Analysis 2018 List Management discussion Pt 2

[DangerousD]

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.

They can also push for our 2nd or third or a pick swap. I am convinced they will force us in to a trade which is why I have no problem trading for him this year.

I also suggested we trade our 2019 first rounder this year for a player or more 2018 picks as GWS won’t match if we don’t have a 1st rounder to trade.

 

[DangerousD]

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.

It means they have more cap space to make sure they re-sign the other two. If they have the big 3 coming ooc next year they won’t be able to deal properly as they won’t know how much room they have.

Trading out 1 this year not only gets them a better pick outcome it gives them clarity in terms of what they can offer the other 2 going in to next season.

 

[DangerousD]

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.

If every player was single and young then I would agree, but for anyone with a wife/partner, kids, elderly/sick parents then there is no way it would work.

I’d like to see a few tweaks to give clubs a little more control

 

[Stamos]

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.

No, they can't say they can match an offer which they can't actually match. It all goes through the AFL. It's not a case of bluffing.

 

[HereComesJuddy]

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 .

Speak to me when you're a certified accountant

 

[SkyhorseTamer]

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.

This is incorrect and not how restricted free agency works. To match you must be able to afford the contract as then there is either a trade or the player stays. It is a pre requisite. You cannot bluff that.

 

[Iamcarlton]

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...

Agree we already have 2 potential superstars on our list Cripps and Curnow think weve done extremely well to tie Charlie up for 5 years .
But Cripps will be in for a big pay rise end of next year .
Dont mind Shiel as he'll be a bit below Cripps price bracket but from there if we want a Kelly or similar it could cause a squeeze imo .
Possibly for similar reasons the tigers went after the likes of Prestia Caddy .

 

[bigdog43]

Why can't Lin Jong get a game in that bulldogs team?

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

Their time is gone.

TBH, I think their time is over. They wont win a premiership now. They need to retool.

Surely after seeing what Richmond and the Dogs have done you can't seriously believe a club with twice as much talent can't turn things around. Two prelims in the last two years and they still have that core and some brilliant young talent coming through.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

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.

You're right about that, but that's why we need to seal the Shiel deal first.

 

[Blue_Fusion]

Surely after seeing what Richmond and the Dogs have done you can't seriously believe a club with twice as much talent can't turn things around. Two prelims in the last two years and they still have that core and some brilliant young talent coming through.

There's something not right between the ears of that playing group.

Also, they have been too injury prone to build any consistency.

 

[Vamos Juddamente]

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.

I undestand your point but my point is the AFL has to be a dictatorship or the expansion teams will not be sustainable. Yes Degoey can be allowed to leave but Collingwood should be able to get the best deal for him. I do not agree that players should have control of where they live and work initially they can make that move when they are a free agent.

This is pretty standard in American sports and they are most like AFL in that they have drafts and equalisation measures. In soccer you once your contract is up you can leave but who wants to watch the Premier League where the richest club wins each year.

The point is unless you keep the competiton equal then the TV rights will drop and all players will be worse off. Is it really a terrible hardship to be asked to live out of your home state until you are a free agent.

 

[ItsAllAboutMe]

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.

Exactly and Leon Cameron would be acutely aware that if he fails next year his coaching career is finished, no way he is going to risk this by trading away key contracted players.

 

[Metalcrusher]

It means they have more cap space to make sure they re-sign the other two. If they have the big 3 coming ooc next year they won’t be able to deal properly as they won’t know how much room they have.

Trading out 1 this year not only gets them a better pick outcome it gives them clarity in terms of what they can offer the other 2 going in to next season.

Toby Green alone is worth big $$$$ They are so going to struggle keeping interstate players at that club when the salary cap bug hits them …. They will find it a hard sell to stay for the "love of the club".....

 

[Accidental genius]

Toby Green alone is worth big $$$$ They are so going to struggle keeping interstate players at that club when the salary cap bug hits them …. They will find it a hard sell to stay for the "love of the club".....

They could stay on less money to bag a flag

 

[Metalcrusher]

They could stay on less money to bag a flag

Sure they could …. that's what FA is all about … lol …..

