Analysis 2018 List Management discussion Pt 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nah we can't pay more than our first pick but we won't be doing that when he's a FA. There's no way GWS can match what we'll offer.

I’m not sure if I’m not articulating my point very well or others just don’t agree it’s possible or don’t think it will happen.

GWS will match even if they can’t legitimately afford to because Dylan won’t stay, they only have to be able to fit him in at that price if he stays.

Dylan might then choose to stay (I doubt) and the Giants will have to pay him that amount and they will have to cut others to do so, but in terms of matching an offer, they COULD if they had to.

Adelaide matched Geelongs offer to force a better trade hand and I very doubt the AFL accounts department were doing a through audit on their player payments as the payments in question have yet to be made.
 
Yes but how is that enforced or checked?

If we offer Shiel $1M and GWS match, they don’t need the room unless he stays, if the AFL checked I think there would be a wink wink nudge nudge from the Giants CEO but the Giants could easily say, if Dylan decided to stay we would be able to find that room by trading out others.

Am I making sense?

The whole set up is crap, out of the FA that have left their clubs I don’t think they left for more money.
They can match if they can fit him in. If that means they have to move others on then that's what they'd have to do.

Unless you're insinuating that the GWS will be allowed to match his offer and go over the cap?

Most players will go for good money but don't want to go to a bottom 4 club. I don't blame them at all, good on them for taking $200-300k less and going to a team with a greater chance of winning. You'd have to question a player if he chose money over success and he'd probably not be the right fit for any side in the long run
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Wouldn’t mind it with a few tweaks, a player could be traded by the club to another in the same state as not to disrupt their wives careers, family support, kids school and so on.

AFL players don’t make enough money to justify being shipped to another state and having to uproot your family against your will.

Sure they make enough money. And no one will be able to be traded without agreeing to it first. Its not the NBA, NFL or MLB where one day you are playing in New York and the next day you are traded to Arizona on the whim of the owner or manager. The AFL doesn't and will never work like that.
 
I’m not sure if I’m not articulating my point very well or others just don’t agree it’s possible or don’t think it will happen.

GWS will match even if they can’t legitimately afford to because Dylan won’t stay, they only have to be able to fit him in at that price if he stays.

Dylan might then choose to stay (I doubt) and the Giants will have to pay him that amount and they will have to cut others to do so, but in terms of matching an offer, they COULD if they had to.

Adelaide matched Geelongs offer to force a better trade hand and I very doubt the AFL accounts department were doing a through audit on their player payments as the payments in question have yet to be made.

Yeah but even so dane, the point I was trying to make was even if GWS matched our offer next year, we can only offer what our first pick is next year and dare I say it'll be a bit later in the draft than this year.

So maybe next year we end up with pick #5, I'm not so fussed paying that. pick #5 in a weaker draft isn't as much as pick #1 in a very strong draft.

If I was SOS though, I'd be offering Kelly HUGE $$$ as well. That way, GWS will have major issues. We can then work out a trade for Kelly involving our 2019 1st while taking Shiel as a FA. Considering they potentially lose both, AFL will give them pretty good compo for Shiel. They can then load up on next year's draft with their 1st, our 1st and AFL compo 1st while we bring both in. Won't happen but I'm allowed to dream.
 
Wouldn’t mind it with a few tweaks, a player could be traded by the club to another in the same state as not to disrupt their wives careers, family support, kids school and so on.

AFL players don’t make enough money to justify being shipped to another state and having to uproot your family against your will.
I disagree I think the players have too much power. If you want a national competition to succeed it will only work if players are willing to play interstate particularly in Sydney/Brisbane.

If a player wants to leave before being a free agent the club should be able to shop him to all clubs and take the best deal. It is a privilege to play AFL and they are getting paid extremely well. It is a National competition and if you don’t want to leave your home state no one is forcing you to nominate for the draft.

