Mega Thread 2014 Free Agency and Trade discussion

[Cannon82]

See this is where I feel you are missing the point it's not a "rule" its a discretionary allowance.

We deserve ALL the picks. Go away.

 

[manboob]

 

[Devastating Boris]

I know it's your board, and no disrespect - but you brought a lot of that on yourself. It's going to hard to generate any sympathy from the AFL and other clubs when it comes to a priority pick. If Frawley goes you don't seriously believe you are entitled to 3 picks in the top 10?

Would say not 3 but certainly top tier compo. I think the bidding war will mean he'll command enough coin and contract length to bump it up. For what it's worth the way I see it is that if Melbourne is not given a pp then it should be scrapped. Just for the record I don't want it (pp)

 

[Blackas87]

http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-football-blog/malceski-set-to-reunite-with-roos/20140728-3cpv1.html

If we do get him, Frawley stays, and we pick up a big-bodied midfielder (Shiel, Petracca, etc) I'll back us for finals next year.

Finals lol, no chance.

But also on the agenda for Peter Jackson is Mitch Clark possibly coming back to football

 

[LeverPuller]

I know it's your board, and no disrespect - but you brought a lot of that on yourself. It's going to hard to generate any sympathy from the AFL and other clubs when it comes to a priority pick. If Frawley goes you don't seriously believe you are entitled to 3 picks in the top 10?

Three picks is simply the luck of it with the timing; and ome is for losing an AA full back.

Realistically, I would love to know at what point the discretion applies. Because this is Melbourne's fourth free agent that we are going to lose as well with Frawley. Yeah, yeah, new rules. I'm still peeved that the decision to front-load Frawley - which was made before free agency was on the table - now means he is a UFA which gives Melbourne no chance.

Oh, and the PP could be end of first round.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

I know it's your board, and no disrespect - but you brought a lot of that on yourself. It's going to hard to generate any sympathy from the AFL and other clubs when it comes to a priority pick. If Frawley goes you don't seriously believe you are entitled to 3 picks in the top 10?

Look, I'm not saying I want a PP - but how can any club deserving of a priority pick NOT have brought it on themselves with poor management, etc?

If a club is run well, or even adequately, there's no need for a PP.

 

[Klyntonius]

We aren't a horrendously bad team, we're a young team prone to inconsistency which is steadily improving.

We WILL NOT and SHOULD NOT get any form of priority pick*, we are no longer incompetent enough to warrant one.

*Compensation pick for losing Frawley (if we do, which I'm still not convinced that we will lose him) is different.

Fair enough, I'll upgrade us from horrendously bad to terrible. And whilst we're "young" under the tenure of Roos, our best 22 ain't really that young. Youth is less of a problem than lack of skill.

Last year Jackson went hard to get a priority pick and we were knocked back with the stench of tanking still in the air. This year there is no playing for a priority pick and yet we still stink. I think he'll push hard again this year if things finish the way I think they will (one more win) and I think we'll have the strong case to get it. We as Melbourne folk of course know better than anyone that draft picks don't equal success but there's no doubt we need more talent on our list.

And I'm not convinced Frawley is gone either.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

I know it's your board, and no disrespect - but you brought a lot of that on yourself. It's going to hard to generate any sympathy from the AFL and other clubs when it comes to a priority pick. If Frawley goes you don't seriously believe you are entitled to 3 picks in the top 10?

As opposed to the clubs who deserve PPs because other clubs made them bad?

 

[Demon 16]

I know it's your board, and no disrespect - but you brought a lot of that on yourself. It's going to hard to generate any sympathy from the AFL and other clubs when it comes to a priority pick. If Frawley goes you don't seriously believe you are entitled to 3 picks in the top 10?

If Frawley leaves, that would be 1 pick for him, plus 1 normal pick as every other club receives. Then it's just a question of whether we need any assistance to help break our cycle of shitness, which as you have correctly pointed out (and is blatantly obvious), has mostly been our own doing.

