Bailey Rice?

[ripplug66]

If they renamed it father-illegitimate son we may have been in with a go.

One of plugger's illegitimate sons (allegedly) played in Dingley's recent premiership team. There's more than one, apparently. Why does the great man have four "legitimate" daughters? Again, nature and the universe conspire against the saints.

If that was true it seems the player wasn't good enough anyway.

[SaintPav]

If they renamed it father-illegitimate son we may have been in with a go.

One of plugger's illegitimate sons (allegedly) played in Dingley's recent premiership team. There's more than one, apparently. Why does the great man have four "legitimate" daughters? Again, nature and the universe conspire against the saints.

If that was true it seems the player wasn't good enough anyway.

Assuming certius paribus.

[whiskers3614]

ceteris*

[asiu]

logic !!

at saintsational.
... your kiddn me ! .... yea ?

[SaintPav]

Anal-retentive*

[WinnersOnly]

If our remaining 3rd & 4th round draft picks end up something like #39 & #62 = totalling 569 points?

If that is the case any nominations for Bailey Rice over a pick totalling 569 points (after discount) will come off next years picks. 

As an example if Carton bid their pick # 23 (815-197=618) we will have a carry over owe of 49 points which would drop next years equivalent round pick about 3 spots. 

So if Im right we really dont want any other club to bid on Rice any higher than about pick #25. The other down side is we would be very unlikely to take another live pick in the draft after 62 so it will mean a draft of -

Pick # 14
Bailey Rice
Jack Sinclair upgrade

[saintsRrising]

If our remaining 3rd & 4th round draft picks end up something like #39 & #62 = totalling 569 points?

Does anyone have an actual link that shows that points are revalued in this way?

It would seem to me that this would be "double-dipping" as the picks consumed have already been used for those pick values.

Logically if we have pick 45, even if we get to pick the say the 39th player it would still be worth the points of 'pick 45. After all those picks and points have been consumed. So what does the AFL rules actually say on this?

[Con Gorozidis]

If our remaining 3rd & 4th round draft picks end up something like #39 & #62 = totalling 569 points?

Does anyone have an actual link that shows that points are revalued in this way?

It would seem to me that this would be "double-dipping" as the picks consumed have already been used for those pick values.

Logically if we have pick 45, even if we get to pick the say the 39th player it would still be worth the points of 'pick 45. After all those picks and points have been consumed. So what does the AFL rules actually say on this?

The system works in that whatever picks a club uses on a a FS or Academy player is moved to the back of the draft.

See page 8-9 of this document for a better explanation:

http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20 ... system.pdf

[Bluthy]

I hope we have mathematicians at the club or else we'll probably put a line through Rice just because its too damn tricky to crunch the numbers. Is he good enough to pick for us anyway when we don't have many picks this year and next in the draft? Are we gettting to caught up in the father and son thing and looking at it with cold, hard "will he be good enough" eyes? We seem to get caught up in "needing" certain players and gettting tunnel vision.

[Con Gorozidis]

I hope we have mathematicians at the club or else we'll probably put a line through Rice just because its too damn tricky to crunch the numbers. Is he good enough to pick for us anyway when we don't have many picks this year and next in the draft? Are we gettting to caught up in the father and son thing and looking at it with cold, hard "will he be good enough" eyes? We seem to get caught up in "needing" certain players and gettting tunnel vision.

It is complicated although I actually think the AFL has done a pretty good job on this system. Even though it is complicated it seems pretty fair.
I think the best way to think about it (as others have mentioned) is that if another club comes in and wants him with a pick between say 20-30 - then we will miss out on him.
If another club rates him highly then they rate him highly. I still think the odds are in favour that we will get him. 45 should get it done and 45 + 63 or whatever it is we have should get it done.

[Rosco]

If our remaining 3rd & 4th round draft picks end up something like #39 & #62 = totalling 569 points?

Does anyone have an actual link that shows that points are revalued in this way?

It would seem to me that this would be "double-dipping" as the picks consumed have already been used for those pick values.

