Free Agency, the salary cap and Chip Frawley

[LeverPuller]

Now, I'm going to start with the obvious.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-03-11/frawley-free-to-move

Frawley is a unrestricted free agent. He's free to move. Frawley is also in his eighth season. Now, most players at this point have been restricted free agents - including Buddy Franklin and Travis Cloke.

Now, why is this?

It appears that due to Melbourne front-loading Frawley's contract that he doesn't fall into the top 25% of players for the 2014 season. Thus, the AFL have ruled him UFA.

But, in a sense, this is punishing Melbourne for being shit. Part of cleaning up the salary cap over the last couple of years for the club has been paying particular players forward in order to make the salary cap minimum. Been happening for a number of years. And almost certainly went up when the new CBA - upping the minimum spend of the cap to 95% of maximum.

My theory is that Melbourne have paid Frawley's contract in advance to make the minimum spend a couple of years ago and now (with free agency introduced later) been burnt by the AFL changing the rules. They paid Frawley forward assuming the 25% rule would apply to the length of the contract only to find out it only applies in a contract year NOW.

There hasn't been a case like this. There's no precedent. But now the Dees don't have a leg to stand on with him later in the year. Much of the strategy would have revolved around force a trade for better than a first-rounder (which he's worth; how often do you get a 25yrold AA full back come onto the market) and go from there. Instead, Melbourne will get yet another draft pick and be told tough shit as they lose their fourth free agent in four years.

 

[radiojake]

Hmmm.. does seem a little rough if that indeed the case -

Who would be the top paid Melbourne players currently?

 

[LeverPuller]

Hmmm.. does seem a little rough if that indeed the case -

Who would be the top paid Melbourne players currently?

Mitch Clark.
Chris Dawes.

That'd be the only two I could name. And to be honest I think they paid Dawes and Clark so much because noone else was earning anything - they had the money to throw at them. You can't imagine any of the legion of relatively recent draftees earning $500k/year.

 

[joop]

Yep, once again the afl are punishing melbourne for being shit

 

[PenAndPaper]

How much help do you guys keep wanting...

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Mitch Clark.
Chris Dawes.

That'd be the only two I could name. And to be honest I think they paid Dawes and Clark so much because noone else was earning anything - they had the money to throw at them. You can't imagine any of the legion of relatively recent draftees earning $500k/year.

Jones would be on a fair bit to being your best player and a leader + has attracted interest from a number of clubs.

 

[daniel_4tw]

Worth more than a first rounder? I honestly think you guys have had way too many first rounders, and now you don't know how valuable they are.

It's a moot point anyway. No one matches the contract (including Saints with Goodard who were in a similar spot), because why would you force someone to stay at your club when they want to leave?

 

[Furn2]

While it is harsh I don't think it will actually make a difference.

I don't see a club ever matching a big RFA offer as teams put culture, salary structures , team harmony and all that ahead of just getting good players.

I also don't see the match and force a trade idea working. The fact is teams offer overs for FAs because they don't have to give up anything else.

The Swans were never giving Buddy 10mil and a 1st rounder and Hannebery, and no one else is giving a 9 year deal to a play that doesn't want to go there. So it will just end up like Tippett and they get there in the psd.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Is FA compo still a thing?

 

[LeverPuller]

How much help do you guys keep wanting...

What, a change in status from UFA to RFA?

Frawley's the only eight-year player I know of who's hit UFA. He's also certainly the highest-profile to do so who I'd consider likely to move after only eight years. Furthermore, his contract was written in 2010, 18 months before the FA rules were announced.

I'm just suggesting that the rule as it should be written should have had it defined as "over the length of the contract" rather than "in the contract year". If Melbourne had known in 2011 or 2012 that this would have occurred in 2014 do you think they would have managed it differently? Of course. I'm not suggesting it's 'help' like 'oh here have a first rounder for being crap'. We're losing an AA fullback. Probably either way. It's just changing how it operates ever so slightly and might get Melbourne, say, a mid-first and a player instead of a high first.

Once again, it's short-sighted implementation from the AFL by 'defining' FA status at the start of the contract year based on contract year status rather than the length of the contract. Frawley would have certainly been in the top 25% for the length of his deal - a four-year deal which he signed at a point of strength as it was his AA year. To count it based off 2014 alone is where my problem lies with it, especially since it messes with the planning clubs may have undergone for years and also can be interfered with by forcing clubs to pay the 95% minimum. The implication is that a club going through a weak phase may be face with a choice of breaching AFL salary cap rules or losing a player because of the free agency rules.

