2020 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[bloodspirit]

I'm not sure if you all are understanding my point or not. Currently, Paps is contracted (for this season and another two). That is why last year when he wanted to go we were able to hold him against his wishes. However, potentially, if contracts are effectively voided so that they can be downgraded to lower value amounts due to the COVID-19 induced financial crisis (can this even happen? I'm not sure - legally probably not, commercially, maybe), players would not have to accept the renegotiated level (even if we offered the same or more than he is currently getting) and he would have more choice about whether he walks. The only thing we could then do might be to refuse an inadequate trade offer and force him to choose between taking our offer and going to the open draft (possibly with a price tag on his head designed to make him hard for anyone except the club of his preference to take him).

Who knows whether this will happen. Nobody has much of a clue at this stage. But the point of my post is to speculate about (a) whether this might happen; and (b) whether he would go against our wishes if he gets the option. Nobody, certainly not I, is questioning his worth to the club. (Although no player is priceless.)

[Nico]

I'm not sure if you all are understanding my point or not. Currently, Paps is contracted (for this season and another two). That is why last year when he wanted to go we were able to hold him against his wishes. However, potentially, if contracts are effectively voided so that they can be downgraded to lower value amounts due to the COVID-19 induced financial crisis (can this even happen? I'm not sure - legally probably not, commercially, maybe), players would not have to accept the renegotiated level (even if we offered the same or more than he is currently getting) and he would have more choice about whether he walks. The only thing we could then do might be to refuse an inadequate trade offer and force him to choose between taking our offer and going to the open draft (possibly with a price tag on his head designed to make him hard for anyone except the club of his preference to take him).

Who knows whether this will happen. Nobody has much of a clue at this stage. But the point of my post is to speculate about (a) whether this might happen; and (b) whether he would go against our wishes if he gets the option. Nobody, certainly not I, is questioning his worth to the club. (Although no player is priceless.)

Are you a footy journo?

[bloodspirit]

Are you a footy journo?

Yeah. I'm just looking for some quotes from a few of you "reliable" sources. It's not that easy reporting 'news' from my lounge room you know. Help a mate out. C'mon, Nico.

[Melbourne_Blood]

I'm not sure if you all are understanding my point or not. Currently, Paps is contracted (for this season and another two). That is why last year when he wanted to go we were able to hold him against his wishes. However, potentially, if contracts are effectively voided so that they can be downgraded to lower value amounts due to the COVID-19 induced financial crisis (can this even happen? I'm not sure - legally probably not, commercially, maybe), players would not have to accept the renegotiated level (even if we offered the same or more than he is currently getting) and he would have more choice about whether he walks. The only thing we could then do might be to refuse an inadequate trade offer and force him to choose between taking our offer and going to the open draft (possibly with a price tag on his head designed to make him hard for anyone except the club of his preference to take him).

Who knows whether this will happen. Nobody has much of a clue at this stage. But the point of my post is to speculate about (a) whether this might happen; and (b) whether he would go against our wishes if he gets the option. Nobody, certainly not I, is questioning his worth to the club. (Although no player is priceless.)

I'm not sure if you all are understanding my point or not. Currently, Paps is contracted (for this season and another two). That is why last year when he wanted to go we were able to hold him against his wishes. However, potentially, if contracts are effectively voided so that they can be downgraded to lower value amounts due to the COVID-19 induced financial crisis (can this even happen? I'm not sure - legally probably not, commercially, maybe), players would not have to accept the renegotiated level (even if we offered the same or more than he is currently getting) and he would have more choice about whether he walks. The only thing we could then do might be to refuse an inadequate trade offer and force him to choose between taking our offer and going to the open draft (possibly with a price tag on his head designed to make him hard for anyone except the club of his preference to take him).

Who knows whether this will happen. Nobody has much of a clue at this stage. But the point of my post is to speculate about (a) whether this might happen; and (b) whether he would go against our wishes if he gets the option. Nobody, certainly not I, is questioning his worth to the club. (Although no player is priceless.)

That’s a very big can of worms to open, could not see that happening, would cause even more disarray to an already wobbly competition.

And if it did it opens up just as many opportunities for us to go cherry picking from other clubs as well...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bloodspirit]

I guess, at this point, the talk seems to be of gradually shrinking the salary cap and it's unclear whether it will be necessary to renegotiate player contracts to achieve the reductions or whether they can be achieved just on basis of unallocated money. If it's the latter, it's going to suck for all the players out of contract because there will be way less money in the pool for their contracts whereas the guys who are at the beginning of a long, lucrative contract (e.g. Coniglio) will be sitting pretty. So the gradual, phased reductions in the salary cap tend to make me think they won't seek to void and renegotiate contracts but the unfairness that will produce tends to make me think they will do it, probably in collaboration with the AFLPA to produce fairer outcomes. But I really have no idea.

[Nico]

Yeah. I'm just looking for some quotes from a few of you "reliable" sources. It's not that easy reporting 'news' from my lounge room you know. Help a mate out. C'mon, Nico.

Sorry, can't reveal my sources.

[bloodspirit]

FWIW, Damien Barrett can foresee 75% of player contracts being renegotiated, especially those recently signed e.g. Brodie Grundy's.


AFL Video - AFL.com.au

I think it comes in a little after the 29 minute mark.

[S.S. Bleeder]

2020 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

I wholeheartedly agree that Paps needs to stay. He's one of our elite players. We can't let him walk unless we get adequate return. If he nominates the Blues again, then one of their elite players should make their way north, or a set of very handy picks. The Blues would surely baulk at letting Cripps or Walsh go. We should do the same with Tom.

