List Mgmt. Trade/Draft/Targets rumours 2019

[Tiger_Mad_80]

Just caught up with a s**tload of Tiger talk from all the papers from the last week, and the bit i missed, and not sure if its been mentioned here, but apparently Kmac wants out. Was extremely hurt at missing out on two flags and even though he re-signed last July wants to explore options.

well then let him go to freo to win a flag

 

[Stevi_Tigers]

Should look at trading 38,39,40 for a higher first rounder

Could even trade next years first

Would love to move up the order for Kemp

Or if we could draft McAsey and sdk our kpd’s would be set for 10 years

McAsey
Sdk
To replace rance and astbury
Garth as grimes replacement

Balta to be a swingman

Ccj as jack’s replacement

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Who here has said the AFL is out to get us? All I've read is people pointing the constant inconsistencies in AFL house decision making. And you, just like us are basing our information given to us through the media. And all information points to, including our club obviously thinking the pick given is not in line to previous picks given to other clubs.

And instead of passively attacking posters opinion how about link some of the articles you've read that so we may be as enlightened on this subject as you are.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Noone is saying the AFL is out to get us? Are you only reading every second post in the thread?

 

[Charlie Pannam]

AFL’s free agency compensation under fire after Richmond received end of second round pick for Brandon Ellis
The AFL’s free agency compensation is under scrutiny again after Richmond was given an end of second round draft pick for losing Brandon Ellis on a deal very similar to moves in previous years. So what’s the difference?

Disappointed Richmond officials requested the AFL review the free agency compensation it received for the loss of Brandon Ellis as the league’s formula for awarding draft picks for the loss of free agents comes under fire again.

The Tigers were handed an end of second round pick for Ellis, currently No.39, after he officially joined Gold Coast on Saturday.

As revealed by the Herald Sun, Ellis has accepted a five-year, $3 million deal to join the Suns.

It was a contract the Tigers had hoped would net them an end of first round compensation selection, which would have been pick 20 given Richmond’s premiership status and the Suns’ freshly awarded priority pick.

Richmond chief executive Brendon Gale revealed the Tigers were so unhappy with the compensation, the club urged the AFL to review it.

“We were very dissapointed with the offer of a 2nd Rd pick for Brandon Ellis and asked the AFL to review it. AFL has since explained that the points allocated (based on age & average $$$), fell just short of the points required for the awarding of a 1st Rd pick in 2019,” Gale tweeted.

The AFL has refused to explain its compensation “formula”, which is said to be based on age, salary and contract length, but can be altered at the discretion of a committee.

The Ellis pick has many scratching their heads given recent cases at other clubs.
View attachment 759338
West Coast last year got an end of first round compensation pick for losing Scott Lycett to Port Adelaide on a deal widely reported to be exactly the same — $3 million over five years.

Like Richmond, the Eagles were premiers. Like Ellis, Lycett was 26. Yet there is 19 draft picks difference.

Steven Motlop signed on for less at Port Adelaide when he left Geelong at the end of 2017.

Motlop accepted a four-year deal worth around $2 million, leading to a belief the Cats would get an end of second round pick (No.35) to compensate.

When pick 19 came back there was surprise. When the Cats used pick 19 to bring Gary Ablett home there was cynicism.

Former Adelaide onballer Cam Ellis-Yolman on Saturday finalised a three-year free agency contract offer from the Brisbane Lions.

The Crows received a third-round pick — No. 47 — as compensation after choosing not to match the deal.

Brisbane might not be done there, with Collingwood forward Jamie Elliott attending the Pies’ best and fairest on Friday night before touring the Lions’ facilities the next day.

Lol
AFL are refusing to disclose their formula but it “can be altered at the discretion of the committee”

Who’s going to bother altering a formula that nobody knows ?!
Bunch of muppets

 

[_RT_]

Assuming the base rates are identical, and as groc pointed out, the ranking in player payments remains unchanged even with the increase in cap

But not paranoid, it's the AFL out to get us right?

