Frawley to Join Hawks. (Pick 3 to the Dees)

[nineteen eighty]

Not sure what the cries of "what about equalisation" in regards to this are all about.

Hawthorn have lost Lance Franklin (best key position player and biggest marquee of his generation), Clinton Young, Xavier Ellis and Tom Murphy to free agency (and been compensated with pick 19 in total).
Hawthorn may gain James Frawley (where Melbourne are likely to be compensated pick 3).

If anything, there is too much 'equalisation' in those transactions. It's not the AFL's fault that Hawthorn continue to succeed despite losing talent and having late draft picks. Do people just want them to rotate the flag on an 18 year cycle?

36 works for me.

Counting down the years since 1980...

 

[Fluro Boots]

I like the idea of bottom 4 clubs not being able to lose a player to FA, it protects them from being poached and feeding the stronger clubs.

They could still ask for a trade or walk into the PSD for nothing, Gunston pick 24, Luke ball pick 30 etc. Some clubs are actually better off under free agency like collingwood with Dale Thomas.

 

[Kavliaris69]

Spangher will be our next coach.

Let's not get too crazy now.....

 

[The Swans Blog]

Gibson now becomes that third tall defender, allowing him to play a more attacking role.

Lake and Frawley will now take the number 1 and number 2 oppositions key forwards respectively.

Spangher is the unlucky one who will make way.

Still can't see it happening to be honest. Sure, it'll force Spangher out but you'll lose that beard and long hair bouncing like crazy across the field. Thought that's what Hawks fans paid to see, or at least if you read enough Bigfooty you'd think he was the bees knees, king dick, creme on the top, get my jist?

 

[Fat Tony!]

Will the AFL release the calculation that delivers the # of the pick - I'd back Greg Swann to leak it IF AFL House isn't transparent (aka another motherhood statement from Gil resulting in nothing).

They wont follow the formula. They didn't for the Priority Pick either. AFL=WWE

 

[Max Force]

Spangher is the unlucky one who will make way.

Sad but true.

 

[Crankyhawk]

I have no issue with it either (or the basic idea of free agency). Where my issue comes in with Frawley is the nature of what's happened.

Frawley's 4-year deal would have been signed in 2010 or 2011 - around or just after his All Australian year. His value would have been high.
Melbourne have paid his contract forward early because of a large number of draftees and/or depth players.

Free agency has come in in 2012, after Frawley's deal has been signed and he has been paid forward.
The terms of Restricted Free Agents:

Source: http://www.afl.com.au/afl-hq/the-afl-explained/free-agency
This is also how the rules were listed in 2013, before the Frawley determination. Source: https://web.archive.org/web/2013101...l.com.au/afl-hq/the-afl-explained/free-agency

The relevant quote here is: "Players who are in the top 25 per cent of salaries at their club (that is, in the club’s top nine-10 paid players) are eligible for restricted free agency the first time they are out of contract, if they have served at least eight years with the club."

At no point in the rule does it specifically say whether it is in the eligible year or whether it is the total value of the contract.

Yet the AFL just goes and says, after the dealing and moves have already been made by Melbourne, "tough s**t".

This "competition" is a farce and I genuinely wish there was a way for me to enjoy Melbourne and only Melbourne without giving any form of monetary compensation onto AFL House right now. They laugh at the small clubs and kick them in the groins, yet still expect the supporters to pony up with cash.

Ranking of contracts to determine restricted vs unrestricted should be pro rata over term of contract so front and back loading irrelevant.
If Hawks are getting him for 450k and demons offered 750k I actually expect the afl to step in and block it. Because the perception of success is effectively giving us a 60% higher salary cap.

 

[master bate]

I like the idea of bottom 4 clubs not being able to lose a player to FA, it protects them from being poached and feeding the stronger clubs.

The thing is, it sucks Frawley is leaving but if he wanted out under the old system he could be traded and surely we'd get a first round pick or something similar to the Ryder deal. I'm not biased enough to claim pick 3 for Frawley isn't a great deal if it happens. Of course FA does make it more acceptable for players to move. Where it really hurts is the Hawks get to top up a potential weakness post Lake and stay at the pointy end of the ladder.

So Frawley going to the Hawks for nothing really hurts all the other top 8 teams particularly those in the 5-8. But then North sign Higgins and Dal Santo for nothing and they stay 5-8.

Unless there are enough free agents around that everyone can sign a few each year to fill their salary cap it will mainly just reinforce the top clubs.

