2023 List Management

[Auntie.Gerald]

Warning though we lost contested possessions 107-141so not easy to watch rd 3

[Thunder Shaker]

So Port only had one pick for the draft available?

How does that work?

PORT ADELAIDE

Who left: Xavier Duursma (trade, Essendon)

Who arrived: Ivan Soldo (trade, Richmond), Jordon Sweet (trade, Western Bulldogs), Esava Ratugolea (trade, Geelong), Brandon Zerk-Thatcher (trade, Essendon)

Draft picks owned: 73

Port Adelaide has draft picks later in the draft that are not listed: round 6 and so on. (I originally had round 5 here, but Port lacks a round 5 pick as well.)

[Thunder Shaker]

Sydney completed four player trades inside the first 13 trades, then nothing after that.

It is interesting how our early completion of trades allowed several other trades to be completed later.

Pick 26 (tied to Hawthorn):
Sydney > North Melbourne (Dylan Stephens trade).
North Melbourne > Carlton (Zac Fisher trade)
Carlton > Gold Coast (Elijah Hollands trade)

Pick 34:
Sydney > Collingwood (Taylor Adams trade)
Collingwood > Fremantle (Lachie Schulz trade)

Pick 47 (tied to Hawthorn):
Sydney > Melbourne (Brodie Grundy trade)
Melbourne > Brisbane (Tom Fullarton trade)
Brisbane > Hawthorn (Jack Gunston-Brandon Ryan trade)

Pick 55:
No trades.

[Auntie.Gerald]

KB could really be the master of unlocking complexity ????????????????

[i'm-uninformed2]

Appears Hawthorn have their first pick at 73. I thought clubs had to go into the draft with 3 picks, and then do deals on the night that might result in lesser picks.

I think you mean Port.

And yes, this is my issue - I thought there were rules - and maybe I misunderstood - requiring the use of a certain number of first round picks over a four-year cycle, and given Port will have had none last year, this year and have none next year - I'm not sure why the AFL has let it through. Happy to be corrected on the nuance of this.

Plus, I'm not sure their list is so great they should be skipping the draft anyway. They've improved down back, but are no more than a batch of B-graders, excellent through the inside midfield but a bit weak on outside run, and ok up forward.

[Thunder Shaker]

I think you mean Port.

And yes, this is my issue - I thought there were rules - and maybe I misunderstood - requiring the use of a certain number of first round picks over a four-year cycle, and given Port will have had none last year, this year and have none next year - I'm not sure why the AFL has let it through. Happy to be corrected on the nuance of this.

Port Adelaide first round picks in recent drafts:

2019: pick 14 (Miles Bergman), pick 18 (Mitch Georgiades).
2020: pick 16 (Lachlan Jones, Academy)
2021: pick 12 (Josh Sinn)
2022: none

Current first-round picks held:
2023: none
2024: none

Clubs are supposed to use two first-round picks in four years. Port Adelaide will be required to acquire and use a first-round pick before next year's draft (but they have 13 months to do this).

[Thunder Shaker]

Future picks held by Port Adelaide: second round, third round, fourth round (Essendon), fourth round (Carlton).

[liz]

So what happens if every club refuses to trade them a 2024 first round pick? And unless they have a high profile player wanting to leave, their main currency for acquiring a 2024 first round pick will be their 2025 first round pick, which then just pushes the problem back a year because they’ll also need to actually use a first round pick in 2025 to satisfy the “two in four years” requirement.

What sanctions will/can the AFL apply if they fail to meet the requirements?

In some ways it’s a bit silly to apply a blanket rule. Although they’ve not used first round picks in recent seasons, they used a lot of them to acquire a player who was the number one pick just a year earlier. Maybe they’ve received private dispensation from the AFL to strictly meet these draft requirements in recognition of the acquisition of JHF.

[i'm-uninformed2]

So what happens if every club refuses to trade them a 2024 first round pick? And unless they have a high profile player wanting to leave, their main currency for acquiring a 2024 first round pick will be their 2025 first round pick, which then just pushes the problem back a year because they’ll also need to actually use a first round pick in 2025 to satisfy the “two in four years” requirement.

What sanctions will/can the AFL apply if they fail to meet the requirements?

In some ways it’s a bit silly to apply a blanket rule. Although they’ve not used first round picks in recent seasons, they used a lot of them to acquire a player who was the number one pick just a year earlier. Maybe they’ve received private dispensation from the AFL to strictly meet these draft requirements in recognition of the acquisition of JHF.

This might be the case afterall, and part of my misunderstanding.

This article is old but I've seen it a couple of times now from memory: that clubs can apply for an exemption based on the age of recruits during the period (and other draft picks).

Another secret herbs and spices special from the AFL. And frankly, quite dumb. JHF is likely going to be a total, best-in-class gun. But what if he isn't? And how does that rule apply this year, when they've brought in two B-grade, mid-20s defenders.

Trading first-round picks: Misunderstood rule explained

[liz]

There's an article on the ABC news site called "How the trade period could turn next year's AFL season on its head". The link button that enables one to post links to troublesome websites seems to have gone walkabout (as it does, from time to time) and my attempts to paste the URL as plain text aren't working. But I am sure most people can find their way to the ABC site.

If anyone does, can they explain the charts included in the article? In particular, there is a chart about halfway down the article that purports to show the short term and long term gain or loss in value, using the PAV (Player Approximate Value) as a measure of gains and losses. I get to the second line of this chart and see Richmond. Unless I'm forgetting some major trades that Richmond did, how does a gain of Koschitzke, and the loss of Soldo and Nyuon equate to such a large increase in long term value gained? They got a future second round pick in. Does that really account for all that value gained? Seems bizarre.

