Rumour GFC 2024 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists Pt 3

[ShadowCat]

Does Clohesy have to be upgraded, or can he stay a rookie?

As it is, we have 5 senior list spots, and Smith and Martin incoming.

Be more than that wouldn't it?

OUT -

Senior: Foster, Willis, Tuohy, Hawkins, Rohan, Parfitt

Rookie: Jeka, Hardie, O. Murdoch

IN -

B. Smith, J. Martin, ???????

Leaves 4 Senior List spots after Smith and Martin come. Take 3 in the draft, 2 in the rookie draft + the Irish boy who looks likely. Upgrade Ted or Oisin (one of them is already upgraded, just don't know who), and leave one rookie spot open for DFA, SSP or MSD, as per usual

 

[D BRIDGE]

Great post

I expect the next step the AFL goes will be RFA for any player out of contract so they can keep the media circus of will they match, what compo pick will they get and of course so they can continue to give bullshit picks out using the compensation system without looking like they are handing them out like candy.

And maybe eventually in about 15 year players will finally be fully OOC when they are OOC and can just move to whomever they choose without all the bullshit.

That would be terrible for us in this situation with Smith.

RFA's have less power than OOC players and the entire RFA should be scrapped IMO.

The Dog's could match our bid and force a trade if Smith was an RFA (same as GWS with Jez).

Him being OOC gives them the chance of losing him for nothing if they don't trade him... which gives us leveridge.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Does Clohesy have to be upgraded, or can he stay a rookie?

As it is, we have 5 senior list spots, and Smith and Martin incoming.

Believe can stay but if he gets an offer from another club and we only ly offer a rookie spot he becomes a free agent... maybe... I think. No one can give me a straight answer on the last part

 

[CatToTheFuture]

That would be terrible for us in this situation with Smith.

RFA's have less power than OOC players and the entire RFA should be scrapped IMO.

The Dog's could match our bid and force a trade if Smith was an RFA (same as GWS with Jez).

Him being OOC gives them the chance of losing him for nothing if they don't trade him... which gives us leveridge.

I actually think that might be better if Smith was RFA. Dogs might say yes to what I think is pick 12 right now?

 

[D BRIDGE]

Hmm i think Rioli's worth is more like 13 and 23 since he is contracted

Uncontracted 13 would be fine with a 3rd coming back

Tiges will get #6 for him every day of the week.

Been strong on this for a while.

Every possible advantage to capitalise on a trade is in the Tiges favour.

 

[D BRIDGE]

I actually think that might be better if Smith was RFA. Dogs might say yes to what I think is pick 12 right now?

Not confident we are offering up a band 1 contract for him.

But yeah I guess if he was an RFA we could push the contract to make that happen.

I still hate RFA though because so much of it depends on what position the team losing the player finished.

If the club doesn't want to lose the player they can just match and force a stronger trade... when they are OOC they can't play full-on hardball because they risk losing the player for zero.

 

[cats_09]

I can almost bet with 100% certainty that if trade period was reduced to 3-5 days the exact same amount of trades would be done

Exactly

Players & their managers have been speaking with teams all season, list managers will have been in contact for a ages to know each other's expectations etc

They should start the FA period slightly later, so rather than a few days after the GF wait until the Monday the following week. Then have the trade period start that Wednesday or Thursday and then finish the following Tuesday or Wednesday, so that it's all done is about 8 days

 

[cats_09]

Not confident we are offering up a band 1 contract for him.

But yeah I guess if he was an RFA we could push the contract to make that happen.

I still hate RFA though because so much of it depends on what position the team losing the player finished.

If the club doesn't want to lose the player they can just match and force a stronger trade... when they are OOC they can't play full-on hardball because they risk losing the player for zero.

But we might have stumped up a slightly higher initial offer in a RFA situation

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Not confident we are offering up a band 1 contract for him.

But yeah I guess if he was an RFA we could push the contract to make that happen.

I still hate RFA though because so much of it depends on what position the team losing the player finished.

If the club doesn't want to lose the player they can just match and force a stronger trade... when they are OOC they can't play full-on hardball because they risk losing the player for zero.

Yeah, but even if we aren't then they match and we are no worse off

 

[Gunf]

That would be terrible for us in this situation with Smith.

RFA's have less power than OOC players and the entire RFA should be scrapped IMO.

The Dog's could match our bid and force a trade if Smith was an RFA (same as GWS with Jez).

Him being OOC gives them the chance of losing him for nothing if they don't trade him... which gives us leveridge.

Oh i am aware but i think that is the path the AFL would go down if and when it changes

 

[Gunf]

Tiges will get #6 for him every day of the week.

Been strong on this for a while.

Every possible advantage to capitalise on a trade is in the Tiges favour.

