Rumour GFC 2024 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists Pt 1

[michelzing]

The whole equalisation policy for me is just wildly at odds with reality. The draft as it is is fine and salary caps are crucial, but coaching is a massive leg up for good sides.

The thing that needs change is the soft cap. North has spent it all on Clarko and has no money for the type of people that make a footy system work: development coaches, oppo analysts etc.

The comparison I think of is say you walk into North as the forwards development coach. Every forward on your list bar Shiels, Simpkin, and Zurhaar is going to be on your rotation and you need to go over their footage, assess, provide feedback etc. Shiels is the only player who can be an on field coach.

Now think of a development forwards coach at Geelong. The list of guys you don't need to worry about developing is basically the starting forwards minus Henry. He gets to spend all his time working on Henry, Mannagh, Wiltshire, Neale, Foster etc. He has a list half as long and can spend twice as much resources on the kids.

If you extend to oppo analysis resources, if your team can walk in wins against a big list of teams then the teams you can do the work on is smaller.

Handing out draft picks to struggling clubs is silly. They need extra in soft cap. It is the only way

Thats a really good point

 

[4quarter_cat]

Exceptionally astute from CttF.

Also agree with other point ppl are making that Max being signed makes it easier to retain and attract other talent.

 

[Turbocat]

I have no info on LDU..

But consider this.

GFC has won more games this year than north has in the 23 and 24 combined.

That’s gonna grate on a player.

I’d say he’s gettable

Go Catters

I think players at sides like North reach a point where they have to make a professional decision. It sort of reminds me of Rivers when he came to us. Guys like Lake going to Haw show that making that choice can be rewarding

LDU next year reaches FRA. For him.. North being a cellar dweller will mean that RFA will be UFA. North will not match and risk a P2 or P3.

He might goes elsewhere. It has been reported that the Pies will be going hard at FA next year , after the North experience .. Id think its likely he will want his next destination to be somewhere there is money (obviously) but also big games and finals experiences. Im sure we will ask the question but so will the other big name Melb clubs. Maybe he likes living out of the Melb furnace. Sydney might appeal. We offer something few others can match. Big games and a relaxed environment. We will see.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

But how would that be policed? A good team could fall down the ladder get a soft cap raise which would have to be managed over years as you can’t just take it off them as soon as they rise above the ladder ….you could get a top 8/4 team with a larger soft cap over their rivals

.recipe for disaster

I think you can give them specific boundaries. Go into bottom 4 and they give you enough money outside the soft cap for an extra development coach on a 3 year contract. The money is only taken away at the end of the 3 year contract, at which point you need to churn the assistants, which is probably happening anyway 3 years in.

Maybe 1 extra assistant if you're out of the 8 and 2 if you're bottom 4. On 3 year contracts, 3 years bottom 4 would give you 6 extra assistants at any time.

 

[Strange Cat]

I think you can give them specific boundaries. Go into bottom 4 and they give you enough money outside the soft cap for an extra development coach on a 3 year contract. The money is only taken away at the end of the 3 year contract, at which point you need to churn the assistants, which is probably happening anyway 3 years in.

Maybe 1 extra assistant if you're out of the 8 and 2 if you're bottom 4. On 3 year contracts, 3 years bottom 4 would give you 6 extra assistants at any time.

It’s still unbalanced with a multi year soft cap is still an unfair advantage if the club rises to the top 8 or top 4 .

There’s no easy answer imo but the AFL will step in for Nord just like they did for Melbourne all those years ago

 

[Turbocat]

The whole equalisation policy for me is just wildly at odds with reality. The draft as it is is fine and salary caps are crucial, but coaching is a massive leg up for good sides.

The thing that needs change is the soft cap. North has spent it all on Clarko and has no money for the type of people that make a footy system work: development coaches, oppo analysts etc.

The comparison I think of is say you walk into North as the forwards development coach. Every forward on your list bar Shiels, Simpkin, and Zurhaar is going to be on your rotation and you need to go over their footage, assess, provide feedback etc. Shiels is the only player who can be an on field coach.

Now think of a development forwards coach at Geelong. The list of guys you don't need to worry about developing is basically the starting forwards minus Henry. He gets to spend all his time working on Henry, Mannagh, Wiltshire, Neale, Foster etc. He has a list half as long and can spend twice as much resources on the kids.

If you extend to oppo analysis resources, if your team can walk in wins against a big list of teams then the teams you can do the work on is smaller.

