2016 trading and drafting (merged thread)

[aardvark]

We've got JPK and Sam Reid out of contract and free agents next year, so we can't be throwing around big money at anyone if we want to re-sign them.

JPK is a must keep. Sam Reid....meh!

[Markus26]

JPK is a must keep. Sam Reid....meh!

I'm a greedy man. Keep both I say!

[barry]

I hope omeara stays at the gold coast. They need him more than us.

[Levii3]

I hope omeara stays at the gold coast. They need him more than us.

+1

Also we need to enough cap room to resign Heeney and Mills who will have significant interest from all 17 clubs

[Melbourne_Blood]

I could see JOM going to GWS if they can fit him in their salary cap. They certainly would have the most to offer the Suns in trade value. JOM's from WA, so there's no go home factor to a Victorian club and playing in finals for the rest of your career would be attractive as well.

We've got JPK and Sam Reid out of contract and free agents next year, so we can't be throwing around big money at anyone if we want to re-sign them.

They ( GWS) need to shed 600k from their cap at the end of the year according to media reports so unless they offload quite a few contracts, I don't think that will happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bungwahl]

We had the same argument with Buddy. I trust the club to make these long term decisions. I'm sure they have 1, 2, 5, 10 and 15 years plans. At the beggining of the year they probably didn't have any plans to go aftwr JOM. But the improvement of some of our younger players probably gives them the confidence to let some Established players go like Mitchell and Reid. Both are on reasonable coin. Richards and McGlynn are not likely to be there next year either. The development of Naismith and Nankervis would also give them confidence in renegotiating Tippett's contract on better terms when he is due for renewal.

Players have most of the power when it comes to trade. Other clubs are very reluctant to pick up a player if they don't want to play for them. As we have seen with Cam McCarthy, they will even sit out a season if they don't get what they want. I also doubt clubs will be offering JOM 700-800k for long term contracts with his injury history. For all we know, if he really wants to come and play for the Swans and learn his trade from the best midfield in the league then he may be willing to sign a 500K contract for 2 years with a 2 year extension trigger if he meets KPI's. Our team is only going to make him better and improve his value.

Yes and the fact we went through with the Buddy deal is part of the reason why we would be limited in terms of doing another big money deal. Other clubs have much more available cap space than we do.

I don't think using Cam McCarthy's situation proves that players will happily sit out seasons to move to the club of their choice. I can't think of any other examples where that has happened, yet a few players have been thrown in to the PSD to be snapped up by whoever wants them. As far as I know JOM has no family or strong ties to Sydney, and there is no way we can be the highest bidder, so I don't see why he'd be so determined to get to Sydney that he'd throw his toys and sit out a year.

Would we like to have him? Of course! What's the chance of it happening? Damn close to zero percent.

[waswan]

Todays article was funny with commentary on Boyd from WB and that he should take a pay cut.
Werent we held to Buddys 10Mil deal by that w*nker Fitzpatrick ? Is he allowed to take a pay cut ?

Doesn't it further make a mockery of Free Agency if a player leaves for 7yr 7Mil and due to paycuts his contract end up being 5Mil ?
Can we just grab anyone restricted FA and say 10yrs 10 Mil to get them from their club then on the side ask them to take a cut in 2yrs ?

[Cosmic Wizard]

Yes but the argument is all about that JOM is after more money??

He must be on a lot at GC; what if his motivation is for a premiership???

Which clubs are capable of fulfilling that dream for him; the swans for one!

It must get pretty sad watching your team get flog and never making the finals.

I think we are in with a big chance.

[ernie koala]

Todays article was funny with commentary on Boyd from WB and that he should take a pay cut.
Werent we held to Buddys 10Mil deal by that w*nker Fitzpatrick ? Is he allowed to take a pay cut ?

Doesn't it further make a mockery of Free Agency if a player leaves for 7yr 7Mil and due to paycuts his contract end up being 5Mil ?
Can we just grab anyone restricted FA and say 10yrs 10 Mil to get them from their club then on the side ask them to take a cut in 2yrs ?

Yep, good point. It's a question I'd like to see put the Gill the Dill or one of his cronies.

Their answer would be interesting to say the least.

They need to step in and say categorically whether pay cuts, by an acquired free agent, are permissible during the contract that got them to the club.

[giant]

The numbers being thrown about seem to start at $700k+. Just seems like it'd be an odd move to further invest in the mids when we're struggling for forward targets with Reid being injured all year.

Agree. Those numbers seem extraordinary for a kid (unquestionably very talented) that hasn't played for two years.

[liz]

Yep, good point. It's a question I'd like to see put the Gill the Dill or one of his cronies.

Their answer would be interesting to say the least.

They need to step in and say categorically whether pay cuts, by an acquired free agent, are permissible during the contract that got them to the club.

I don't know the answer to the more general question about the ability of clubs to renegotiate contracts partway through and the salary cap impact, but the AFL did state during Buddygate that you couldn't do so for restricted free agents. It makes sense that these are a special case (given the existing club has the chance to match a contract).

That doesn't mean they won't change the rules at some time in the future for a different restricted free agent who has nothing to do with the Swans or who hasn't otherwise put the AFL"s nose out of joint because he didn't go to the club they wanted him to go to.

[Ludwig]

That doesn't mean they won't change the rules at some time in the future for a different restricted free agent who has nothing to do with the Swans or who hasn't otherwise put the AFL"s nose out of joint because he didn't go to the club they wanted him to go to.

This is a very radical idea which could undermine the raison d'?tre of RWO.

[Maltopia]

Agree. Those numbers seem extraordinary for a kid (unquestionably very talented) that hasn't played for two years.

I think it is just too bad. The club agreed to those terms. It is not that different to e.g., Reid being paid $500K this year to do rehab, we had no idea he would be non-productive for an entire year when we signed his last contract. WB should have put performance conditions on Boyd's contract. Only fair-ish way I can see for him to take a pay cut is to have his contract torn up, and then become a restricted free agent, and allow other clubs to bid for him and determine a fair market price for him.

Otherwise, his pay cut just allows the club to have an extra 300K for example to pay for players that other clubs don't get since the other clubs don't have the ability to cut player's contracts part way through.

[Markwebbos]

I'm quietly confident Tom Boyd was not a free agent when he went to the Bulldogs

[Meg]

I'm quietly confident Tom Boyd was not a free agent when he went to the Bulldogs

And you are right. Boyd had only played one year of his two-year draftee period and so was still under contract with GES when he was traded to the Bulldogs.

OUT-OF-CONTRACT players become free agents after a minimum of EIGHT years' service at the one club, while any player who is initially classified as a restricted free agent (among the top 25 per cent of salary earners at his club) becomes eligible for unrestricted free agency after TEN years' service.