Note, as above, I'm not sure how many other ways there are to be really s**t, other than to actually just be really s**t!?

See this is where I feel you are missing the point it's not a "rule" its a discretionary allowance.

Ok now your just being a w***er.

 

[manboob]

Ok now your just being a ******.

Fair suck of the old slips cordon. Completely unnecessary. The guy I quoted wasn't offended so I can't see why you should be.
I'm simply saying it's not like A and B and C = a PP. There aren't objective criteria so it's impossible to say its warranted under a specific set of circumstances.

Note, as above, I'm not sure how many other ways there are to be really s**t, other than to actually just be really s**t!?

I fear I'll get a card if I state why.

Anyway understandably this is a sore point so I'll leave you in peace.

 

[Gysberts2Bate]

I feel like our collective allergy to stupidity on this board sometimes excludes opposition supporters

 

[schmuttt]

Can see both sides of the argument tbh, on one hand I agree with manboob that we've had so many picks and still keep ******* them up, on the other hand we have suffered from free agency and Clark leaving. I don't really care about a PP though, just focused on hopefully a few more wins between now and the end of the season, then hopefully we are aggressive in the trade market.

 

[Demon 16]

Fair suck of the old slips cordon. Completely unnecessary. The guy I quoted wasn't offended so I can't see why you should be.
I'm simply saying it's not like A and B and C = a PP. There aren't objective criteria so it's impossible to say its warranted under a specific set of circumstances.


I fear I'll get a card if I state why.

Anyway understandably this is a sore point so I'll leave you in peace.

Don't worry we're pretty liberal around here - you're welcome to an opinion.

Apologies for the first comment you've quoted, I just think you are trying to be technical, and there's no point debating whether it's a 'rule' or a 'discretionary allowance' or whatever. Cannon82's point still stands, whatever we call it - if it's not going to be used in an instance like this, when will it ever? And perhaps we are just better off without it, in order avoid potential ambiguity and confusion.

On your second quote, I'm pretty sure we are well aware that our club has been terribly managed - by our own people over the past 8 years or so. But if you have some other enlightening view, feel free to share it. There are many specific circumstances around our poor performances (and subsequent poor scheduling and attendances). From poor coaching and management, to poor drafting, to poor player development, to the loss of senior players for varied reasons.

Who's fault they all are is fairly well irrelevant now that we have a new board, executive and coaching department in place. If there is a 'rule' or 'discretionary allowance' in place to assist poor performing clubs exit a cycle of poor performance, I can't imagine it ever being used if it is not used here.

The only other option I can think of, is to end free agency - but I can't see that happening.

 

[manboob]

Thanks. I appreciate the thought-out and measured reply.

 

[ThePuppetMaster]

I fear I'll get a card if I state why.

Anyway understandably this is a sore point so I'll leave you in peace.

Trust me mate, we would have definitely covered whatever you're thinking somewhere over the past 3-4 years.

 

[Demon 16]

Thanks. I appreciate the thought-out and measured reply.

No worries.

I should also add, that even though I'm enjoying discussing and debating the merits of a priority pick - I can't actually decide if I want one or not!

On one hand, despite some improvement I do think we still need some more help.

On the other, there is certainly something degrading about being offered a compensation pick - particularly as you say - it's discretionary, rather than measured.

 

[manboob]

It would be hard to argue with Roos doing the picking I would much rather a pick ends up in the hands of one of the two oldest clubs than a franchise.

 

[LeverPuller]

No worries.

I should also add, that even though I'm enjoying discussing and debating the merits of a priority pick - I can't actually decide if I want one or not!

On one hand, despite some improvement I do think we still need some more help.

On the other, there is certainly something degrading about being offered a compensation pick - particularly as you say - it's discretionary, rather than measured.

My attitude to it is it should be scrapped if Melbourne doesn't get one after finishing on 4 wins again for the fifth season in eight years and the third year running. It took less than eight over two back in 08-09 with a maximum of four over any one year. Furthermore, apart from Mitch can we really say there have been huge injury issues? Hogan, too, but then he's an unproven player who hasn't played a game - sure, everyone thinks he'll be huge, but the argument last year for no was that Melbourne had Hogan waiting in the wings and Clark injured...look how that's gone.

