draft !

[Mug Punter]

GWS currently have 20 first round picks on their list (I'm including under age selections of Shiel, Wilson and Cameron as first rounders)

They get two top 6 picks this year and already have three first round picks in the 2016 draft.

Now, I'm not the smartest knife in the draw but I just can't see them being able to cherry pick two top 10 picks from the Riverina who they have put very little real development effort into (The AFL doing bugger all before because it was AFL territory is not a valid response) on a long term basis.

They will have 25 first rounder on their list in 2017!!!!!! Sheedy's Frankenstein club will have arrived and I reckon we'll hear the screaming from Melbourne in our loungerooms

[dimelb]

GWS currently have 20 first round picks on their list (I'm including under age selections of Shiel, Wilson and Cameron as first rounders)

They get two top 6 picks this year and already have three first round picks in the 2016 draft.

Now, I'm not the smartest knife in the draw but I just can't see them being able to cherry pick two top 10 picks from the Riverina who they have put very little real development effort into (The AFL doing bugger all before because it was AFL territory is not a valid response) on a long term basis.

They will have 25 first rounder on their list in 2017!!!!!! Sheedy's Frankenstein club will have arrived and I reckon we'll hear the screaming from Melbourne in our loungerooms

As a loyal Sydney member in Melbourne, I might join them!

[Mug Punter]

No Cookies | Herald Sun

Gary Buckenara's predictions

Interesting he has the Gold Coast making some bids on academy players. This is one instance where I'd expect a little unofficial communication between clubs but I'd have no issue with then making honest bids in the name of the system working, it is the type of goodwill that is required and I am sure that GWS would not be annoyed if GC bid for Kennedy at 8 or for Keays at 19.

He sees Mills at 4 and, interestingly, sees the Dees getting Collins at 10 along with Parish at 3. He has Dunkley at 27 going to West Coast, well that would be funny of he snubbed us to stay close to his family, can someone e-mail that to young Josh?

[Mug Punter]

As a loyal Sydney member in Melbourne, I might join them!

I won't be enjoying seeing them dominate but it will be a classic case of needing to be careful for what you wish for. The only thing that will make me laugh will be the histrionics from the likes of Eddie, especially as GWS will be on the AFL's teat financial; until about 2040

[Meg]

He has Dunkley at 27 going to West Coast, well that would be funny of he snubbed us to stay close to his family, can someone e-mail that to young Josh?

I've been mulling over that very same potential outcome. Would indeed be ironic.

[iigrover]

Not sure if I follow you here, the draft picks are just a number, it is the player the clubs gets that is important

To use an example, If the Dees have pick 3 and they bid for Mills because they think he is the third best footballer in the land and if we match it then their pick becomes 4, our next pick gets upgraded to 3 and any other picks we use up for points get placed at the back of the draft. So if the Dees bid for Mills and we match him they get the fourth best player at Pick 4, if they don't bid for him (even if they rate him at #3) then they get the third best player at Pick 3. They get the same player

I can't see any benefit to Melbourne in this really as the players they will get remain unchanged. In fact 16 clubs gets pushed back one place for their first rounder but their later picks get slightly pushed forward.

Academy kids should be bid for their approx. worth because academy clubs always have the option of passing on the match and leaving the bidding club holding the baby. There may be some spurious bids early on but I genuinely think the potential cost is too high - if I was Carlton for example I would not be 100% sure of Mills being matched at #1 given what he will cost us. If he was a Wayne Carey in-the-making CHF sure but a midfielder with some recent injuries opposed to a cherry ripe gun KPD? They'd be mad.

- - - Updated - - -



I'd say that this Beatson taking a worst case scenario, with a bit of luck we'll get a early to mid 40s pick where we could well get some value.

I'd like to see us take Young from Sydney Uni and at least three of the other academy kids for our rookie list.

Mug,
I see how you can be confused with this. It took me a while to get my head around the complexities of the new draft bidding system as well.

It seems to be the big mistake people are making is that look at the draft order base on the naorrow lense of one club, one player, one draft pick. e.g. in your example you only looked at the impact of the bid on Melbourne, Mills, pick 3.

In fact, to understand my point you need to to look at what happens to the whole draft order on Melbourne.

That is, expand your analysis to look at the full impact of the order of all draft picks due to a bid for Mills at 3 AND the next nearest academy picks either side of pick 3 on Sydney and Melbourne and the Academy clubs either side THEN (and most importantly) compare that to the impact on all of those clubs of changing those academy bids by one place.


Ill try to give an overly simplified example to explain my point.

Lets say:
Club A has pick 1 in the draft worth 3000 points, and picks 19, 37,55, 73, and so on.
Club B (Academy Club) has picks 26 (756 points), 27 (703), 34 (542), 35 (522), 36 (502)
Club C (Academy Club) has picks 7 (1644 points), pick 38 (465), pick 39 (446), pick 40 (429), 61 (135)


Club B's Academy player is the better than Club C's, who are both the best players in the draft.

Most people current thinking is that Club A will pick Club B's Academy player (as the best player in the draft), which will get matched by Club B. It Pick 1 will become Pick 2, then it will use its pick 2 will bid for Club C's academy player, which will get matched by Club C, then its Pick 2 will become pick 3.

However this thinking is wrong - because you need to look at the impact on all picks on what Club A's bid order will be NOT the marginal quality of the player.

(Without going into the mathematics) The strategy for Club A of picking the best academy player first would leave it with the following picks:
3, 20, 34, 52, 71.