They either have to bite the bullet and expand FA and in turn give clubs something back (ie. the ability for all draft pick contracts to be 4 or 5 years plus a franchise year and for those players to be traded).

Or they have to do something to clamp down on the top clubs. If they want to keep free agency in check then I'd make all free agents subject to a draft pick cost depending on their age and contract signed and then that draft pick has to be relinquished to get the player. So if Frawley's value is pick 10 then Hawthorn can sign him as soon as they offer up something or things worth pick 10 which go to Melbourne. It still lets the successful clubs to sign free agents at a bargain price if that's what they negotiate but it makes it much easier for free agents to go to the lower clubs on the ladder.

 

[hk89]

The player is an idiot if he accepts this type of offer lol, why would he accept 200k from the swans when he realises he could get 220k?

Because he gets whatever Sydney decide to give him unless someone else is willing to offer him 220k. If he is only worth 200k , and he is the type of player where it is a buyers market (which at 200k is probably the case), then he doesn't have a strong negotiating position. "Look you know you are worth 200k, we know you are worth 200k, those teams down south know you are worth 200k, we are going to pay you 200K is total , if you don't like it , try to find another offer". Or they offer him 210k after COLA if Sydney think someone else has a deal at 200k on the table, and they are still paying 10k unders on him that they can then use elsewhere in their payments.

I am pretty sure he knows that Sydney is a more expensive city and if he's fooled that easily than I have lost faith in humanity.

Cost of living differences between cities for people on 200k is a croc. It is a much smaller percentage of their total pay than average people, except perhaps for house purchases if they buy somewhere swish, but they get that money back any time they choose to sell so unless they are going to rename it a Cost of Property Investment Allowance, I don't think that is valid either.

In any case, this has been done to death elsewhere, at the end of the day you have had quite a bit more to spend than almost all other clubs on total player payments. I look forward to seeing the results of this being more fairly administered in the years to come.

 

[Superstar swan]

This is an outrage !!! How can the premiers strengthen their list!!!!

 

[Crankyhawk]

I would say top 4 as they were the better teams over the course of an entire season. It would mean this year Sydney, Hawthorn, Geelong and Fremantle would be barred from signing free agents unless they lose a free agent themselves though in truth I would be okay with a blanket ban on signing free agents if you are a top 4 side.

I'd have that top 4 clubs can get the delisted fa - these are players who have been deemed not even worth a trade by other clubs.

 

[hk89]

Far out I thought this was done & dusted, it's been going on all season! Some people are just slow on the uptake I suppose!
But since COLA is no longer available to the Sydney Swans if we offered a player $200k, he gets $200k. ******* hell. Might have more success with a stone and something about blood...

Yes, obviously I was describing the situation under which Sydney has been able to operate in the past (and directly responding to Swans fans that think COLA couldn't have been used for redistribution across the list in uneven amounts if desired).

Have the AFL actually announced what system they ARE moving to next year, or how they are handling the transition? It would seem harsh if they completely turn the tap off completely from day 1.

 

[davis_756]

Another example of players who want to win flags choosing flag contenders and probably signing for even money while the poor clubs down the bottom will build up another class act to be given away in another 3 years

 

[Strapping Young Lad]

So where does Gibson play? The bench?

He plays in the pocket.

 

[RUNVS]

I'd have that top 4 clubs can get the delisted fa - these are players who have been deemed not even worth a trade by other clubs.

Delisted Free Agents is fine. Just not access to the free agents that genuinely have value and I do mean Frawley and Franklin. I really believe that if both players wanted to move they should be forced to go to clubs lower on the ladder than the top 4.

 

[LeverPuller]

Ranking of contracts to determine restricted vs unrestricted should be pro rata over term of contract so front and back loading irrelevant.
If Hawks are getting him for 450k and demons offered 750k I actually expect the afl to step in and block it. Because the perception of success is effectively giving us a 60% higher salary cap.

I'm just sick of it. I'm getting sick of the 'sport'. It feels like Melbourne get shafted year on year. A lot of which is through no fault of their own.

Don't get me wrong, they've been s**t. There's been administrative awfulness and a terrible coach.

But, some examples, just over the last few years.

