2019 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Auntie.Gerald]

Head office for the AFL should move to the Gold Coast for some reality

[S.S. Bleeder]

Head office for the AFL should move to the Gold Coast for some reality

But who would they have their long lunches with?

[Steve]

The AFL is the only pro league where this happens. In the NBA, most players can be traded overnight to any city without their consent and they just have to go. Period.

Yeah, but the minimum salary in the NBA is $500K, and that basically doubles if you get into a second or subsequent year.

I'm sure in the AFL a second-year player would accept getting traded anywhere if they were on a minimum of $1M - but until the AFL can say "you earn so much, that offsets any unfairness of not having a say when or where you're traded", it won't happen.

There are a lot of other dynamics to it though. As comes up in the Academy debate, there would be teenagers choosing between sports and if everything was fairly equal but in the AFL you could be traded in-contract against your wishes, I'm sure that would work against the AFL.

[Ludwig]

Yeah, but the minimum salary in the NBA is $500K, and that basically doubles if you get into a second or subsequent year.

Kevin Durant still loves his mother. Just because he makes a lot of money doesn't mean he doesn't have to live with her. The money factor is totally unrelated with this go home thing. It's a total ruse. The AFL should only let adults play in the league. They can stay in the juniors if they want to stay close to home.

The bottom line is that this 'go home' factor, btw promoted exhaustively by the Melbourne media, is a blight on the competition, which the AFL states has equalisation as its highest priority.

[waswan]

Fee things that need to be adopted from NBA free agency is
A) %Max salary based on years played i.e. In the nba a max salary is 7yrs 35% of salary cap and a sliding scale back from there, similar needs to be in place in AFL.
Shouldne be able to offer Kelly the same as Buddy just cos tou have money
B) in free agency your current club can give you a 5yr deal anyone esle can only give your 4yrs

[Swannette]

So you would swap Papley for Daniher effectively ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I really fail to understand why this speculation is even voiced on a supporter site. First, papley is pretty much universally regarded as a player we would like to keep. So therefore, "real fans" would be very unlikely to contemplate a trade for him. I would think most would like to keep him. Secondly, he voluntarily extended his contract, suggesting he wants to stay. But mostly, I just don't get the apparent buzz - or sense of importance - whatever - in what I perceive to be an arrogant speculative troll like statement. I don't believe you actually think daniher is a better inclusion than papley, so the question is, why make as uch a statement. Do you want the club to make a poor decision? Each to their own and I love this site since 03 but some of the statements are quite baffling.

[stevoswan]

I'd personally put Papley well ahead of Daniher. He's younger and scores more goals per season, considering that Daniher will miss games due to injury. I also think Papley has more upside; he could be anything next year based on his trend.

I agree. Besides his obvious skills, Paps can electrify our team.....his excitement is contagious and his best is still ahead of him. Long term Swan for mine and I sincerely hope he stays.

Daniher, for all his skill and potential, seems too injury prone. At his best he could be Buddy-lite (or even mid strength) but I fear he won't get on the park enough.

[Ludwig]

This is just not the right time to go after someone like Daniher, or any big time KPP. We have a lot of KPPs that need to be tested next year just to see where they stand; it's better to wait for the outcome of those trials. Our forward line with Buddy, Reid and either McCartin or Blakey, with Amartey, McLean and Sinclair waiting for a shot, is very well stocked. Daniher would only complicate things and make our player development more difficult.

Let him play for the Dons next year. He's a FA next year. We can re-evaluate then.

[Melbourne_Blood]

I really fail to understand why this speculation is even voiced on a supporter site. First, papley is pretty much universally regarded as a player we would like to keep. So therefore, "real fans" would be very unlikely to contemplate a trade for him. I would think most would like to keep him. Secondly, he voluntarily extended his contract, suggesting he wants to stay. But mostly, I just don't get the apparent buzz - or sense of importance - whatever - in what I perceive to be an arrogant speculative troll like statement. I don't believe you actually think daniher is a better inclusion than papley, so the question is, why make as uch a statement. Do you want the club to make a poor decision? Each to their own and I love this site since 03 but some of the statements are quite baffling.

Are you serious ? Was this supposed to be directed at markwebbos? Who I directed my question ( not statement ) to ? If you’re going to have a crack get the target right first...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Markwebbos]

I really fail to understand why this speculation is even voiced on a supporter site. First, papley is pretty much universally regarded as a player we would like to keep. So therefore, "real fans" would be very unlikely to contemplate a trade for him. I would think most would like to keep him. Secondly, he voluntarily extended his contract, suggesting he wants to stay. But mostly, I just don't get the apparent buzz - or sense of importance - whatever - in what I perceive to be an arrogant speculative troll like statement. I don't believe you actually think daniher is a better inclusion than papley, so the question is, why make as uch a statement. Do you want the club to make a poor decision? Each to their own and I love this site since 03 but some of the statements are quite baffling.

