2018 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[KSAS]

This is a more recent article:

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-trade-news-lost-salary-cap-cash-contributes-to-list-squeeze-at-gws-giants-20161006-grwmi8.html

Says all clubs have same salary cap at 2017. GWS's problems was that they signed players before the rules were changed.
As usual, Eddie was very helpful and suggested the giants need to sit out the 2017/18 trade periods (another trade ban for northern clubs).

You cant underestimate how destructive those melbourne @@@@@s are.

Thanks for clearing that up Barry.

[Blood Fever]

This is a more recent article:

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-trade-news-lost-salary-cap-cash-contributes-to-list-squeeze-at-gws-giants-20161006-grwmi8.html

Says all clubs have same salary cap at 2017. GWS's problems was that they signed players before the rules were changed.
As usual, Eddie was very helpful and suggested the giants need to sit out the 2017/18 trade periods (another trade ban for northern clubs).

You cant underestimate how destructive those melbourne @@@@@s are.

This is why I revelled in seeing McGuire cop stick as he walked past me after the game last Saturday. Karma bus still has heaps of petrol in the tank as far as he's concerned.

[KSAS]

Harley also quashed rumours of the club making moves for Gold Coast defender Steven May and GWS midfielder Dylan Shiel.

Bugger!!! Particulaly with Shiel. Has Harley quashed Gaff as well?

[stellation]

Scully contracted for $500k for the next 2 seasons with GWS trying to clear space

We should be all over that, perfect (and cheaper) replacement for Hanners

The salary cap squeeze must be pretty severe to consider offloading a guy of Scully's calibre at that price (even coming off a major injury). He'd have to agree to a trade if he's contracted, and I assume that agreement is contingent on a revised contract for a lot more bucks at his new club.

[barry]

Scully would have had a very heavily front loaded contract.

[Bloods05]

Dropped, well ahead of time too based on the Vic media hype that they would win all premierships between 2016 to 2026.
Gill, our man of steel, folded like a cheap Bunnings camping chair.

So Barry, do you think GWS should have kept their CoLA after the Swans lost theirs?

[KTigers]

So Barry, do you think GWS should have kept their CoLA after the Swans lost theirs?

I think I can see what you're thinking, but maybe GWS should have been allowed to keep COLA for as long as the Swans
had it. Wouldn't that be fair? Both teams are in the same city, same housing market etc....

[liz]

I think I can see what you're thinking, but maybe GWS should have been allowed to keep COLA for as long as the Swans
had it. Wouldn't that be fair? Both teams are in the same city, same housing market etc....

Both teams still have a watered down version of COLA - the rental allowance for players earning under the median wage.

The purpose of this allowance (and COLA before it) is to offset the higher costs of living, especially in the property market, and hence provide some offset against the inherent disadvantage the Sydney clubs have over those in other states in retaining players, particularly those for whom cost of living takes up a meaningful part of what they earn. I don't understand the argument that one Sydney club should continue to have it and the other not.

The question of a retention allowance for the clubs in the northern states is a separate question. Brisbane had one for a while, and we did too. Although ours was always referred to as a COLA, it was larger while Brisbane also had a retention allowance. I think it was around 15%, and then was cut back to just under 10% when Brisbane lost their retention allowance, implying the larger allowance was both a COLA and a retention allowance. I suspect all four northern clubs, even those who can offer the lure of playing in a competitive side (ie the two Sydney teams currently) still have to pay a little more to retain non-local players (ie most of them) than other clubs do, particularly the large Victorian clubs. But a retention allowance will never swim again because the powerful clubs won't let it.

[liz]

Top draft pick not part of any Shiel deal: Saints - AFL.com.au

Anyone else think this is ridiculous from the Saints? They are reportedly offering Shiel a contract well in excess of $1m a year yet think they ought to be able to obtain him without giving up pick 4. He ain't a free agent. It's not only players who are acting as if they are free agents before they have earned that right. Clubs, too, are acting as if they should be able to secure top-tier, non-free agents using a bit of loose change in their pocket.

[KSAS]

In the words of Darryl Kerrigan - "tell them they're dreaming!"

Saints would have to trade a Jack Stevens plus a future pick you'd think? Leathlan has already stated Stevens will be at Saints next year & with their 2019 2nd rounder seemingly locked in for Hanners, they don't have any hand to play with. Just PR from Saints to make them look active for their fans knowing they have no chance getting Sheil without using their pick 4. Heard whisper earlier on Sheil isn't interested in Saints anyhow.

[barry]

So Barry, do you think GWS should have kept their CoLA after the Swans lost theirs?

Lets defined what allowances there are and arent.
In the old days, Brisbane and Sydney had a "retention" allowance. This was to be able to retain players from outside their state. As we can see from the significant go-home factor, aided and abeted by free agency, this still has merit. Sydney, being a destination club for a while there, caused its undoing. Its now gone.
"Cost of living allowance". This was a sydney thing due to the higher cost of living in Sydney. Gone now, but I dont think COL differential has changed. So now Sydney clubs are at a disadvantage. Although replaced by rent-assistance or whatever its called.

GWS and Gold coast have significant retention problems. These are always there for new fledgling clubs. But still real enough for Brisbane and Sydney
Sydney and GWS have cost of living problems. Sydney is expensive and not a footy state.

Without some sort of cap extension, these teams are at a disadvantage and more likely to end up near the bottom of the ladder long term.

[barry]

Top draft pick not part of any Shiel deal: Saints - AFL.com.au

Anyone else think this is ridiculous from the Saints? They are reportedly offering Shiel a contract well in excess of $1m a year yet think they ought to be able to obtain him without giving up pick 4. He ain't a free agent. It's not only players who are acting as if they are free agents before they have earned that right. Clubs, too, are acting as if they should be able to secure top-tier, non-free agents using a bit of loose change in their pocket.

Shiel could easily be worth a number 1 pick. I mean what are the chances a No.1 pick will be better than him ? Less than 50/50 I'd say.

[Markwebbos]

This is what Harley said about us NOT landing a big fish this trade period! Swans trade update - sydneyswans.com.au

Our focus throughout the year was to sign some of our priority players that were out of contract in Jake Lloyd, Allir Aliir and Sam Naismith towards the end of the year. We are still absolutely planning on being active during the trade period but I would be surprised if it was one of those big fish [like Shiel, May etc]

[KSAS]

With the new drafting rules surrounding Carlton & GC having first access to players who missed out in draft or no longer in the AFL system (i.e. 2nd chance), just heard either club could potentially draft Mumford & then on trade him to GWS if he is serious making a comeback!

[Markwebbos]

With the new drafting rules surrounding Carlton & GC having first access to players who missed out in draft or no longer in the AFL system (i.e. 2nd chance), just heard either club could potentially draft Mumford & then on trade him to GWS if he is serious making a comeback!

I thought big Mummy was still on GW$' books?