List Mgmt. Trade & Free Agency talk Pt 5

[Bojangles17]

People are actually stupid if they think it will be Bowes + pick 7 for someone like Aarts/RCD.
Will almost definitely be Bowes + pick 7 for pick 12 or something like that if we were to trade for him.
You’re not getting a top 10 pick to take on 2 years of salary. Especially when they kid isn’t all that bad of a player.

Yes you are as they want to quit 500k a year for a VFL player , they literally need to pay someone to do that , what part of salary dump don’t you understand

 

[RockJobster0312]

When you sign Pick 7, you are taking a 2 year risk on them with low financial cost.

When, you are paying 2 players 5 million over 7 years each, the risk is undoubtedly a lot higher. One serious injury in their first 2 years and you are stuck with a extremely expensive potato on your list for 5 years. Look at Grundy & Treloar - they looked well and truely worth the risk of their contracts at the time, but both will be moved on for pennies on the dollar.

in the NBA, 7 year contracts are illegal because so many clubs destroyed themselves with longer ones. They can only offer 4-5 year, at most. Even at 5 years, those contracts often end up being the ones the team has to bundle with first rounders like GC are doing right not to move on

Sure there is a risk that at pick 7 you end up a dud, but it & the few picks after it have also been one of the most successful picks in draft history with the likes of Selwood, J.Lewis, Naughton, Bailey Smith - loads of talent im around that pick in history.

People need to remember also, we are not married to having to take both GWS guys - we could take the cheaper or more required of the 2, then take Bowes and use the money we were spending on the 2nd GWS kid on Bowes + pick 7

So then we trade maybe Pick 12 + Soldo, get Taranto. Then the money we were going to spend on Hopper we pay to Bowes, who contract is a 150k a season more than what we are offering, but also get pick 7

So essentially we get Taranto, Bowes & upgrade pick 12 to 7, and only lose Soldo.

If we think Hopper is actually the more required player here despite his trade cost likely to be a bit less, we might even up getting him, Bowes & heading into this years draft with pick 7 & 12, while trading out 19 + Soldo

The money we were using on Taranto & Soldo more than covers Bowes contract, which in 2 years time becomes a massive $850k space in our cap to chase the top Free Agent with

Also, a lot of people think us offering these guys 7 years is overpaying too. Its a insanely long contract. To give 2 of them at the same time is pretty wild

I admit I don’t like 7 year contracts because of the increase risk that at some point over the contract that injury or other will see the contract become a poor one.

I also think that in some scenarios that it’s bad for the player as they’ll be paid less than their peers if the outperform the contract.

Both were common in the NBA before the maximum five year contract limit was in place as you say.

In the AFL however, this risk is somewhat offset by the fact that the a players amount isn’t tied to a % of the salary cap that NBA contracts are; with Supermax Contracts being 35% of the total salary cap on a year to year basis. You also have contract maximums tied to experience and other benefits which don’t exist in the AFL.

Taranto and Hopper are likely to be around 5% of the salary cap each year one, and around that % is likely to be constant for duration of the contract. The list size is in the AFLs case is the way that somewhat regulates the risk.

Somewhere between the MLB and the NBA is probably where the AFL sit in terms of contract management.

Grundy and Treloar aren’t great examples in my opinion because they are still definitively high level AFL talent. The issue with both of them from Collingwood’s perspective was that they were the most liquid contracts to move to free up cap space. Those contracts themselves weren’t necessarily the problem, it was those contracts in addition to all the other contracts which was the problem. Again, they’re probably more easily moveable than say, Will Hoskin-Elliot and will get more space if they can move them.

The other element with NBA contracts is they’re more often than not fixed or increasing year on year. It’s rare to have the top echelon of players being on front ended or back ended contracts (there was a spate of ‘poison pill’ contracts four/ five years ago with significant front loaded contracts to help minimize the possibility of a team
Matching in free agency but that has seemingly gone.

As I said, I don’t like 7 year deals, but as it is more easier to spread a contract over that duration as well as such a small % of the salary cap, that risk is minimized.

In relation to pick 7, the NBA (and American pro sports in general) is a lot more mature than the AFL in terms of players’ readiness to contribute upon entering the league. The College Basketball pathway is well entrenched and extremely competitive with future pros and older seasoned players providing a better litmus test than the TAC cup. Also the age requirements of the NBA see players being drafted around 19/20 years of age.

Basically, AFL rookies are drafted 18 months to two years earlier than their NBA counterparts, who are also in a more stable development pathway and are therefore more ready to contribute over their rookie contract, and the risk of their future outlook is often more ‘certain’ than what it would be in the AFL.

