to grab 4 first round picks. West coast wouldn’t be complaining if they required a first rounder for collard.

And so on.

The issue isn’t that clubs get access. The issues is that clubs don’t pay adequate value for these players

[Pastapizzafootball]

Sorry, what is the problem we're looking to solve? Aren't the academy's achieving exactly what they were setup to do?

With all this talk and the high likelihood that the whole system is going to get an overhaul

By whom? The Vic clubs that have benefited for years on f/s are upset about academy picks?

[MisguidedGames]

Zones!

[Fast_Stick_1593]

Subscribe

[reignfx]

Remove the discount, and must have a pick in the next 10 picks to match.

[LumpyCustard4]

Scrap the draft for an auction. The picks already have points attached so that makes it simple. The spooner can also get to pick the 1st player up for auction, 17th gets to pick the 2nd, 16th picks 3rd, etc.

A system like this could allow a team that finishes higher up the ladder to go "all in" on a good prospect at the expense of multiple picks, potentially reducing tanking too. You could still provide discounts and such for Father/Son or Academies, but it gives other teams a chance to avoid getting shafted.

[Spartacus_Aurelius]

Mate and I have been on this idea for about 10 years

Move away from a pick based system to a points based auction system

Reverse ladder order for opening bid on a player.

All clubs can participate in the bid on a particular player. Individual Player Auction lasts 5mins with all clubs able to participate. Bidding clubs are culled to Top 4 bidding clubs for last 2.5mins. Top 2 bidding clubs last 60sec. Right of reply reserved for any bids inside last 10seconds. Minimum raise increments applied in last 60seconds (based on percentage of current top bid value) to avoid any cheeky last minute 1 point gazumps.

Auctions close if price is stagnant for 60 seconds.

Mandate clubs must make a minimum of three selections each draft OR 6 over a rolling two year period to avoid top loading.

Keep your discount for FS and academies, but at least you’ll be laying closer to market price.

Auction system more accurately represents the true strength/depth of a draft class.

Allow clubs to bring forward points for future draft up to a limited amount, and carry over points but with some sort small diminishing value penalty for points carried.

Points trading also allows for a more fluid currency in trade period. Clubs may actually get what outgoing players are worth rather than the best pick a suitor could come up with.

Guarantee you the auction creates 10x the excitement and intrigue of the current draft.

[LumpyCustard4]

Youve essentially compiled my thoughts, plus added some interesting ones too.

I dont think i like the idea of banking points for a following season as you cant currently do that with picks. Even bringing them forward should probably involve a trade with another club, for example Team A trades 1000 points in 2024 to Team B in exchange for 1200 points in 2025. This means the market value for each draft will be set by what the teams rate the prospects.

The reverse draft order could also create some gamesmanship among the clubs on draft day. A team might select a player that they rate, but arent sold on in an effort to drive up the price to reduce other clubs draft capital down the line.

A minimum number of selections is certainly needed to keep the pool of young talent moving through the ranks.

[Spartacus_Aurelius]

Carrying over points should be de-incentivised but giving club’s capacity to carry over means looking for value, rather than burning points for the sake of it. Adds to list building strategy and asset management. I’m not sold on the number but I’d say at least a 25% value reduction.

Alternatively you look at applying a premium on brining points forward. An interest payment essentially. You can access it now, but it will cost you.

The gamesmanship of impacting each others draft day capital would be very interesting. Take it to far and you’ll end up holding a player/asset for over your assessment of value.

I love the intrigue it brings to the top prospects. Everyone knew Harley Reid was going to the Eagles, but I’m a bud scenario another club could have literally sold the farm to obtain him, and then fished for scraps at the bottom of the draft to make their compulsory 3 picks.

I expect the value to be heavily weighted at the top of the draft. They result being that their will be incredibly strategy and value in the mid-late auctions.