- A #1 overall draft pick walking out on the club two years after being drafted because of a startup club. AFL says 'everyone must lose to get these clubs going'.
- A continued FIXture providing terrible financial drawings to the club. We haven't played Carlton as a home game in 6 years IIRC and we've only played Essendon as a home game once in the last decade. No Friday night football in 3 years either. Meanwhile, we get games like Port Adelaide (before they came good) on Easter Sunday at 1:10 and Gold Coast on Mother's Day at 4:40.
- An investigation run based off an interview given by an ex-player on a talk show, when similar comments by an ex-coach on another talk show regarding a different team were blatantly ignored. Regardless of what the actual outcome was, the way that Melbourne cops a full-blown tanking investigation but Carlton is completely ignored is just stupid.
- One of their only All-Australian players having his walking from the club presided over by the AFL re-defining their rules on the fly.

The AFL is trying to improve Melbourne by appointing adminstrators and coaches, but continues to totally shaft Melbourne by not attempting to equalise all the stumbling blocks.

You watch. Watch this year if Nathan Jones doesn't sign. Watch every man and his dog call him 'gone' straight away and speculate all year on Melbourne losing another senior player. Watch everyone come out and claim he's not worth a first round draft pick. Watch as Melbourne get scheduled to play non-Victorian sides for 7 of their 11 home games but apparently we don't deserve Queen's Birthday either.

I hate the administration of this game with regards to Melbourne. I'm expected - yes, expected - to buy tickets, buy memberships, show up, and support. If I don't I'm not a 'true' footy fan.

I've seen ten wins in the last eight years by Melbourne.

Football is quickly becoming an exercise in torture. I love the NFL now. You know why? Because ultimately, when it comes down to it, it's fair. Free agency compensation is defined a year later based on relative gains and losses in your playing group. If you lost good players and didn't get replacement quality you'll get higher picks. The salary cap is enforced hard. No extra bits for anyone. The teams all have the same opportunities open to them, and it's up to them to innovate. The schedule is pre-determined when it comes to who is playing who. The prime-time games are capped per team and there are also minimums per team.

 

[rick_422]

Are you suggesting the Hawks didn't pay the full cap this year?

Nope. Just before the finals last year they announced a heap of new contract signings which ideally would have front loaded some deals to use the cap space up for this year. Then on their regular deals for next year plus the Franklin money.
But this of course me just joining the dots!

 

[Spook]

This genuinely made me laugh. Where and when is he going to get a game? Lake isn't going no where and they play the same position. Sure, have him and keep him on the bench for the season.

That's the same as Franklin and Tippett playing same position.

 

[Bayer_]

I'm just sick of it. I'm getting sick of the 'sport'. It feels like Melbourne get shafted year on year. A lot of which is through no fault of their own.

Don't get me wrong, they've been s**t. There's been administrative awfulness and a terrible coach.

But, some examples, just over the last few years.

- A #1 overall draft pick walking out on the club two years after being drafted because of a startup club. AFL says 'everyone must lose to get these clubs going'.
- A continued FIXture providing terrible financial drawings to the club. We haven't played Carlton as a home game in 6 years IIRC and we've only played Essendon as a home game once in the last decade. No Friday night football in 3 years either. Meanwhile, we get games like Port Adelaide (before they came good) on Easter Sunday at 1:10 and Gold Coast on Mother's Day at 4:40.
- An investigation run based off an interview given by an ex-player on a talk show, when similar comments by an ex-coach on another talk show regarding a different team were blatantly ignored. Regardless of what the actual outcome was, the way that Melbourne cops a full-blown tanking investigation but Carlton is completely ignored is just stupid.
- One of their only All-Australian players having his walking from the club presided over by the AFL re-defining their rules on the fly.

The AFL is trying to improve Melbourne by appointing adminstrators and coaches, but continues to totally shaft Melbourne by not attempting to equalise all the stumbling blocks.

You watch. Watch this year if Nathan Jones doesn't sign. Watch every man and his dog call him 'gone' straight away and speculate all year on Melbourne losing another senior player. Watch everyone come out and claim he's not worth a first round draft pick. Watch as Melbourne get scheduled to play non-Victorian sides for 7 of their 11 home games but apparently we don't deserve Queen's Birthday either.

I hate the administration of this game with regards to Melbourne. I'm expected - yes, expected - to buy tickets, buy memberships, show up, and support. If I don't I'm not a 'true' footy fan.

I've seen ten wins in the last eight years by Melbourne.

Football is quickly becoming an exercise in torture. I love the NFL now. You know why? Because ultimately, when it comes down to it, it's fair. Free agency compensation is defined a year later based on relative gains and losses in your playing group. If you lost good players and didn't get replacement quality you'll get higher picks. The salary cap is enforced hard. No extra bits for anyone. The teams all have the same opportunities open to them, and it's up to them to innovate. The schedule is pre-determined when it comes to who is playing who. The prime-time games are capped per team and there are also minimums per team.

