Chris Judd: It's time the top 4 cannot attract free agents

[Furn2]

Cool can we have Bont and Cripps for buddy now ?

 

[brett_warne]

What I have a problem with is 7 game players telling their clubs where they will go. I have no problem with free agents but 7 game players.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

What I have a problem with is 7 game players telling their clubs where they will go. I have no problem with free agents but 7 game players.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

Who should decide where they go?

 

[brett_warne]

The clubs. If I was running it I would have a roping point. Maybe 6 years, after that go where you want. But under 7 years the clubs decide. I get you all think that they are in a normal workforce but it every position where you are well paid you have a separation clause where you can not go to a competitor for 6 to 12 months.

Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk

 

[davis_756]

I actually think we should go the other way and simplify the system further. If a player is uncontracted, they should be a true free agent, and a trade shouldn't be needed to acquire them. There shouldn't be compensation picks either. If you lose a player, you lose a player. Regroup and use the salary cap space and list spot to get someone else.

If they do this the ladder will never change again.

Player x will sign for hawthorn for 500k a year but if he is going to play for a Brisbane down the bottom of the ladder he wants 700k a year. All of a sudden Hawthorn have 7 players of that level and Brisbane have only 5, creating a never to be closed talent gap between the top and bottom sides.


How are the bottom sides ever going to catch up with 80% of the talent the top teams have and don't bullshit about good list management when we all know premiership success is the only real contract lowering tool available to clubs

 

[Guardian Hawk]

Excellent article.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...d-to-attract-free-agents-20160918-griyvc.html

Key point:

You don't necessarily have to bottom out after a flag. In fact, recent history suggests you're more likely to win another in the following years than you are moving towards the bottom end of the ladder in what used to be a cyclical expectation.


In other words - when the Hawks go to get Mitchell and O'Meara and all the others (whether by free agency or not) they will get them for unders.

The Hawks don't have to give up anything of note to get these players. A draft pick in the 20s and a fringe player is not a sacrifice to them to get top-end talent in their team. Or maybe it will be two draft picks...it won't be a lot.

The Hawks are blessed by a system that supports them to be up the top.

Such an ignorant post! A few facts you may find enlightening:

1. Nearly double (31 vs 17) of free agents have actually moved to clubs lower on the ladder! - that's the vast majority!
2. Of the 16 free agents to have moved to clubs higher on the ladder, they include:

• Jonathon Simpkin who was delisted by his former club
• James Gwilt who was delisted by his former club
• Jeremy Laidler who was delisted by his former club
• Sam Blease who was delisted by his former club
• Tom Derickx who was delisted by his former club
• Colin Sylvia who Melbourne were happy to see go and needed a fresh start.
• Brent Moloney who went from a 16th placed team to a 13th placed team
• Quentin Lynch who was on the scrapheap and moved to a team 1 spot higher on the ladder.
• Troy Chaplin who was on the scrapheap and went to a team 12th on the ladder.
• Matthew Leuenberger who wasn't getting a game and went to a club widely tipped to win the spoon.

3. 6 players (out of 44) have gone from non top 4 to top 4 clubs. They are:

• Colin Sylvia - as above, total spud.
  
• Tom Derickx who was delisted.
  
• Jeremy Laidler who Malthouse didn't want.
  
• James Frawley who Melbourne were happy to let go as the compensation was better than keeping him.
  
• Jared Waite who was always injured and went to North for a retirement package - far from a powerhouse club.
  
• Shaun Higgins - see Jared Waite.

4. Free agency has helped equalise as evidenced by above and the fact compensation bottom clubs receive is significantly better than that of top clubs.
5. Jaeger O'Meara and Tom Mitchell have not been traded yet (Mitchell not even requested a trade) and it remains to be seen what Hawthorn will be giving up anyway.
6. Regardless, neither are free agents and Hawthorn is not in the top 4 anyway.
7. Hawthorn have lost Lance Franklin, Matthew Suckling, Xavier Ellis, Tom Murphy and Clinton Young to free agency and been compensated with picks 19 and 40 total for all 5 players. We have picked up Frawley the other way and Melbourne were compensated with pick 3 - apparently worth more than Franklin et. al combined. Yet, you choose to use Hawthorn as your example of benefitting from free agency??

It's a nice strawman you (and Juddy) have made but the facts demonstrate you don't know what you are talking about. I think its time I bump my "Free agency myth" thread.