Last thing I’d mention is ‘not being wedded’ to Taranto and Hopper. We absolutely are. Players like Riewoldt and Cotchin took paycuts specifically to enable this to happen. It would also damage the RFC reputation severely with players and player managers that the RFC court players, offer them contracts and then change track on a whim because a higher pick may be available. RFC has a reputation of being good to its players and treating them right (it’s why so many of our players take pay cuts to stay, the culture is what it is etc.) to change track because something seems to be glittering a little brighter is folly.

 

[Wacky Tiger]

People are actually stupid if they think it will be Bowes + pick 7 for someone like Aarts/RCD.
Will almost definitely be Bowes + pick 7 for pick 12 or something like that if we were to trade for him.
You’re not getting a top 10 pick to take on 2 years of salary. Especially when they kid isn’t all that bad of a player.

Yep. It's cause the media don't report it like that. I think I've heard 1 media person say Gold Coast will clearly want a mid-late first rounder back. But no one reports it cause it dosent make it sound as outlandish.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Mr Magic]

I admit I don’t like 7 year contracts because of the increase risk that at some point over the contract that injury or other will see the contract become a poor one.

I also think that in some scenarios that it’s bad for the player as they’ll be paid less than their peers if the outperform the contract.

Both were common in the NBA before the maximum five year contract limit was in place as you say.

In the AFL however, this risk is somewhat offset by the fact that the a players amount isn’t tied to a % of the salary cap that NBA contracts are; with Supermax Contracts being 35% of the total salary cap on a year to year basis. You also have contract maximums tied to experience and other benefits which don’t exist in the AFL.

Taranto and Hopper are likely to be around 5% of the salary cap each year one, and around that % is likely to be constant for duration of the contract. The list size is in the AFLs case is the way that somewhat regulates the risk.

Somewhere between the MLB and the NBA is probably where the AFL sit in terms of contract management.

Grundy and Treloar aren’t great examples in my opinion because they are still definitively high level AFL talent. The issue with both of them from Collingwood’s perspective was that they were the most liquid contracts to move to free up cap space. Those contracts themselves weren’t necessarily the problem, it was those contracts in addition to all the other contracts which was the problem. Again, they’re probably more easily moveable than say, Will Hoskin-Elliot and will get more space if they can move them.

The other element with NBA contracts is they’re more often than not fixed or increasing year on year. It’s rare to have the top echelon of players being on front ended or back ended contracts (there was a spate of ‘poison pill’ contracts four/ five years ago with significant front loaded contracts to help minimize the possibility of a team
Matching in free agency but that has seemingly gone.

As I said, I don’t like 7 year deals, but as it is more easier to spread a contract over that duration as well as such a small % of the salary cap, that risk is minimized.

In relation to pick 7, the NBA (and American pro sports in general) is a lot more mature than the AFL in terms of players’ readiness to contribute upon entering the league. The College Basketball pathway is well entrenched and extremely competitive with future pros and older seasoned players providing a better litmus test than the TAC cup. Also the age requirements of the NBA see players being drafted around 19/20 years of age.

Basically, AFL rookies are drafted 18 months to two years earlier than their NBA counterparts, who are also in a more stable development pathway and are therefore more ready to contribute over their rookie contract, and the risk of their future outlook is often more ‘certain’ than what it would be in the AFL.

Last thing I’d mention is ‘not being wedded’ to Taranto and Hopper. We absolutely are. Players like Riewoldt and Cotchin took paycuts specifically to enable this to happen. It would also damage the RFC reputation severely with players and player managers that the RFC court players, offer them contracts and then change track on a whim because a higher pick may be available. RFC has a reputation of being good to its players and treating them right (it’s why so many of our players take pay cuts to stay, the culture is what it is etc.) to change track because something seems to be glittering a little brighter is folly.

being locked in before acceptances is bigger folly.

Taranto and Hopper still might fall through yet. RFC has a history of coming up before acceptances like with Conca and Vlastuin was another I think

In fact AFL HQ bank on RFC going too early as do other clubs, its absolute stupidity

 

[NZ_Tiger]

lol that is just a trade suggestion by whoever the F JJ is - its nothing more.

They’ve listened to McCartney and realised that discussions are seemingly amicable. They e looked at picks and come up with a fairly obvious trade.

Previous they were trading half our list to get 4 first rounders. They’ve read the room.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mr Magic]

Yep. It's cause the media don't report it like that. I think I've heard 1 media person say Gold Coast will clearly want a mid-late first rounder back. But no one reports it cause it dosent make it sound as outlandish.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Then Geelong is not a option because they will need that for Bruhn but I bet they find a way to do a shifty.

Twomey's interpretation of the Taranto Hopper trade is insane

 

[Charlie Pannam]

Sos on SEN now

Hopper and Taranto deal will get done quickly as there’s a good relationship btwn the 2 clubs.

