General footy chat The problems with free agency

[Thunder Shaker]

The problems with free agency have been discussed in other threads. I have created this thread to allow these problems to be discussed in greater depth.

Problem 1: The club receiving a player via free agency pays no price in the draft for such a player. This penalises all other clubs.

Problem 2: The free agency compensation picks are poorly structured. A club finishing on the bottom of the ladder has essentially no difference between an end-of-first-round compensation pick and a second-round compensation pick. A club finishing as premiers has essentially no difference between a first-round and end-of-first-round compensation pick.

Problem 3: The formula for determining free agency picks is not disclosed publicly by the AFL.

Problem 4: Clubs that are regularly raided by other clubs for players are not given any assistance to aid player retention. This is particularly pronounced with Gold Coast and GWS.

Problem 5: Clubs that regularly replenish their playing lists via free agency are able to circumvent the AFL's equalisation policy.

Problem 6: There is no effective limit on the number of players a club can acquire with free agency other than the salary cap.

Problem 7: Free agency may allow draft tampering by manipulating the compensation picks.

The system has other problems as well.

[Aprilbr]

I love your list, TS. I would add to it that highly sort after FAs seem to target big Victorian Clubs and/or teams right at the Apex of their premiership window. The rest miss out.

Another problem is that the Salary Cap is not a very effective vehicle for levelling the playing field as players will go to big clubs for less, and want overs for playing at battlers eg Gold Coast. The big clubs also seem to be better able to provide players with inducements outside of the Cap to go to their club. This might be in the form of "marketing contracts" or in future business opportunities. So this problem is exacerbated with FAs who also relish these additional benefits.

All up, I dont like FA and I also think the Salary Cap needs to be more tightly regulated including banning extra marketing contracts.

[bloodspirit]

Thanks for the thread, Thunder Shaker (great handle, btw), and for highlighting the imperfections of the free agency system.

I'm not convinced about problem 2. I think the AFL actually has a lot of flexibility although we don't know much about it because of problem 3. Also, the point and effect of the current structure is to try and equalise hence the differential impact of a pick coming after your natural draft position.

[bloodspirit]

I think the salary cap is very effective at equalising but it's not sufficient by itself. Fortunately we have the draft as well but it may still not be enough. There are some clubs that defy the odds to stay at the top (including us) but that's desirable to because there has to be room for skill and good management to advantage you, otherwise it's not really a competition.

[Thunder Shaker]

Thanks for the thread, Thunder Shaker (great handle, btw), and for highlighting the imperfections of the free agency system.

I'm not convinced about problem 2. I think the AFL actually has a lot of flexibility although we don't know much about it because of problem 3. Also, the point and effect of the current structure is to try and equalise hence the differential impact of a pick coming after your natural draft position.

I'll quote the problem 2 here for reference:

Problem 2: The free agency compensation picks are poorly structured. A club finishing on the bottom of the ladder has essentially no difference between an end-of-first-round compensation pick and a second-round compensation pick. A club finishing as premiers has essentially no difference between a first-round and end-of-first-round compensation pick.

(There are also end of second round picks. The same defect applies to them. For simplicity, I'll only mention the end of first round picks.)

To see why the picks are not well structured, consider a club that finishes in 10th. Their first-round pick will be pick 9, and second-round pick would be pick 27.

* First-round compensation would be pick 10.
* End of first round compensation would be pick 19.
* Second-round compensation would be pick 28.

Notice how these theoretical picks are fairly evenly spaced?

For clubs at the top or bottom, there is much less difference between the end of first round compensation picks and their first or second round picks. A bottom club earning an end of first round compensation pick would receive almost the same compensation as a top club, differing by at most one or two draft spots. This penalises bottom clubs compared to top clubs.

An improvement can be made by replacing the end of first round compensation picks by a draft pick midway between the club's first and second round picks. This counts as a first-round pick if it comes before the bottom side's second-round pick.

