List Mgmt. Trade/Draft/Targets Part II

[Stars align]

They mentioned on trading day and was by far the most interesting part of the show and perhaps the week is that the 2020 draft will be severely compromised due to 17 of the top 45 picks either being father/son or academy players. So by they're reckoning a lot of picks are going to be pushed well back once bidding and matching takes place
Not sure how it affects us next year but the feeling was that clubs want picks from this year as where those picks land next year is anybody's guess

 

[Charlie Pannam]

Cap space is just if not more important for us than picks.
The average AFL wage is up around 370k (inflated by top end talent).

Our situation is that we’ve shored up all our A & B grade talent and to afford this we need to lose some mid priced players. Replace these guys with players coming in on base wages and we continue to turn our list over and stay under the cap

 

[Muddiemoose]

I don’t know why people keep saying our cap is tight, it’s NOT.
Ellis 500k
Grigg 350-400k
Butler 150-200k
Menadue 150k

We’re clearing more than a million dollars a year out of our cap this year.

Just bc we may choose not to replace it with an incoming player immediately doesn’t mean our cap is tight

The way we have front/ back loaded some players contracts may come into account as well

Potentially next year might be a heavy year with some of those contracts dusty may be getting say 1.5 next year so other years in his contract isn’t as much as a toll

The same could be said for lynch and any others who those longer term contracts who we may be paying large portions of

Prestia comes out of contract the year after next so being his last year on his current contract when we signed him we may have heavily back loaded it so this year he’s taking home more coin compared to others

And like others have mentioned we had a pretty big year last year with re signing some younger talent that would of eaten away some of that cash

 

[Charlie Pannam]

Read somewhere that Lynch will be earning 1.5 million in the last year of his 7 year contract

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

Why? We draft well these days.
Gives up cap space for us to keep the next gen of best 22 ala Stack, Ross, Pickett, Balta. We re-signed Bolton as well.
We clearly keep who we want and get who we target.
Trades arnt meant to fu** teams over. You never know when you’ll need to deal with that team again.

Yeah Carlscum...

 

[Sol23]

Hear we are looking at drafting relton again, he’s off the burgers and would thrive under our new culture.

 

[Roksman]

They mentioned on trading day and was by far the most interesting part of the show and perhaps the week is that the 2020 draft will be severely compromised due to 17 of the top 45 picks either being father/son or academy players. So by they're reckoning a lot of picks are going to be pushed well back once bidding and matching takes place
Not sure how it affects us next year but the feeling was that clubs want picks from this year as where those picks land next year is anybody's guess

Yep that's true, it's a very compromised draft but those simpletons don't understand that there's still value in those picks.

Those clubs with the academy players still need picks to have the adequate points. So it would be smart to keep valuable picks because you can always trade them to these clubs for future (2021) picks where the Draft won't be compromised.

These journos don't realise that list managers are always planning 3 years ahead.

 

[HeadandShin]

Hang on. First you said the bid came “very late”. Now you’re saying it was “where he was rated”. Which is it?

I would personally tread carefully around bidding on academy and father sons. Certain clubs (including Richmond) haven’t done so in the past and I think there’s potential to create bad blood between clubs.

Bidding on a player who most likely won’t end up at your club is essentially just forcing another club’s hand. You can be “that club”, but I think it will come back to bite you on the arse eventually.

Most academy/father sons have been sliding lately, so I think clubs share my sentiment.

If I recall correctly Naish was expected to go in the 20s, 30 at the latest. There was even media speculation that he might go first round. That’s partly why we traded 15 into 20 and 25 as insurance. Turns out no one bid on him until 34. And st Kilda whilst making the bid did us little harm. I remember someone saying at the time that the St Kilda bid was like saying “enough now”. Before that draft if someone offered us the first Naish bid at 34 you would have bitten their hand off. We essentially got 4 top 25 players in 2017.

 

[richard parker]

If we support our players even on the way out the door then we become a more attractive destination for free agents and other players down the track. Draft is a bit of a lottery anyway and we have a pretty decent recruiting team now so I’m just going to keep backing them in.

 

[Phar Ace]

Why? We draft well these days.
Gives up cap space for us to keep the next gen of best 22 ala Stack, Ross, Pickett, Balta. We re-signed Bolton as well.
We clearly keep who we want and get who we target.
Trades arnt meant to fu** teams over. You never know when you’ll need to deal with that team again.

