Prediction 2017 Free Agency & Trading - go to the Gibbs thread if you wish to discuss Gibbs!!!

[Heafy83]

His potential wages sit outside the top-15, because he's not a good enough player to justify being paid a top-15 wage. Not top-15 in either talent or wage, so not Band 1.

If the AFL wants to give Brisbane a priority draft pick, as they did last year, then that's another matter entirely. Free Agency compensation has nothing to do with this - it's based purely on the player, and what they're offered by their new club. On that basis, there is no case whatsoever for Brisbane receiving Band 1 compensation for Rockliff.

Yes it is. You are totally ignoring that last paragraph and the committees decision. Its not a set rule.

That was lifted off the AFL website today. It is current.

You never answered my question....... Is Sloane worth band 1 compo?

 

[Heafy83]

He's a $650k player. $800k is about right, including a premium for luring him away from his existing club. $950k for a player of Rockliff's ability is ridiculous.

You are talking two different things here. I am not debating whether his salary is right or not. Talent and salary don't always meet up. Dangerfield is a perfect example. Should be the highest paid player in the league but wont be for various reasons. Tippett on $1mill a year is the complete opposite.

You stated that $950k figure and said it would be an anomaly. I simply stated regardless of it being that it would meet the band 1 criteria anyway.

 

[Vader]

Yes it is. You are totally ignoring that last paragraph and the committees decision. Its not a set rule.

That was lifted off the AFL website today. It is current.

You never answered my question....... Is Sloane worth band 1 compo?

Sloane was one of the red hot favourites for the Brownlow this year, until he started getting tagged. There's a strong case that he's one of the top-15 players in the league, so yes - he'd be Band 1. He's probably the only Band 1 player on our list. Not Tex, not Talia.

 

[Heafy83]

Sloane was one of the red hot favourites for the Brownlow this year, until he started getting tagged. There's a strong case that he's one of the top-15 players in the league, so yes - he'd be Band 1. He's probably the only Band 1 player on our list. Not Tex, not Talia.

And yet Rocky is equal to him in almost every way. He was one of the favs for the brownlow last year too. Only reason Rocky wasn't was because the Lions didn't win enough games.

I'd argue Tex being top 5 in the coleman and first for goal assists would have him def in band 1 in an open market. The fact he is our captain and has taken one for the team with less pay is an anomaly.

 

[Vader]

Yes it is. You are totally ignoring that last paragraph and the committees decision. Its not a set rule.

That was lifted off the AFL website today. It is current.

You never answered my question....... Is Sloane worth band 1 compo?

I'm not ignoring it - it's irrelevant. You're deliberately overlooking the qualifier: if the formula produces a materially anomalous result.

Band 2 compensation is not a "materially anomalous result", if anything Band 1 would be "materially anomalous" for Rockliff. If there's no "materially anomalous result", then there's no justification for the committee to upgrade the compensation.

 

[Heafy83]

I'm not ignoring it - it's irrelevant. You're deliberately overlooking the qualifier: if the formula produces a materially anomalous result.

Band 2 compensation is not a "materially anomalous result", if anything Band 1 would be "materially anomalous" for Rockliff. If there's no "materially anomalous result", then there's no justification for the committee to upgrade the compensation.

It's not irrelevant. Its an AFL catch all. It literally enables the AFL to do as they please because the football public are non the wiser due to lack of transparency in wages.

 

[Vader]

And yet Rocky is equal to him in almost every way. He was one of the favs for the brownlow last year too. Only reason Rocky wasn't was because the Lions didn't win enough games.

I'd argue Tex being top 5 in the coleman and first for goal assists would have him def in band 1 in an open market. The fact he is our captain and has taken one for the team with less pay is an anomaly.

Top 15 players in the competition? That's less than 1 player per club, on average - and some clubs would have more than one such player (e.g. Sydney - Franklin & Kennedy).

I don't have a problem with Rockliff being in the next group, players ranked 16-45, which is Band 2 compensation. You're having a lend of yourself if you think he's top-15 in the league.

 

[Vader]

It's not irrelevant. Its an AFL catch all. It literally enables the AFL to do as they please because the football public are non the wiser due to lack of transparency in wages.

It's not irrelevant, and it's not a "catch all". It applies if there is a "materially anomalous result" when their formula is applied. Rockliff being outside the top 5% is not "materially anomalous". Rockliff being in the top 5% would be anomalous.

Who do you think would be the top-15 highest earners in the AFL, aged 25+? I bet Rockliff doesn't make your list.

Rockliff didn't make the 40-man AA squad last year, let alone the final (22-man) team. How you can argue that he should be in the top-15 wage earners is entirely beyond me.

