Rumour 2024 Hypothetical trade and FA Thread

[Strapping Young Lad]

2024 Picks



2025 Picks

 

[Luke_Hodgey_15]

What are peoples view of the pursuit of Perryman? Very very solid player with a great footy IQ but lacks pace and doesn't have a real position - where we he slot in and who would he replace - not to mention 800k is a lot of coin!
We dodged a bullet last year with Ratugolea and this feels like it could be something similar.

FWIW - would be happy to give up our 1st rounder for bailey Smith - absolute jet at his best and a genuine point of difference in our midfield.

Bro, there's 50 pages worth of peoples views, how much more do we need?

 

[smeltitdeltit]

Our on field performance, particularly our midfield unit, hasn’t remotely changed in those 6 months either hey.

And smith hasn’t done a serious injury that could affect his main attribute either.

 

[TylerDurden]

 

[Manila_Hawk]

And smith hasn’t done a serious injury that could affect his main attribute either.

His hair ?

 

[Hodginator]

Our on field performance, particularly our midfield unit, hasn’t remotely changed in those 6 months either hey.

No doubt

But Smith has clearly slowly become a worse player in here since the Geelong talk ramped up.

Will just be funny watching a lot of people jump back on his wagon if we end up landing him.

Reminds me a bit of the Mckay talk last year. The more he was linked to Essendon, the worst his stats suddenly became vs when there was a lot of talk to him coming to us.

 

[Hodginator]

We finished bottom four last year and someone like Smith would have drastically improved our midfield, in the time since, our midfield has improved perhaps more than a lot of people could have guessed. I would consider this a major factor as to why people here don’t really see the need to pay a seemingly hefty price for a good to very good midfielder that is coming off an ACL and a good reason as to why they may now prefer someone like Geelong to cough up instead.

I like Smith and would love him at the Hawks but maybe our collateral is better spent on an extremely good midfielder to help ice the cake or even on a different position, whatever that may be.

Definitely our collateral may be better spent elsewhere. You back the club in to make the right call.

Wasn’t really my point though.

 

[KermitJagger]

Compo has to go. Battle isn't worth a pick that early to anyone.

 

[I got the outside word]

Definitely our collateral may be better spent elsewhere. You back the club in to make the right call.

Wasn’t really my point though.

Your point was that people have turned since Geelong was mentioned as his likely destination, I don’t think that’s the case. Since his name was brought up posts have been concerned with his form prior to his ACL and the fact that he has done an ACL. I just think you have nit-picked a few recent posts and run with it. That’s not to say that a couple of posters aren’t bitter at the news but the same concerns have been consistent throughout.

 

[Noel Gallagher]

Compo has to go. Battle isn't worth a pick that early to anyone.

It is such as a farce. We desperately tried to keep Franklin but received pick 18 in return. North literally pushed McKay out the door to receive pick 3 as did Melbourne with Frawley. This is an easy fix - if a club blatantly pushes a player out via a poor contract / played in non prefered positions in order to get a premium pick - no compo. If a club does everything in its power to retain player but player still leaves (i.e Franklin) different story

 

[A1fromDay1]

It is such as a farce. We desperately tried to keep Franklin but received pick 18 in return. North literally pushed McKay out the door to receive pick 3 as did Melbourne with Frawley. This is an easy fix - if a club blatantly pushes a player out via a poor contract / played in non prefered positions in order to get a premium pick - no compo. If a club does everything in its power to retain player but player still leaves (i.e Franklin) different story

It's a simple fix, scrap the compo picks in round 1, band 1 should be end of first round.

Noone would care if Battle or Mckay saw the clubs compensated with pick 19.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

No doubt

But Smith has clearly slowly become a worse player in here since the Geelong talk ramped up.

Will just be funny watching a lot of people jump back on his wagon if we end up landing him.

Reminds me a bit of the Mckay talk last year. The more he was linked to Essendon, the worst his stats suddenly became vs when there was a lot of talk to him coming to us.

I disagree - I think people have remained fairly firm in their views of Smith as a player. Even last trade period when it was mooted we were into him there have been those who are keen to get him who remain so, there are some who think he is a butcher who weren't keen on the assets required to get him and there have been those (like me) who have been on the fence. in the last few weeks people are still posting here that we desperately need him, others just disagree. In my postings on him lately I have been saying I am not concerned about losing him not because he is a crap player - I just think we can find other players who fill bigger needs at present and we have the assets (salary cap and trade) to get it done, so if he doesn't want to come then I am excited about who else we might be targeting.

I think your overall point is a tad hyperbolic.

 

[Ned Ryerson]

It's a simple fix, scrap the compo picks in round 1, band 1 should be end of first round.

Noone would care if Battle or Mckay saw the clubs compensated with pick 19.

I agree there should be no compensation, but this is a good idea to fix it. Compensation picks can't dilute the first round of the draft and can't be allocated within say the first 25 picks of the draft.

 

[Nugett]

Compo has to go. Battle isn't worth a pick that early to anyone.

Neither was Frawley, or McKay. I would even argue that Daisy Thomas wasn’t worth pick 11 either.
The reward for losing players is that they free up cap space.

 

[butlers hawks]

 

[Rich]

If wages are going up 30%, shouldn’t the threshold for band 1?

Farcical.