Handing out draft picks to struggling clubs is silly. They need extra in soft cap. It is the only way

You have expanded on what I mentioned. Well done. Extra soft cap for 3 years or 5 years or..even till they start winning ex number of games again.

I don't agree though that the draft is fine. I have a problem with the concept. Its an anachronism but till something better comes along I guesss we are stuck with it in some form. The draft has lost its influence since FA, which means top sides probably gain more from free agents than they do from early picks. Then once kids are out of contract ..trade picks for the ones that look like they will work. I watch the draft a bit ..but the early choice by clubs cant be that bad.the top 20 or so kids are well known.. and no matter who has the picks most would probably call the same names. Its only after a few years in the system that the wheat gets sorted from the chaff. One might ask has Philips helped North? What would he have been like if drafted to Geelong. He might not have played till ready .. and when played would not be asked to do more than he was capable of. Its a bit nutty that Dempsey (A Rookie) can look so much more likely than a number three draft pick.

The truth is unlike some comps around the world , in AFL players are rarely ready to make a difference on drafting. Harley Reid is a rare beast. Hence the idea on a soft cap expansion being more help than giving the yet another kid and let him sink or swim

Even when they get it right, it takes too long to rebuild if you are at the bottom in Norths position. Wardlaw looks a good pick. Chezzel too. Geelong would like to have grabbed one of them. The kids they added las year are highly rated. Just more youth alone takes too long .. and as we are about to see with LDU ... you will leak talent thru lack of success. They can not get access to mature players... in fact they lose them..and in some respects have to lose them to get extra early draft picks.

If the draft is to work going forward..I think we have to balance up the loss of influence the draft has felt. Yes the Father Sons and acdemy kids play a role but the major flaw is limited numbers. One bad choice. One bad year. Even a good choice in an ordinary year means its influence will be minimised. Luck of the year, good choices that just do not work. Mistakes and a poor choice can be lethal and years just go by and the embeds poor performance.

If the draft works ..should winning one game as North have done , should it mean a decade of pain? Maybe Ried is an outlier. One might say they brought it on themselves. Thats true but it still leaves a mess for everyone else that shows that the draft , as it is, is not really is not ultimate equalisation device. It needs to be complimented, so, I totally agree ..development and making the most of the talent you have access to would be beneficial. A 3 year or 5 year expansion of the Soft Cap would help.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

It’s still unbalanced with a multi year soft cap is still an unfair advantage if the club rises to the top 8 or top 4 .

There’s no easy answer imo but the AFL will step in for Nord just like they did for Melbourne all those years ago

I think you just wear it. The marginal value of additional coaches to top teams is lower too.

Pies drop out of the 8 in 2021, say they get 2x assistants for 3 years. This would be the last year of their contracts. Those two would have been assistants during a premiership. End of this year they're looking for jobs and there are 8x job ads at bottom 4 teams that would massively benefit from having them.

 

[Gunf]

The draft is massively flawed but until a new solution comes up all we can do is try to get rid of as many compromises as possible.

The main thins compromising the draft right now are in no particular order

1 Father and Sons
2 Academy's
3 Priority picks/assistance packages
4 Free agency compensation

1 i like it for the romance but it needs to be changed so clubs can't get a Daicos, Ashcroft etc for junk picks but i can understand getting rid of it completely for fairness.
2 Academy's could do the same job they are doing if the AFL took over them and the kids went into the open draft
3 Clubs shouldn't get help for ****ing up ever and that includes Geelong if we are ever that bad
4 first get rid of RFA and make it FREE agency after that it depends on weather we want to have clubs lose players for free or compromise the draft if we keep compensation the formula should be made public.

 

[D BRIDGE]

So where do we find out the actual rules regarding bonuses for 1st rounders these days?

When they changed it so first-rounders would be contracted for 3 years, I knew there had to be some kind of move that could be made with contracts so that gun first-rounders weren't dudded financially, but I just don't recall hearing any specifics.

Now it's starting to come out with Reid bonus talks.

Is this a thing for all first-rounders?

Just haven't been educated on it from what I can remember.

 

[iameviljez]

1 i like it for the romance but it needs to be changed so clubs can't get a Daicos, Ashcroft etc for junk picks but i can understand getting rid of it completely for fairness.

Father-Son is one of the great aspects of the AFL and I would never junk it. It's just wrong for the likes of Ablett, Darcy, West, Daicos etc running round for another club. Yes, Gary, I'm looking at you.