And then you look at Melbourne, down towards the bottom, who are shown as suffering a short term loss in PAV. But they lost two players who they weren't playing for most of this year, and didn't seem likely to play much last year. That loss should be offset by the gains of McAdam and, possibly, Billings. You can see the size of the loss attributed to Adelaide from McAdam leaving - some of that bar might be Doedee, except that Brisbane's short term gain is very small (and it's hard to see Fullerton or Gunston offsetting much of their gross gain - Ryan as well as Doedee).

None of it is especially intuitive.

[Thunder Shaker]

So what happens if every club refuses to trade them a 2024 first round pick?

This is unlikely. I doubt there would be any concerted effort to mess around with Port Adelaide's recruitment staff like that. The clubs need to keep a good working relationship with each other.

And unless they have a high profile player wanting to leave, their main currency for acquiring a 2024 first round pick will be their 2025 first round pick, which then just pushes the problem back a year because they’ll also need to actually use a first round pick in 2025 to satisfy the “two in four years” requirement.

Port Adelaide has a second-round future pick, a third-round future pick and two fourth-round future picks. Some combination of these can be traded to another club looking for draft points in exchange for a late first-round pick.

What sanctions will/can the AFL apply if they fail to meet the requirements?

I cannot find any documents that explain this. The AFL has a "Determination for the trading of future draft selections" document somewhere but it doesn't seem to be posted online.

I imagine that the AFL could require that first-round picks be acquired, or failing that, impose a ban on the trading of first-round picks. I don't know though; this is just speculation on my part.

In some ways it’s a bit silly to apply a blanket rule. Although they’ve not used first round picks in recent seasons, they used a lot of them to acquire a player who was the number one pick just a year earlier. Maybe they’ve received private dispensation from the AFL to strictly meet these draft requirements in recognition of the acquisition of JHF.

The AFL has discretion to waive the requirement, provided other requirements are met.

Here is a link to an explainer from five years ago: Trading first-round picks: Misunderstood rule explained

[O'Reilly Boy]

The best line in the linked article is this:

"The Bombers have transformed themselves into a premiership threat in the past year with a series of trade prizes, including Devon Smith, Adam Saad and, most recently, Dylan Shiel".

Hasn't that aged well?

Is there a resource anyone knows that outlines the rules, in total, for the draft?

[i'm-uninformed2]

There's an article on the ABC news site called "How the trade period could turn next year's AFL season on its head". The link button that enables one to post links to troublesome websites seems to have gone walkabout (as it does, from time to time) and my attempts to paste the URL as plain text aren't working. But I am sure most people can find their way to the ABC site.

If anyone does, can they explain the charts included in the article? In particular, there is a chart about halfway down the article that purports to show the short term and long term gain or loss in value, using the PAV (Player Approximate Value) as a measure of gains and losses. I get to the second line of this chart and see Richmond. Unless I'm forgetting some major trades that Richmond did, how does a gain of Koschitzke, and the loss of Soldo and Nyuon equate to such a large increase in long term value gained? They got a future second round pick in. Does that really account for all that value gained? Seems bizarre.

And then you look at Melbourne, down towards the bottom, who are shown as suffering a short term loss in PAV. But they lost two players who they weren't playing for most of this year, and didn't seem likely to play much last year. That loss should be offset by the gains of McAdam and, possibly, Billings. You can see the size of the loss attributed to Adelaide from McAdam leaving - some of that bar might be Doedee, except that Brisbane's short term gain is very small (and it's hard to see Fullerton or Gunston offsetting much of their gross gain - Ryan as well as Doedee).

None of it is especially intuitive.

I haven't dived into the assumptions behind the Index, but when Jacob Koschitzske - who could barely get a game with a side as crap and so lacking in KPPs as Hawthorn - is ranked sixth in career value of all the players traded, the underlying methodology is nonsense.

[i'm-uninformed2]

The best line in the linked article is this:

"The Bombers have transformed themselves into a premiership threat in the past year with a series of trade prizes, including Devon Smith, Adam Saad and, most recently, Dylan Shiel".

Hasn't that aged well?

Is there a resource anyone knows that outlines the rules, in total, for the draft?

My all time favourite of the genre that I've regularly referenced on here was St Kilda in 2019, when they effectively gave away two years of draft picks PLUS Blake Acres for Dougal Howard, Dan Butler, Paddy Ryder, Zac Jones and Brad Hill.

It was the classic example of being busy over strategic, and over-rating your list.

But alas, according to some of the usual suspect morons in David King, Jon Ralph and the other contender with Luke Darcy for the dumbest and laziest commentator in footy, Leigh Montagna, St Kilda "won trade week".

Just check out of some of the glorious quotes in here: "one of the great trade periods we've seen in a decade" ; "potential All Australian" Dougal Howard ; "awesome work by St Kilda". They really should be taken out the back of the shed and put out of their misery.

AFL trades 2019: AFL trade period winner, St Kilda, Dougal Howard, Paddy Ryder, Bradley Hill, Zak Jones, Dan Butler

[barry]

The draft rule effecting port is the old Fitzroy rule. Fitzroy were so broke they were selling picks to stay afloat. AFL put a stop to that. Port aren't in that position, so that rule can be quietly disposed of id say.