2020 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[Ludwig]

Yep the FA compo is a joke. Either scrap it, or it comes from the club ( one way or another ) that is poaching the player. It’s still far less than the actual trade value in most cases.

What the AFL should do is use the same system to value the FA player that was used when the value points system was created. Then, whatever the points come out to has to be paid by the acquiring club. There would be a formula that translates the points to actual picks.

We should take our academy boys and go home. Move pick 3 (4 or 5) to the 2021 draft. This draft is way too compromised. With the kind of salaries being paid for recruited players, there are going to be more clubs like Collingwood and GWS that will have to offload players in a TPP dump in the coming years. It could be a good strategy to build a powerful hand to move on a player that will help the club once we are challenging for a premiership again.

Once the AFL take the candy away from the Gold Coast, they are going to be such a bad place from a TPP standpoint. They will have years of fire sales to get back to normal. Once GC make the finals, the Melbourne clubs will start crying and force the AFL to go back to the system where GC become a development zone for Victoria.

[Thunder Shaker]

Yep the FA compo is a joke. Either scrap it, or it comes from the club ( one way or another ) that is poaching the player. It’s still far less than the actual trade value in most cases.

As it stands, Geelong could get two free agents, and holds THREE first round picks that don't even get touched. How on earth is that fair, especially when Sydney was penalised for playing by the same rules by recruiting Tippett and Franklin in consecutive years with a trading ban?

IMO, this serious anomaly can be fixed by applying 80% of the value of the FA compensation as a draft points deficit against the club receiving the player. Free agents can still swap clubs but it would now come with a fair price.

If Geelong paid the 80% price, GWS' pick 10 (1395 points) and Hawthorn's pick 45 (347 points) would be applied to Geelong as a points deficit totalling 1393.6 points. That would wipe out Geelong's pick 13 (1212 points) and the remaining 181.6 points would come off Geelong's pick 15 which would slide down to pick 19.

The key here is removing Geelong's first pick (13). All following picks are bumped up one spot, and the four picks between pick 15 and pick 19 are bumped up two spots.

[Markwebbos]

The number of high draft pick KPF failures has been well documented, so any KPF pick is a big risk, but the reward is big if the player goes on to fulfill his potential. To use pick 3 on a key defender with the hope he can make it as a key forward is far too big a risk.

There are lots of key forwards who successfully move to the back line, but not many who go the other way.

I would like to see if we could trade pick 3 for a 2021 1st rounder (probably above a projected pick 7), plus a high 2nd rounder this year. Some other swaps will make up any value points gap. This would cover bids on the academy boys and give us 2 first rounders next year. We would still have our full complement of 2nd, 3rd and 4th round 2021 picks we could use to get a ruckman this year. Two quality midfielders plus a ruckman would be a good outcome for us this year.

I agree drafting a KPF is risky and requires patience, but the alternative is having to pay through the nose for one. What's more likely to deliver success: Jesse Hogan, Ben Brown, a McDonald, Paddy McCartin, Josh Schache, Tom McCartin ... anyone else on our list or pick 3.

The situation with ruckmen is also challenging as they take so long to develop no one wants to recruit them. But everyone wants multiple ready to play ruckmen. If we draft one, we'll be waiting 3 years minimum before that investment bears fruit. I can see the appeal of a Coleman-Jones or a Hayes.

BTW Cal Twomey on AFL exchange suggests that the Aliir - Port situation may be far from over.

[Melbourne_Blood]

Pick 7 compo for JD. It’s substantial for a guy that’s played 15 games in 3 years ..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Melbourne_Blood]

As it stands, Geelong could get two free agents, and holds THREE first round picks that don't even get touched. How on earth is that fair, especially when Sydney was penalised for playing by the same rules by recruiting Tippett and Franklin in consecutive years with a trading ban?

IMO, this serious anomaly can be fixed by applying 80% of the value of the FA compensation as a draft points deficit against the club receiving the player. Free agents can still swap clubs but it would now come with a fair price.

If Geelong paid the 80% price, GWS' pick 10 (1395 points) and Hawthorn's pick 45 (347 points) would be applied to Geelong as a points deficit totalling 1393.6 points. That would wipe out Geelong's pick 13 (1212 points) and the remaining 181.6 points would come off Geelong's pick 15 which would slide down to pick 19.

The key here is removing Geelong's first pick (13). All following picks are bumped up one spot, and the four picks between pick 15 and pick 19 are bumped up two spots.

I think that’s an excellent suggestion and hopefully something like that gets looked at. This current system can’t go on, for exactly the reasons you stated. You either take all your picks in the draft , take some of them and trade some for players , or get rid of all of them and go hard on trades. Surely you can’t have your cake and eat it too like the Geelong scenario.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ludwig]

I agree drafting a KPF is risky and requires patience, but the alternative is having to pay through the nose for one. What's more likely to deliver success: Jesse Hogan, Ben Brown, a McDonald, Paddy McCartin, Josh Schache, Tom McCartin ... anyone else on our list or pick 3.

If we could get any of JUH, Logan McDonald or Thilthorpe, I would go with pick 3, but most draft pundits think they will be gone by our 1st pick. So I would have to say that some of the players on your list would be more likely to deliver success.

There is a another road to success that doesn't necessarily require a dominant key forward. We are building a team with good speed and top shelf kicking skills. Sort of like a quick version of Hawthorn, 2012 - 2015 model. We should be able to produce a high scoring team with smaller, quick and strong marking forwards. We will still have McCartin and Blakey for height combined with speed and marking skills. McCartin, Blakey, Heeney, Papley, Dawson and Hayward could be a very damaging forward line if we have the midfielders to deliver the ball accurately inside 50.

