Track and Yield Deal - Mark Stevens
Quote:
Track-and-yield deal to compensate for lost players to Gold Coast
THE recipe is as top secret as the Colonel's own.
We know there are herbs and spices - age, original draft position, salary rating, best-and-fairest results and All-Australian selections - but the weighting of each will remain a mystery.
That is why the formula to decide compensation for players lost to Gold Coast is open to howls of discontent from clubs that it is too subjective.
It is also open to rorting in the area of best-and-fairests.
What's to stop a club tinkering with its club champion award slightly to ensure a Gold Coast target finishes a spot or two higher?
It has happened before at clubs, when the incentive was not as great.
A top-five finish might be enough to boost a departing player's value from a second to a first-round pick.
But as the AFL reviews its formula, with an eye to compensating a club for the loss of a marquee star like Gary Ablett, it has a reputable alternative right under its nose.
For the first time, the AFL's official statistician Champion Data has attached a points value to every player in the league based on SuperCoach rankings, past and present form, experience and where they stack up against other rival players in similar positions on the ground.
It is the AFL's version of tennis's ATP points system and it could be the best way to decide compensation - without a whiff of subjectivity.
Every player in the competition now has a points ranking out of 30, with Champion Data providing an accurate list of where a player sits at each club.
It forms the basis of the Herald Sun Full Strength Indicator, which ranks the relative strength of each team each week, taking into account the value of absentees.
Using the system, every player ranked at a maximum 30 points could be classed as a "marquee" player worth two first-round picks.
Seven other players join Ablett in the elite 30-point class.
Ablett's teammate Joel Selwood, also a Gold Coast target, is worth 26 points - equal seventh at Geelong. Under the formula, he has paid the price for a slight dip in form this season.
Jared Brennan, the Lion linked to GC17, is worth 24 points - equal fourth at Brisbane.
Using guidelines to match the ratings, Geelong would receive a first-round pick in return for Selwood and the Lions would get a pick at the end of the first round for Brennan.
Bulldog Jarrod Harbrow, strongly linked to GC17, is worth 23 points (equal 10th at the club) and worthy of a second-round pick.
Campbell Brown is also worth 23 points (equal eighth at Hawthorn).
The ratings change week by week, fluctuating slightly on form.
By the end of the season, when compensation is dished out, they should be even more accurate.
Ken Wood, the salary cap cop, will oversee the workings of the AFL's secret recipe.
As if he hasn't got enough on his plate. Hand it over to the stats guys.
Is the FSI ranking really a reputable calculation for deterrmining a player's compensation value ? I wasn't aware that the FSI calculation factored in a player's future worth or their growth potential. Surely a Harbrow would offer GC17 significantly more longer term value than a Campbell Brown.
Re: Track and Yield Deal - Mark Stevens
Why don't they just link it to the salary offered by GC17?
Gold Coast have already determined the players value by what they intend to pay them. Except for whatever's under the table, of course.
Re: Track and Yield Deal - Mark Stevens
If it was just linked to salary then it would be unfair on a team who loses a recent top draft pick. Currently all draft selections sign 2 year deals initially and if say Gold Coast offered one of the top picks from the 2008 draft, let's for example said Naitanui, $300-350k (he might get around $100-$150k at wce) then they'd get far less of a compensation than they deserve.
Just on the article, the FSI ranking etc isn't being used by the AFL. It's just what Champion Data is using as a way of trying to make an approximate guess as to what each player might be worth. Really, the only reason for this article is the close link that Champion Data have with the Hearld-Sun, particularly through SuperCoach
Re: Track and Yield Deal - Mark Stevens
Quote:
Originally Posted by
divvydan
If it was just linked to salary then it would be unfair on a team who loses a recent top draft pick. Currently all draft selections sign 2 year deals initially and if say Gold Coast offered one of the top picks from the 2008 draft, let's for example said Naitanui, $300-350k (he might get around $100-$150k at wce) then they'd get far less of a compensation than they deserve.
Just on the article, the FSI ranking etc isn't being used by the AFL. It's just what Champion Data is using as a way of trying to make an approximate guess as to what each player might be worth. Really, the only reason for this article is the close link that Champion Data have with the Hearld-Sun, particularly through SuperCoach
Natanui's next contract will way, way more than $300K no matter where he is playing. Then if GWS want to steal him they'll have to pay way, way over the odds. Nic Nat could be a $800K man by the time he's 21.
Re: Track and Yield Deal - Mark Stevens
Quote:
Originally Posted by
divvydan
Just on the article, the FSI ranking etc isn't being used by the AFL. It's just what Champion Data is using as a way of trying to make an approximate guess as to what each player might be worth. Really, the only reason for this article is the close link that Champion Data have with the Hearld-Sun, particularly through SuperCoach
Divvydan, yes I do appreciate that. I was more bemused by the fact that the writer, Mark Stevens, who by the way being a Dogs supporter should know better ;), drew a conclusion that the AFL actually has
Quote:
a reputable alternative right under its nose
He no doubt was trying to market the new FSI indicator on behalf of his employer by oddly endeavouring to associate it with modelling a fair compensation model. A very long bow considering FSI is not forward looking as any compensation model would need to factor in.
Cal Ward or Jordan Roughhead are not deemed part of our best 22 players by FSI ranking but they would undoubtedly be worth more on the market now than either Eagleton or Hahn who FSI both have within our current best 22.
Re: Track and Yield Deal - Mark Stevens
Anything with any link to supercoach poiints is tripe.
