Salary caps and list management

[blaze036]

How on earth is it possible for Hawthorn to have 700k over a few years free to get Frawley

I know they lost Franklin but how are they getting away with paying their other players so little?

 

[Seedsfan]

How on earth is it possible for Hawthorn to have 700k over a few years free to get Frawley

I know they lost Franklin but how are they getting away with paying their other players so little?

Because some people don't play for money

 

[blaze036]

Because some people don't play for money

Who are they and lets sign them for 60k

I don't believe hawthorn have anywhere near as much free salary cap space as some people make out. McEvoy and Lake wouldn't of come cheap

 

[Seedsfan]

Who are they and lets sign them for 60k

Their are a lot of players in the AFL that remaining a one club player is more important than getting as much money as they can get playing footy

 

[blaze036]

Their are a lot of players in the AFL that remaining a one club player is more important than getting as much money as they can get playing footy

That is true and every club has them but that still doesn't explain where Hawthorn get all this money from despite being the dominate force in the competition regularly now

I reckon a lot of the 700k or so they had saved for Franklin would of gone to Mcevoy/Lake and the rest to keep the players they have

 

[Seedsfan]

That is true and every club has them but that still doesn't explain where Hawthorn get all this money from despite being the dominate force in the competition regularly now

Because most of their guys would preffer to play there on less money and have a shot at winning a flag then going elsewhere

 

[Apex36]

That is true and every club has them but that still doesn't explain where Hawthorn get all this money from despite being the dominate force in the competition regularly now

I reckon a lot of the 700k or so they had saved for Franklin would of gone to Mcevoy/Lake and the rest to keep the players they have

Lake was signed before Buddy left, and it was pretty well publicised that he took a pay cut to move from the dogs for the lure of a premiership.
McEvoy, whilst being a decent ruckman, certainly wouldn't command the salary of a bonafide star. Coupled with Baileys retirement last year, I doubt he would have made a big dint in their cap space.
It was also pretty well publicised that some of the Hawks stars like Hodge and Mitchell signed contracts below their market value in the hopes they would be able to keep Franklin.
I would say they have a pretty handy amount of space in their cap at the moment.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

They pick up guys who aren't superstars but can kick. Moneyball in the AFL.

 

[Old Spice]

Sewell, Mitchell, Hodge as well. Hawthorn will easily accommodate a Frawley

 

[Jelly Bean]

They pick up guys who aren't superstars but can kick. Moneyball in the AFL.

Yeah, Hawthorn is the best example of the 'moneyball' principle in the AFL. Not just getting players who can kick (which is a little bit of a no-brainer) but getting left footers in particular (who it was found had a 2-3 point higher kicking efficiency than right footers).

 

[DaVe86]

There are 2 recruiting techniques that have worked in recent times. One is Hawthorn who have consistently topped up on older players from clubs at the bottom of the ladder. They get them cheap because the other club is just interested in a 2nd round pick.

The other technique has been the Geelong model where they just build from within and develop kids around experienced stars.

We fall more into the Geelong mould, but also go out and recruit heavily and have utilised Free Agency. I think ours is working nicely too.

I would not encourage us to go our recruiting 30 year olds because our list is too young. I think we keep building through youth. Once the side has matured, then I think we go recruit the top up players. I think we are only 1 or 2 years off that.

 

[soreplums]

Build through the draft and top up via FA.

 

[Scodog10]

Their are a lot of players in the AFL that remaining a one club player is more important than getting as much money as they can get playing footy

Spot on. Throughout the past 6-7 seasons Geelongs highest paid player has been on 600k. Sometimes the best of the best take less for the good of the club.

 

[Knightmare]

Spot on. Throughout the past 6-7 seasons Geelongs highest paid player has been on 600k. Sometimes the best of the best take less for the good of the club.

It's also the foundation Collingwood was built on.

Under Jock McHale all players were on the same salary regardless of talent. It was a team thing. Everyone because of it was considered an equal. And while it's impractical today the theory from a team concept standpoint is excellent.

It has also been done in other sports with great success. The San Antonio Spurs for those basketball fans are the model organisation whereby all their stars have given up the potential for more money and more prominent roles for winning.