 

[Scorpus]

It's not irrelevant. Its an AFL catch all. It literally enables the AFL to do as they please because the football public are non the wiser due to lack of transparency in wages.

They won't give Brisbane pick 2 for Rockliff because there would once again be an uproar about the Buddy Franklin compensation. Which is the whole reason they changed the system.

The system now ensures you have to be a star/elite player, Dustin Martin or Patrick Dangerfield quality, to get that top-end compensation.

 

[Shaz2012]

His potential wages sit outside the top-15, because he's not a good enough player to justify being paid a top-15 wage. Not top-15 in either talent or wage, so not Band 1.

If the AFL wants to give Brisbane a priority draft pick, as they did last year, then that's another matter entirely. Free Agency compensation has nothing to do with this - it's based purely on the player, and what they're offered by their new club. On that basis, there is no case whatsoever for Brisbane receiving Band 1 compensation for Rockliff.

You are not factoring in the value that the club getting him doesnt have to give up anything in trade to get him. This has massive value whether you accept that or not. For a club in the top 6, Rockliff could potentially be the difference between winning a flag or not. Yet the ability to get a player like Rockliff may come at a huge cost in terms of draft picks or players.

Rockliff is the equal of Sloane, your kidding yourself if you dont recognise this. If Sloane is worth $750k then getting Rockliff without having to exchange players or draft picks is worth more than $750k. How much more is the question.

If Sloane was to move as an RFA then we would demand r1 compensation from the AFL or the equivalent from his next club. So his next club would likely offer him more than his worth to get him for free and let the AFL pick up the compensation tab.

Its really not difficult to understand. It is similar across all sports codes when a player is available for free vs if they must be traded for or a transfer fee paid.

 

[Heafy83]

It's not irrelevant, and it's not a "catch all". It applies if there is a "materially anomalous result" when their formula is applied. Rockliff being outside the top 5% is not "materially anomalous". Rockliff being in the top 5% would be anomalous.

Who do you think would be the top-15 highest earners in the AFL, aged 25+? I bet Rockliff doesn't make your list.

We are two different mind sets here. I am not arguing he is in the top 15 paid. Never said he was or ever will be. Mind you Tom Boyd is and according to you that makes him one of the top 15 best players in the league.

I am saying regardless of you interpretation of it being an anomaly or not the AFL, in a leg up to the Lions, will give them a band 1 compo. Its close enough for them to do it without them copping huge backlash from the the community.

 

[Shaz2012]

Top 15 players in the competition? That's less than 1 player per club, on average - and some clubs would have more than one such player (e.g. Sydney - Franklin & Kennedy).

I don't have a problem with Rockliff being in the next group, players ranked 16-45, which is Band 2 compensation. You're having a lend of yourself if you think he's top-15 in the league.

You are being ridiculous. The AFL arent going to come out and block a deal for Rockliff on the basis that he cant be in the top 15 in the competition. Of course he could be.

 

[Vader]

You are not factoring in the value that the club getting him doesnt have to give up anything in trade to get him. This has massive value whether you accept that or not. For a club in the top 6, Rockliff could potentially be the difference between winning a flag or not. Yet the ability to get a player like Rockliff may come at a huge cost in terms of draft picks or players.

Rockliff is the equal of Sloane, your kidding yourself if you dont recognise this. If Sloane is worth $750k then getting Rockliff without having to exchange players or draft picks is worth more than $750k. How much more is the question.

If Sloane was to move as an RFA then we would demand r1 compensation from the AFL or the equivalent from his next club. So his next club would likely offer him more than his worth to get him for free and let the AFL pick up the compensation tab.

Its really not difficult to understand. It is similar across all sports codes when a player is available for free vs if they must be traded for or a transfer fee paid.

I'm not overlooking any of that. The compensation formula is quite simple. If Rockliff's new wage, at Adelaide, places him in the top-15 wage earners (aged 25+), then Brisbane get Band 1 compensation. If he's not, then they get Band 2 (or lower). Rockliff isn't good enough to justify a top-15 wage, even factoring in the premium required to lure him away from his existing club. End result - Brisbane don't receive Band 1 compensation.

 

[Heafy83]

They won't give Brisbane pick 2 for Rockliff because there would once again be an uproar about the Buddy Franklin compensation. Which is the whole reason they changed the system.

The system now ensures you have to be a star/elite player, Dustin Martin or Patrick Dangerfield quality, to get that top-end compensation.

They are not giving the Lions pick 2. They are giving them band 1 compo. It just so happens they are bottom of the table. If they were mid table and receive pick 11 or so then it would still be the same compensation. The clubs position on the ladder does not come into it at all.

