2016 trading and drafting (merged thread)

[Industrial Fan]

Generally speaking as well, I think if players move for that reason they are generally a bad pick up as they're not fully committed to the game. For reference, Nick Davis, L. Jetta someone like Dangerfield might be an exception with ties to the falcons as a junior.

Same reason imo Gold Coast has struggled as they were able to sell the club as a lifestyle choice but that's also not helpful in building a winning culture in a cutthroat environment.

[Ludwig]

I bet you wouldn't be so uncharitable if it was NSW boys from the academy wanting to be back home with their family. And for the Swans building a home grown list has to be a priority for that very reason. At the same time you want us to be able to build a home grown list you try and stop the WA and SA clubs doing the same, even though they don't get the academy benefits we do. Instead you want to impose a draconian employment condition ("forever barred from playing in the AFL", are you really serious?). Your attitude reeks of hypocrisy and double standards and a sense of entitlement given how outraged you are at the slightest threats to our ability to recruit via the academy.

I'm absolutely serious. No hypocrisy and no double standards. If a NSW player gets drafted by Freo and wants to 'go home' while contracted, then he's out as well. It applies to everyone.

My point is: There are 12,000,000 jobs in Australia. There are 800 playing jobs in the AFL. If there are considerations more important than playing in a national competition away from home, then I say fine, just take one of the other 11,999,200 left over. I'm sure there are many close to home.

I'm all for clubs targeting local players in the draft. That's not an issue, and it's common practice. The academies help facilitate this. In this draft, for example, there are 7 WA prospects that deserve to be drafted by pick 33. The Perth clubs only have 2 picks in this range. So what happens to the other 5? Where do they go? Why shouldn't GC feel at ease in drafting one of these players without the fear they will bail out in a year or two.

It's funny how Australian basketball players go to the other side of the world and don't seem to get homesick. I wonder why this malady only seems to affect AFL players.

I posted my solution to this problem, but I'm happy to consider others.

[Faunac8]

I think the difference with WA is the number of indigenous players that originate from there. Indigenous players have a heavier reliance on family, especially the ones from remote areas. That's why I'd stay clear of them in the draft. If they're from cities and large towns it's a little different.

The exception to your rule I like his attitude. Shame he probably won't be around when our first pick falls. He has already spent time living in Sydney but wasn't impressed by the lack of footy culture.

Going places: This draft's most gifted West Australian reveals where he wants to play - M.afl.com.au

[YvonneH]

A couple of articles on The Roar website has us with pick #10. I thought we had #9, although I realize this might change on draft night with bids for academy/father son picks.

[mattybloods]

A couple of articles on The Roar website has us with pick #10. I thought we had #9, although I realize this might change on draft night with bids for academy/father son picks.

Yeah must be after an academy bid or something


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[O'Reilly Boy]

A couple of articles on The Roar website has us with pick #10. I thought we had #9, although I realize this might change on draft night with bids for academy/father son picks.

Still at number 9 on AFL site.

[barracuda]

I bet you wouldn't be so uncharitable if it was NSW boys from the academy wanting to be back home with their family. And for the Swans building a home grown list has to be a priority for that very reason. At the same time you want us to be able to build a home grown list you try and stop the WA and SA clubs doing the same, even though they don't get the academy benefits we do. Instead you want to impose a draconian employment condition ("forever barred from playing in the AFL", are you really serious?). Your attitude reeks of hypocrisy and double standards and a sense of entitlement given how outraged you are at the slightest threats to our ability to recruit via the academy.

Surely the whole idea of bringing in the WA and SA clubs in the first place was to develop the game there and surely the idea was to give their local players an opportunity in their home states. As it is, their elite talent often goes interstate and they have to recruit from interstate themselves (Judd and go home factor anyone, though I agree the drug culture was probably part of the problem).

None of the SA/WA clubs have a homegrown content over 50% as it is and whenever a player wants a trade back they are labelled sooks. And for every WA boy that wants to go home there are just as many if not more that don't (O'Meara, Buddy and Hogan to name a few) I just find the hysteria on here about it ridiculous and OTT.

McCarthy didn't "pull" anything. I think he was (and may still be) a very unwell young man and being close to his family is obviously a huge issue, anyone with an ounce of empathy should see that. I do agree that the trend of demanding a move mid contract (like Bryce with three years to go) is a bad one. As long as players honour their contracts and give it 100% then they should be able to play wherever they want. And clubs should also be prepared to hold firm and demand a suitable trade like Gold Coast did.

I watched some of the first Sunday academy benchmark session for the year on the weekend. I watched the under 17s, 18s and returning 19s. (about 60 players) I get the sense it is getting more serious. The players were already looking very fit and lean, there is plenty of height (a 180cm player looks on the small side in the group) and skills were not bad for the first hit out of the year.