Agreed. It’s time for us to start dictating the terms of trades.

[Melbourne_Blood]

FWIW, Damien Barrett can foresee 75% of player contracts being renegotiated, especially those recently signed e.g. Brodie Grundy's.


AFL Video - AFL.com.au

I think it comes in a little after the 29 minute mark.

DB sees a lot of things, generally his ‘insights’ miss the mark, sometimes spectacularly. Without watching the video, is he suggesting (like you ) that re-negotiating contracts could lead to players switching clubs if they are unhappy with their new salary ?

I just can’t see how that will work, every club is going to be operating under the new cap so I hardly think anyone is going to have a war chest there to throw overs at players from other clubs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bloodspirit]

DB sees a lot of things, generally his ‘insights’ miss the mark, sometimes spectacularly. Without watching the video, is he suggesting (like you ) that re-negotiating contracts could lead to players switching clubs if they are unhappy with their new salary ?

I just can’t see how that will work, every club is going to be operating under the new cap so I hardly think anyone is going to have a war chest there to throw overs at players from other clubs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not suggesting players contracts will be renegotiated. I've heard talk that player contracts will have to be renegotiated and I have wondered, if that is so, what are the consequences? I have asked whether others have thoughts about this and, in particular how it might impact on whether Papley remains at the club. DB's opinion is nothing more than an example of that. I agree that he is not especially credible. He's certainly not one of my favourite pundits.

I take your point about clubs not necessarily having war chests to chase other players if all (or even just a substantial slice of) the contracts are negotiated down. However that doesn't mean that Papley couldn't use a contract renegotiation as an opportunity to return to Melbourne if that's what he has his mind set on. And I don't buy that just because he's playing well and recommitted to the club for the season that that necessarily means he's given up on the idea of going back to Melbourne. However, I do think that the salary Carlton was offering him was part of his motivation for going and, if they are no longer in a position to offer a better salary maybe his motivation will dry up.

[707]

Carlton are paying eye watering front ended $ to Jack Martin so big $ to lure Papley may not be there for a second bite.

IF the AFL are intent on reducing the Salary Cap going forward then the only way it would work is a flat % across all current contracts, that is if the AFLPA agree to players earning less in future. A 10% cut to all players going forward would save over $24 million per annum across the league, $3 million per club reduction in soft cap (which should be a hard cap to stop the arms race) saves $54 mill per annum.

Remember this CBA only has two years? more to run. We then get into the new broadcast deal which may not be as lucrative this time around meaning Salary Caps would need to be lowered anyway?

This crisis has thrown up a can of worms in so many areas of the AFL, those left working at AFL House are really earning their reduced salaries now!

[Aprilbr]

My feeling is that Papley continues to be highly connected to his family in Vic and that his girlfriend will continue to put him under pressure to relocate. Moreover, others might pay him more than us. If that is the case., then we should adopt a GWS approach of getting the most for him in a likely trade. It seemed to work for GWS in the Treloar, Shiel and Hosken-Elliott deals. Good players traded but good picks in return. While I would love for him to stay perhaps we just need to accept the reality of the situation and get the best deal? If he has another good season (assuming we play again this season) then a top 10 pick is quite plausible.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[bloodspirit]

My feeling is that Papley continues to be highly connected to his family in Vic and that his girlfriend will continue to put him under pressure to relocate. Moreover, others might pay him more than us. If that is the case., then we should adopt a GWS approach of getting the most for him in a likely trade. It seemed to work for GWS in the Treloar, Shiel and Hosken-Elliott deals. Good players traded but good picks in return. While I would love for him to stay perhaps we just need to accept the reality of the situation and get the best deal? If he has another good season (assuming we play again this season) then a top 10 pick is quite plausible.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

I think we play it the same way as last time around. We only let him go if we are satisfied (a) that we are somehow going to be able to replace him on the field (especially his goal scoring); and (b) we get sufficient compensation at the trade table. I think this is a reasonable approach and, provided we are reasonable, he is not likely to spit the dummy and he will continue to give his best for the club while he remains with us. If we don't get those things, we hang on to him for another season (assuming we don't lose the choice).

Incidentally, I would expect that his worth at the trade table will fall as (1) he gets closer to the end of his contract; and (2) gets older. Still at this stage he is still young, in his early prime and well worth a top 10 pick in my view.

[Aprilbr]

I think we play it the same way as last time around. We only let him go if we are satisfied (a) that we are somehow going to be able to replace him on the field (especially his goal scoring); and (b) we get sufficient compensation at the trade table. I think this is a reasonable approach and, provided we are reasonable, he is not likely to spit the dummy and he will continue to give his best for the club while he remains with us. If we don't get those things, we hang on to him for another season (assuming we don't lose the choice).

Incidentally, I would expect that his worth at the trade table will fall as (1) he gets closer to the end of his contract; and (2) gets older. Still at this stage he is still young, in his early prime and well worth a top 10 pick in my view.

I agree with you, BS. He is entering his prime years. If he another season this team like last season then he is definitely worth a top 10 pick.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[MattW]

I agree with you, BS. He is entering his prime years. If he another season this team like last season then he is definitely worth a top 10 pick.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

I think his trade value has already increased. In part, because of where we set the market. But also, playing well for Victoria, which prompted a bunch of 'looks good in navy blue!' takes. Also had a very good first game with a couple of great goals.

He's at least worth a top ten pick.