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

Such an ignorant post! A few facts you may find enlightening:

1. Nearly double (28 vs 16) of free agents have actually moved to clubs lower on the ladder! - that's the vast majority!
2. Of the 16 free agents to have moved to clubs higher on the ladder, they include:

• Jonathon Simpkin who was delisted by his former club
• James Gwilt who was delisted by his former club
• Jeremy Laidler who was delisted by his former club
• Sam Blease who was delisted by his former club
• Tom Derickx who was delisted by his former club
• Colin Sylvia who Melbourne were happy to see go and needed a fresh start.
• Brent Moloney who went from a 16th placed team to a 13th placed team
• Quentin Lynch who was on the scrapheap and moved to a team 1 spot higher on the ladder.
• Troy Chaplin who was on the scrapheap and went to a team 12th on the ladder.
• Matthew Leuenberger who wasn't getting a game and went to a club widely tipped to win the spoon.

2. Free agency has helped equalise as evidenced by above and the fact compensation bottom clubs receive is significantly better than that of top clubs.
3. Jaeger O'Meara and Tom Mitchell have not been traded yet (Mitchell not even requested a trade) and it remains to be seen what Hawthorn will be giving up anyway.
4. Regardless, neither are free agents and Hawthorn is not in the top 4 anyway.
5. Hawthorn have lost Lance Franklin, Matthew Suckling, Xavier Ellis, Tom Murphy and Clinton Young to free agency and been compensated with picks 19 and 40 total for all 5 players. We have picked up Frawley the other way and Melbourne were compensated with pick 3 - apparently worth more than Franklin et. al combined. Yet, you choose to use Hawthorn as your example of benefitting from free agency??

It's a nice strawman you (and Juddy) have made but the facts demonstrate you don't know what you are talking about. I think its time I bump my "Free agency myth" thread.

as much as i love juddy he's totally off the mark here. it's amazing how people think this o'meara proposed trade is the norm when there's so much evidence to the contrary that not even OJs lawyers could make a compelling argument against it, much less the bf community

 

[Furn2]

For Henderson - we got pick 17 that was traded to GWS and gave us more fringe players.

We are in a merry-go-round of getting fringe players as we are a weak club.

Pick 17 does not equate to the value of Lachie Henderson.

People continually seem to go back to the draft and think that is "market" value. but the point is the beggars can't be choosers. We get what we are given.

The draft is a system that breeds inequity, time to look at getting rid of the draft or greatly modify it.

You guys need some Tony Robbins tapes or something.

 

[r_boy]

I like the idea but I think it should be decreased to just the premiership team. I'm not sure anyone can disagree with that.

 

[MotleyLemon]

I like the idea but I think it should be decreased to just the premiership team. I'm not sure anyone can disagree with that.

I can.

You can't ban one team.

 

[romeohwho]

Such an ignorant post! A few facts you may find enlightening:

1. Nearly double (31 vs 17) of free agents have actually moved to clubs lower on the ladder! - that's the vast majority!
2. Of the 16 free agents to have moved to clubs higher on the ladder, they include:

• Jonathon Simpkin who was delisted by his former club
• James Gwilt who was delisted by his former club
• Jeremy Laidler who was delisted by his former club
• Sam Blease who was delisted by his former club
• Tom Derickx who was delisted by his former club
• Colin Sylvia who Melbourne were happy to see go and needed a fresh start.
• Brent Moloney who went from a 16th placed team to a 13th placed team
• Quentin Lynch who was on the scrapheap and moved to a team 1 spot higher on the ladder.
• Troy Chaplin who was on the scrapheap and went to a team 12th on the ladder.
• Matthew Leuenberger who wasn't getting a game and went to a club widely tipped to win the spoon.

3. 6 players (out of 44) have gone from non top 4 to top 4 clubs. They are:

• Colin Sylvia - as above, total spud.
  
• Tom Derickx who was delisted.
  
• Jeremy Laidler who Malthouse didn't want.
  
• James Frawley who Melbourne were happy to let go as the compensation was better than keeping him.
  
• Jared Waite who was always injured and went to North for a retirement package - far from a powerhouse club.
  
• Shaun Higgins - see Jared Waite.

