The 2020 Rolling Draft Points 'Gap' Thread

So we exchanged our 2nd and The Cows 3rd. This will obviously create a small 'gap' in points. The smaller the gap, the less we have given up and the better the trade gets.

So I will keep tabs on this through next year. And I will start with some conservative assumptions, and not factoring in any free agency compo at the end of second round. Say the Western Bulldogs win one final, finishing 5th with better percentage. The Cows finishing between 14th or 15th (they finished 11th this year, are now rebuilding whilst losing head and other coaches, Keath, Greenwood, Betts, Jacobs, Ellis-Yolmen, Jenkins, Otten, Douglas).

1. Dogs 5th (Pick 31), Cows 15th (Pick 40 - 177 draft points gap), Cows 14th (Pick 41 - 194 draft points gap)
= 177 points is equivalent to Pick 58. 194 draft points equivalent to Pick 56.

Say the dogs won two final finishing 4th.

2. Dogs 4th (Pick 32), Cows 15th (Pick 40 - 155 draft points gap), Cows 14th (Pick 41 - 172 draft points gap)
= 155 points is equivalent to Pick 60. 138 draft points equivalent to Pick 58.


These are merely hypothetical right now and could widen or shorten if we do really well next year, or if Adelaide surprise everyone next year. But if we can keep the gap under 200 points (Pick 56) and hopefully trade a fringe player for something between 56-64 next year, then we most likely won't notice it. With a lot of clubs not rating the mid-to-late draft next year we might just score a fourth rounder for a fringe player and recover the 'gap'. So right now these are just to illustrate the gap and the want to root against Adelaide every game.


Edit: Because we are all about the DVI next year, that makes the Keath trade Pick 45 & future Pick 56-60 on the above as it related to us.

Thread stuck

Currently giving them pick 20 for pick 44, so in the negative draft points against us is 550 draft points. Worth about pick 25.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Twodogs

Thread stuck

---

On what?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by azabob

On what?

---

The top of the Unleashed board.

Where else am I going to stick it? :D

Dumb question: if there are no more games played this year, then how is the 2020 draft order determined?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dry Rot

Dumb question: if there are no more games played this year, then how is the 2020 draft order determined?

---

Officially? No real method announced.

How it'll happen? Probably a lottery I'd have to imagine. Maybe weighted lightly but again what's an actual fair way to do that? No idea what that means for future pick trades from previous years either.

They could use the same order as last year and tack round one on it to adjust it for this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dry Rot

Dumb question: if there are no more games played this year, then how is the 2020 draft order determined?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hujsh

Officially? No real method announced.

How it'll happen? Probably a lottery I'd have to imagine. Maybe weighted lightly but again what's an actual fair way to do that? No idea what that means for future pick trades from previous years either.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hotdog60

They could use the same order as last year and tack round one on it to adjust it for this year.

---

I think both of this options have some merit but the lottery might appeal to the AFL the most
I'm still of the belief that they will push the National draft back a year but have something else for the de-listed players due to the list size reductions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hotdog60

They could use the same order as last year and tack round one on it to adjust it for this year.

---

That was mentioned as "the most likely scenario" when the possibility of a delayed or cancelled AFL system broke.

My idea of just using the round 1 results seems far less likely...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mofra

That was mentioned as "the most likely scenario" when the possibility of a delayed or cancelled AFL system broke.

My idea of just using the round 1 results seems far less likely...

---

But I really like that idea.

I saw an idea going around that clubs get automatic access to at least one of their NGA players. This seems the most fair and reasonable approach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dry Rot

Dumb question: if there are no more games played this year, then how is the 2020 draft order determined?

---

Base it on the ladder positions after round 1. Is an accurate reflection of how the teams performed during the year for games that were available

I think if there is no draft this year then the indigenous portion of the NGA is D-O-N-E.

If there is a 2020 draft, the rules will remain in place...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mjp

I think if there is no draft this year then the indigenous portion of the NGA is D-O-N-E.

If there is a 2020 draft, the rules will remain in place...

---

I hope like hell that one of the incentives of using our own cash during this time is that our access to Jamarra is guaranteed.

I think they should do an aggregate ladder over the last 5 years and base the draft order on that. In fact that's probably a better system all round. Just keep doing it after each year. That way you won't have 'anomalies' like the bombers getting the number 1 pick after being punished for drug cheating. A team can't just have one bad year and scoop up the number 1 pick. And there's less incentive to tank. Who's gonna tank for 5 years?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mjp

I think if there is no draft this year then the indigenous portion of the NGA is D-O-N-E.

If there is a 2020 draft, the rules will remain in place...

---

I would hope they would be 'grandfathering' any change to indigenous NGA rules. That is existing participants already aligned, would still be able to join, but no new indigenous entrants into the NGA allowed.
That would be the most equitable exit arrangement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dancin' Douggy

I think they should do an aggregate ladder over the last 5 years and base the draft order on that. In fact that's probably a better system all round. Just keep doing it after each year. That way you won't have 'anomalies' like the bombers getting the number 1 pick after being punished for drug cheating. A team can't just have one bad year and scoop up the number 1 pick. And there's less incentive to tank. Who's gonna tank for 5 years?

---

Not the worst idea at all DD. Worth thinking about a little deeper.

My initial thoughts to this are;

1) How many clubs have actually tanked and rebounded strongly to make a PF or win a Premiership? Carlton, Melbourne, GC etc. were/have been crap for years after those periods of time. There was a stat for a few years running when a bottom 4 team would make the 8 the following year but I don't think that was related to any kind of 'tank'.

2) If we were to implement the suggested system above, it would mean that rebuilds would (likely) take a hell of a lot longer than they currently do. The current system does allow for clubs to bounce back quickly which can be a good thing for an even competition. Ultimately what we don't want is to have 'cycles' where we see the same top 4-5 teams compete for a period of time, then a new top 4-5 take over for a few years thereafter.

I don't mind your suggestion as playing the 'averages game' makes sense. I wonder if it would make much of a difference though, as a club tanking in any given year would still result them in receiving a lower draft pick regardless.