 

[LeverPuller]

Is FA compo still a thing?

Yes, and may it live on. The NFL and MLB run compensation, while the NBA has a culture of sign-and-trade as well as salary cap provisions as compensation. The systems work very well in the NFL and MLB, too.

 

[Quinz]

Melbourne should be able to offer him more than other clubs can.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Melbourne should be able to offer him more than other clubs can.

In pure salary terms sure, but a good, well resourced club is apparently a very big incentive to move.

 

[wowlace]

Bye bye Chip.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I love that the whole premise of this is the belief that given two equal offers, Frawley will not choose the Dees, so the only way they can retain him is to force him by matching a competing offer

How about give the guy a reason to stay, and not putting your hand out yet again Oliver?

 

[Swansujelly]

we should have some space..

 

[LeverPuller]

I love that the whole premise of this is the belief that given two equal offers, Frawley will not choose the Dees, so the only way they can retain him is to force him by matching a competing offer

How about give the guy a reason to stay, and not putting your hand out yet again Oliver?

I count only two FAs who have stayed of what I would dub the 'major' FAs - Cloke and Boak. The rest - Goddard, Dal Santo, Sylvia, Franklin, Rivers, Moloney and Thomas - have walked. It's more common to stay than go. I won't be surprised if he does walk regardless of how the club does. My point is that it's a silly decision to rule based on 2014 salary alone rather than salary across his entire contract.

 

[L_W_P]

Even being front loaded its staggering to think there are 10 players on the list getting paid more than him in 2014.

Believable -
N.Jones
Howe
Dawes
Clark

Maaaybe -
Watts
Grimes
Vince
Trengove
Jamar

Can't imagine ever paying the rest more than Chip right now.

Get the feeling if his manager and the AFL have worked this loophole out then he is probably looking at leaving.

Get the feeling a few contracts are going to be extended and restructured in the next couple of weeks due to this ruling.

 

[Heaps of fun]

It's not going to make much of a difference though is it? Melbourne can still match the offer and Frawley can decide whether to leave or not. If he really wanted to go this year and was an RFA he could have asked for a trade.

 

[Jamurp]

Only way he'll stay with us is if we have a much improved season and show we're going somewhere. Decent pay package + a spot in a top four team would be very tempting for a lot of players. Really hope he stays though, love him.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I count only two FAs who have stayed of what I would dub the 'major' FAs - Cloke and Boak. The rest - Goddard, Dal Santo, Sylvia, Franklin, Rivers, Moloney and Thomas - have walked. It's more common to stay than go. I won't be surprised if he does walk regardless of how the club does. My point is that it's a silly decision to rule based on 2014 salary alone rather than salary across his entire contract.

Seriously? Last year alone had Rutten, Van Berlo, Brown, Fletcher, Corey, Harvey, Petrie, Hayes, Goodes, and Cox, and that's running though the list quickly omitting many names

Most players stay, claiming otherwise is just wrong. Give Frawley a reason to stay, he will. Thinking "how can we force him to stay" is just sad

 

[Monkey King]

I agree it's a flawed interpretation of pay-scale if his contract has been front-loaded. Although how it plays out in reality going on the trends of free agents thus far - I don't think any club has trumped an offer after a player has accepted a rival offer; correct me if I'm wrong. So basically, Chip will see what's on offer and make a call and if history is anything to go by, if it's the Dees he stays, if it's another club he goes ... regardless of being a RFA or not.

 

[Ashton Agar]

Probably would have gone anyway. We are still yet to see one club match an offer so far.

 

[HFF]

Sounds a tad "unfair" but I don't think the Dees are a club that complain about being dealt a "rough deal" by the AFL when you consider everything they have received and gotten away with in recent years.

See the tanking saga where they received a slap on the wrist, despite all that unfolded and the compo received for Tom Scully that was ridiculous that he was classed in the same category as the game's greatest player Gary Ablett. Now, they are being bankrolled by the AFL and despite being "broke" they can 'afford" to make Paul Roos the highest paid coach in the game.

I wouldn't be complaining if I were a Dees fan.

 

[Sylvia Saint]

RFA are a waste of time. Clubs haven't and won't ever 'match' an offer for reasons already outlined in the thread.

I really do hope Frawley stays, and I give him some chance of doing so. But the technicalities of free-agency won't be to blame if he leaves. We'll also get good compensation for a player that has walked.