If you want to build a winner everyone needs to sacrifice to stay together and it would be optimal if Collingwood can generate this same winning environment. We're the highest profile club, attract the largest crowds, play at the MCG and have a young squad with winning chances so you'd hope we could follow this formula.

If looking for a tall midfield David Mundy is an option this year. As a defender Sean Dempster this year or Joel Patfull next year as a free agents would be great pickups with our back half lacking experience. Anyone younger or higher profile is too costly and too restrictive on future moves.

 

[Kilmo]

It's also the foundation Collingwood was built on.

Under Jock McHale all players were on the same salary regardless of talent. It was a team thing. Everyone because of it was considered an equal. And while it's impractical today the theory from a team concept standpoint is excellent.

It has also been done in other sports with great success. The San Antonio Spurs for those basketball fans are the model organisation whereby all their stars have given up the potential for more money and more prominent roles for winning.

If you want to build a winner everyone needs to sacrifice to stay together and it would be optimal if Collingwood can generate this same winning environment. We're the highest profile club, attract the largest crowds, play at the MCG and have a young squad with winning chances so you'd hope we could follow this formula.

If looking for a tall midfield David Mundy is an option this year. As a defender Sean Dempster this year or Joel Patfull next year as a free agents would be great pickups with our back half lacking experience. Anyone younger or higher profile is too costly and too restrictive on future moves.

This is very interesting, I have always thought that it does seem a very simple and effective strategy that if every player took a ~10% pay cut then we could afford to pay for a ~10% better team, just for a back of the envelope calculation there. Of course caps on the number of players and a multitude of other factors comes into it but the basic logic is there. Of course it is easy for me to say that as a fan and not someone whose income is in question! However there is a strong argument that states that a successful footballer stands to make a decent amount post-football just for being a legend.

 

[AJH073]

It's also the foundation Collingwood was built on.

Under Jock McHale all players were on the same salary regardless of talent. It was a team thing. Everyone because of it was considered an equal. And while it's impractical today the theory from a team concept standpoint is excellent.

It has also been done in other sports with great success. The San Antonio Spurs for those basketball fans are the model organisation whereby all their stars have given up the potential for more money and more prominent roles for winning.

If you want to build a winner everyone needs to sacrifice to stay together and it would be optimal if Collingwood can generate this same winning environment. We're the highest profile club, attract the largest crowds, play at the MCG and have a young squad with winning chances so you'd hope we could follow this formula.

If looking for a tall midfield David Mundy is an option this year. As a defender Sean Dempster this year or Joel Patfull next year as a free agents would be great pickups with our back half lacking experience. Anyone younger or higher profile is too costly and too restrictive on future moves.

I think the benefits of staying a Pies player outweigh any other club as well not only while they are playing but also after football. As you say, they have to put the team first. It should be meaning so much more than just money. They will never have these opportunities again and looking back on their careers it would be a shame to think they left for money.
Fortunately, these boys know they play for the biggest club and to play for the Pies is something special. Hopefully this type of culture can develop especially with the youngsters coming through. In fact I cant remember the last time we had a star leave for money?

 

[35Daicos]

IIn fact I cant remember the last time we had a star leave for money?

Perhaps Dale whatshisname who went to Carlton?!

 

[Bard]

Perhaps Dale whatshisname who went to Carlton?!

inb4 someone says he wasn't a star, out of malice or spite or somesuch.

 

[35Daicos]

I suppose some would say it was more about reuniting with his favourite coach, but I would have thought the money was the key factor.

 

[Knightmare]

This is very interesting, I have always thought that it does seem a very simple and effective strategy that if every player took a ~10% pay cut then we could afford to pay for a ~10% better team, just for a back of the envelope calculation there. Of course caps on the number of players and a multitude of other factors comes into it but the basic logic is there. Of course it is easy for me to say that as a fan and not someone whose income is in question! However there is a strong argument that states that a successful footballer stands to make a decent amount post-football just for being a legend.

The way the game is some won't accept any pay cut. Guys want their money. But in team sports you'll also find many are motivated by winning and as you rightly mentioned those who are parts of winners they're the guys who get media jobs, coaching jobs and endorsements. James Frawley if he remains a one club player for Melbourne assuming they remain a bottom 10 club through his career. That's a hard sell. If he moves to say Hawthorn on a slightly reduced salary potentially he may end up with a premiership medallion and then open up some future possibilities. But it depends on the person. You can encourage it and some will buy in. Others won't. But if you can build it, it's big for winning.