Agree 100%. This is part of the Richmond Man principle. Respect runs both ways. Leave with respect to the Club and we make sure they can find their way somewhere when we can't find space for them anymore. Everyone is valued at, or after the their time at the Club. The bi-product is we are approachable, we have a jar full of good deeds to call upon - it's not why it's done, it's simply what accrues when you do.

 

[GoTigers2015]

If I recall correctly Naish was expected to go in the 20s, 30 at the latest. There was even media speculation that he might go first round. That’s partly why we traded 15 into 20 and 25 as insurance. Turns out no one bid on him until 34. And st Kilda whilst making the bid did us little harm. I remember some one saying at the time that the St Kilda bid at the time was like saying “enough now”. Before that draft if you were offered the first Naish bid at 34 you would have bitten their hand off. We basically got 4 top 25 players in 2017.

A bid after pick 29 meant we avoided a draft deficit. So when the Saints bid at 34, we matched with our first 3rd rounder and the second 3rd rounder move back to a pick in the low 60s (Miller).

If there was no bid on Naish we could have selected a player in the low 50s instead of getting Miller and using the second third rounder to get Naish.

 

[WATiger86]

Only concern RE: trading butler for a late pick is if it ends up being a pick we don’t use - as long as we move up the order on our last pick I’m more than ok with it

Very professional and understanding by our club - putting the players future and exposure at AFL level first

 

[JAKLAUGHING]

Yep that's true, it's a very compromised draft but those simpletons don't understand that there's still value in those picks.

Those clubs with the academy players still need picks to have the adequate points. So it would be smart to keep valuable picks because you can always trade them to these clubs for future (2021) picks where the Draft won't be compromised.

These journos don't realise that list managers are always planning 3 years ahead.

Yes and what a fecking headache it would be too...
Keeping inside the Salary Cap...paying bonuses to players and staff for winning the GF!
Keeping an eye on player delistings and player salaries....juggling the top player salaries (Tom, Meatball, Dusty!) year to year...
Extra bonuses to players for AA selections...Brownlow wins...etc..
Getting Sponsors, not knowing your yearly membership numbers...phew...
Then working out the value of the Club's draft picks, trades...brown paper bag plz...

 

[Tiger_Mad_80]

Lets not kid ourselves we'll be getting a slab for butler thats it.

st kilda premiership cans ?

 

[tony__montana]

The way we have front/ back loaded some players contracts may come into account as well

Potentially next year might be a heavy year with some of those contracts dusty may be getting say 1.5 next year so other years in his contract isn’t as much as a toll

The same could be said for lynch and any others who those longer term contracts who we may be paying large portions of

Prestia comes out of contract the year after next so being his last year on his current contract when we signed him we may have heavily back loaded it so this year he’s taking home more coin compared to others

And like others have mentioned we had a pretty big year last year with re signing some younger talent that would of eaten away some of that cash

Yep which is why I’m bullish about it, have heard we managed Prestias and Dusty’s contracts by front loading them early to allow us to get a Tom Lynch type and by which time we will also soon have cotch jack and Rance coming to the end of their current contracts. If that’s the case we’ve managed rhis
Magnificently

 

[Pattiger]

What has happened to Maurice Rioli son when is he eligible for the draft

 

[Tiger_Mad_80]

What has happened to Maurice Rioli son when is he eligible for the draft

kidnapped by Steve Hocking

 

[austyn08]

If I recall correctly Naish was expected to go in the 20s, 30 at the latest. There was even media speculation that he might go first round. That’s partly why we traded 15 into 20 and 25 as insurance. Turns out no one bid on him until 34. And st Kilda whilst making the bid did us little harm. I remember some one saying at the time that the St Kilda bid at the time was like saying “enough now”. Before that draft if you were offered the first Naish bid at 34 you would have bitten their hand off. We basically got 4 top 25 players in 2017.

At the time they looked over at our table and both clubs had a chuckle. Both knew we got a fair deal and it was about time someone made a bid.

 

[Toadvine]

They mentioned on trading day and was by far the most interesting part of the show and perhaps the week is that the 2020 draft will be severely compromised due to 17 of the top 45 picks either being father/son or academy players. So by they're reckoning a lot of picks are going to be pushed well back once bidding and matching takes place
Not sure how it affects us next year but the feeling was that clubs want picks from this year as where those picks land next year is anybody's guess

We're part of the reason it's compromised. With Rioli and Baxter coming through in 2020.