 

[Blue and Silver]

Do we need pick 1?

Well... no

Would it be nice? Yes

But Pick 1, leaving aside the candidates, means investing in an 18yo when we're already loaded up on talented but inexperienced kids.

That's not a great move, we need experienced mids to push more of our fringe players into, well, the fringes.

Trading pick 1 is not selling out on the rebuild, its going to stage 2.

It gives the players hope that next year will be better, it gives other targets the idea we're going somewhere.

What is pick 1 going to do for us next year?

Basically nothing.

What would Shiel do?

Push us up the ladder.

 

[BrisbaneCFC]

Surely after seeing what Richmond and the Dogs have done you can't seriously believe a club with twice as much talent can't turn things around. Two prelims in the last two years and they still have that core and some brilliant young talent coming through.

I think they have missed their chance this time around even with the talent they have on their list. Something isn't quite right there with this group.

 

[DangerousD]

This is incorrect and not how restricted free agency works. To match you must be able to afford the contract as then there is either a trade or the player stays. It is a pre requisite. You cannot bluff that.

We are going to have to agree to disagree, if a club matches, who’s to say they can’t afford it? The club only has to be able to pay it if the player stays.

 

[HereComesJuddy]

Do we need pick 1?

Well... no

Would it be nice? Yes

But Pick 1, leaving aside the candidates, means investing in an 18yo when we're already loaded up on talented but inexperienced kids.

That's not a great move, we need experienced mids to push more of our fringe players into, well, the fringes.

Trading pick 1 is not selling out on the rebuild, its going to stage 2.

It gives the players hope that next year will be better, it gives other targets the idea we're going somewhere.

What is pick 1 going to do for us next year?

Basically nothing.

What would Shiel do?

Push us up the ladder.

You could also say.
What will Shiel do in 5 years time for us. Nothing
What will pick 1 do in 5 years? Probably be still killing it.
Positives and negatives for and against

 

[RudyBlue]

We are going to have to agree to disagree, if a club matches, who’s to say they can’t afford it? The club only has to be able to pay it if the player stays.

You'd offer money you can't afford and hope they don't call your bluff?

 

[DangerousD]

No, they can't say they can match an offer which they can't actually match. It all goes through the AFL. It's not a case of bluffing.

Going to have to agree to disagree on this one, GWS would obviously tell the AFL they can match and they are under no obligations to prove otherwise. Salary caps are year by year prospect and players can be traded to free up cap space.

If Shiel decided to stay then GWS have to pay him his contract amount then they would find a way by letting some players go, but Shiel won’t stay so they are safe.

Last point on this. The AFL massage and manipulate every situation they can to get the outcome they want. Melbourne getting pick 3 for Frawley, Geelong getting pick 19 or so for Motlop and funny enough it ends up at GC, Dusty getting off for an umpire shove that only weeks before was a suspension.

The AFL will make sure the Suns and the Giants won’t lose any key players for a pittance.

 

[Stamos]

Going to have to agree to disagree on this one, GWS would obviously tell the AFL they can match and they are under no obligations to prove otherwise.

Feel free to disagree with facts, but you are plain wrong

 

[Funk]

Can't we just knock off Bris, StK and GCS in the next few weeks and forget all this pick 1 stuff

Sadly - probably not.

 

[DangerousD]

I undestand your point but my point is the AFL has to be a dictatorship or the expansion teams will not be sustainable. Yes Degoey can be allowed to leave but Collingwood should be able to get the best deal for him. I do not agree that players should have control of where they live and work initially they can make that move when they are a free agent.

This is pretty standard in American sports and they are most like AFL in that they have drafts and equalisation measures. In soccer you once your contract is up you can leave but who wants to watch the Premier League where the richest club wins each year.

The point is unless you keep the competiton equal then the TV rights will drop and all players will be worse off. Is it really a terrible hardship to be asked to live out of your home state until you are a free agent.

Agree with a lot there just not with your solution and I doubt the players would agree, unless they stand to gain a lot from it. The pay in American sports can kind of justify the trading of contracted players but not so much here.

Retention money will rear its head again with the Suns struggling big time and with the Giants salary cap at breaking point.