Nope not paranoid at all.

Just venting my frustration at how 4 players on similar length/value deals, can have 3 adjudged to be worth a band 2 pick while the 4th isn't.

The only way it works out is if the Suns base is about $150-200k below overall yearly average of $600k, which would cause a drop in points awarded to put him below the band 2 threshold.

Highly unlikely that he would have left for that sort of high risk deal given it's supposed to be about setting up his family for life.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Nope not paranoid at all.

Just venting my frustration at how 4 players on similar length/value deals, can have 3 adjudged to be worth a band 2 pick while the 4th isn't.

The only way it works out is if the Suns base is about $150-200k below overall yearly average of $600k, which would cause a drop in points awarded to put him below the band 2 threshold.

Highly unlikely that he would have left for that sort of high risk deal given it's supposed to be about setting up his family for life.

Not that insane given how much high cost talent has left the sun's. They aren't facing the gws issues remember.

I get venting, but today has been ridiculous. Normally sane posters are posting the kind of shit we mock in the oppo melt thread.

 

[tigs2010]

Ellis would have been a delisted free agent within a year or 2 anyway. Pick 39 will be next Cripps

 

[AuntyBlindEye]

Ellis would have been a delisted free agent within a year or 2 anyway. Pick 39 will be next Cripps

Ohhhhhhh that would be ****ing nice.

 

[SplintWhisky]

compo is off base contract only

salary cap includes everything

we have to budget for the latter, not the former - else we will blow the cap if all our players hit their KPI's

Wait I can't believe I let you get away with this. Whilst that may be true that compensation is based of base wage, you are purely speculating on the players base wage to make the point. Since the only piece of data we have is what is reported by the AFL media (which is total contract), we have a right to be pissed with the inconsistencies of their system.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Wait I can't believe I let you get away with this. Whilst that may be true you are purely speculating on the players base wage to make the point. Since the only piece of data we have is what is reported by the AFL media, we have a right to be pi**ed with the inconsistencies of their system.

Players have incentive and bonus payments.

Forwards often have payments for goals scored, many have them for BnF results, older players for number of games played in a season. As I mentioned earlier, it was reported in the media that stack has a large incentive payment if he comes back from the break in good condition. I've also known of players who had behavioural incentives in their deals.

All of these we have to account for in salary cap planning, unless you want to blow your cap (as happened to one club a decade ago when they failed to budget of injuries, lost a bunch of guns on high guaranteed contracts and had to replace them with guys who had low guarantees but high match payments).

However none of these incentive payments are included in the AFL compo calculations, only guaranteed payments the player will receive.

Going back to your point, the suggestion of us agreeing to the $600k for ellis. Even if we thought he was worth it, we couldn't afford it as we would have busted the cap, or been forced to push out someone else. There is a reason we were reducing his offer from the current $500k to $350-400k, we needed his money for more critical players to our list balance

 

[theflea]

Not that insane given how much high cost talent has left the sun's. They aren't facing the gws issues remember.

I get venting, but today has been ridiculous. Normally sane posters are posting the kind of s**t we mock in the oppo melt thread.

No its not ridiculous that we would like some consistency from the AFL. You're basing your argument on fans using supposition on contract size, yet you're using the same logic for yours. The AFL are hypocritical all the time, so not sure why our cynicism is hard to understand.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

No its not ridiculous that we would like some consistency from the AFL. You're basing your argument on fans using supposition on contract size, yet you're using the same logic for yours. The AFL are hypocritical all the time, so not sure why our cynicism is hard to understand.

Being a cynic I get. We have people wanting us to boycott the pick, to spam the AFL until they reverse, and of course claiming the AFL is out to get us because they hate our success. That's not cynicism, that's hysteria

 

[theflea]

Being a cynic I get. We have people wanting us to boycott the pick, to spam the AFL until they reverse, and of course claiming the AFL is out to get us because they hate our success. That's not cynicism, that's hysteria

I understand the fringe, but that also doesn't mean its fair to be pissed about the compo given.