I think it is totally unfair for example if Collingwood draft DeGoey with a top 5 pick then develop him then he says he wants to leave and he will only go to North Melbourne. Collingwood should be able to get the best desk since they have invested heavily in him.

If we keep allowing this go home rubbish we will have to fold the expansion clubs and Brisbane.
 
Why isnt it achievable? You will have no firm case to justify. And i dont have a firm case saying it will happen. But anything can happen in football.

If we land just one of Gaff, Shiel or Kelly we would consider that a huge success. Adding Brodie, Lloyd and Lukosius this year is certainly achievable though and would be a good haul.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Why isnt it achievable? You will have no firm case to justify. And i dont have a firm case saying it will happen. But anything can happen in football.
Salary cap says we cant we'd be roughly paying 35-40% of our cap on 5 players Charlie Cripps Shiel Gaff and Kelly .
System isnt set up so you can go and grab 3 players on that kind of money in a short space of time like that proposal .
 
Yeah but even so dane, the point I was trying to make was even if GWS matched our offer next year, we can only offer what our first pick is next year and dare I say it'll be a bit later in the draft than this year.

So maybe next year we end up with pick #5, I'm not so fussed paying that. pick #5 in a weaker draft isn't as much as pick #1 in a very strong draft.

If I was SOS though, I'd be offering Kelly HUGE $$$ as well. That way, GWS will have major issues. We can then work out a trade for Kelly involving our 2019 1st while taking Shiel as a FA. Considering they potentially lose both, AFL will give them pretty good compo for Shiel. They can then load up on next year's draft with their 1st, our 1st and AFL compo 1st while we bring both in. Won't happen but I'm allowed to dream.

Here's the thing - if we trade for Kelly, GWS can absolutely afford to match a deal for Shiel. If we want both, our best case scenario is to trade for one this year (preferably Kelly).

Pick 1 and 23 for Kelly and 43.
Maybe GWS consider offering Murphy an out and we get Pick 20ish (Band 3) coming back through that.
Next year, Shiel as a Free Agent, GWS match, we trade Pick 8 and a swap of future first round picks.

GWS get: 1, 23, Murphy, 8 (2019), 12 (2020)
CAR get: Kelly, 20, 43, Shiel (2019), 15 (2020)

If they're confident on Taranto, Setterfield, Perryman etc. it's a reasonably equitable deal that works well for both sides.
 
If Kelly and Shiel leave next season they will get two firsts for Kelly and a first compo for Shiel. They have nothing to gain selling one this year except abit better draft pick. They have had that many top end picks what would be the point of chasing another. The entire purpose of building a list is to win a flag not to constantly trade trying to improve your draft hand year after year. Their time is now.
 
If Kelly and Shiel leave next season they will get two firsts for Kelly and a first compo for Shiel. They have nothing to gain selling one this year except abit better draft pick. They have had that many top end picks what would be the point of chasing another. The entire purpose of building a list is to win a flag not to constantly trade trying to improve your draft hand year after year. Their time is now.
Their time is gone.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Wouldn’t mind it with a few tweaks, a player could be traded by the club to another in the same state as not to disrupt their wives careers, family support, kids school and so on.

AFL players don’t make enough money to justify being shipped to another state and having to uproot your family against your will.

This is easily offset by a relocation fee, lets call it $100k is added to your first year salary to cover relocation costs that can be outside of the salary cap.
 
Just as a matter of interest is anyone aware of what stats Lukosius has been putting up in SANFL seniors this season .
Ive only been able to come across a couple of games he's played in the seniors ?.
 
Salary cap says we cant we'd be roughly paying 35-40% of our cap on 5 players Charlie Cripps Shiel Gaff and Kelly .
System isnt set up so you can go and grab 3 players on that kind of money in a short space of time like that proposal .
So most of Charlies goes into next year. Say 2 mil. For the remaining 4 years he is probs on 400k a year. Same with Gaff.
Its easy to do. Its about being creative
 
If Kelly and Shiel leave next season they will get two firsts for Kelly and a first compo for Shiel. They have nothing to gain selling one this year except abit better draft pick. They have had that many top end picks what would be the point of chasing another. The entire purpose of building a list is to win a flag not to constantly trade trying to improve your draft hand year after year. Their time is now.