Logically if we have pick 45, even if we get to pick the say the 39th player it would still be worth the points of 'pick 45. After all those picks and points have been consumed. So what does the AFL rules actually say on this?

You'd hope so. If not, and you had picks 45 & 46, then used the 45 points on someone, and pick 46 then became 45, you could then use the pick 45 points again on another bid. Seems crazy.

[borderbarry]

WinnersOnly, if we had say Pick 11 next season, worth 1329 points, and we owed 49 points from this year, we would end up with 1280 points, still above pick 12 at 1268, so we would retain pick 11.

[WinnersOnly]

BB apparently the rule is points off equivalent round/pick in the following year. If Rice us taken in round 2 its the same round next year. We have traded that pick so will move tto 3rd round...

[saintsRrising]

See page 8-9 of this document for a better explanation:

http://www.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20 ... system.pdf

Yes I have read that. It only states the draft order is re-ordered (as in were you pick a player). It does not state that points are also recalculated.

Is this stated anywhere, or are people just guessing that the points change too?

[bergholt]

BB apparently the rule is points off equivalent round/pick in the following year. If Rice us taken in round 2 its the same round next year. We have traded that pick so will move tto 3rd round...

I wouldn't be too worried about a third round pick being demoted, there's basically no difference between (say) 42 and 45. I'm sure if that's the only negative then the club will snap him up.

[8bloggs]

BB apparently the rule is points off equivalent round/pick in the following year. If Rice us taken in round 2 its the same round next year. We have traded that pick so will move tto 3rd round...

Where has the AFL indicated that this is the case?
Happy to be corrected but wouldn't the points come off the next available pick, which I thought would be our first round pick next year?

[Rosco]

If a Nominating Club does not have enough points to secure a F/S or Academy selection in a given Draft, the points required will carry over to the Club’s first selection the following year.
- In this case, points will be deducted prior to the trade period to ensure the Nominating Club pays it points debt, rather than trades picks away.

clear as mud.

if you don't have enough what carries over? the points you didn't have (i.e. you might be 50 points short) or the full points you required (e.g. you might have needed 500)?

the points carry over to your first selection?

so if you are 50 points short and you have pick 6 (1751 pts), you slide to pick 7 (1644 pts) and forfeit the other 57 points?

a bunch of examples are listed but none show the case of where you don't have enough points and spill into the following year.

___________________

also, in the Heeney example (i.e. if the current regime applied last year):
- Sydney started with picks 18, 37, 38, 57 & 70
- Sydney uses the points from pick 18 which moves to back of draft - also says draft order is updated
- then says Sydney uses points from pick 37 which moves to back of draft - SO OBVIOUSLY THE DRAFT ORDER HASN'T BEEN UPDATED BECAUSE THEIR ORIGINAL 37 IS STILL 37 AND HASN'T BEEN BUMPED UP TO 36

my brain is hurting. i hope questions have been asked and answers given.

[damienc]

If they renamed it father-illegitimate son we may have been in with a go.[/quote

Seriously though. I would be seriously perplexed if we dont get him. He is not an Ablett but he is ours. It should be his right. I havent got a good argument really. I have to admit this is all emotion. But I still wont change my mind and I would go rookie. With Freemans hammies its a fair chance.

You have a great argument. Bailey Rice is one of ours. His Dad was a champion. If the reports about Bailey are correct then he plays very much like his Dad. Fearless, courageous ball winner who gives 100 percent in everything he does. Look you can argue, as many have done here, about the whys and the wherefores. The fact is the kid wants to come, we want him and we are going to get him. And he is going to be a great player for us. There endeth the lesson.

[supersaints]

Anything near is old man you will all be very happy.

[8bloggs]

If a Nominating Club does not have enough points to secure a F/S or Academy selection in a given Draft, the points required will carry over to the Club’s first selection the following year.
- In this case, points will be deducted prior to the trade period to ensure the Nominating Club pays it points debt, rather than trades picks away.

clear as mud.

if you don't have enough what carries over? the points you didn't have (i.e. you might be 50 points short) or the full points you required (e.g. you might have needed 500)?

the points carry over to your first selection?

so if you are 50 points short and you have pick 6 (1751 pts), you slide to pick 7 (1644 pts) and forfeit the other 57 points?

a bunch of examples are listed but none show the case of where you don't have enough points and spill into the following year.