 

[Brant]

View attachment 2038054

hahaha classic.

OK, now do Damien Barrett.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

It's a simple fix, scrap the compo picks in round 1, band 1 should be end of first round.

Noone would care if Battle or Mckay saw the clubs compensated with pick 19.

Agree, but if they MUST include compo, base it on the current clubs offer to stay.

 

[bindas12]

Can't be waiting till October. We really need a mid-year trading period!

 

[The Golden Glenferrie]

Can't be waiting till October. We really need a mid-year trading period!

AFL would royally **** that up

 

[Ned Ryerson]

Can't be waiting till October. We really need a mid-year trading period!

I hate the concept of a player starting the season at one team in the league and then ending up at another - seems cheap to me. I know most other leagues do it but I like that if you have a player at the start of the year they're yours the whole way through.

 

[butlers hawks]

Agree, but if they MUST include compo, base it on the current clubs offer to stay.

There are lessons to be learned from the NFL and how they do it for mine. Especially on the Restricted Free Agents.

Depending on years in the system and pay scale they have various options

Firstly they can Franchise Tag an Unrestricted Free Agent, this means that that player gets a further one year deal at the team but they are paid the average wage of the top 5 players at that position. Depending on the type of Franchise tag that player can or cannot negotiate with other teams it is simply used to give the team more time to attempt to find a long term deal with the player or trade them (their trade period is much different to ours it runs for a good chunk of the season and off season). Normally they do non-exclusive franchise tags which are cheaper for the tagging team (average of top 5 at the position over last 5 years) where a player can go out and talk to other teams and if a team offers a deal that the player likes the original team has a right to match or not (similar to our RFA). If the tagging team dont match it then the team that has offered the deal gives the initial team two first round picks of their own. This is why it doesnt happen much, generally if a player signs the tag they play out the year and become a free agent again.

They also have something that isnt used much which is called the Transition Tag. This is similar to the Franchise Tag except it is the average of the top 10 players over 5 years. The difference with this one is the same as our Restricted Free Agency. If you decide to match an offer from another team that player stays on that contract. If not he goes to that team and the players original team doesnt get compensation.

So in these two situations the original team needs to pay the player more to get the chance at landing picks.

Their other part is more interesting though. They can add a specific tender to a player. These are decided on by the original team and link directly to the salary that player will get.

They do First Round, Second Round and Original Round/Right of First Refusal Tenders. So if they put a first round tender on a player and an offer sheet isnt matched by the team then the offering team gives the original team a first rounder for that player, same with second round tender and then if they dont match an original round tender then the team gets a pick from the round in which they took the player at the draft.

Their tenders cost differently for the teams on the cap sheet for complete example due to the different salary cap structure

First round: $6.8m
Second round: $4.9m
Original round: $3.1m
First refusal: $3m

Dont think we ever get to the point where teams have to give up their picks for Free Agents but their system is so easy to understand that when a player signs everyone knows what they are getting.

They also get their picks in the following draft not the one in the Free Agent cycle

 

[cryptor]

I hate the concept of a player starting the season at one team in the league and then ending up at another - seems cheap to me. I know most other leagues do it but I like that if you have a player at the start of the year they're yours the whole way through.

Agree. List management is part of the strategy of the season. You build a balanced list with depth and then you see how it goes over a long campaign. If you get a few more injuries than expected there is the MSD to let you patch holes.

If they bring in a mid season trade period then they should probably look at limits on who is eligible to be traded. I'd suggest a limit on number of games played during that season. Ideally 0 games.

 

[Blackhawk42]

Can't be waiting till October. We really need a mid-year trading period!

Thankfully, it looks as though the idea has been squashed!

It appeared to be a fait acompli, but the non-Victorian sides raised a great point about why it would be unfair and unequal.

How many players would be willing to relocate interstate mid-season when they are already on an AFL list receiving an AFL wage?
You'd get a lot of movement between Victorian clubs where the player doesn't need uproot their lives to continue their season.

I'm personally against it, so this was music to my ears.

 

[Crankyhawk]

It is such as a farce. We desperately tried to keep Franklin but received pick 18 in return. North literally pushed McKay out the door to receive pick 3 as did Melbourne with Frawley. This is an easy fix - if a club blatantly pushes a player out via a poor contract / played in non prefered positions in order to get a premium pick - no compo. If a club does everything in its power to retain player but player still leaves (i.e Franklin) different story

Compo should be tied to the existing clubs offered contract (as a marker of how much the club losing the player valued them). During the process where the player is “deciding “ both contracts would be held by afl and then whichever club is chosen that contract and terms are then fixed

 

[bindas12]

Thankfully, it looks as though the idea has been squashed!

It appeared to be a fait acompli, but the non-Victorian sides raised a great point about why it would be unfair and unequal.

How many players would be willing to relocate interstate mid-season when they are already on an AFL list receiving an AFL wage?
You'd get a lot of movement between Victorian clubs where the player doesn't need uproot their lives to continue their season.

I'm personally against it, so this was music to my ears.

The amount of media content and TV audience it will add makes it a no brainer for AFL I would have thought. They are driven by commercial targets so it helps them extend the season and earnings. We are months away from the trade period and on page 227 of this thread already, So there's definitely enough demand there. I would say therefore, its definitely going to come in!