And if GCS keep letting teams walk over them they will continue to be laughed at and ripped off... Eventually they need to stop over paying for players and get shit together.

 

[frggr]

More evidence for the "Gary Lyon is an A-grade turnip" case

 

[D BRIDGE]

Yeah, but even if we aren't then they match and we are no worse off

We are way worse off if they match.

 

[Gunf]

We are way worse off if they match.

You are going to have to explain how we are not just worse off but way worse?

ooc we trade
RFA if they match we trade

The only real difference is maybe we offer a little more cash to hopefully not get matched

He would still cost the same trade wise in 99% of cases

 

[Bald]

I actually think that might be better if Smith was RFA. Dogs might say yes to what I think is pick 12 right now?

Yeah him being a free agent would absolutely be the best case scenario for Geelong, and depending on banding, us as well.

There's every chance his deal would only be worth band two compensation (I believe it's not huge money?), so we'd essentially get pick 24ish (where ever the first round ends) and Geelong's first round draft hand would be untouched.

Edit: He wouldn't be in our top quarter of paid players I wouldn't have thought, so he'd be unrestricted.

Edit Edit: Pays to read the whole conversation, if he was a free agent I agree it's likely Cats would probably bump the contract a bit. Which would be best case scenario for all.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

We are way worse off if they match.

How?

 

[iameviljez]

We are way worse off if they match.

How so? that just makes it a regular trading scenario.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Yeah him being a free agent would absolutely be the best case scenario for Geelong, and depending on banding, us as well.

There's every chance his deal would only be worth band two compensation (I believe it's not huge money?), so we'd essentially get pick 24ish (where ever the first round ends) and Geelong's first round draft hand would be untouched.

Edit: He wouldn't be in our top quarter of paid players I wouldn't have thought, so he'd be unrestricted.

Edit Edit: Pays to read the whole conversation, if he was a free agent I agree it's likely Cats would probably bump the contract a bit. Which would be best case scenario for all.

Yeah if you're bringing down the age threshold you probably also need to change the threshold for where a restricted becomes unrestricted too. He might be UFA but feels like he should be RFA.

 

[Tony Barber]

Exactly

Players & their managers have been speaking with teams all season, list managers will have been in contact for a ages to know each other's expectations etc

They should start the FA period slightly later, so rather than a few days after the GF wait until the Monday the following week. Then have the trade period start that Wednesday or Thursday and then finish the following Tuesday or Wednesday, so that it's all done is about 8 days

I really don’t understand this line of thinking. What does it achieve?

If you’re purely looking at it from a spectator’s point of view then maybe just don’t follow the first week at all.

It would be interesting to hear from players who want to move on this subject.

They are the only ones that matter.

What if Geelong get wind of someone from W.A suddenly wanting to move?

You’ve got to fly him over. Meet him. Do a medical. Let him go home and talk to his family, and then start having club conversations.

Sure, that can be done in 8 days.
But what if all of your balls are in the air and you’re looking at 3 going, and 4 coming?

How do you pull that off?
I bet Richmond are going through this right now for example.

 

[catempire]

Trade week* is an entertainment product.




That’s it. That’s the post.

 

[D BRIDGE]

You are going to have to explain how we are not just worse off but way worse?

ooc we trade
RFA if they match we trade

The only real difference is maybe we offer a little more cash to hopefully not get matched

He would still cost the same trade wise in 99% of cases

Ok this is something I'm not 100% on and could change me saying "we'd be way worse off" if a hypothetical RFA bid was matched on Smith.

If Smith (or anyone) was an RFA and a team matches a bid... does that contract automatically green-light or can the player refuse it and put themselves into the draft?

Can anyone clarify this 100%? It obviously has never happened so it doesn't get much of a mention.

 

[Gunf]

Ok this is something I'm not 100% on and could change me saying we'd be way worse off if a hypothetical RFA bid was matched on Smith.

If Smith (or anyone) was an RFA and a team matches a bid... does that contract automatically green-light or can the player refuse it and put themselves into the draft.

No player will ever be forced to sign a contract or it would open restraint of trade can of worms that would bring the whole house of cards down

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Trade week* is an entertainment product.




That’s it. That’s the post.

it would be such a great field for a psychologist to look at basic human emotional drivers. It's 10% hope, 20% reasoning, and 70% fear of loss

 

[petrolium]

Cal just said on Gettable just a couple of mins ago that there is no basis to SDK rumours.

 

[Gunf]

it would be such a great field for a psychologist to look at basic human emotional drivers. It's 10% hope, 20% reasoning, and 70% fear of loss

I think you need fear of loss a little higher but yep

80% fear of loss 15% hope and maybe 5% reasoning ... That last one seems high