[Melbourne_Blood]

Just on Geelong though, Cameron is a great get but Smith and potentially Higgins reek of short term desperation for a flag. Which is fine, but at what cost ? They’ll both probably come cheapish $ wise but they’ll be keeping guys out who will turn around soon enough and put their hand up to get a game somewhere else. It’s a bit of a pyramid scheme type deal , it’s bound to come crashing down at some point , hopefully ( for them ) they’ve stolen a flag before it does !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Markwebbos]

Pick 7 compo for JD. It’s substantial for a guy that’s played 15 games in 3 years ..

But a lot less than the Dodo knocked back last year.

However, if they can prize Carlton’s first rounder for Saad (debatable) they’ll have 6, 7 and 8 and may try and turn 7&8 into the pick 2 it looks more and more likely the Crows will get for Crouch.

RFA is a joke when teams can engineer contracts to ensure high compensation, which every club pays for, so they can get a player for nothing.

I know we benefitted from it with Buddy for nothing, but the impact on all the other clubs was much smaller. Why the hell should we have to lose a lot of points because Saints are prepared to pay way overs for Brad Crouch so they get him for nothing?

[Markwebbos]

Just on Geelong though, Cameron is a great get but Smith and potentially Higgins reek of short term desperation for a flag. Which is fine, but at what cost ? They’ll both probably come cheapish $ wise but they’ll be keeping guys out who will turn around soon enough and put their hand up to get a game somewhere else. It’s a bit of a pyramid scheme type deal , it’s bound to come crashing down at some point , hopefully ( for them ) they’ve stolen a flag before it does !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree. What is the impact of this decision on the careers of Jordan Clark and others?

The poor kids are all tied up in long contracts so there’s nothing they can do about it. If they want to leave, Cats will make clubs pay thru the nose. Look at how they screwed WCE for an out-of-contract Tim Kelly!?!

Picks 14, 24, 37 and a future first rounder! Compare that to what we got for a future Brownlow medallist?

[Markwebbos]

One player who it might be worth pursuing is Jarrod Brander at the Weagles: pick 13 in 2017, 195cm, can’t break into their forward line.

[Thunder Shaker]

I think that’s an excellent suggestion and hopefully something like that gets looked at. This current system can’t go on, for exactly the reasons you stated. You either take all your picks in the draft , take some of them and trade some for players , or get rid of all of them and go hard on trades. Surely you can’t have your cake and eat it too like the Geelong scenario.

Such a system can be a fair way of dealing with compensation picks when free agents go both ways. Any FA points deficit comes off the FA compo picks first.

Another refinement would be to get rid of the end of first round and end of second round compensation. Replace these with picks halfway between the first and second round. For the bottom side, an end of first round compensation pick would be replaced with one that falls after pick 10. Its a rule of nine: go nine spots in the draft away to find the position of the compensation pick.

End of first round compensation picks under this system (which ignores additional picks):
1->10, 2->11, 3->12, 4->13, 5->14, 6->15, 7->16, 8->17, 9->18. (first round)
10->19, 11->20, 12->21, 13->22, 14->23, 15->24, 16->25, 17->26, 18->27 (second round). Pick 19 could also count as a first-round pick because the club missed the finals.

The system I proposed has another benefit. It would protect bottom clubs better from player raids. If a club raiding the bottom side of a star player had to pony up 80% of the value of pick 2 for that player, they would think more carefully about such a decision. If they did not have enough points, the free agency recruitment could be disallowed.

[Melbourne_Blood]

But a lot less than the Dodo knocked back last year.

However, if they can prize Carlton’s first rounder for Saad (debatable) they’ll have 6, 7 and 8 and may try and turn 7&8 into the pick 2 it looks more and more likely the Crows will get for Crouch.

RFA is a joke when teams can engineer contracts to ensure high compensation, which every club pays for, so they can get a player for nothing.

I know we benefitted from it with Buddy for nothing, but the impact on all the other clubs was much smaller. Why the hell should we have to lose a lot of points because Saints are prepared to pay way overs for Brad Crouch so they get him for nothing?

I think it’s murky whether we actually offered the two first rounders, just that we asked if that would get it done and were rebuked. At this stage our best ( non) trade move in years !! Suck it Dodo


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Nico]

Pick 7 compo for JD. It’s substantial for a guy that’s played 15 games in 3 years ..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's a joke. We have a draft that is supposed to be helping equalisation. I am with the idea that compensation picks are slotted in after the bottom 8 have had their pick.

[Melbourne_Blood]

It's a joke. We have a draft that is supposed to be helping equalisation. I am with the idea that compensation picks are slotted in after the bottom 8 have had their pick.

Another great idea, in terms of equalisation though thunder shaker is into a good thing. The top sides can’t keep plundering the bottom sides and give nothing up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Markwebbos]

I think it’s murky whether we actually offered the two first rounders, just that we asked if that would get it done and were rebuked. At this stage our best ( non) trade move in years !! Suck it Dodo

Allegedly we were prepared to offer pick 5 and another first rounder (9 from Carlton or our future which is 3) but never offered it because Dodo refused to entertain it.

Bottom line is Dodo rolled the dice, and lost big time: paid a year's salary and lost at least one first round draft pick.