Oppo Camp OTHER CLUB Trade and F/A Discussion

[doofdoof]

So Jamarra is waiting until next season to decide what he will do.
Just a tiny sliver of hope.

"WESTERN Bulldogs forward Jamarra Ugle-Hagan will let things unfold into next season as the gun enters the final year of his contract.

Ugle-Hagan, the top pick in the 2020 draft, is contracted at the Bulldogs until the end of 2024 and speculation has already started about his future.

The 21-year-old's manager, Robbie D'Orazio, said they would wait to see how 2024 progressed."

Did the Swans just setup the Dogs by getting them to sign Naughton to a huge deal taking a giant chunk of salary cap?

Was JUH their target all along?

 

[sr36]

What?

No one would move via FA.
So we now end up with clubs trying to low ball to get players out……then the holding club just ups the ante to force a better compo match.

Either way, same situation as now….or do away with FA because no one will move vie that mechanism because the cost to move is too hard (why would anyone move interstate?!?)
Makes it all too hard for the player to move.

So might as well just do away with RFA.

I think they should do away with it. Uncontracted 20 year olds get where they want to go. Contracted 30 year olds get where they want to go. FA just seems to be a mechanism that encourages blokes to jump ship or be pushed by giving freebies at the cost to non-involved clubs.

 

[JuniorB]

Did the Swans just setup the Dogs by getting them to sign Naughton to a huge deal taking a giant chunk of salary cap?

Was JUH their target all along?

If they're after Jamarra, we'll take Logan McDonald off their hands.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

I think they should do away with it. Uncontracted 20 year olds get where they want to go. Contracted 30 year olds get where they want to go. FA just seems to be a mechanism that gives freebies at the cost to non-involved clubs.

AFLPA will never allow that.
I’m sure it’s ingrained the CBA and it’s removal would be challenged with some sort restraint of trade scenario.

For mine, if everyone is worried about the rich getting richer….than cap the amount of FAs a club can persue over a period of time to stop the powerful clubs just landing FA whenever one becomes available.
Wouldn’t work either and would be howled down by the clubs.
Unfortunately, the AFL has to have equalisation in it, cannot afford a club to be bad for a decade. Population and money is not enough given clubs are not privately owned.

 

[Chameleon75]

https://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/afl-trades-live-veteran-jack-gunston-linked-with-hawks-return/news-story/02c8c2c36535b3bde719ae2280fc8894

sometimes in chess you make move to provoke a response from your opponent that creates a weakness you can exploit later.

So it seems that’s the case with the swans offer to naughton, the dogs in throwing a big contract his way will make it harder to match offers for JUH, their intended target. If that’s true as the article says, that’s a pretty smart move.

 

[sr36]

AFLPA will never allow that.
I’m sure it’s ingrained the CBA and it’s removal would be challenged with some sort restraint of trade scenario.

For mine, if everyone is worried about the rich getting richer….than cap the amount of FAs a club can persue over a period of time to stop the powerful clubs just landing FA whenever one becomes available.
Wouldn’t work either and would be howled down by the clubs.
Unfortunately, the AFL has to have equalisation in it, cannot afford a club to be bad for a decade. Population and money is not enough given clubs are not privately owned.

I've got no qualms about the equalisation measure in it. It's a club getting a freebie and then non-involved clubs paying for it by having lesser draft picks that I don't like. If they have to keep it, I'd definitely remove the restricted matching the offer part. There's never actually been a matched player that's been kept. That part just works towards rorting of contracts to avoid a trade, so the acquiring club ensures they get him for free and the losing club gets an extra advantage above the reasonable compo.

 

[Caztheconquerer]

Gee geelong and there supporters are so unbearable and hypocritical. Demand the world for players leaving the club but expect players to come for nothing. Seriously hope port walk rat through the draft

 

[Chameleon75]

Gee geelong and there supporters are so unbearable and hypocritical. Demand the world for players leaving the club but expect players to come for nothing. Seriously hope port walk rat through the draft

only problem is Geelong would pick him before he gets to port out of spite, on the plus side it would be nice to see them burn a 1st round pick just to retain someone already on their list

 

[windchimes]

Gee geelong and there supporters are so unbearable and hypocritical. Demand the world for players leaving the club but expect players to come for nothing. Seriously hope port walk rat through the draft

They know they're in an ominous and funky spot with their list and are highly anxious about it I reckon

 

[Caztheconquerer]

only problem is Geelong would pick him before he gets to port out of spite, on the plus side it would be nice to see them burn a 1st round pick just to retain someone already on their list

No chance cats take in the draft with pick 8 imo

 

[Caztheconquerer]

They know they're in an ominous and funky spot with their list and are highly anxious about it I reckon

Yep I reckon your right

 

[Scodog10]

Nope.
That’s called a trade,

FA is exactly the opposite. To reward a player and give them the opportunity to move clubs….take that away by forcing a trade and it’s not FA.