I think the benefits of staying a Pies player outweigh any other club as well not only while they are playing but also after football. As you say, they have to put the team first. It should be meaning so much more than just money. They will never have these opportunities again and looking back on their careers it would be a shame to think they left for money.
Fortunately, these boys know they play for the biggest club and to play for the Pies is something special. Hopefully this type of culture can develop especially with the youngsters coming through. In fact I cant remember the last time we had a star leave for money?

That Dale Thomas guy left because Collingwood had no interest in spending $700,000 on him whereas Carlton did but that move was more to be re-united with coach Malthouse and be a more prominent component to winning than he projected to at Collingwood - and going by what we've seen of Dale so far this year letting him go looks like the right call.

But the premise of your points are certainly right. Collingwood is where you want to be and as a club Collingwood should from a free agency perspective be considered a destination club and for current players a club where you want to remain. If I was a footballer I'd love the opportunity to play in front of 70,000-80,000 most weeks at the MCG. It's more fun than playing in Tasmania or some boutique stadium only attracting 10,000-20,000 fans a week. It certainly attracted Taylor Adams and if we can continue to win and remain a perennial top 8 side then there is no reason why we can't continue to attract players to Collingwood as one of the proven winning clubs remaining relevant since 2007.

 

[piedpiper32]

This is very interesting, I have always thought that it does seem a very simple and effective strategy that if every player took a ~10% pay cut then we could afford to pay for a ~10% better team, just for a back of the envelope calculation there. Of course caps on the number of players and a multitude of other factors comes into it but the basic logic is there. Of course it is easy for me to say that as a fan and not someone whose income is in question! However there is a strong argument that states that a successful footballer stands to make a decent amount post-football just for being a legend.

I'm not sure about this idea of ALL players taking a pay cut to increase the chances of team success. The concept does have its merits, but as you also state there are a number of other factors that come into it and it's far from simple.

For the star players it may actually be an easier decision with the relative security they get as the contracts are much larger in terms of $$$ as well as number of years, plus they know their spot in the team is relatively safe. Of course giving up 60, 70, 80K a year is a large amount, but of course there should also be more opportunities open to them after they retire.

For the middle to lower tier guys and others on the edge of the best 22 they have a lot less security, with much smaller and shorter contracts, plus they can often be just a few bad games away from being dropped. Serious injuries are always a possibility. It would be a tough decision then to be taking less when you are not even sure if you will end up being a part of any success, let alone thinking long-term whether any post-football opportunities may present themselves.

I would have thought the best way is for the star players to make the sacrifice and take less than they might get on the open market, but with the amounts saved this money can then go towards enticing and retaining the middle tier guys and role players that are required to achieve team success.

 

[Vinnie Vegas]

Perhaps Dale whatshisname who went to Carlton?!

Not quite - We could afford what Carlton paid him, but chose not to pay it.

That's not quite the same as Hawthorn or Geelong with Franklin/Ablett, who simply couldn't afford what the other club was offering.

 

[Quicky]

There are 2 recruiting techniques that have worked in recent times. One is Hawthorn who have consistently topped up on older players from clubs at the bottom of the ladder. They get them cheap because the other club is just interested in a 2nd round pick.

The other technique has been the Geelong model where they just build from within and develop kids around experienced stars.

We fall more into the Geelong mould, but also go out and recruit heavily and have utilised Free Agency. I think ours is working nicely too.

I would not encourage us to go our recruiting 30 year olds because our list is too young. I think we keep building through youth. Once the side has matured, then I think we go recruit the top up players. I think we are only 1 or 2 years off that.

The big difference between us and Geelong is that we turn over our list far more heavily than they do. They pick a player, stick with the player and painstakingly develop them through their VFL team. We are far quicker to make a call and delist them. I think there are times this is needed but making 10-12 list changes each year is really impacting the stability of the list. I would like to see us peel this back a bit.

 

[Vicky Park]

The above posts were all moved over from the Darcy Moore thread.

 

[blaze036]

Ooh I started a new thread in my sleep