Atkins out - will explore free agency

[Thetrader15]

I think this was one of the greatest deals Noble has done. Blind Freddie could see they has massive amount more salary cap room than us. Noble stayed on good terms and worked on a deal that got us extra draft picks, and allowed Geelong to still sign Henderson and all their veterans.

It was a great deal...for Geelong

 

[Mego Red]

... for Dangerfield ...
Wasn't Tex filthy? I wasn't happy at the time.

No, the players have all stayed mates with him and were fine.

Tex was dirty at Lever, though.

 

[Mego Red]

Good point, because they just use the average of the salary in the end for the FA compensation.

No they don't. The length of the deal is part of the calculations.

 

[Mego Red]

Yes, I saw that, and replied that it was on good terms "for Dangerfield".
The additional was just opinion, because the poster suggested he left on good terms with the Club, of which Tex is a playing member, of which I am a supporter.
Have you never commented on how you felt about a player leaving, or a game/win/loss or other?
If you can, I can.

You're not part of the club, though. Neither am I. We're fans of the club, but we're external to it.

 

[Crow Envy]

I think this was one of the greatest deals Noble has done. Blind Freddie could see they has massive amount more salary cap room than us. Noble stayed on good terms and worked on a deal that got us extra draft picks, and allowed Geelong to still sign Henderson and all their veterans.

Why was it a good outcome for us to allow Geelong to strengthen their side by signing Henderson and keeping their veterans?

 

[Ozzie]

So we didn’t lose all our negotiating power

What killed us was the AFL coming to Geelong rescue and allowing Them to use a future first in spite of them already having used the maximum number allowed. I think IIRC that allowed them to get Henderson /Tuohy from Carlton.

 

[Mego Red]

It was a great deal...for Geelong

How was it not a better deal for us?

Compo was a first round pick.

Instead we got an earlier first, AND a second, AND a player.

That were the two options, not the fictional multiple firsts that were never available.

 

[Mego Red]

Why was it a good outcome for us to allow Geelong to strengthen their side by signing Henderson and keeping their veterans?

Things CAN be win-win.

We got better than FA compo, they got room to sign others.

That's better than the nuclear option of Geelong signing him for an unmatchable overpay, and us just getting compo.

I wish we'd got multiple firsts as well, but I'm glad we didn't get caught with just compo because we acted like flogs.

 

[Crow Envy]

What killed us was the AFL coming to Geelong rescue and allowing Them to use a future first in spite of them already having used the maximum number allowed. I think IIRC that allowed them to get Henderson /Tuohy from Carlton.

We could have demanded that pick if we didn’t play so nice

 

[Ozzie]

We could have demanded that pick if we didn’t play so nice

I agree with you. P1ssed me right off.

 

[CrowBloke]

You're not part of the club, though. Neither am I. We're fans of the club, but we're external to it.

True, but I can comment. Isn't that what we're doing in here, commenting?
In fact, I asked "Wasn't Tex filthy?" which you answered (thanks ). I didn't say "Tex was filthy" because I don't know what's in his mind.
I did say that I wasn't happy, and am allowed to. I thought ABAB was nit-picking, but it's not worth the time the 3 of us have spent on it, lol.
Wrt to Atkins, he was only good for one thing, as outside receiver with a terrific left foot on the run. Loved some of his running goals and passes 2016-17, but as the mids output fell off, so did he. He was not great at 1%-ers and tackle-averse.
A tackle-free zone, and often caught htb.
Disappeared when we were getting done and underperformed in key games eg 2017GF. I've got nothing personal against Atkins, not even that haircut when he had it *shrug*, but based on what Nicks has said about what he wants from a player, Atkins ain't it. Nicks dropped him, Atkins wants out and the Crows might benefit from it. Win-win-win.

 

[Thetrader15]

How was it not a better deal for us?

Compo was a first round pick.

Instead we got an earlier first, AND a second, AND a player.

That were the two options, not the fictional multiple firsts that were never available.

yes, it was better than compo, but not a great deal for the best player in the comp.

Lever, Teloar, Shiel, Kelly - all these deals were better than we got for the best player in the comp.

 

[ABAB]

No they don't. The length of the deal is part of the calculations.

It wasn't part of that "formula" the AFL released publicly though....only average salary and age are used in the calculation.

 

[King Elvis]

I was talking to someone today heavily involved in the club but not the Football List Management side. They were saying they thought we could get about pick 12 as compensation for Atkins?

I don't believe it but I was trying to work out how that would be possible?

Sounds like someone is only using 10% of their brain

 

[GROTTO]

Why was it a good outcome for us to allow Geelong to strengthen their side by signing Henderson and keeping their veterans?

Exactly.

 

[mistylake]

I think some serious questions need to be asked of list management. Does the blame lie with Reid as List Manager, or is there too much interference from above. We know Roo is chair of the "List Management Committee", is Reid really there as the puppet for Roo, to do the boring stuff, while Roo gets to play "List Manager" for the interesting/important bits?

Either way there significant issues in that department, a relative procession of talented players going out over the past 5 years with very little coming back the other way, whilst long term deals have left us hamstrung on far too many occasions.



His performance against Hawkins will help us no end. Already the Victorian media are talking him up

In all seriousness, similar to Atkins, you wouldn't begrudge him seeking opportunities elsewhere, all going well he's not playing next year as we're getting games into McAsey, Butts and Worrell +/- any other tall defenders we draft.