TBH, I think their time is over. They wont win a premiership now. They need to retool.
 
So most of Charlies goes into next year. Say 2 mil. For the remaining 4 years he is probs on 400k a year. Same with Gaff.
Its easy to do. Its about being creative
And Shiel + Kelly ? you reckon Charlies on 2 mill next year please .
Cripps will be on a mill a year after next year Sheil would be a minimum 800k per year same for Gaff to get them away from their clubs and Kelly 1-1.1 mill at the minimum cant backend all that and expect to keep other improvers happy .
 
Unless you're insinuating that the GWS will be allowed to match his offer and go over the cap?

They will match the offer, forcing a trade, they only have to be able to afford his salary if he stays which he won’t.

It’s like a game of bluff, GWS can match as they know Dylan won’t accept their offer.
 
And Shiel + Kelly ? you reckon Charlies on 2 mill next year please .
Cripps will be on a mill a year after next year Sheil would be a minimum 800k per year same for Gaff to get them away from their clubs and Kelly 1-1.1 mill at the minimum cant backend all that and expect to keep other improvers happy .


You just can't be over paying anyone and expect to win premierships... fine to over pay if you want to battle like Norf, but to win the cup you need the most talent, to fit the most talent into the cap you need to pay the least $/talent ratio...
 
They're not allowed to.

The only time a club has had to trade for a FA is Dangerfield, and that was because Geelong only paid him $800k, ie below market value. If they offered 1.1 I don't think Adelaide would have been matching.

As I said a few times, you only need to be able to afford the players salary if he stays. The Giants can and will match imo forcing a trade.

They will do this because they know Dylan won’t stay.
 
Sure they make enough money. And no one will be able to be traded without agreeing to it first. Its not the NBA, NFL or MLB where one day you are playing in New York and the next day you are traded to Arizona on the whim of the owner or manager. The AFL doesn't and will never work like that.

You realise that you are agreeing with me, right?
 
I disagree I think the players have too much power. If you want a national competition to succeed it will only work if players are willing to play interstate particularly in Sydney/Brisbane.

If a player wants to leave before being a free agent the club should be able to shop him to all clubs and take the best deal. It is a privilege to play AFL and they are getting paid extremely well. It is a National competition and if you don’t want to leave your home state no one is forcing you to nominate for the draft.

I think it is totally unfair for example if Collingwood draft DeGoey with a top 5 pick then develop him then he says he wants to leave and he will only go to North Melbourne. Collingwood should be able to get the best desk since they have invested heavily in him.

If we keep allowing this go home rubbish we will have to fold the expansion clubs and Brisbane.

You seem to be confusing or blurring the lines of the difference between not willing to go interstate in the draft and a player deciding to leave a club after his contract has ended.

The National comp needs the draft and any player not wanting to move interstate needs to suck it up. On the flip side, clubs need to realise this is not a dictatorship and people are allowed to choose where they work and live.

An increase from 2-3 years for new draftees has been requested but if you’re suggesting clubs have total power over a player until they reach free agency then it’s only fair for every player to demand a contract from the club until they reach free agency which would send the clubs broke. I’m not sure how you can have it both ways.

If Degoey is not happy at Collingwood, doesn’t like teammates, coaches, staff, location or his salary then he can go where he likes.

The academies have been introduced to counter the go home factor that you talk about but it will take a while for it to pay off.
 
They can match if they can fit him in. If that means they have to move others on then that's what they'd have to do.

Just because a team matches doesn’t mean the player stays. GWS can match which then forces Carlton in to a trade or Shiel in to the draft. They only have to afford him if he decides to stay.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top