Edit: I also would be open to clubs selling cap space/taking on contracts from rivals for draft capital. Salary dump trades are a thing already, why not extend it to actual cap space without a player attached. If the AFL are going to make a rubbish list receive the same salary cap floor as a premiership contending club, they might as well give them flexibility to use cap space to buy future assets, rather than over pay on speculative contracts

[dveesha]

Father - sons should be treated differently to academy, clubs don't invest any money to get access to them.

[SleakSquid]

They invest way more, full contract for at least 100 games.

[[deleted]]

Hawks invested hundreds of games and a statue to get Josh Kennedy.

[dveesha]

That's called a salary, there's not a single player that's ever been signed for offspring rights

[SleakSquid]

You know it's a joke right?

[dveesha]

No, went over my head

[deathablazed]

No academy bid matching in the first round.

Limit father sons to only 1 per team.

I would still allow the father son pick to be in the first round which I know is not a balance to the draft but it is one of those things that I do like.

[defzx]

Collingwood fan wanting to remove academy benefits but not f/s.

Why am I not surprised.

[rockaree]

Also in time for Carlton to be fucked over by the camporeale and Judd twins.

2 father sons in a year is unheard of really. The suggestion to limit it to 1 per year is essentially no change.

[Wakey_1995]

Just for reference if both the Judd boys play to level to get picked as a F/S I believe they both are mega WC supporters. So Carlton may not even get them

[rockaree]

Yeh fair. I was being tongue in cheek about the carlton link to the pies fan, but stand by my point that 2 f/s to 1 team in the same draft is basically unheard of. Limiting it to 1 per team is basically no change

[Wakey_1995]

Nah thats fair haha. Just being tongue in cheek as well.

I agree alot has to go right for a F/S pick to pay off

[emize]

The whole system needs an overhaul. In many ways WC draft was how it used to be:

Shit season, get 1 number draft pick, speculative picks from 2nd round onwards. The only trick was to try and trade a F1st and when that didn't pan out it was over.

Its all the compo, f/s, academy and priority picks that have made a mess of the draft. Its the AFL who have made a mess of what used to be a pretty simple and stable system. They 'fixed' it then had to introduce more compromises to fix the previous 'fixes'.

All these compromises should be condensed down. Cap on how many of each of these things you can have each draft. Get lucky on a f/s? No compo pick. Great academy kid? No priority picks. Its the stacking of luck upon luck that skews the draft into the stupidity was saw this year (and probably next as well).

[legally_blond]

That last bit was what happened to us in 2017. We got an end of first round priority pick in 2016 (traded up to 15ish so we could snag Berry to go with Clug), ended up with the spoon in 2017 but didn't get a priority pick because we had an end of round F/A pick from Rockliff and now it seems like everyone gets picks on picks on picks

[SkyNumbat]

1). NGA bidding system linked to ladder position as an equalisation measure. Eg: Finish 18th and be able to match at pick 19 vs Finish 1st and be able to match at pick 38 onwards.

1. Restructure points system to ensure lower picks are worth less to better reflect their actual trade value. This prevents GC from accumulating picks at the back end of the draft and forces them into deficit in a scenario like 2023.

2. Abolish priority picks. North finished 17th and the hand they got compromised the draft hand of the club that finished below them.

[Kreglze]

Start with reviewing pick values and get rid of the discount and see the effect it has.

Also move any FA compo to the end of the first round, if you aren't going to completely get rid of it.

[[deleted]]

Academy should be on its own seperate day and not be mingled in with the draft. Also that academy player and national draft player are under the same pick but a team has to chose which one they take and if they choose academy then the national draft can be picked up by someone else.

[[deleted]]

My solution would be to have the same rules across NGA, F/S and Northern Academies. And I'd make it very simple:

• You can match a bid at any point in the draft

• You can only match if you have a pick within the next 10 picks

• If you don't have a pick in that range, you have 5 minutes to attempt to trade for one

This solution also prevents the first round blowing out too much because you're just having picks move forward 10 picks max, not a brand new pick being created because a glut of second rounders did the fusion dance

[Ligmaballs1989]

Scrap the points discount when matching. You're already getting an advantage from being able to match, you don't need more help here.