 

[energyquant]

Also we probably already committed to Hopper and Taranto before this deal with Bowes+pick 7 popped up.

Everyone seems to be forgetting that it's pick 7. In this draft. I'm not sure what that's worth, but it ain't pick 1 or 2.

Draft picks are overrated. I'm very happy with the clubs strategy to bring in high performance over high potential.

Now we just need our 3x premiership players to start developing our pipeline of father-son picks.....

 

[Charlie Pannam]

Everyone seems to be forgetting that it's pick 7. In this draft. I'm not sure what that's worth, but it ain't pick 1 or 2.

Draft picks are overrated. I'm very happy with the clubs strategy to bring in high performance over high potential.

Now we just need our 3x premiership players to start developing our pipeline of father-son picks.....

And most likely the club taking that deal is sending an early pick back. So not as enticing as it looks

 

[Sol23]

We have been belted out of the middle for years and we have 2 blokes who can dramatically improve that and people still complain. What about the positive flow on effect for dion,shai,dusty etc. massive win for the club.

 

[juss]

And most likely the club taking that deal is sending an early pick back. So not as enticing as it looks

It'll be a great bargain IMO providing the club that takes him has cap availability.

Hypothetically say it was either pick 12 or 19 for 7 + Bowes.

In any other year youd jump at that in a heartbeat if you had room to accommodate the deal.

 

[prodigy]

People will shit on this kid, but I'd seriously look at him if he came cheap enough.

 

[Tzatziki_Man]

We have been belted out of the middle for years and we have 2 blokes who can dramatically improve that and people still complain. What about the positive flow on effect for dion,shai,dusty etc. massive win for the club.

Our midfield is our handicap.

Before the stand rule, and 6-6-6, Richmond could set up play to win the ball down the defensive end. It explains why we were highest scoring rebound team for so long.

The new rules have hurt us, the game is quicker, our defenders are caught deep at sea, and when a club takes control of us in the midfield, we essentially have no answers to really, really high scores against.

It was a waterfall of goals in the final quarter against Carlton in Round 1, when Cripps, Kennedy, Walsh, Hewett, just burst through the midfield and gave their forwards quick delivery.

Makes what you say really profound, if we're winning clearances, we're kicking that ball to the no.1 offence in the competition.

Taranto and Hopper are just want we need

 

[THECHIEFTON]

Everyone seems to be forgetting that it's pick 7. In this draft. I'm not sure what that's worth, but it ain't pick 1 or 2.

Draft picks are overrated. I'm very happy with the clubs strategy to bring in high performance over high potential.

Now we just need our 3x premiership players to start developing our pipeline of father-son picks.....

I'd rather 2 guaranteed gun mids over the other options aswell. Might aswell have another few goes at a flag while we have this team.

 

[THECHIEFTON]

People will s**t on this kid, but I'd seriously look at him if he came cheap enough.

I'd rather have him than Ben Brown.

 

[Muddiemoose]

Our midfield is our handicap.

Before the stand rule, and 6-6-6, Richmond could set up play to win the ball down the defensive end. It explains why we were highest scoring rebound team for so long.

The new rules have hurt us, the game is quicker, our defenders are caught deep at sea, and when a club takes control of us in the midfield, we essentially have no answers to really, really high scores against.

It was a waterfall of goals in the final quarter against Carlton in Round 1, when Cripps, Kennedy, Walsh, Hewett, just burst through the midfield and gave their forwards quick delivery.

Makes what you say really profound, if we're winning clearances, we're kicking that ball to the no.1 offence in the competition.

Taranto and Hopper are just want we need

Yup don’t try and get to cute. Go with a plan and execute it

We have the plan, we know what it will cost and are in a position where we can afford to pay it given our draft hall last season

Like the 2016 trade period all over again
Stick to the plan

 

[Charlie Pannam]

I'd rather 2 guaranteed gun mids over the other options aswell. Might aswell have another few goes at a flag while we have this team.

Cotch probably hangs up the boots 2023.
Meatball is contracted til 2024, by which stage he’s 32.
Dusty is 32 next year and spending more time forward.
Bringing 2 A grade mids aged 25 and 26 makes perfect sense

 

[juss]

People will s**t on this kid, but I'd seriously look at him if he came cheap enough.

Well that's 100% a position of a need, great size at 197/97.
The concern would be he's been stuck behind Ben Brown and on a list for quite a while, so not young.

He's probably only someone I'd take at barebones contract, cheap deal e.g. a pick 45+ in this draft.

 

[Freddy Swift]

Some clubs can pitch an attractive lifestyle to their players.

Paddy and Jezza both love a surf, they live in Torquay, away from the Melbourne bubble, they can ride the waves and live by the beach + they're close to their family.