4. Free agency has helped equalise as evidenced by above and the fact compensation bottom clubs receive is significantly better than that of top clubs.
5. Jaeger O'Meara and Tom Mitchell have not been traded yet (Mitchell not even requested a trade) and it remains to be seen what Hawthorn will be giving up anyway.
6. Regardless, neither are free agents and Hawthorn is not in the top 4 anyway.
7. Hawthorn have lost Lance Franklin, Matthew Suckling, Xavier Ellis, Tom Murphy and Clinton Young to free agency and been compensated with picks 19 and 40 total for all 5 players. We have picked up Frawley the other way and Melbourne were compensated with pick 3 - apparently worth more than Franklin et. al combined. Yet, you choose to use Hawthorn as your example of benefitting from free agency??

It's a nice strawman you (and Juddy) have made but the facts demonstrate you don't know what you are talking about. I think its time I bump my "Free agency myth" thread.

Thanks, some good info. How many good players have moved to lower clubs though? Most of the middling type players don't make a significant impact in their departure and at their new club do they? Whereas the good players, like Dangerfield make a big difference and that is where the impact is most felt.( or lost at a weak club)

 

[2006_Eagles]

Who should decide where they go?

Make it minimum 3 years with the club that drafts

 

[NathanMX]

No trade bans, just slap a tax on higher ranked teams who attract free agents.

eg

Top 6 +10% loading
7-12 +5%
Bottom 6 +0%

Top teams will soon see they cannot have everyone when they have the pay the excess.

 

[Guardian Hawk]

Thanks, some good info. How many good players have moved to lower clubs though? Most of the middling type players don't make a significant impact in their departure and at their new club do they? Whereas the good players, like Dangerfield make a big difference and that is where the impact is most felt.( or lost at a weak club)

Obviously depends how you define good (there would only be a couple of players in the entire league capable of transforming a club single-handedly, if any - look at Ablett). Aside from Dangerfield (who was traded for in the end), Franklin is the only 'superstar' that left due to free agency and he left the reigning premiers for girlfriend, mega-contract, etc. Even Dangerfield left a top 6 side that had won a final and went to a side that finished 10th (to go home).

Not enough sample size basically but certainly no trend of superstar players leaving bottom clubs to go to top clubs as everyone seems to suggest.

 

[kaiserchief13]

I actually think we should go the other way and simplify the system further. If a player is uncontracted, they should be a true free agent, and a trade shouldn't be needed to acquire them. There shouldn't be compensation picks either. If you lose a player, you lose a player. Regroup and use the salary cap space and list spot to get someone else.

100% agree. If a club loses an excellent player and can't replace them with another excellent player or players then that's because the club is run poorly. There are free agents every year to sign. Like you said use the salary cap space to get a replacement.

 

[kaiserchief13]

If they do this the ladder will never change again.

Player x will sign for hawthorn for 500k a year but if he is going to play for a Brisbane down the bottom of the ladder he wants 700k a year. All of a sudden Hawthorn have 7 players of that level and Brisbane have only 5, creating a never to be closed talent gap between the top and bottom sides.


How are the bottom sides ever going to catch up with 80% of the talent the top teams have and don't bullshit about good list management when we all know premiership success is the only real contract lowering tool available to clubs

If players are willing to play for less at one team that's because that team meets other criteria other than money for them. Instead of blaming the system how about have the clubs take some responsibility and fix up their shit, be it facilities, coaches etc

 

[mehow2g]

The way I see it is that AFL wants certain clubs the big clubs who earn a lot of to always be in the mix and at least make finals, I don't know exactly to what extent but such systems can help that happen.

The draw, umpiring and maybe now free agency.

Jager omera "choosing" hawthorn is uncanny timing sure it may be legit but pretty amazing as he's from WA.

However great timing for the aging hawks list.

 

[coerced]

Such an ignorant post! A few facts you may find enlightening:

1. Nearly double (31 vs 17) of free agents have actually moved to clubs lower on the ladder! - that's the vast majority!
2. Of the 16 free agents to have moved to clubs higher on the ladder, they include:

• Jonathon Simpkin who was delisted by his former club
• James Gwilt who was delisted by his former club
• Jeremy Laidler who was delisted by his former club
• Sam Blease who was delisted by his former club
• Tom Derickx who was delisted by his former club
• Colin Sylvia who Melbourne were happy to see go and needed a fresh start.
• Brent Moloney who went from a 16th placed team to a 13th placed team
• Quentin Lynch who was on the scrapheap and moved to a team 1 spot higher on the ladder.
• Troy Chaplin who was on the scrapheap and went to a team 12th on the ladder.
• Matthew Leuenberger who wasn't getting a game and went to a club widely tipped to win the spoon.