The major issue is that clubs don't have the balls to bid early on F/S and call bluff. Daicos and Ashcroft should have both gone #1. The points system does over-value later picks, too.

FWIW, Tom Hawkins was the reason why bidding was introduced in the first place... remember when we got him for a pick in the 40s? Ha!

 

[Turbocat]

The draft is massively flawed but until a new solution comes up all we can do is try to get rid of as many compromises as possible.

The main thins compromising the draft right now are in no particular order

1 Father and Sons
2 Academy's
3 Priority picks/assistance packages
4 Free agency compensation

1 i like it for the romance but it needs to be changed so clubs can't get a Daicos, Ashcroft etc for junk picks but i can understand getting rid of it completely for fairness.
2 Academy's could do the same job they are doing if the AFL took over them and the kids went into the open draft
3 Clubs shouldn't get help for ******* up ever and that includes Geelong if we are ever that bad
4 first get rid of RFA and make it FREE agency after that it depends on weather we want to have clubs lose players for free or compromise the draft if we keep compensation the formula should be made public.

Those are reasonable observations

I feel a flaw that has always been in the AFL draft , that has only been exemplified since Free agency , is dealing of talent is too widely dispersed and not focused enough on those that need help and identifying correctly who needs the most help.

Is one bad year and poor percentage worse than the ongoing year after year bad years.

Norths last three years compared top West Coast saw them with 18, 20, 20 (58) ... compared to 40, 20, 20 (80). One could make the argument that the draft order should be based on more of an average result ... say wins over the last three years. West Coast actually have a history of dropping hard when they did drop. Its how they got Judd amd now Reid. North miss on the number one pick by percentage yet they have been poor for much longer than WC.

I feel the main issue with the draft is that one player is only equal to 5.5% of the playing team. Compared to something like the NBA where one player is equal to 20% of the playing side.

Bar access to that one player... the bottom team is almost identical to the top team in the draft .... P1 ..P18-P19 ... P36-P37. The doubling up of talent is why tanking was so enticing , and now why bottom clubs are almost encouraged to let Band1 free agents to go. They just do not get a big enough impact from the draft. It takes too long once you balance misses and poor outcomes. Players may spend 5-6 years at losing clubs and in the end want out.. creating a spiral. Id say most of the success allocated to the draft happened when clubs arranged to have multiple early picks as early in the draft as possible over multiple years. Even Geelong back in 99 traded out to get more picks/players

For whats is worth..

id be getting rid of FA compensation that affects the draft. Come up with something else but I cant see a pure FA system being brought in..even though imo, a player out of contract should be a FA.

I think clubs are uneven and are given different complexities to deal with. If the afl are intent on socialisation( That is what the draft and cap is ) then there will always be some clubs more in need of help than others, always be some clubs screaming about their issues. COLA up north.. poor fixturing... one can only imagine what Tas will grumble about.

Elite Father Son / Academy players should not be given any discount. In fact ..I think ist fair to pay a premium for that right. Colloingwood might have grumbled but even at 120%..they still would have been happy to pay that for Dacios.

Players like Ashcroft number 2 this year for Brisbane.. the advantage they have is being able to plan for their arrival. Late Father Sons ..that are fringe..I doubt anyone really cares. If and when we draft our next FS ...( Mooneys boy?)'s son ends up being a Rookie at Geelong I doubt no one will say boo unless he becomes a kid as good as Demp.

 

[cats_09]

So where do we find out the actual rules regarding bonuses for 1st rounders these days?

When they changed it so first-rounders would be contracted for 3 years, I knew there had to be some kind of move that could be made with contracts so that gun first-rounders weren't dudded financially, but I just don't recall hearing any specifics.

Now it's starting to come out with Reid bonus talks.

Is this a thing for all first-rounders?

Just haven't been educated on it from what I can remember.

There's a link within the below article that covers the new 2023 - 2027 Joint CBA

I'm sure you'll find answers in that if you wanted to check it out

CBA

Find out more about The Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) and what this means for players.

www.aflplayers.com.au

 

[Turbocat]

Father-Son is one of the great aspects of the AFL and I would never junk it. It's just wrong for the likes of Ablett, Darcy, West, Daicos etc running round for another club. Yes, Gary, I'm looking at you.

The major issue is that clubs don't have the balls to bid early on F/S and call bluff. Daicos and Ashcroft should have both gone #1. The points system does over-value later picks, too.