[snajik]

Great list. I've increasingly felt that FA is having a really negative effect on the game. The Victorian clubs have clearly been the primary beneficiaries. Whatever one's thoughts are on the expansion clubs, it can't be denied that they've been raided mercilessly, along with teams finishing lower on the ladder.
It irks me that our initiative to grow the game in Sydney by introducing an Academy was penalised, whereas the FA raids by (mostly) Vic clubs which does nothing to nurture the game is applauded.
I'd like to see a limit on how many players a team can have on its list that began their careers with other clubs (FA or otherwise). A number like 6 or 7 could work. Then clubs such as Collingwood, Hawthorn, Carlton, Richmond etc and more recently St Kilda would be forced to rely on the draft, more aligned with the premise of equalisation, and actually do the work themselves in polishing the player's skills and attributes.
I'd be very surprised also if there aren't surreptitious deals going on between player agents and journalists, whereby the journalist intentionally fans a rumour about a player wanting to go to a specific club. Where the desire for a bigger salary is portrayed as 'player discontent.' The media report with such assuredness around these matters now, it appears less than legit.

[707]

Gaming the system to the detriment of other clubs who are not involved in FA dealings that year.

Crows should be doing all they can to keep Brad Crouch to assist in their rebuild but are (with Saints assistance) gaming the system to overpay Crouch to collect Crows a pick 2 pushing out every other clubs picks. North who finish the season the biggest basket case will have their pick 2 pushed out to pick 3 because of compo pick manipulation.

Crouch is not worth pick 2 in anyone's eyes, even the Crows, hence they are pushing him out because the reward is greater than the players value. No way should this be the case. A maximum compo pick should be pick 11 after all the non finalists have used their first rounder.

[Thunder Shaker]

I'd like to see a limit on how many players a team can have on its list that began their careers with other clubs (FA or otherwise). A number like 6 or 7 could work. Then clubs such as Collingwood, Hawthorn, Carlton, Richmond etc and more recently St Kilda would be forced to rely on the draft, more aligned with the premise of equalisation, and actually do the work themselves in polishing the player's skills and attributes.

A straight limit based on head counts would not work because not all players are of equal ability. A star player is not the same as a player offered a contract by a new club after being delisted. It also discourages clubs from swapping players to balance the playing lists.

A limit based on contract amounts could work.

Another possible limit is a points-based system that restricts clubs from drafting too many players based on free agency.

I posted possible ideas in the 2020 trading thread:

Free agency is unbalanced because it rewards established clubs at the expense of the others.

To balance it, it needs to have a cost in draft picks or points for the destination club.

Possible limits (that would only apply to free agents that do not attract compensation).
* 20% of the cost of the compensation to be applied as a points deficit for the destination club.
* Clubs are limited to signing three free agents per four years, with that limit reduced by half a player each time the club made the finals.
* A similar system to above, but each free agent has a value from zero to five points, and clubs are limited to 12 free agency points every four years with that limit reduced by 1 point for making the finals, by two points for making the preliminary finals, and by four points for the premiers. Clubs losing players get additional free agency points equal to half the player's value.

To expand on the points system: A player that attracts a first-round compo pick would be valued at five points, a player that attracts no compensation would be worth zero. However, on reflection I would add one to each of those numbers so all players that transfer via free agency (other than delisted players) have a points value.

The points system for clubs that I suggested here also needs some work.

[barry]

Great list. I've increasingly felt that FA is having a really negative effect on the game. The Victorian clubs have clearly been the primary beneficiaries. Whatever one's thoughts are on the expansion clubs, it can't be denied that they've been raided mercilessly, along with teams finishing lower on the ladder.

Eddie McGuire let it slip on footy classified last week when he said that GWS and gold coast were set up such that they would be poached once players hit 26/27 at free agency, or earlier.
Caro, ever aware of AFL media policy, had to quickly "correct" him.

We arent stupid you muppets.

[Thunder Shaker]

Problem 2: The free agency compensation picks are poorly structured. A club finishing on the bottom of the ladder has essentially no difference between an end-of-first-round compensation pick and a second-round compensation pick. A club finishing as premiers has essentially no difference between a first-round and end-of-first-round compensation pick.

Adelaide has highlighted how this is a problem. Their head of football Adam Kelly said today (emphasis is mine):

We're obviously hopeful the compensation would be resulting in pick two, and it’s only really under those circumstances we would consider matching and looking to force a trade or obtain Brad's services.
Fortunately, in this situation, Brad's been fairly open about his love of Adelaide and of the footy club, so we don't think it would be a scenario where the player would not be wanting to come back to the club, so we would certainly look to match if it's not resulting in pick two.
We'll certainly be looking for a better outcome than what that compensation would be if it's not pick two, because [otherwise] it would be end of first round or start of second, which because of our ladder position is effectively the same thing.
That pick itself could push out to the mid-20s after all the Next Generation Academy [bids] come through. We don't see that as adequate compensation for a player of Brad's calibre, so we would certainly be looking at matching."