From the perspective of the playing group, I'm not sure. That said, I think there's a chance we could get a massive fish if we go and trade pick 1. Trade it to the Doggies for a couple of mids is my view. Or do a three-way with GWS somehow.

That said, I think it's a much easier argument if you put it at the end of the first. Then we go and trade it for someone.

 

[Captain Jack]

Dragging this up from a few days back...

2016 seems like a cracking free agency year, it is very early now but yeah start to get players thinking.

We also need to go hard at the 2016 FA pool (2008 draftees). Beams, Hanneberry, Shuey, Hill, etc. Get in their ear now. Chances of any of them moving is minimal, but at least we'll be active and hopefully get a few players thinking.

This thinking annoys me a bit... every year people have said "ooh look at the Free Agency pool in 2/3 years time, so many quality players". It was said about this year, and lo and behold the only big fish left on the table (mixed metaphors?) is Frawley. Let's be reasonable here: almost all these gun players will re-sign long before they get close to the relevant FA period.

Besides, are we even allowed to have informal discussions that far out? Surely that sort of activity is frowned upon - unless it's the expansion clubs, in which case the AFL turns a blind eye.

 

[Cannon82]

Dragging this up from a few days back...



This thinking annoys me a bit... every year people have said "ooh look at the Free Agency pool in 2/3 years time, so many quality players". It was said about this year, and lo and behold the only big fish left on the table (mixed metaphors?) is Frawley. Let's be reasonable here: almost all these gun players will re-sign long before they get close to the relevant FA period.

Besides, are we even allowed to have informal discussions that far out? Surely that sort of activity is frowned upon - unless it's the expansion clubs, in which case the AFL turns a blind eye.

If you think 2016 looks good, 2017 and 2018 are just amazing.

 

[Bluelegs]

I know it's your board, and no disrespect - but you brought a lot of that on yourself. It's going to hard to generate any sympathy from the AFL and other clubs when it comes to a priority pick. If Frawley goes you don't seriously believe you are entitled to 3 picks in the top 10?

While I hate priority picks the 'brought it on yourself' argument is bs. All teams that received priority picks 'brought it on themselves'

 

[Cannon82]

While I hate priority picks the 'brought it on yourself' argument is bs. All teams that received priority picks 'brought it on themselves'

We could argue that the other 17 teams in the competition brought it on us - it's not our fault. It's impossible to turn a club around in just 8 years.

 

[Black Dynamite]

It is impossible to be as bad as we have without being borderline incompetent.
It is also impossible to get a PP unless you are borderline incompetent, if you weren't you would have dragged yourself out of the mire by now.

 

[Cannon82]

It is impossible to be as bad as we have without being borderline incompetent.
It is also impossible to get a PP unless you are borderline incompetent, if you weren't you would have dragged yourself out of the mire by now.

Borderline?

 

[Demon 16]

While I hate priority picks the 'brought it on yourself' argument is bs. All teams that received priority picks 'brought it on themselves'

To be fair to manboob (and correct me if I'm wrong), I'm pretty sure he was referring to tanking.

But, I have 3 responses to that;

1) we've been punished already.
2) yes it was terribly poor management and coaching of yesteryear, which has seen everyone involved moved on - and look where it got us anyway.
3) we probably would have been awarded a PP for the last 2 years if it wasnt for that - so I think the tanking argument has been, and gone, and is no longer relevant.

Without trying to repeat myself, there are plenty of arguments which don't involve us 'just being s**t' in recent times such as losing players to other clubs, poor fixturing and scheduling which contributes to low audiences and attendances, losing Jurrah, Scully and Clark in unusual circumstances, our association with the MCC 'diluting' our membership base, etc.

All of these contributing to reduced revenue and a limited capacity to spend the salary cap, and on the football department.