To be fair - you did get shitloads of number 1 picks and priority picks during the past 6 years. And you seemed to have dodged a bullet when Scully left, giving you more picks again.

 

[Furn2]

I forget who suggested it but I like the idea someone had in the media where teams in the top 4 are not allowed to sign free agents unless they lose a free agent themselves.

My suggestion, if a team would of qualified for a priority pick under the old rules then they can't lose a player to free agency. I know this restricts players which is against the idea of it but the bottom clubs need to be protected more. Also if you take a free agent you should lose your draft pick equal to the band the player is worth.

maybe a free agent carn't go to a club who finishes higher than his original club ? unless its bottom 4 maybe ?

dunno its only a guess but what i do know is it aint working at the minute ! no good when the hawks can feed of the demons bones

I like the idea of bottom 4 clubs not being able to lose a player to FA, it protects them from being poached and feeding the stronger clubs.

These are all good ideas but thats taking the free out of free agency, the players wanted this and they dont seem to care what happens to the bottom sides.

 

[LeverPuller]

To be fair - you did get shtiloads of number 1 picks and priority picks during the past 6 years.

No we didn't.

We got:
2x #1 picks. (Watts, Scully)
1x start of first PP (Trengove)
1x end of first PP (Blease)

Now, the #1 pick left. We did get compensated. But you know what? It still looked ******* awful and created an air of awfulness - a guy walks out on a club two years after he's drafted? Jeez.

But no, I wouldn't consider two, both of which were awarded 6 and 7 years ago now, a 'shitload'. There's a perception of Melbourne that I would love to break. It's been terrible administration and coaching that has led the high draft picks to fail, but that's not necessarily the 'equalisation' element that I speak to. Clubs need to sort that out. The combination of the fixture, the way the new clubs were introduced and the way free agency has been introduced has combined to continue to cripple Melbourne over the past few years in addition to the poor admin and coaching.

 

[Bayer_]

No we didn't.

We got:
2x #1 picks. (Watts, Scully)
1x start of first PP (Trengove)
1x end of first PP (Blease)

Now, the #1 pick left. We did get compensated. But you know what? It still looked ******* awful and created an air of awfulness - a guy walks out on a club two years after he's drafted? Jeez.

But no, I wouldn't consider two, both of which were awarded 6 and 7 years ago now, a 'shitload'. There's a perception of Melbourne that I would love to break. It's been terrible administration and coaching that has led the high draft picks to fail, but that's not necessarily the 'equalisation' element that I speak to. Clubs need to sort that out. The combination of the fixture, the way the new clubs were introduced and the way free agency has been introduced has combined to continue to cripple Melbourne over the past few years in addition to the poor admin and coaching.

Fair enough mate. IMO your club needs a person both capable and financially successful. We had Ian Dicker save our club through his nous, connections and (anonymous - but we all know where it came from) donations. Stynes was able to rally people, but he could do no more for your club than Jason Dunstall or Don Scott could for ours.

Surely there are enough rich Melbourne fans, that one is able to turn you around?

 

[Paul Kersey]

This is an outrage. The premiership side should NOT be able to strengthen their list with the most high-profile signing of the off season. THAT'S NOT HOW THE SYSTEM IS MEANT TO WORK.

I know you're hamming it up, but for the ones who are not - comments like this might carry some weight if Sydney had the same salary cap.

Instead, they look pretty damn silly.

 

[LeverPuller]

Fair enough mate. IMO your club needs a person both capable and financially successful. We had Ian Dicker save our club through his nous, connections and (anonymous - but we all know where it came from) donations. Stynes was able to rally people, but he could do no more for your club than Jason Dunstall or Don Scott could for ours.

Surely there are enough rich Melbourne fans, that one is able to turn you around?

Jimmy was probably the closest. Jim's board was an assembly of some of the smartest Melbourne fans around. The problem was, he was the guiding light, and when he got sick none were willing or able to step up and take charge.

I don't know if there is anyone.

 

[iluvparis]

We will get band 2, which will be pick 23. I think that is too low and 3 is too high. I think 10-15 is reasonable. It is what I think he would get in a trade. We will get maybe 2nd or 3rd Round for Clark. So for losing 2 key position players we will get maybe pick 23 and 30 odd. Does anyone genuinely think that Melbourne are being reasonably compensated if that turns out to be the case?

FFS - as is ALWAYS the case, and what the average punter in the street doesn't get - your compensation is the EXTRA cap space you now have to go and sign your own free agent.