___________________

also, in the Heeney example (i.e. if the current regime applied last year):
- Sydney started with picks 18, 37, 38, 57 & 70
- Sydney uses the points from pick 18 which moves to back of draft - also says draft order is updated
- then says Sydney uses points from pick 37 which moves to back of draft - SO OBVIOUSLY THE DRAFT ORDER HASN'T BEEN UPDATED BECAUSE THEIR ORIGINAL 37 IS STILL 37 AND HASN'T BEEN BUMPED UP TO 36

my brain is hurting. i hope questions have been asked and answers given.

-------------------------------------
Had another look at the AFL document and I think from the Zaine Cordy example on page 6 it looks like the deficit of points is subtracted from next year's first round pick and then if the resulting number of points is still more than the next pick, you get to keep your original pick. In the Cordy example they say "pick 5 would remain as Pick 5" as the number of points left = 1878 - 98 = 1780, which is still more than 1,751 which is what pick 6 is worth.....

[saintsRrising]

also, in the Heeney example (i.e. if the current regime applied last year):
- Sydney started with picks 18, 37, 38, 57 & 70
- Sydney uses the points from pick 18 which moves to back of draft - also says draft order is updated
- then says Sydney uses points from pick 37 which moves to back of draft - SO OBVIOUSLY THE DRAFT ORDER HASN'T BEEN UPDATED BECAUSE THEIR ORIGINAL 37 IS STILL 37 AND HASN'T BEEN BUMPED UP TO 36

my brain is hurting. i hope questions have been asked and answers given.

I think it is that the DRAFT ORDER IS UPDATED:
* in terms of "pick selection"
* but that the points value stays as the pick was originally valued at.

ie Pick 45 may be able to actually be used to pick the 32nd player, but if used fora F/S (or Academy player) then the points consumed will be from the points for pick 45.

[borderbarry]

Say we use our 5th round pick 81 as an example. If their are 7 Academy kids picked up with the Northern clubs using 7 spots for these kids but have to pay for them with 19 later picks, all before 81, our 81 would become pick 68, which I am sure we would use if 45 and the original pick 68 have been used on Bailey rice. So even if 81 is still known as 81, it will be the 68th pick used in the draft.

[ace]

Say we use our 5th round pick 81 as an example. If their are 7 Academy kids picked up with the Northern clubs using 7 spots for these kids but have to pay for them with 19 later picks, all before 81, our 81 would become pick 68, which I am sure we would use if 45 and the original pick 68 have been used on Bailey rice. So even if 81 is still known as 81, it will be the 68th pick used in the draft.

The first pick that is used is drained of all it's points regardless of any surplus. That pick is effectively expired. It goes to the back of the pack with no points.
BUT when another pick is also required to make up the points total, picks that are completely drained of their points moved to the back of the pack but if they are only partly consumed their remaining points determines how fare back they are moved.

[ace]

This means we will use our notional pick 14 at around pick 18.
Bailey Rice should be called by some club ahead of our next pick.
We will offer up that pick notionally pick 45
Then if the 197 bonus is insufficient we will offer up our third pick notionally pick 68.
It will then be moved backwards based upon any surplus points.
If that pick is insufficient then we will lose points off our third round pick for 2016.

If Rice has not been called ahead of our 2nd pick expect the club to let him slip and choose another player.
Our 2nd pick could easily be moved into the late 30s so worth using on some other talent.
Then when Rice is finally called by another club use our 3rd pick to trump with the 197 bonus points.
Any points outstanding would be taken from either our 3rd or 4th round picks in 2016 depending on which round he is called by the other club.


The AFL Puter will do all maths as the draft proceeds.
It will tell our team the changing pick number of our 3 picks at any time and the changing value of points.

[WinnersOnly]

Has anyone got Baileys draft camp results - I was interested to see how strong his running is?