However, if it was to pick the second best academy player before the best academy player, they would be left with picks:
3,19,35,52,71

So by bidding for the second best academy player first would result in a better outcome for it (in this example a higher comparative second round pick at the expense of a lower third round pick).

So dont assume Academy kids will get picked 'in the order of their worth'.

They will get picked in the order that results in the 'best post bid outcome' for the bidding non-academy club.

Confused yet :-)

[Triple B]

Sheedy's Frankenstein club will have arrived and I reckon we'll hear the screaming from Melbourne in our loungerooms

Not sure you'll hear them over the top of screaming of the many Swans supporters who have had the blinkers on for the past few years...

[Mug Punter]

Mug,
I see how you can be confused with this. It took me a while to get my head around the complexities of the new draft bidding system as well.

It seems to be the big mistake people are making is that look at the draft order base on the naorrow lense of one club, one player, one draft pick. e.g. in your example you only looked at the impact of the bid on Melbourne, Mills, pick 3.

In fact, to understand my point you need to to look at what happens to the whole draft order on Melbourne.

That is, expand your analysis to look at the full impact of the order of all draft picks due to a bid for Mills at 3 AND the next nearest academy picks either side of pick 3 on Sydney and Melbourne and the Academy clubs either side THEN (and most importantly) compare that to the impact on all of those clubs of changing those academy bids by one place.


Ill try to give an overly simplified example to explain my point.

Lets say:
Club A has pick 1 in the draft worth 3000 points, and picks 19, 37,55, 73, and so on.
Club B (Academy Club) has picks 26 (756 points), 27 (703), 34 (542), 35 (522), 36 (502)
Club C (Academy Club) has picks 7 (1644 points), pick 38 (465), pick 39 (446), pick 40 (429), 61 (135)


Club B's Academy player is the better than Club C's, who are both the best players in the draft.

Most people current thinking is that Club A will pick Club B's Academy player (as the best player in the draft), which will get matched by Club B. It Pick 1 will become Pick 2, then it will use its pick 2 will bid for Club C's academy player, which will get matched by Club C, then its Pick 2 will become pick 3.

However this thinking is wrong - because you need to look at the impact on all picks on what Club A's bid order will be NOT the marginal quality of the player.

(Without going into the mathematics) The strategy for Club A of picking the best academy player first would leave it with the following picks:
3, 20, 34, 52, 71.

However, if it was to pick the second best academy player before the best academy player, they would be left with picks:
3,19,35,52,71

So by bidding for the second best academy player first would result in a better outcome for it (in this example a higher comparative second round pick at the expense of a lower third round pick).

So dont assume Academy kids will get picked 'in the order of their worth'.

They will get picked in the order that results in the 'best post bid outcome' for the bidding non-academy club.

Confused yet :-)

Very confused and I'm really interested if anyone else can understand your theory here (serious question, not being smart)

With respect I think you are over-complicating this, I've got a fairly high degree of statistical literacy so either you are some higher plane or I have just lot it completely

In my humble opinion, all that really happens with this system is that there is a re-alignment of the draft order for clubs based on us moving our pick up, should we wish to match a bid for an academy player - some of that means picks moving to the back of the pack, some down the order, it just depends on what sort of "advantage" we get after the 20% discount. The resultant movement of picks is simply a compensation mechanism for the rest of the competition. I guess in the short term the clubs at the early bidding stand to be penalised the most because they are the ones missing out in the player and the compensation is spread evenly.

I can't see your logic of why a club like Melbourne or any club would bid for the second highest rated academy player because they will have the risk of holding that second best player if the academy club passes on matching.The in-built mechanism for clubs bidding fairly against academy players is that, within a margin for error, they cannot bid too aggressively because it the academy club will pass and they will be left, in the case of the Dees for example, with a player of Pick Quality 7 when they could have had a player of Pick Quality 3 if they had bid with integrity.

[Meg]

I have only recently realised that the recruiters will be out of sight on draft night. That is a pity, I had anticipated part of the fun would be watching the tension and mild panic on their faces as they grappled with the constantly changing pick order and points values!

[Triple B]

I have only recently realised that the recruiters will be out of sight on draft night. That is a pity, I had anticipated part of the fun would be watching the tension and mild panic on their faces as they grappled with the constantly changing pick order and points values!

They are in a different room to the main show, but we may still get live images from that room with any luck. Have to wait and see I guess, looking forward to it more than most draft nights...

[Auntie.Gerald]

Dunkley nominates for father-son - sydneyswans.com.au

see Dunkley thread !!!

[iigrover]

Very confused and I'm really interested if anyone else can understand your theory here (serious question, not being smart)

With respect I think you are over-complicating this, I've got a fairly high degree of statistical literacy so either you are some higher plane or I have just lot it completely
....

I can't see your logic of why a club like Melbourne or any club would bid for the second highest rated academy player because they will have the risk of holding that second best player if the academy club passes on matching.The in-built mechanism for clubs bidding fairly against academy players is that, within a margin for error, they cannot bid too aggressively because it the academy club will pass and they will be left, in the case of the Dees for example, with a player of Pick Quality 7 when they could have had a player of Pick Quality 3 if they had bid with integrity.

That's cool. I think I confuse myself sometimes with this too!

You're absolutely right that clubs risk a bad outcome if they overbid for Academy players.


What I was trying to wrap my head around is that: with a number of academy kids all bunching together at the top of the draft, Melbourne will have a different outcome for their draft picks lower down the order by changing the order in which the bid for academy kids at the top of the order.

In other news, YAY DUNKLEY!