Why do clubs announce delistings before trade period?

[Dr Awkward]

Fairly simple question - am I missing something here?

It seems to me like folding your poker hand before anybody has made a raise.

Wouldn't you at least shop around all of your players first? Some of them sound good enough to at least be steak knives in some deals.

 

[Jaeger]

You're assuming players aren't shopped around prior to the trade period.

List managers are very careful with their decisions and they aren't made overnight. Collingwood, for example, could've reached the decision to delist Jolly five weeks ago, perhaps earlier.

Clubs don't just delist a player and go "now what". They plan ahead and there's a reason for everything - whether it's for more room in the salary cap, for an extra pick in the draft, space on the list for a free agent or to elevate a rookie onto the senior list.

 

[Hearts to hearts]

In Collingwood's case, and maybe Melbourne's, I wondered if they decided making the statement - the future starts right now - was more value than potential trades. Still seems odd, though. Perhaps the name players being uncontracted, unrestricted free agents makes trading discussion a bit of a waste of time.

 

[gandaal]

In part it would be for the benefit of the players to let them know that they won't be at the club next year so they can start to organise their future.

 

[Simon_Nesbit]

Players "cannot" be shopped around whilst under contract by their managers. Clubs can of course have informal chats with each other. They also can't train, or interview at other clubs.

A club is more likely to draft or rookie list an opposition spud (after having a chance to see them train, interview) than they are to trade for them, even if giving up pick #123 for them, due to the nature of public reactions.

In many cases, 'delisting' a player is a mutual decision - the club suggests they do not wish to renew contract, give the option to try and trade the player, informal chats happen with no positive responses, the club delists the player so the player can begin formal discussions with other clubs, also allowing for lower-league clubs to begin targetting their 'star recruits'.

There's often more money to be made in lower level comps than the likes of the VFL too.

 

[Riccardo11]

Haven't you got to make room on the list for potential new draftees, traded players and elevated rookies?

I see no problem with trimming the fat as soon as the season is over, it gives those cast off a good long while to decide what to do next.

 

[Riccardo11]

There's often more money to be made in lower level comps than the likes of the VFL too.

There is virtually no money at VFL level, unless you are playing for one of the AFL reserves teams.

Players honestly make a better wage working a 9 to 5 and playing in the EFL or WDFL. Quite sad, actually.

 

[West123]

You can't trade uncontracted players.

 

[blue healer]

You can't trade uncontracted players.

Since when?

 

[West123]

Yeah good point.

 

[1970crow]

I would have thought that guys like didak and jolly will only appeal to a few (or less) clubs. no doubt the list manager at pies would have had an informal chat to other clubs about whether there's any interest. they'd all be fairly honest with each other and if there's nothing on the table that's earlier than the 4th round then they might as well delist and move on.

 

[IanW]

There is virtually no money at VFL level, unless you are playing for one of the AFL reserves teams.

Players honestly make a better wage working a 9 to 5 and playing in the EFL or WDFL. Quite sad, actually.

Well, then more people need to pay their $10 at the gate so the clubs can pay players ...

 

[Superstar swan]

The clubs have a pretty good understanding of what they want their list to look like pretty early in the peace . They delist the guys that really don't have that much trade value. If someone were to trade for a didak or a jolly they are only really going to offering really late draft picks like 5th rounders. Probably better to get rid of their Salaries as soon as possible so they know what they are dealing with come free agency and trade period

 

[Superstar swan]

The clubs have a pretty good understanding of what they want their list to look like pretty early in the peace . They delist the guys that really don't have that much trade value. If someone were to trade for a didak or a jolly they are only really going to offering really late draft picks like 5th rounders or later. Probably better to get rid of their Salaries as soon as possible so they know what they are dealing with come free agency and trade period

 

[Sector 7G]

Fairly simple question - am I missing something here?

It seems to me like folding your poker hand before anybody has made a raise.

Wouldn't you at least shop around all of your players first? Some of them sound good enough to at least be steak knives in some deals.

It is actually like throwing in your 3 and 5 when you have been dealt 3 aces first up.

None of the players delisted so far have any trade value.

 

[MarkT2]

There is an element of respect owed to a player like Didak that has served the club well for a long period and informing him and the market early helps him sort his on and off field life out.

In general terms though, with the advent of free agency, older, uncontracted players have little to no trade value because clubs can take them for nothing as free agents. No one is going to give Collingwood a draft pick for Didak if they can just take him in the free agency periood.

With contrated players, the more chance you give them to find a home the less chance you have to wear their salary in your cap as a payout. If a player has a year to run on his contract and yiou can't get a trade through in trade week you are stuck with his salary. If you allow him to get to a club for no transfer cost then you at least will mitgate the salary cost and possibly eliminate it. That's a big help when you want to re sign, say, a Thomas, or recruit another player within a tight salay cap.

 

[seanoff]

it gives the players certainty too. it is far better to be given 4 or 5 weeks to sort out your future than a couple of days. it's happened in the past where players were kept till the very last day and then de-listed giving them no hope of finding another club. the AFLPA really don't like that sort of thing and was one of the myriad reasons free agency came to pass.