FWIW, Tom Hawkins was the reason why bidding was introduced in the first place... remember when we got him for a pick in the 40s? Ha!

Tom Hawkins was probably the only time we obviously won from Father Son..and we won big time. Not only getting him..but keeping our R1 to get Selwood. Both playing 350 games. Both winning multiple flags. These days to take Hawkins , we probably would have traded out of the first round.

 

[iameviljez]

Tom Hawkins was probably the only time we obviously won from Father Son..and we won big time. Not only getting him..but keeping our R1 to get Selwood. Both playing 350 games. Both winning multiple flags. These days to take Hawkins , we probably would have traded out of the first round.

He would have gone top three in an open draft.

The other two major wins (Scarlett, Ablett Jr) weren't obvious as junior stars.

 

[Gunf]

Father-Son is one of the great aspects of the AFL and I would never junk it. It's just wrong for the likes of Ablett, Darcy, West, Daicos etc running round for another club. Yes, Gary, I'm looking at you.

The major issue is that clubs don't have the balls to bid early on F/S and call bluff. Daicos and Ashcroft should have both gone #1. The points system does over-value later picks, too.

FWIW, Tom Hawkins was the reason why bidding was introduced in the first place... remember when we got him for a pick in the 40s? Ha!

Like i said i like F&S but it needs adjusting to either picks after 30 are worth 0 or something similar also no discount

 

[Gunf]

Tom Hawkins was probably the only time we obviously won from Father Son..and we won big time. Not only getting him..but keeping our R1 to get Selwood. Both playing 350 games. Both winning multiple flags. These days to take Hawkins , we probably would have traded out of the first round.

Yes but in the current system we would trade our first for a future first and grab as many 3rd-4th rounders needed to match somehow

We and others shouldn't be able to get a Hawkins, Daicos etc with junk

Make clubs pay for them or if they don't want to or can't due to bad management they go to who ever picks them

 

[iameviljez]

Like i said i like F&S but it needs adjusting to either picks after 30 are worth 0 or something similar also no discount

Eh, I don't think picks after 30 should be worth zero, it's just that the scaling needs to be more aggressive.

 

[Gunf]

Eh, I don't think picks after 30 should be worth zero, it's just that the scaling needs to be more aggressive.

Maybe no 0 but low enough that you can't match a bid inside 10 with them

 

[Vallace96]

Norf supporters are just bitter in general though. They're eerily similar to their Punt Rd counterparts.

Seeing your footy club suck for generations must do something to people. They should do a study on it, because they're just perpetually angry.

North should be grateful they still have a team!

Can’t believe they didn’t move them to Tassie, would have saved so much f’en around.

 

[Turbocat]

He would have gone top three in an open draft.

The other two major wins (Scarlett, Ablett Jr) weren't obvious as junior stars.

Hawk was dominant. Larke medalist. Id say in an open draft he would not have got past Ess ..as they went tall.

Scarlettt was not even the highest rated Father son the year we took him. Woolnough was rated higher.

Ablett Jr...it would have been interesting where he would have gone. 2001 draft was about as good as it gets.

 

[Turbocat]

Yes but in the current system we would trade our first for a future first and grab as many 3rd-4th rounders needed to match somehow

We and others shouldn't be able to get a Hawkins, Daicos etc with junk

Make clubs pay for them or if they don't want to or can't due to bad management they go to who ever picks them

Yes but we still miss out of the Geelong's Capt Blood.

As it was we lucked out that Haw did not call his name.

 

[cats_09]

 

[Turbocat]

Not for us ...but I could see Melb looking at him.

 

[cats_09]

Not for us ...but I could see Melb looking at him.

Agree

It's just nice to not be linked to every available player for once

At this stage, we're also not linked to LDU

 

[Turbocat]

Agree

It's just nice to not be linked to every available player for once

At this stage, we're also not linked to LDU

The FA market is going to go baboon droppings in the next couple of years. I think and hope we will be careful who we go after. You don't get into a gun fight with a butter knife. If they want us , they know Mackies number Id be looking at looking if we could find another Bowes, Bruhn somewhere. The Suns are bound to be under playing someone. They just brought in 4 including a mid Rodgers ..and have another one, Lombard, coming this year. Is Davies worth a look. What about GWS. They probably have some being under played.

The key imo will be to have the age of our list in control by the time Tas starts ripping into the draft.