3. 6 players (out of 44) have gone from non top 4 to top 4 clubs. They are:

• Colin Sylvia - as above, total spud.
  
• Tom Derickx who was delisted.
  
• Jeremy Laidler who Malthouse didn't want.
  
• James Frawley who Melbourne were happy to let go as the compensation was better than keeping him.
  
• Jared Waite who was always injured and went to North for a retirement package - far from a powerhouse club.
  
• Shaun Higgins - see Jared Waite.

4. Free agency has helped equalise as evidenced by above and the fact compensation bottom clubs receive is significantly better than that of top clubs.
5. Jaeger O'Meara and Tom Mitchell have not been traded yet (Mitchell not even requested a trade) and it remains to be seen what Hawthorn will be giving up anyway.
6. Regardless, neither are free agents and Hawthorn is not in the top 4 anyway.
7. Hawthorn have lost Lance Franklin, Matthew Suckling, Xavier Ellis, Tom Murphy and Clinton Young to free agency and been compensated with picks 19 and 40 total for all 5 players. We have picked up Frawley the other way and Melbourne were compensated with pick 3 - apparently worth more than Franklin et. al combined. Yet, you choose to use Hawthorn as your example of benefitting from free agency??

It's a nice strawman you (and Juddy) have made but the facts demonstrate you don't know what you are talking about. I think its time I bump my "Free agency myth" thread.

Great post.

I think what's unsaid about free agency is that it tends to make those who aren't yet free agents 'defacto' free agents. That is, with the market flooded with players who are free agents, the value of trading diminishes, meaning that those who aren't yet free agents can choose where they go, and the club that they are originally from have less bargaining power. For arguments sake, if Fyfe is on the market for free this year, then O'Meara becomes less valuable.

Free agency has undermined trading where picks have high currency and that has possibly benefitted the top clubs who have fewer valuable picks.

 

[BlakeyNoFlakey]

I haven't read the thread in its entirety but if people are whinging about Geelong getting Paddy, Henderson, Scooter, and Smith as an example of how FA's move to top teams, we finished tenth on the ladder last year when we recruited them, so they actually came to a club outside the 8.

I don't think FA is the problem with equalisation, it's the ridiculous draft system that's meant to be fair but isn't really. The draft was a great idea, but as long as the AFL keep tinkering with it, the system will always be flawed.

 

[Freomaniac]

Why are you handicapping strong clubs? Should we just pass the premiership cup club by club each year?

yep basically

 

[Freomaniac]

The free agency rules are half cocked...

Bring it down to 6 years. See what a 24/25 year old would do after 6 years.....Stay at the current club or go to another club on good money.

A team can only be crap for so long. Surely going from bottom 4 to finals in a space of 5-6 years is achievable

 

[Tristan34]

Well if they did that then technically it isnt free agency...

 

[Glorin]

I haven't read the thread in its entirety but if people are whinging about Geelong getting Paddy, Henderson, Scooter, and Smith as an example of how FA's move to top teams, we finished tenth on the ladder last year when we recruited them, so they actually came to a club outside the 8. The only FA at Geelong I can think of as a player coming to us when we were in the top 6 of the ladder is probably Caddy, and that's all.

I don't think FA is the problem with equalisation, it's the ridiculous draft system that's meant to be fair but isn't really. The draft was a great idea, but as long as the AFL keep tinkering with it, the system will always be flawed.

Caddy wasnt a free agent. You would have traded for him

 

[Messenger]

The fact that every single Hawks supporter argues that there is no problem, pretty much tells you how much of a problem there is.


There is also a fair problem with 'forced trades'. Players who could leave with free agency, so the club they are leaving does any trade they can.

THEN there is the problem of contracted players wanting out. OMeara types. Really we want types like that going to clubs that are struggling. I'd suggest taking away the ridiculous minimum cap payments would help.

I agree. We have too many clubs that are so poorly run they can't keep players they've had for years and a rash of players who like money. When will the AFL act?

 

[Tulip]

Agree with Judd. Top four by ladder finish, and top four by finals finish should all be excluded.