The only reason you're keeping him is effectively as a playing development coach in the SANFL. We're likely forking out a tonne of cash to him either way, we've just lost a tonne of money from the football department, can we effectively employ him as a "development coach", but funnel it through the playing salary cap? Would also depend on salary caps and list sizes etc for next year, if there's big cuts you don't want to be carrying too many.

Walker's in a similar boat I think. Leadership invaluable, but form and needing to develop Fogarty etc likely means we don't want him playing too many games next year. Are we better off cutting him completely, or keeping him on for leadership/development purposes, but almost exclusively as a SANFL player.

What happened to one year deals only after 30? Reid comes along and were giving 5 year deals to 29 year olds. FfS. No one gets better after 28 ****ing ridiculous.

 

[mistylake]

If anything the 5 years is probably a downside for us. There is usually a trade off between amount per year and total contract length.

Sounds like Rat and GC decided on more job security for him at a lower pay rate.

They know he’ll last a while, skirting all the tough stuff

 

[Redline]

Sounds like someone is only using 10% of their brain

They wouldn't understand the compo system. They would be going on what they were told. I won't hold them to pick 12 exactly as there are probably a few variables but certainly a mid to low first round. Time will tell.

They are good with their information normally though, thats where I got the tip off about Pyke that I posted a few days before it was in the media.

Anyway it's not going to happen so probably shouldn't have posted it

 

[Mego Red]

Exactly.

I'm pretty sure the idea of "win-win" has already been explained in this thread.

 

[ad victoriam]

OK from what I have gathered, Remember the Higest ranked players are based at 100 with lowest at 0,
The length of a contract appart from minium 2 years requirement, it only counts ina tie breaker with the longer term contract placing a player higher
So the Players are ranked on there wage of the new contract average out over the lenght of the contract, Game and additional Payments not included.
As for Age that is important as there are 12 additional points for a player’s age. At 25 (as of October 31), a player receives the maximum of 12 points, a 26-year-old earns another 10 points, 27-year-olds gain another 8, 28 brings 6 and so forth, with a 30-year-old worth just 2 extra points.
That can move a level 4 into level, level 3 into level 2. Over 30 no additional piont for age.

Re Atkins his wage depending on what effect covid along with his 5 years put at the top of 400to 450k my thinking in the group of Band 3-4 area,
But his 10 pionts for his Age put him in the band 2-3 which makes no differance to the Crows, we either get the pick before our 2nd or straight after our 2nd.

 

[Vader]

OK from what I have gathered, Remember the Higest ranked players are based at 100 with lowest at 0,
The length of a contract appart from minium 2 years requirement, it only counts ina tie breaker with the longer term contract placing a player higher
So the Players are ranked on there wage of the new contract average out over the lenght of the contract, Game and additional Payments not included.
As for Age that is important as there are 12 additional points for a player’s age. At 25 (as of October 31), a player receives the maximum of 12 points, a 26-year-old earns another 10 points, 27-year-olds gain another 8, 28 brings 6 and so forth, with a 30-year-old worth just 2 extra points.
That can move a level 4 into level, level 3 into level 2. Over 30 no additional piont for age.

Re Atkins his wage depending on what effect covid along with his 5 years put at the top of 400to 450k my thinking in the group of Band 3-4 area,
But his 10 pionts for his Age put him in the band 2-3 which makes no differance to the Crows, we either get the pick before our 2nd or straight after our 2nd.

While there's no difference between bands 2 & 3 as far as Adelaide is concerned, there is a big difference between bands 3 & 4.

 

[Thetrader15]

OK from what I have gathered, Remember the Higest ranked players are based at 100 with lowest at 0,
The length of a contract appart from minium 2 years requirement, it only counts ina tie breaker with the longer term contract placing a player higher
So the Players are ranked on there wage of the new contract average out over the lenght of the contract, Game and additional Payments not included.
As for Age that is important as there are 12 additional points for a player’s age. At 25 (as of October 31), a player receives the maximum of 12 points, a 26-year-old earns another 10 points, 27-year-olds gain another 8, 28 brings 6 and so forth, with a 30-year-old worth just 2 extra points.
That can move a level 4 into level, level 3 into level 2. Over 30 no additional piont for age.

Re Atkins his wage depending on what effect covid along with his 5 years put at the top of 400to 450k my thinking in the group of Band 3-4 area,
But his 10 pionts for his Age put him in the band 2-3 which makes no differance to the Crows, we either get the pick before our 2nd or straight after our 2nd.

Hey, it even sounds like you know what you are talking about, so I'm convinced we are getting pick 21 for Rat now!

 

[Thetrader15]

While there's no difference between bands 2 & 3 as far as Adelaide is concerned, there is a big difference between bands 3 & 4.

What was reported recently from Chapman re our draft picks this year again?

Was he alluding to this one perhaps rather than Brad Crouch? Something like 5 picks in the top 30?

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

While there's no difference between bands 2 & 3 as far as Adelaide is concerned, there is a big difference between bands 3 & 4.

Yes, if we can somehow get a band 3 for Atkins then it will be an unbelievably good outcome for us. I'm still thinking band 4, but band 3 is a possibility.
If we are offered band 3 for Atkins & band 2 for Brouch, we should keep Brouch as imo getting under but we get a great pick for Atkins. Gather a band 5 for Hartigan is a possibility which would be effectively just after thr end of 2nd round... which would also be a good outcome.

 

[mistylake]

Hey, it even sounds like you know what you are talking about, so I'm convinced we are getting pick 21 for Rat now!

21 for Atkins is start the car territory. He’s the kind of player I don’t want in my team. Everyone needs to be a hard nut in my opinion. That’s pretty good from what Pick 81 or something like that? We’d never get that in a trade.