Swannette, I don't think anyone has the right to say what a "real fan" would or wouldn't say. I also don't appreciate being called "arrogant", or "troll like"

Do you not think an All-Australian, who's won the Anzac medal, club B&F and kicked 65 goals in a season might be considered a reasonable swap for Papley? Particularly if it were a matter of when not if Papley leaves (that part is speculative).

[bloodspirit]

I have to side with mw here. While I'm a huge Papley fan, and don't want him to leave, KPFs are harder to come by by far and worth correspondingly more. If Papley does want to leave (and we can't trade him without his agreement), then I would absolutely do an effective swap for Daniher, notwithstanding Daniher's recent injury history, provided Daniher is fit and has all the medical clearances to assure us there is every chance of him fulfilling his potential. Still a gamble. But one worth taking.

I agree with Ludwig that we don't need Daniher next year. In fact I would go further and say it might suit us better to get him in a year's time, but I think you take him when he's available, and if we can get him now without breaking the bank, we do it.

And it's true, part of a player like Daniher's value is selling memberships. And he has a swagger about him that will pull crowds far more than McCartin let alone Pink or Amartey (who I don't rate quite as highly as Ludwig). Daniher's also tall and can offer genuine relief in the ruck.

[Nico]

I agree. Besides his obvious skills, Paps can electrify our team.....his excitement is contagious and his best is still ahead of him. Long term Swan for mine and I sincerely hope he stays.

Daniher, for all his skill and potential, seems too injury prone. At his best he could be Buddy-lite (or even mid strength) but I fear he won't get on the park enough.

I would rather not have Daniher. He has a flaw in his game that he has carried from junior footy; he tries to mark from behind due to his height but rarely succeeds. Because he is light he is easily knocked off the footy and blocked metres from the contest. The times he does play in front he looks really good. And yes, he does seem to have a fragile body and not big enough tank to ruck all day. The underrated Sinkers has a light frame, is a better mark and can go all day.

[giant]

Kevin Durant still loves his mother. Just because he makes a lot of money doesn't mean he doesn't have to live with her. The money factor is totally unrelated with this go home thing. It's a total ruse. The AFL should only let adults play in the league. They can stay in the juniors if they want to stay close to home.

The bottom line is that this 'go home' factor, btw promoted exhaustively by the Melbourne media, is a blight on the competition, which the AFL states has equalisation as its highest priority.

Really? I believe Free have recruited 9 go-homers in the last 3 years, most of whom were very good quality. For the WA clubs, it's like an academy on steroids.

[giant]

I'm with Sprite. Great analysis, well worth reading. Interesting thoughts about trading. Thanks Aaron!

Worth extracting some of the part about Papley:

"it was revealed that Papley had hit a trigger in his contract this year which automatically extended him from the end of 2020 to the end of 2023.

This means the Swans can hold him to his deal for multiple years if they wish to, and, being happy at the club, it’s believed Papley would not object to that happening if there isn’t a team who can satisfy Sydney in a trade."

Yes, a thoughtful article. Makes the very good point that the Swans have been rebuilding (albeit "on the run") for a number of years and haven't simply waited for the inevitable moment when they slipped out of the 8 to begin the process or fruitlessly try to "top up". We are effectively a long way down the rebuild already.

[Ludwig]

I just saw this article on the SEN website: HAWKS FIRST PICK TRADE RESTRICTION LIKELY TO BE WAIVED: WHATELEY

Hawthorn look set to be able to trade their first round pick despite recently implemented restrictions by the AFL according to SEN's Gerard Whateley.

So I asked myself: Why does Hawthorn deserve a rule waiver?

"They (Hawthorn) will be able to get that waived," Whateley said on SEN's Crunch Time.

"It's there for the clubs who might recklessly do it. I think you make your submission and get that waived. It would be the first instance of it, because no team has done it before.

"I think they (Hawthorn) will simply apply and they (the AFL) will simply go 'yes, you know what you're doing'.

I guess the statement It's there for the clubs who might recklessly do it refers to the Swans. No doubt the swans would incur a trade ban just for requesting the waiver.

It's comical how some clubs are exempt from the rules, while othesr are penalized for non-existent rules or rules not broken. Someone should make a list of the new rules implemented specifically to restrict the Swans.

Talk about a fair competition. What a joke!