 

[Vader]

We are two different mind sets here. I am not arguing he is in the top 15 paid. Never said he was or ever will be. Mind you Tom Boyd is and according to you that makes him one of the top 15 best players in the league.

I am saying regardless of you interpretation of it being an anomaly or not the AFL, in a leg up to the Lions, will give them a band 1 compo. Its close enough for them to do it without them copping huge backlash from the the community.

You keep trying to argue that the "leg up" factor is going to influence the result. It's 100% completely and utterly irrelevant. The only thing that matters is the salary, and whether or not it's an anomaly. By your own admission, he's not going to be top-15 based on salary, and this is not an anomaly. That's it - game over. By your own words you've admitted that he's not worthy of Band 1 compensation.

 

[Vader]

You are being ridiculous. The AFL arent going to come out and block a deal for Rockliff on the basis that he cant be in the top 15 in the competition. Of course he could be.

WTF? Who is saying that they'd block the deal? I don't think you understand this topic of conversation.

The debate here is whether or not the AFL would give Brisbane a Band 1 (1st round) compensation pick, if Rockliff moved to Adelaide as an RFA. Band 1 requires that Rockliff's wage at Adelaide ranking him in the top-15 players across the entire league. That's not going to happen - and Heafy agrees with this assessment.

The most likely outcome is that Brisbane receive Band 2 compensation.

 

[Shaz2012]

They won't give Brisbane pick 2 for Rockliff because there would once again be an uproar about the Buddy Franklin compensation. Which is the whole reason they changed the system.

The system now ensures you have to be a star/elite player, Dustin Martin or Patrick Dangerfield quality, to get that top-end compensation.

No. It doesnt. You yourself have quite clearly stated what the new system requires for Brisbane to get pick 2.

The AFL could not under any reasonable circumstances deny a contract for Rockliff that put him in the top 15 players over 25 in the league. He is quite clearly in that conversation and there will be no debate if he gets such a contract. The AFLPA would not allow this for a start because where does it stop. Do they go and blocking a $750k contract for JJ which he was offered. Or a $1m contract for Lever. Not a chance the AFL blocks any of these contracts.

Once the contract is done and if Rockcliffs is in the top 5% of over 25s they will have zero scope to deny band 1 compensation. This is absolutely guaranteed.

 

[Heafy83]

You keep trying to argue that the "leg up" factor is going to influence the result. It's 100% completely and utterly irrelevant. The only thing that matters is the salary, and whether or not it's an anomaly. By your own admission, he's not going to be top-15 based on salary, and this is not an anomaly. That's it - game over. By your own words you've admitted that he's not worthy of Band 1 compensation.

I believe its an easy leg up for them to give rather than having to give them a priority pick. You are suggesting the decision is set in stone and not subject to deliberation when it quite clear its up to a committees discretion. You are also suggesting the AFL always stick to the rulebook :/

 

[Scorpus]

They are not giving the Lions pick 2. They are giving them band 1 compo. It just so happens they are bottom of the table. If they were mid table and receive pick 11 or so then it would still be the same compensation. The clubs position on the ladder does not come into it at all.

But what you are saying is the AFL will bend the rules to give Brisbane a "leg up". So they're going to know full well that they are handing them pick 2 for free. I'm saying they won't bend the rules to allow this outcome because both clubs and supporters will complain about it. Rockliff is clearly not a top 15 player, the rules are clear, people will make a fuss and the AFL won't want that.

The most likely outcome is, unless he genuinely receives a massive contract offer, Brisbane will get an end of 1st round compensation pick.

 

[Scorpus]

No. It doesnt. You yourself have quite clearly stated what the new system requires for Brisbane to get pick 2.

The AFL could not under any reasonable circumstances deny a contract for Rockliff that put him in the top 15 players over 25 in the league. He is quite clearly in that conversation and there will be no debate if he gets such a contract. The AFLPA would not allow this for a start because where does it stop. Do they go and blocking a $750k contract for JJ which he was offered. Or a $1m contract for Lever. Not a chance the AFL blocks any of these contracts.

Once the contract is done and if Rockcliffs is in the top 5% of over 25s they will have zero scope to deny band 1 compensation. This is absolutely guaranteed.

Obviously if Rockliff actually gets a contract offer in the top 5%, he will generate band 1 compensation. What I'm suggesting is that a) no club would give him that sort of contract (assumed to be $900k+ per year) and b) the AFL wouldn't bend the rules to give Brisbane band 1 compensation if he actually falls into band 2 compensation.