 

[RockJobster0312]

Certainly, however a couple Of things

-Players like Houli and Edwards won’t be getting increases in wages at their age, if anything a downgrade.

- balmes a smart operator - we did very well over the previous few years front loading a couple of big player contracts

-increase in salary cap space of about 3-400 thousand.

-Players like Soldo, Baker, Chol and Naish would barely make a dent with their increases (if any).
no doubt we’ve chewed into some of that 1.2mill and perhaps we will front end a couple of the bigger contracts to chew through the rest to open up more space next year and beyond. Just don’t believe it’s tight

I was working on an average of $50k raises for contract extensions done this season, which for a team that won a premiership in 2017 and we're Minor premiers in 2018 I think is a little on the low side. So Edwards, Houli etc. may not have massive increases, but other (e.g. Bolton) may.

I'd also point out that as much as Balmy is a good operator, he is also an honest one. Has said multiple times our cap is tight.

Other things I didn't mention but should have:

- the players that leave this season have to be replaced, which increasingly seems like it will be via the draft. Not sure on pay scale (I assume it's a sliding scale) but say we take four picks and the the average contract is $100k that's $400k.

I also believe that the following player at are out of contract in 2021: Houli, Pickett, RCD, Turner, Graham, Caddy, Garthwaite, Short, English, Broad, Markov, Nankervis. All have to be factored into this seasons decisions that will impact the cap for following seasons.

The cap may not be tight for season 2020 (though I think it is), I definitely think it will be for 2021 and beyond. It's unlikely that any player will come to to the RFC will take a one year deal. Balmy & Co. would need a pool of money to negotiate - a buffer if you will - with those players out of contract (and the free agent class for us in 2021 is scary so we would want to lock in as many of those in 2020 that we can), and at a guess would Be say 10-20% of the current cap.

I 100% believe we have a tight enough cap that it would be a mistake to bring in any decent player via the trade week.

 

[Meteoric Rise]

I don’t know why people keep saying our cap is tight, it’s NOT.
Ellis 500k
Grigg 350-400k
Butler 150-200k
Menadue 150k

We’re clearing more than a million dollars a year out of our cap this year.

Just bc we may choose not to replace it with an incoming player immediately doesn’t mean our cap is tight

Must not forget either these players need to be replaced on the list, and even minimum wage players are going to take $100k or more on average. So you are down to creating only about $750k extra cap space by your own estimates. Add to this the extra $260k or so from the AFL wide salary cap increase in 2020, and we might have an extra $1m or so to work with.

But the club knew the extra $260k was coming and will no doubt have pre-committed that to existing contracts signed from 2017 onwards. And as others have said we had all the re-signings, and players like Bolton, Stack, Baker, tick them off one by one but they would have to be averaging at least $100k more than previous deals otherwise the likes of Ralph Carr are asleep at the wheel. So given the long list of re-signing upgrades over and above any re-signing downgrades it is not hard to see the $750k of “new” cap space evaporating completely just within the existing playing group.

So any substantial spare cap space now could really be coming from previous front loading being greater than current back loading of the major contracts. Any of us would only be guessing about this, but if Balme has stated publicly we won’t be busy in the trade period due to the salary cap then there is no real reason to disbelieve him.

Even if it is the case we have some spare cap space I am sure not all of us would be of the view to jam our cap based on being in the premiership “window.” Our 2019 Premiership was probably the first team since 2015 to win a flag that was in its “window,” so that makes a nonsense of that type of thinking. If there is some money spare and no glaring need for a new player on highish money, then use the spare on existing contracts and make life easier down the road, makes perfect sense to me.

 

[Marcel Proust]

Read somewhere that Lynch will be earning 1.5 million in the last year of his 7 year contract

I hear he is on 500k for the first three years... 19(tick)/20/21

if true thats incredible for a player of his quality

ellis was apparently on the same money lol with richmond

 

[Marcel Proust]

Must not forget either these players need to be replaced on the list, and even minimum wage players are going to take $100k or more on average. So you are down to creating only about $750k extra cap space by your own estimates. Add to this the extra $260k or so from the AFL wide salary cap increase in 2020, and we might have an extra $1m or so to work with.

But the club knew the extra $260k was coming and will no doubt have pre-committed that to existing contracts signed from 2017 onwards. And as others have said we had all the re-signings, and players like Bolton, Stack, Baker, tick them off one by one but they would have to be averaging at least $100k more than previous deals otherwise the likes of Ralph Carr are asleep at the wheel. So given the long list of re-signing upgrades over and above any re-signing downgrades it is not hard to see the $750k of “new” cap space evaporating completely just within the existing playing group.