I get the impression that the academy is now starting to become more of a fixture than a novelty. More kids are taking the opportunity seriously and making considerable commitments. Given the apparent depth in the group I was left asking myself, how do the swans sort through all this, and i was excited by the impact all this talent will have on the local comp and Neafl.
I didn't see the under 16s but I know there are a whole bunch more in that group including blakey.

I think more important than ever swans supporters need to be defending and supporting the academy. This years draft may be a little lean, but boy it looks interesting after that.

[707]

It is highly likely that one of the GWS players will be bid on and taken before pick 9 so that will push out our pick number as GWS first pick they will use for an academy player is pick 15.

It doesn't however diminish who we can choose from, given Bowes to Gold Coast is likely at 4,6 or 8, we will get to choose who we believe is the 8th non academy player. That is 7 non academy players will have been taken by our first pick, 17 non academy players will have been taken by our second pick.

Based on what is generally accepted, McCluggage, McGrath and Ainsworth are likely first three. Gold Coast with two or three picks for non academy players before us and Freo with three WA players worthy of their pick 7. Interesting evening the ND will be for us this year.

[Mug Punter]

I watched some of the first Sunday academy benchmark session for the year on the weekend. I watched the under 17s, 18s and returning 19s. (about 60 players) I get the sense it is getting more serious. The players were already looking very fit and lean, there is plenty of height (a 180cm player looks on the small side in the group) and skills were not bad for the first hit out of the year.

I get the impression that the academy is now starting to become more of a fixture than a novelty. More kids are taking the opportunity seriously and making considerable commitments. Given the apparent depth in the group I was left asking myself, how do the swans sort through all this, and i was excited by the impact all this talent will have on the local comp and Neafl.
I didn't see the under 16s but I know there are a whole bunch more in that group including blakey.

I think more important than ever swans supporters need to be defending and supporting the academy. This years draft may be a little lean, but boy it looks interesting after that.

Just wait until the GPS and CAS schools start funding their AFL programmes properly and watch the talent flow.

Are you still of the opinion that Hardman and Bell (indigenous kid from Shell Harbour) are the pick of 2017

[Mug Punter]

I'm absolutely serious. No hypocrisy and no double standards. If a NSW player gets drafted by Freo and wants to 'go home' while contracted, then he's out as well. It applies to everyone.

My point is: There are 12,000,000 jobs in Australia. There are 800 playing jobs in the AFL. If there are considerations more important than playing in a national competition away from home, then I say fine, just take one of the other 11,999,200 left over. I'm sure there are many close to home.

I'm all for clubs targeting local players in the draft. That's not an issue, and it's common practice. The academies help facilitate this. In this draft, for example, there are 7 WA prospects that deserve to be drafted by pick 33. The Perth clubs only have 2 picks in this range. So what happens to the other 5? Where do they go? Why shouldn't GC feel at ease in drafting one of these players without the fear they will bail out in a year or two.

It's funny how Australian basketball players go to the other side of the world and don't seem to get homesick. I wonder why this malady only seems to affect AFL players.

I posted my solution to this problem, but I'm happy to consider others.

How is a solution to the problem simply targeting WA boys and saying that if you happen to get drafted by an inter-state club that you can never play AFL football again in your home state again? How on earth is this fair when other kids get drafted to other states and also want to go home? How is that fair period.

Or should it be all states? So, if the Swans Academy produces a gun who we cannot afford due to lack of points and he goes to Victoria then that kid can never ever come and play for the Swans or GWS? He can go to WA or SA or QLD but he can never play for the Swans.

Sorry Ludwig, I normally agree with your posts but I think you're over-reacting. My solution - accept it as a fact of life that some kids will want to go home because that is human nature. Do your homework as a club and recruit accordingly and if the player does wish to go home then only accept a fair deal and be prepared to send him to the draft if necessary.

I think the key to your point is while contracted and with that I am in total agreement. Players should honour their contracts and clubs should enforce them though sometimes it is in the interests of both clubs to make a deal work. I think that Carlton would have been quite happy to let Bryce Gibbs go if they threw in a second draft pick in the early 20s but Adelaide didn't play fair and I'm glad Carlton stood firm.

Your proposal was much more extreme than that, it was basically stopping them from going home at all.

The reality is that players have always wanted to go home to their state of origin for various reasons. And players that WA clubs draft want to go home too. It happens all the time for kids going back to Victoria too, not too many to South Australia for obvious reasons (it is a @@@@hole). It's just something that clubs have to factor in when drafting a kid from interstate and if he's good enough they'll take the risk. Clubs that run a good development program and player welfare department will also have higher retention rate and that's why we seem to keep our interstaters better than most. Sometimes I think the GHF is just code for "this club stinks" with Brisbane being a case in point and that it s just a case that once a player decides they are unhappy that a home state club becomes a preference.