 

[Shaz2012]

WTF? Who is saying that they'd block the deal? I don't think you understand this topic of conversation.

The debate here is whether or not the AFL would give Brisbane a Band 1 (1st round) compensation pick, if Rockliff moved to Adelaide as an RFA. Band 1 requires that Rockliff's wage at Adelaide ranking him in the top-15 players across the entire league. That's not going to happen - and Heafy agrees with this assessment.

The most likely outcome is that Brisbane receive Band 2 compensation.

So why are you talking about its ok with you if Rockcliff is in the 16-30 list but not in the 1-15. It doesnt matter how you or anyone else rates him.

Brisbane will be highly unlikely to let him go if they only get band 2 compensation. They will have plenty of money to pay him given the profile of their list.

 

[Shaz2012]

Obviously if Rockliff actually gets a contract offer in the top 5%, he will generate band 1 compensation. What I'm suggesting is that a) no club would give him that sort of contract (assumed to be $900k+ per year) and b) the AFL wouldn't bend the rules to give Brisbane band 1 compensation if he actually falls into band 2 compensation.

I agree with b). I think there is a very good chance that he gets a contract that puts him in the top 15. Why wouldnt port do it? Doesnt cost them any draft picks. Surely they have players they would happily delist/trade. When does Hartlett come out of contract.

I hope we will do it. We have a heap of guys out of contract in 2018. Non best 22 players can be moved on now or next year to make room in our cap.

 

[Heafy83]

But what you are saying is the AFL will bend the rules to give Brisbane a "leg up". So they're going to know full well that they are handing them pick 2 for free. I'm saying they won't bend the rules to allow this outcome because both clubs and supporters will complain about it. Rockliff is clearly not a top 15 player, the rules are clear, people will make a fuss and the AFL won't want that.

The most likely outcome is, unless he genuinely receives a massive contract offer, Brisbane will get an end of 1st round compensation pick.

Its not bending the rules. It clearly states its up to the committee to decide what they see as the right compo if they believe its incorrect. No one knows what Rockliff will be paid but he is close enough to the band 1 compo for them to get away with it. Frawley was no where near the band 1 compo in terms of wages. His was heavily weighted on personal accolades. There was also a massive stink because the Dees had a huge amount of top 5 picks in the last 5 years previous including priority picks.

Brisbane yes have had top picks but are also leaking quality talent. The AFL also screwed them over when they brought GC into the comp robbing them of a lot of local talent. It is clear the AFL is trying to give the Lions a leg up in their involvement in getting the right management up there in place.

Yes there may be a bit of a stink but it will be small because a.) they are not a vic team b.) they are not seen as a threat c.) they are in more trouble than the Dees ever were on and off field

 

[Scorpus]

Its not bending the rules. It clearly states its up to the committee to decide what they see as the right compo if they believe its incorrect. No one knows what Rockliff will be paid but he is close enough to the band 1 compo for them to get away with it. Frawley was no where near the band 1 compo in terms of wages. His was heavily weighted on personal accolades. There was also a massive stink because the Dees had a huge amount of top 5 picks in the last 5 years previous including priority picks.

Brisbane yes have had top picks but are also leaking quality talent. The AFL also screwed them over when they brought GC into the comp robbing them of a lot of local talent. It is clear the AFL is trying to give the Lions a leg up in their involvement in getting the right management up there in place.

Yes there may be a bit of a stink but it will be small because a.) they are not a vic team b.) they are not seen as a threat c.) they are in more trouble than the Dees ever were on and off field

Frawley was before the new system and the reason the new system was introduced.

I think every single club would complain about Brisbane essentially being gifted a first round priority pick. Handing a club pick 2 (or 3) is an enormous gift. Every other club gets their draft pick pushed back. There was already significant negative pressure on the AFL gifting Brisbane an end of first round pick. To gift them a pick far better than pick 19 would cause an uproar

 

[Heafy83]

Frawley was before the new system and the reason the new system was introduced.

I think every single club would complain about Brisbane essentially being gifted a first round priority pick. Handing a club pick 2 (or 3) is an enormous gift. Every other club gets their draft pick pushed back. There was already significant negative pressure on the AFL gifting Brisbane an end of first round pick. To gift them a pick far better than pick 19 would cause an uproar

Where is the negative pressure on the end of round pick? I have not seen any.

Yes clubs may put in a please explain but it will be nothing like the Dees compo saga. It will be done and dusted within a week after draft night, if it lasts that long.

Also I know the Frawley situation was before the new rules but its the closest comparison we have. And even then you are compared apples with oranges. Rocky is a much better player and will be much higher paid than Frawley ever was.