Source: Trade Talk - AFL.com.au

[Thunder Shaker]

How to fix free agency

1. Replace the end of first round and end of second round compensation picks with new mid-round compensation picks that fall nine places after the position of the club's first-round and second-round compensation picks, before any pick adjustment. This is the "Rule of Nine". This pick falls between the club's first-round and second-round picks for a mid-first-round compensation pick, or between the second-round and third-round picks for a mid-second-round pick. Note that such a pick could fall in the next round of the draft for clubs finishing high on the ladder. The mid-round picks are placed after first-round and second-round compensation picks, where applicable, but before second-round and third-round compensation picks.
* Example 1: a club that finishes 18th on the ladder gets a mid-first-round compensation pick after the position of the first-round pick of the club that finishes 9th.
* Example 2: a club that finishes 7th on the ladder that earns a mid-first-round compensation pick has that pick placed after the position of the second-round pick of the club that finishes 16th, but before any second-round compensation picks for the 16th-placed club.

2. A club that receives a player through free agency pays 80% of the cost of the compensation picks for that player through a draft points deficit. These deficit points are applied first to any free agency compensation picks they receive (with no discount), and then to the club's remaining draft picks starting with the first-round pick. A club that has insufficient points to pay for such a free agent with their draft picks has the remaining points applied to their following year's draft with no points discount.

3. A club always receives the compensation picks to which they are entitled. This is important for cases where a club has players going both ways via free agency.

[Thunder Shaker]

Sliding doors 30/10/20
Has a few remarks about problems with free agency:
Adelaide (Saints, Crouch, a $800,000 per year offer and pick 2)
Essendon (compares pick 7 compensation for Daniher with pick 19 compensation for Franklin)
St Kilda (more remarks about what's going on with Crouch)
AFL (criticism of the secrecy of FA compensation, advocates removing it or making it transparent)

[Jimitron5000]

Free agency is a sham, one of the few things I agree with Damian Barrett on.
Unless they come up with a way of charging the destination club a suitable points fee, then I would completely do away with draft pick compensation. Whatever system they have gives wildly inconsistent results and penalises every other club rather than one receiving the player.
I thought if there has to be compensation then a monetary payment could work, where the destination club effectively buys the player at a the players average salary for one year with the money going to the increase their soft cap.

In any case, it has to change.

[Thunder Shaker]

Free agency is a sham, one of the few things I agree with Damian Barrett on.
Unless they come up with a way of charging the destination club a suitable points fee, then I would completely do away with draft pick compensation. Whatever system they have gives wildly inconsistent results and penalises every other club rather than one receiving the player.
I thought if there has to be compensation then a monetary payment could work, where the destination club effectively buys the player at a the players average salary for one year with the money going to the increase their soft cap.

In any case, it has to change.

I don't want to see transfer fees reintroduced in any form. Even the situation where a club pays another club for the salary of a player is dubious.

I like the idea of a "points fee" for a free agent. Such a system would be a more flexible system than the current draft picks in positions that are fixed to a club's finishing position.

One area where free agency has something vaguely correct is the FA compensation being greater for clubs nearer the bottom of the ladder. This can be removed if a higher-ranked club paid for the compensation picks.

Let's rework free agency with such a "points fee". Free agency can be reworked by giving players a points value, up to 3000 (the value of pick 1), the club losing the player gets a compensation draft pick closest in value to that points value, then the value of that compensation pick is taken from the draft picks of the destination club starting with any FA compensation picks that club has received (with no discount), then their first pick that falls after the compensation pick (with a 20% discount), their remaining draft picks after that (with 20% discount), and then any remaining points deficit is applied as a points deficit to their draft picks in the following year (with no discount).

[Thunder Shaker]

Another problem with free agency is the draft manipulation it encourages.

From the AFL's Trade Talk, emphasis is mine:

"Kyle Hartigan is officially a Hawk after crossing from Adelaide via trade on Thursday.

While the key defender was an unrestricted free agent and could have walked to Hawthorn for free, the Hawks chose to trade so they didn't dilute their compensation for departed wingman Isaac Smith.

They gave up a future fourth-round selection in exchange for the 28-year-old."