You’re spot on, but the rules need some tweaking around compensation. The starting point for me is around both the Roos and Saints not even bothering with offers to Gresham and McKay, but still having the right to final dibs. For RFA I think it should work in reverse that the players current club needs to submit an offer to the player and AFL first. The compensation is then dependent on that offer.

For instance the Gresham one has clearly been manipulated to bring about band 2 compensation so that St Kilda can then pass it on to Fremantle for Henry. If St Kilda wanted to play funny buggers and game the system under my model they run the risk of Gresham accepting the offer. In the case of McKay he was never sticking around.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

You’re spot on, but the rules need some tweaking around compensation. The starting point for me is around both the Roos and Saints not even bothering with offers to Gresham and McKay, but still having the right to final dibs. For RFA I think it should work in reverse that the players current club needs to submit an offer to the player and AFL first. The compensation is then dependent on that offer.

For instance the Gresham one has clearly been manipulated to bring about band 2 compensation so that St Kilda can then pass it on to Fremantle for Henry. If St Kilda wanted to play funny buggers and game the system under my model they run the risk of Gresham accepting the offer. In the case of McKay he was never sticking around.

Don’t mind that idea. Hadn’t thought of reversing RFA.
But clubs will game it somehow….if a player is leaving, they’ll just make sure it’s band 1 and away we go! (As you said). So it might stop a few, but won’t stop it all.

I wonder how much this is discussed at top level because it is a hot topic year on year and clearly the AFL have no plans to adjust it.

 

[slugger01]

I think they should do away with it. Uncontracted 20 year olds get where they want to go. Contracted 30 year olds get where they want to go. FA just seems to be a mechanism that encourages blokes to jump ship or be pushed by giving freebies at the cost to non-involved clubs.

But it has to stay, otherwise there will be a potential restraint of trade issue.
And it should help the lower, poorer clubs get better. That’s also a part of equalisation goal.
But, it is not working currently.

To ram home both goals above, why don’t we only give FA compensation picks if the team losing the player is lower on the ladder than the team the player is going to?
If a player from the premiers goes to the wooden spooners, then they get no compensation?

(Haven’t given this much thought, but there probably are some reasons why this won’t work???).

 

[Scodog10]

Don’t mind that idea. Hadn’t thought of reversing RFA.
But clubs will game it somehow….if a player is leaving, they’ll just make sure it’s band 1 and away we go! (As you said). So it might stop a few, but won’t stop it all.

I wonder how much this is discussed at top level because it is a hot topic year on year and clearly the AFL have no plans to adjust it.

Thinking on it further you could also adjust the bands which I think might go some way towards making it super difficult to manipulate:

Band 1: before pick 1 >$5m offer
Band 2: after pick 10 >$4m offer
Band 3: after pick 20 >$3m offer
Band 4: after pick 30 >$2m offer
Band 5: after pick 40 >$1m offer

You would also have to index it alongside the CBA which I don’t think is currently happening.

A practical example of Gresham would be that St Kilda need to offer 4 x $750k or 5 x $600k which I reckon he accepts. In the case of McKay North would need to have offered an extra $1m over the course of the contract to effectively get the same return and I think there’s a reasonable chance he accepts 6 x $850k. It would also address the Buddy anomaly because that one now gets band 1 which is pick 1 unless two megastars leave in the same year (say GAJ left that year then Geelong get pick 1 and Hawthorn pick 2).

Gut feel is your spot on it isn’t discussed anywhere near enough internally given there’s been no public tweaks to it in the 10 years it’s been in effect.

 

[Go Woods]

If they're after Jamarra, we'll take Logan McDonald off their hands.

Hoping GW has JUH at the top of his list for next year.

 

[swoop42]

Geelong currently don't even have a pick listed after 8.

I doubt they would be splitting that for 2 lesser picks in order to then use one on Rat.

They'd be pushing it to get a pick lower than 25 for their future 2nd also.

I hope Port stand firm and call their bluff.

 

[TheVillageIdiot7]

Thinking on it further you could also adjust the bands which I think might go some way towards making it super difficult to manipulate:

Band 1: before pick 1 >$5m offer
Band 2: after pick 10 >$4m offer
Band 3: after pick 20 >$3m offer
Band 4: after pick 30 >$2m offer
Band 5: after pick 40 >$1m offer

You would also have to index it alongside the CBA which I don’t think is currently happening.