So any substantial spare cap space now could really be coming from previous front loading being greater than current back loading of the major contracts. Any of us would only be guessing about this, but if Balme has stated publicly we won’t be busy in the trade period due to the salary cap then there is no real reason to disbelieve him.

Even if it is the case we have some spare cap space I am sure not all of us would be of the view to jam our cap based on being in the premiership “window.” Our 2019 Premiership was probably the first team since 2015 to win a flag that was in its “window,” so that makes a nonsense of that type of thinking. If there is some money spare and no glaring need for a new player on highish money, then use the spare on existing contracts and make life easier down the road, makes perfect sense to me.

assuming we draft four player in the national draft they would be on minimum contracts for first two years so its a significant saving still

 

[Tiger_Mad_80]

lol saints think they are a destination club now

 

[tony__montana]

Must not forget either these players need to be replaced on the list, and even minimum wage players are going to take $100k or more on average. So you are down to creating only about $750k extra cap space by your own estimates. Add to this the extra $260k or so from the AFL wide salary cap increase in 2020, and we might have an extra $1m or so to work with.

But the club knew the extra $260k was coming and will no doubt have pre-committed that to existing contracts signed from 2017 onwards. And as others have said we had all the re-signings, and players like Bolton, Stack, Baker, tick them off one by one but they would have to be averaging at least $100k more than previous deals otherwise the likes of Ralph Carr are asleep at the wheel. So given the long list of re-signing upgrades over and above any re-signing downgrades it is not hard to see the $750k of “new” cap space evaporating completely just within the existing playing group.

So any substantial spare cap space now could really be coming from previous front loading being greater than current back loading of the major contracts. Any of us would only be guessing about this, but if Balme has stated publicly we won’t be busy in the trade period due to the salary cap then there is no real reason to disbelieve him.

Even if it is the case we have some spare cap space I am sure not all of us would be of the view to jam our cap based on being in the premiership “window.” Our 2019 Premiership was probably the first team since 2015 to win a flag that was in its “window,” so that makes a nonsense of that type of thinking. If there is some money spare and no glaring need for a new player on highish money, then use the spare on existing contracts and make life easier down the road, makes perfect sense to me.

I was working on an average of $50k raises for contract extensions done this season, which for a team that won a premiership in 2017 and we're Minor premiers in 2018 I think is a little on the low side. So Edwards, Houli etc. may not have massive increases, but other (e.g. Bolton) may.

I'd also point out that as much as Balmy is a good operator, he is also an honest one. Has said multiple times our cap is tight.

Other things I didn't mention but should have:

- the players that leave this season have to be replaced, which increasingly seems like it will be via the draft. Not sure on pay scale (I assume it's a sliding scale) but say we take four picks and the the average contract is $100k that's $400k.

I also believe that the following player at are out of contract in 2021: Houli, Pickett, RCD, Turner, Graham, Caddy, Garthwaite, Short, English, Broad, Markov, Nankervis. All have to be factored into this seasons decisions that will impact the cap for following seasons.

The cap may not be tight for season 2020 (though I think it is), I definitely think it will be for 2021 and beyond. It's unlikely that any player will come to to the RFC will take a one year deal. Balmy & Co. would need a pool of money to negotiate - a buffer if you will - with those players out of contract (and the free agent class for us in 2021 is scary so we would want to lock in as many of those in 2020 that we can), and at a guess would Be say 10-20% of the current cap.

I 100% believe we have a tight enough cap that it would be a mistake to bring in any decent player via the trade week.

Theres a lot of what you both say that makes sense - Im of the opinion that cap space is not tight right now but they are leaving wiggle room for
1)just in case something falls into our lap and its too good to refuse
2)players coming out of contract and contract upgrades in the future ie Stack and Pickett spring to mind, if they go on to become the players most of us think they will, they will deserve a significant payday
3) however, number 2 is offset by the fact that Cotchin, Reiwoldt and rance who are all on 750k+ are coming to the end of their contracts over the next year or 2 and they will be playing for significantly less in their next contracts(if they even play on at all) lets hope they do. Its a jigsaw puzzle that is planned 5 years ahead, lets also not forget that each year the salary cap increases as well.

I just feel we're in a really good place cap wise for a dominant side - compare it to the pies situation who are in real trouble next year