 

[Ned_Flanders]

I understand the fringe, but that also doesn't mean its fair to be pi**ed about the compo given.

People are beyond pissed

 

[SplintWhisky]

Players have incentive and bonus payments.

Forwards often have payments for goals scored, many have them for BnF results, older players for number of games played in a season. As I mentioned earlier, it was reported in the media that stack has a large incentive payment if he comes back from the break in good condition. I've also known of players who had behavioural incentives in their deals.

All of these we have to account for in salary cap planning, unless you want to blow your cap (as happened to one club a decade ago when they failed to budget of injuries, lost a bunch of guns on high guaranteed contracts and had to replace them with guys who had low guarantees but high match payments).

However none of these incentive payments are included in the AFL compo calculations, only guaranteed payments the player will receive.

Going back to your point, the suggestion of us agreeing to the $600k for ellis. Even if we thought he was worth it, we couldn't afford it as we would have busted the cap, or been forced to push out someone else. There is a reason we were reducing his offer from the current $500k to $350-400k, we needed his money for more critical players to our list balance

That is all perfectly well and true, however since contacts are not know to anyone but the club, AFL and the player all those outside of these groups can speculate. Since that is the case, all that is known is the media reported figure for the full contact value. In that case, the Tigers got shafted, as the whole contract reporting shows, Ellis was offered a contract comparable to other players mentioned

 

[Stevi_Tigers]

How come when our players are up for trade they’re never worth much yet players of similar ability at other clubs go for much higher prices it’s a joke

 

[Pomsta]

The AFL's secret formula for free agency compensation

Geelong were controversially awarded the same compensation for free agent Steven Motlop as the Brisbane Lions received for Tom Rockliff partly because of the one-year age difference between the pair.

Motlop, who surprisingly earned the Cats an end-of-first-round choice (pick 18), just scraped into the same compensation ‘‘band’’ as Rockliff, who was paid close to $100,000 a season more than the ex-Cat over the same period and whose salary nearly delivered the Lions pick No.2 in the 2017 national draft.

Geelong's compensation for losing Steven Motlop was controversial.CREDIT:AAP

The Motlop decision was made on the basis of a secret formula that The Age can reveal in detail – the so-called ‘‘secret herbs and spices’’ which also renders the length of contract largely irrelevant to the draft pick that teams get for losing a free agent.

Key components of the compensation system include:
■A free agent paid $2 million over two years will be ranked higher on the compensation table than one who is paid $3.5 million over four years. The length of contract is only a ‘‘tie-breaker’’ if annual salary is equal to another player. The contract must be at least two years.

■The compensation is based entirely on guaranteed money, or the ‘‘base’’ salary, with incentive-based payments counting for nothing. A player who is paid $500,000 a season, who can make $800,000 with incentives, is ranked on the basis of a $500,000 contract.
It was this factor - plus the player’s age - that meant North Melbourne received only a second-round pick for star Daniel Wells, even though Wells can make more than $1.5 million over his three-year contract.
His base is less than $500,000 a season and he was 31 when he signed with Collingwood.

■The key to the formula is a ranking system, in which every player in the AFL aged 25 or older is placed in order, based on the size of their (guaranteed) contract.
The highest-paid players are ranked at 100 points, the lowest at 0.
The AFL then allocates up to 12 additional points for a player’s age. At 25 (as of October 31), a player receives the maximum of 12 points, a 26-year-old earns another 10 points, 27-year-olds gain another 8, 28 brings 6 and so forth, with a 30-year-old worth just 2 extra points.

Players older than 30 earn no points - which also counted against Carlton when the Blues lost Jarrad Waite to free agency and received nothing. Under this system, thus, the maximum a player can receive is 112 points.

AFL sources say that the age of a player is important, because two fewer points might see a free agent slide 10 or so placings in the rankings, when they are paid the same money.

Motlop is understood to have been right at the bottom of the band for players who earn an end-of-first-round draft pick, while Rockliff - who was paid an estimated $650,000-$700,000 by Port - was right at the top of that band and not far from earning the Lions pick No.2.