Not to mention that your proposal to ban kids from the game that want a trade back to their state of origin would be struck out in a nanosecond by a court of law...

We operate somewhere between the European model of largely total free agency unless under contract (as in the EPL) and the highly regulated environment of the American sports who incidentally have also started to go down the free agency route as demanded by their player unions.

On the whole I think the AFL model works pretty well

[Billericay]

Fairfax Media believes the Giants could lose selections 15 and 37 in this year's draft over the Lachie Whitfield debacle
GWS face loss of draft picks over Lachie Whitfield affair

[CureTheSane]

Fairfax Media believes the Giants could lose selections 15 and 37 in this year's draft over the Lachie Whitfield debacle
GWS face loss of draft picks over Lachie Whitfield affair

Idiots.
Surely they knew that the AFl would find a way to reel them in from dominating the comp.
They made it too easy for them.
AFL will strike on this because they would find another way that is so defendable and accepted.

[Ludwig]

How is a solution to the problem simply targeting WA boys and saying that if you happen to get drafted by an inter-state club that you can never play AFL football again in your home state again? How on earth is this fair when other kids get drafted to other states and also want to go home? How is that fair period.

Or should it be all states? So, if the Swans Academy produces a gun who we cannot afford due to lack of points and he goes to Victoria then that kid can never ever come and play for the Swans or GWS? He can go to WA or SA or QLD but he can never play for the Swans.

Sorry Ludwig, I normally agree with your posts but I think you're over-reacting. My solution - accept it as a fact of life that some kids will want to go home because that is human nature. Do your homework as a club and recruit accordingly and if the player does wish to go home then only accept a fair deal and be prepared to send him to the draft if necessary.

I think the key to your point is while contracted and with that I am in total agreement. Players should honour their contracts and clubs should enforce them though sometimes it is in the interests of both clubs to make a deal work. I think that Carlton would have been quite happy to let Bryce Gibbs go if they threw in a second draft pick in the early 20s but Adelaide didn't play fair and I'm glad Carlton stood firm.

Your proposal was much more extreme than that, it was basically stopping them from going home at all.

The reality is that players have always wanted to go home to their state of origin for various reasons. And players that WA clubs draft want to go home too. It happens all the time for kids going back to Victoria too, not too many to South Australia for obvious reasons (it is a @@@@hole). It's just something that clubs have to factor in when drafting a kid from interstate and if he's good enough they'll take the risk. Clubs that run a good development program and player welfare department will also have higher retention rate and that's why we seem to keep our interstaters better than most. Sometimes I think the GHF is just code for "this club stinks" with Brisbane being a case in point and that it s just a case that once a player decides they are unhappy that a home state club becomes a preference.

Not to mention that your proposal to ban kids from the game that want a trade back to their state of origin would be struck out in a nanosecond by a court of law...

We operate somewhere between the European model of largely total free agency unless under contract (as in the EPL) and the highly regulated environment of the American sports who incidentally have also started to go down the free agency route as demanded by their player unions.

On the whole I think the AFL model works pretty well

You are just misinterpreting what I'm saying. I am not targeting any state or any particular players. I won't go into any further detail, because it's the principle which is more important.

It is simply this: It has become all too easy to use homesickness as an excuse for players to effectively become free agents. It undermines the integrity of the draft and fairness in particular to the non traditional states. The AFL has sat on its hands and ignored the problem. If the AFL want to go to full-on free agency, that okay by me. But this mendacious play-acting to evade contractual agreements and bargaining in good faith has got to stop. AFL administrators and commentators ignore the matter as if it doesn't exist, yet the list of players demanding to go to a particular club before their free agency period accrues is growing exponentially.

[bloodspirit]

Found this surfing the WCE fan site. I think it's a great chart.

I agree this is a great chart. Thanks for sharing.

Possible issue/problem: do we have sufficient picks? Will be obliged to use pick 49 for our 4th (or first) rookie upgrade? If so, why the hell haven't we picked up Barrett as a delisted free agent? Surely we couldn't be afraid of pissing GWS off?

[liz]

I agree this is a great chart. Thanks for sharing.

Possible issue/problem: do we have sufficient picks? Will be obliged to use pick 49 for our 4th (or first) rookie upgrade? If so, why the hell haven't we picked up Barrett as a delisted free agent? Surely we couldn't be afraid of pissing GWS off?

We have as many draft picks as we need to fill the spots available on our senior list. We actually have two more than we will probably use, given we probably won't fill places 39 and 40. So if we are to recruit eight players and four of those are rookie upgrades, they will use the last four picks while the first four will be used to draft new Bloods.