That's worth 25% of a contracts value. Pretty hard to make it sound attractive driving down Punt Road everyday hah

Paddy actually lives at Moggs Creek which is between Aireys Inlet and Lorne, a bit further on than Torquay. I thought Jeremy Cameron must have a farm as he was shown with his cows. I think a few of the Geelong players live along the Surf Coast and no doubt that is a big attraction for them to sign with the club as you say.

 

[Freddy Swift]

There is no way.... NO WAY...... They can give this club any my priority picks or further list concessions after this. Its diabolical if they do. You can't keep bailing people out of trouble due to stupidity.

If the club still can't keep players unless they pay them stupid money after decade, then maybe its time for the AFL to say they got it wrong and close them up - or use the Suns to merge into Tassie so we don't have to spend another decade with the draft being a shitshow

Its just time to close the doors on Gold Coast. No one gives 2 shits about them up here, they are a joke even in their own state. Why are they persisting with it? If they said they were closing the doors, would anyone even care to rattle a tin?

If not, then close it up

You can bet your bottom dollar RJ that if the Tigers were struggling the AFL would do nothing to help us in any way. They would be happy to see us go, they proved that during the ‘Save our Skins’ time.

 

[Mr Magic]

I'd rather have him than Ben Brown.

I would have neither, we have Lynch anyway so it is irrelevant

 

[_RT_]

When you sign Pick 7, you are taking a 2 year risk on them with low financial cost.

When, you are paying 2 players 5 million over 7 years each, the risk is undoubtedly a lot higher. One serious injury in their first 2 years and you are stuck with a extremely expensive potato on your list for 5 years. Look at Grundy & Treloar - they looked well and truely worth the risk of their contracts at the time, but both will be moved on for pennies on the dollar.

in the NBA, 7 year contracts are illegal because so many clubs destroyed themselves with longer ones. They can only offer 4-5 year, at most. Even at 5 years, those contracts often end up being the ones the team has to bundle with first rounders like GC are doing right not to move on

Sure there is a risk that at pick 7 you end up a dud, but it & the few picks after it have also been one of the most successful picks in draft history with the likes of Selwood, J.Lewis, Naughton, Bailey Smith - loads of talent im around that pick in history.

People need to remember also, we are not married to having to take both GWS guys - we could take the cheaper or more required of the 2, then take Bowes and use the money we were spending on the 2nd GWS kid on Bowes + pick 7

So then we trade maybe Pick 12 + Soldo, get Taranto. Then the money we were going to spend on Hopper we pay to Bowes, who contract is a 150k a season more than what we are offering, but also get pick 7

So essentially we get Taranto, Bowes & upgrade pick 12 to 7, and only lose Soldo.

If we think Hopper is actually the more required player here despite his trade cost likely to be a bit less, we might even up getting him, Bowes & heading into this years draft with pick 7 & 12, while trading out 19 + Soldo

The money we were using on Taranto & Soldo more than covers Bowes contract, which in 2 years time becomes a massive $850k space in our cap to chase the top Free Agent with

Also, a lot of people think us offering these guys 7 years is overpaying too. Its a insanely long contract. To give 2 of them at the same time is pretty wild

Gold Coast aren't throwing in pick 7 just to move Bowes off the list. They'll be expecting a first round pick and possibly a later pick to comeback their way.

So for us to be involved we'd likely have to trade say 12 & 30 to get 7 & Bowes, then to land either Taranto or Hopper we'd likely have to trade 7 as a minimum.

So we'd end up with Taranto or Hopper plus Bowes and pick 19 for and use more cap space than we would just trading for Taranto and Hopper.

Before you say we just do the Taranto trade first, GWS will know we're dealing with Gold Coast and will just delay the deal knowing that we are getting 7.

 

[Freddy Swift]

They'll likely add Bowes, pick 7, Ollie Henry & Tanner Bruhn to give them a boost in their rebuild on the fly

How do they fit them all in if nobody is retiring? It’s like they’ve got a bottomless pit of money. It’s all a bit suss

 

[Charlie Pannam]

It'll be a great bargain IMO providing the club that takes him has cap availability.

Hypothetically say it was either pick 12 or 19 for 7 + Bowes.

In any other year youd jump at that in a heartbeat if you had room to accommodate the deal.

Not sure to be honest

A the cap implications . Ok we can renegotiate his contract, but that then ties him in for 4 years or longer

B what is the likelihood of getting a good player with 7 compared to 12. Apparently it’s not a great draft. The best player is a F/S, then 3 or 4 guns before evening out

C is Bowes any good? Has struggled at GC

 

[Mr Magic]

How do they fit them all in if nobody is retiring? It’s like they’ve got a bottomless pit if money. It’s all a bit suss

How do they have the picks to get Bruhn and pick 7 let alone others? At the same time they want us to give up the farm, its a joke