A practical example of Gresham would be that St Kilda need to offer 4 x $750k or 5 x $600k which I reckon he accepts. In the case of McKay North would need to have offered an extra $1m over the course of the contract to effectively get the same return and I think there’s a reasonable chance he accepts 6 x $850k. It would also address the Buddy anomaly because that one now gets band 1 which is pick 1 unless two megastars leave in the same year (say GAJ left that year then Geelong get pick 1 and Hawthorn pick 2).

Gut feel is your spot on it isn’t discussed anywhere near enough internally given there’s been no public tweaks to it in the 10 years it’s been in effect.

Would be a good start to at least look at it.
Can’t believe it’s not indexed…always thought that was crazy.
also can’t believe it doesn’t take the length of the contract into consideration….wtf? That’s laughable in terms of being gamed.

Wonder whether North will change their tune on compensation when they become good ….just as dees have.

I just hope we are rubbish when we next lose a FA player….then we can all sing the praises of the current system!

 

[stormskye]

This was posted on the bombers board to show how “good” Gresham was I guess?

I mean.. elite in disposals sure… but there’s one stat at $700k that’s a little underwhelming for a small forward

 

[Mollythedolly]

They have a formula….which no one likes.
So why would this magical formula be any different ?

Seriously….we are a very lucky club in that we don’t lose many FA…daisy our last one 10 years ago?

Imagine losing one every 2 years….see whether you’d be happy with the current format or not…..

Nathan Brown and Alex Fasolo? Was Keeffe a DFA or an UFA?

 

[sr36]

You’re spot on, but the rules need some tweaking around compensation. The starting point for me is around both the Roos and Saints not even bothering with offers to Gresham and McKay, but still having the right to final dibs. For RFA I think it should work in reverse that the players current club needs to submit an offer to the player and AFL first. The compensation is then dependent on that offer.

For instance the Gresham one has clearly been manipulated to bring about band 2 compensation so that St Kilda can then pass it on to Fremantle for Henry. If St Kilda wanted to play funny buggers and game the system under my model they run the risk of Gresham accepting the offer. In the case of McKay he was never sticking around.

Just get rid of the restricted part and take away the right to match. What function does it actually serve?

 

[sam_e]

sometimes in chess you make move to provoke a response from your opponent that creates a weakness you can exploit later.

So it seems that’s the case with the swans offer to naughton, the dogs in throwing a big contract his way will make it harder to match offers for JUH, their intended target. If that’s true as the article says, that’s a pretty smart move.

question: been thinking for a while if you could land Tim English (Bullies), how he'd go as a dedicated KP forward?

for mine, he projects in the Ben /Max King mould with huge reach, marks ball at its highest point, good sticky hands, reasonably reliable kick and decent mobility for a guy standing 208 cms & 103 kegs

26 yo, played 100 games and scored 63.51 goals over last 5 seasons, averages 5 marks p/game.

 

[Pedro]

So Jamarra is waiting until next season to decide what he will do.
Just a tiny sliver of hope.

"WESTERN Bulldogs forward Jamarra Ugle-Hagan will let things unfold into next season as the gun enters the final year of his contract.

Ugle-Hagan, the top pick in the 2020 draft, is contracted at the Bulldogs until the end of 2024 and speculation has already started about his future.

The 21-year-old's manager, Robbie D'Orazio, said they would wait to see how 2024 progressed."

To me that screams of "if you think i'm pretty good now, wait till next year. You'll really have to get the cheque book out" I just think he's backing himself to get a bigger contract, rather than sign prematurely

 

[sr36]

To me that screams of "if you think i'm pretty good now, wait till next year. You'll really have to get the cheque book out" I just think he's backing himself to get a bigger contract, rather than sign prematurely

Yep. He only kicked 35 goals this year. Hasn't earnt a really big deal yet.

 

[Chameleon75]

question: been thinking for a while if you could land Tim English (Bullies), how he'd go as a dedicated KP forward?

for mine, he projects in the Ben /Max King mould with huge reach, marks ball at its highest point, good sticky hands, reasonably reliable kick and decent mobility for a guy standing 208 cms & 103 kegs

26 yo, played 100 games and scored 63.51 goals over last 5 seasons, averages 5 marks p/game.

rucks often look like they could be good forwards but seldom do, and why would you want to take him out of the ruck in the first place.

Best not to go down the Melbourne route of trying to turn rucks into forwards.