Compromised 2020 Draft

[Demonland 72,213]

King suggests the 2020 draft could be the most compromised ever, as 17 of the 48 players selected in this year’s Under-17 All-Stars game on Grand Final day were either Academy or father-son prospects.

[Diamond_Jim 12,590]

Someone posted on this recently.

Not sure that with the rules re academy players etc that the draft impact is that great. Sure it's an impact but nowhere near as compromised as when GWS and GCS were raiding the player lists.

[demoniac 1,333]

it may actually make high picks more valuable. Both Father/Son and Academy players have to be bid for. If there are highly rated players who might attract a very high bid then their club will want to secure high picks or risk being excised to end of draft for rest of there picks.

[Moonshadow 17,676]

47 minutes ago, demoniac said:

it may actually make high picks more valuable. Both Father/Son and Academy players have to be bid for. If there are highly rated players who might attract a very high bid then their club will want to secure high picks or risk being excised to end of draft for rest of there picks.

Exactly. They still have to find the points for academy or f/s nominees, even if it's 20% off.

[buck_nekkid 5,865]

Potentially compromised draft.... Each club gets their pick in order (with GCS getting extra).  I can see clubs wanting to get early picks, and then points in later picks that they can use.  It would be great if the top 1-5 are all selected, all hell will break loose.  It will be interesting if they will select the ‘best available, or their academy picks.  I suppose clubs will have to make some tough decisions, and you may see players nominated and bids not matched.  Might actually make the whole thing more interesting!

[Lucifers Hero 39,819]

20 hours ago, demoniac said:

it may actually make high picks more valuable. Both Father/Son and Academy players have to be bid for. If there are highly rated players who might attract a very high bid then their club will want to secure high picks or risk being excised to end of draft for rest of there picks.

It could work the other way.  North traded down the order in 2018.  They traded out pick 11 for Polec and Pollard and some later picks.  Then used later picks for their top 10 rated NGA player.

This will help clubs such as us who do not have a F/S or Academy player.  Wouldn't be surprised if we accumulate a few more late 2nd/3rd round 2020 picks before the Draft is over.

Edited October 12, 2019 by Lucifer's Hero

[Demon Dynasty 17,109]

Some very good draft / trade minds on DL.  Well done gents (including many on other draft threads).

i'm not sure how you keep up with all the intricacies.  Some posts more interesting than most of the trade period goings on ....or not goings on as we've mostly seen so far.

?

Edited October 12, 2019 by Rusty Nails

[Dr. Gonzo 24,221]

The AFL has butchered this completely. Instead of removing advantages some clubs had (northern academies) they expand these concepts across the board. Zoning failed last time and contributed to the near destruction of the competition.

How can the draft be used as an equalisation measure when the majority of top 40 picks are going to be zoned to particular clubs? The rules as to who qualifies for the Next Gen Academy zones is also idiotic. I was born in Australia and grew up with a footy in my arms. My parents both grew up in Australia. But because my wife was born overseas (coming here as a teenager) my kids would qualify for Next Gen Academies. These are not kids who are new to the game etc my son started Auskick as a 5 year old.

[Mach5 4,767]

St Kilda actually has a massive advantage currently and aren’t harnessing the opportunity. If they’re not careful, Hawthorn will snatch it from right under their noses, and the saints will have no one to blame but themselves.

[Demon Disciple 12,141]

3 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

The AFL has butchered this completely. Instead of removing advantages some clubs had (northern academies) they expand these concepts across the board. Zoning failed last time and contributed to the near destruction of the competition.

Agree Gonzo. The AFL should abolish recruiting zones and academies all together, if they do in fact want the draft to be an equalisation tool.

I'd be happy for the northern clubs to be given zones within their local proximity if need be (Lions - suburbs, Suns - Gold Coast area, Swans - Sydney suburbs, GWS - western suburbs), but not to the extent where GWS gets kids that are closer to Melbourne than they are Sydney.

These clubs (and the AFL) elected to set up camp at these respective locations, so should consequently feel the effects of this (positive or negative).

I'd be more than happy for the F/S rule to come into line where a club has to pay full price points-wise once they are bid on. Clubs get the advantage of matching bids should they want the F/S prospect, they don't need the additional advantage of paying at a discounted rate (this goes for the northern clubs academies as well).

[Dr. Gonzo 24,221]

2 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

Agree Gonzo. The AFL should abolish recruiting zones and academies all together, if they do in fact want the draft to be an equalisation tool.

I'd be happy for the northern clubs to be given zones within their local proximity if need be (Lions - suburbs, Suns - Gold Coast area, Swans - Sydney suburbs, GWS - western suburbs), but not to the extent where GWS gets kids that are closer to Melbourne than they are Sydney.

These clubs (and the AFL) elected to set up camp at these respective locations, so should consequently feel the effects of this (positive or negative).

I'd be more than happy for the F/S rule to come into line where a club has to pay full price points-wise once they are bid on. Clubs get the advantage of matching bids should they want the F/S prospect, they don't need the additional advantage of paying at a discounted rate (this goes for the northern clubs academies as well).

I'd be happy for either the father son rule to be abolished (along with all academies) or for the father son rule to be retained and GWS/gold coast get to keep their academies until their clubs are old enough to qualify for father sons (let's say 20 years after inception)

[Moonshadow 17,676]

2 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

Agree Gonzo. The AFL should abolish recruiting zones and academies all together, if they do in fact want the draft to be an equalisation tool.

I'd be happy for the northern clubs to be given zones within their local proximity if need be (Lions - suburbs, Suns - Gold Coast area, Swans - Sydney suburbs, GWS - western suburbs), but not to the extent where GWS gets kids that are closer to Melbourne than they are Sydney.

These clubs (and the AFL) elected to set up camp at these respective locations, so should consequently feel the effects of this (positive or negative).

I'd be more than happy for the F/S rule to come into line where a club has to pay full price points-wise once they are bid on. Clubs get the advantage of matching bids should they want the F/S prospect, they don't need the additional advantage of paying at a discounted rate (this goes for the northern clubs academies as well).

IIRC, Spargo was to be a GWS academy prospect until that zone was removed.

I agree that the 20% discount for any academy or f/s should be axed.

[Macca 16,972]

6 hours ago, Demon Disciple said:

The AFL should abolish recruiting zones and academies all together, if they do in fact want the draft to be an equalisation tool.

I'd be happy for the northern clubs to be given zones within their local proximity if need be (Lions - suburbs, Suns - Gold Coast area, Swans - Sydney suburbs, GWS - western suburbs)

To be fair all the other clubs should then therefore be given their own zones to square things up.

But where does it all end?  Over time some zones end up being deemed to be more valuable than other zones (as it was from 1963 to 1986) so nothing is ever 'equal'

Why should the Northern Teams get a leg up?  3 of them are already in a stronger position (player personnel wise) than what we are are (for instance) and before you know it the Suns will be stronger as well.

I'm for the Demons ... the others can push off. Care factor zero.

There seems to be a Victorian supporter edict that the Northern teams need help but if it's at the cost of my club,  forget it.  Actually,  it is already happening but what can one do?  SFA in real terms.

Edited October 13, 2019 by Macca

[Pennant St Dee 13,184]

Bont , Stephen Hill, Paddy Cripps  Clarrie, Trac and Stephenson weren't rated to go high a year out from their draft 

John Butcher, was predicted to go top 3 a year out from his draft

At least half a dozen will bob up from the fringes to top 25 in the next 12 months who won't be academy or father son