First-round picks are awarded to players who rank in the top 5 per cent, based on the points, while end-of-first-round picks are given for free agents in the 5-15 per cent bracket.

Second-round picks - which Tyrone Vickery and Chris Mayne netted Richmond and Fremantle respectively in 2016 - are for free agents in the 15-30 band. End of second round is for those ranked in the 30-50 per cent group.

The AFL has deliberately avoided letting the clubs know the compensation formula, in part because of concerns that it will be manipulated - as some clubs have contemplated.

Clubs have discussed deals in which a player would be paid enough to earn a first-round pick, and then the club receiving the pick would pay part of the salary of a different player in a ‘‘separate’’ trade.

But clubs can only guess at the ranking of a player if they know where he will be placed, contract-wise, compared to the rest of the competition.

Clubs can appeal the compensation decision, but none has chosen to as yet. The AFL can also intervene and change the compensation - as some thought it should in the Motlop case - if it feels that the outcome is an anomaly.

There is a view from some at club level that first-round compensation picks should be placed in the middle of the first round - giving every team that doesn’t play finals an uninterrupted first-rounder.

Calls for compensation to be scrapped seem unlikely to be heeded, given the risks for northern market clubs such as the Giants and Suns, who would potentially see their lists decimated.

The AFL's secret formula for free agency compensation

Length of contract is largely irrelevant, but a one-year age gap can make a big difference.

www.theage.com.au

Well after reading this I'm not that surprised at Band 3 compo. With the increases in salary cap, and better paid older players staying on at clubs longer, it wouldn't surprise if Brando was getting in the 15-30% range for over 25 players. Plus we don't know how much of the $600k is base and what are the incentives. Actually seems reasonable as per the formula the goalposts always move.

 

[beema limapep]

We've been screwed theres no 2 ways about it.

 

[Maurice Mitchell]

How come when our players are up for trade they’re never worth much yet players of similar ability at other clubs go for much higher prices it’s a joke

Did well out of the Vickery FA

 

[Ceehook]

Nope not paranoid at all.

Just venting my frustration at how 4 players on similar length/value deals, can have 3 adjudged to be worth a band 2 pick while the 4th isn't.

The only way it works out is if the Suns base is about $150-200k below overall yearly average of $600k, which would cause a drop in points awarded to put him below the band 2 threshold.

Highly unlikely that he would have left for that sort of high risk deal given it's supposed to be about setting up his family for life.

its part of the equalisation policy

 

[beema limapep]

Did well out of the Vickery FA

yes but oppo fans were just about marching in the streets

 

[Walt Kowalski]

View attachment 758881

Sarah's on to it.

Garbage, Sarah's on to nothing!

Backs : Rance - Grimes - Astbury - Garthwaite - Balta -Chol - Miller, plus Vlaus who can play tall

Fwds: Lynch - Riewoldt - CCJ - Chol - Balta - Miller, Nank (with Soldo in the ruck), plus Dusty who can play tall

Not like we're going to get anyone better than our depth players for free, is it? We don't need any mediocre mid to late 20s types on our list, ever again hopefully.

 

[getthefooty]

Can someone explain something please.

Prior to the AFL letting us know what compo wed receive, many thought that even if we got Band 2, that would in effect be the same result as Band 1 because of where our picks fell in the draft (end of round 1 v start of round 2).

Did we actually get a band 3, or had a lot of people been misinformed about how band 1 v band 2 would operate?

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

Being a cynic I get. We have people wanting us to boycott the pick, to spam the AFL until they reverse, and of course claiming the AFL is out to get us because they hate our success. That's not cynicism, that's hysteria

Thats reality mate.We are the AFL.

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

The issue i have apart from the lack of transparentcy from the AFL is why couldn't they judge that while pick 20 is to low and pick 39 is too high why they couldn't meet in the middle.
Didn't a few clubs get a compo pick around the 10 mark recently?