Opinion Knightsight v Hinesight v Hindsight Nov 2014

[Lefthanded]

100% Agree - The Northern Sides getting a 1st or 2nd Round Prospect each season with late 1st or 2nd Rounders is a Joke

There was talk this year about changes to the F/S & Academy bidding systems. Obviously hasn't happened yet but would be surprised if changes aren't in place by next draft. I believe the goal is for price paid to be closer to market value. How this will work in practice remains to be seen but my guess would be (taking Swans as an example from this year) that Heeney might have cost them their 1st and 2nd round picks. Moore may have cost us our 1st & 3rd.

Egs only, please don't waste people's time debating the merit of the examples in this thread.

 

[ppoiter]

Wait till the Cats play the Brions....

Not til August

 

[Apex36]

Having finished last Melbourne deserved to get the best midfielder in the country. But it's a different matter altogether in one of the best drafts in years, to also get the second best midfielder in the country, courtesy of the AFL. Petracca and Brayshaw are different propositions to Scully and Trengrove. Melbourne will shoot up the ladder next year (similar to PA two years ago) and Roos will get all the credit. Meanwhile Mark Neeld has to contend with an assistant coach role at Essendon when he could have been coaching Melbourne into the finals next year.

This years draft was by no means the best in years, particularly at the top end.

 

[jmac70]

So then you would rather hawthorn get the two best youngsters since you believe in rewarding excellence? Not sure how else you can do it. You either reward the best or help the worst.

I was referring to the priority pick and whether or not Melbourne deserved it. I don't think they did. I would actually prefer a lottery system similar to the USA. I also think that the interstate academy systems should be abolished.

 

[jmac70]

Don't disagree with this but isn't the draft about leveling the playing field? In this case doesn't leveling mean evening the balance for poorly managed clubs?

This is clearly a complicated issue but the fact remains that there are too many sides. Rather than creating new teams with unprecedented draft concessions the AFL had to relocate some of the Melbourne teams.

 

[Lefthanded]

I was referring to the priority pick and whether or not Melbourne deserved it. I don't think they did. I would actually prefer a lottery system similar to the USA. I also think that the interstate academy systems should be abolished.

they didn't get a priority pick, they received free agency compensation for losing James Frawley. For what it's worth I thought pick 3 was too high for the compo and wouldn't be surprised if it was given higher because they denied Dees request for priority pick.

 

[jackcass]

I was referring to the priority pick and whether or not Melbourne deserved it. I don't think they did. I would actually prefer a lottery system similar to the USA. I also think that the interstate academy systems should be abolished.

I don't mind the interstate academy systems as an alternate pathway in developing states to attract players, just think the access to the players who come through them should be more equitable. Alternatively, let every side establish an academy with preferential access.

 

[jmac70]

they didn't get a priority pick, they received free agency compensation for losing James Frawley. For what it's worth I thought pick 3 was too high for the compo and wouldn't be surprised if it was given higher because they denied Dees request for priority pick.

Sorry, you are correct. As you say, pick 3 was too high. Compensation picks should also be abolished.

 

[jackcass]

they didn't get a priority pick, they received free agency compensation for losing James Frawley. For what it's worth I thought pick 3 was too high for the compo and wouldn't be surprised if it was given higher because they denied Dees request for priority pick.

My issue is why should every other team suffer (shuffle down the draft order) for Melbournes lose and Hawthorns gain. If compo is assessed as a 1st round pick then surely the Dees should just get Hawthorns 1st round pick.

 

[Lefthanded]

Sorry, you are correct. As you say, pick 3 was too high. Compensation picks should also be abolished.

My issue is why should every other team suffer (shuffle down the draft order) for Melbournes lose and Hawthorns gain. If compo is assessed as a 1st round pick then surely the Dees should just get Hawthorns 1st round pick.

Agree with some of what each of you are saying but think it's a bit more complicated. There's a whole thread (7 odd pages) on how to fix free agency that I found interesting. Below I've quoted a post of mine from that thread which expands on some of my views and if you go to the link also quotes several others who I think had excellent suggestions. Eg problem with 2nd part of jackcass suggestion is there would be uproar if Hawks lost a player to Melbourne also deemed 1st round and got pick 2, ie disadvantages the teams low on ladder when AFL are aiming to equalise.

When I searched for a thread on free agency my thinking was pretty much compo should come from the side signing the FA - as mentioned by Rampar & Master Bate (each quoted) - I'd have to think more about whether I agree with trading next season's picks though.

Dog's Kennel quoted post has been my favourite suggestion though - with the $300k mentioned possibly subject to change - set by the AFL to roughly where the 15th placed guy on an AFL list gets (15th could be debated). Not sure I'd phrase it as 'didn't value them enough' as they could be depth in a good team, subject to salary cap restrictions. Would still allow these guys to be developed and have time to grow to love the culture & environment before making a choice to chase opportunity or stay.

Also quoted didaksrightfoot as liked most of his points. I don't object to COLA in principle but agree it should only be for lower paid players. Guys who buy property where they move to are essentially getting an allowance and then keep the capital gain too.

 

[jackcass]

Agree with some of what each of you are saying but think it's a bit more complicated. There's a whole thread (7 odd pages) on how to fix free agency that I found interesting. Below I've quoted a post of mine from that thread which expands on some of my views and if you go to the link also quotes several others who I think had excellent suggestions. Eg problem with 2nd part of jackcass suggestion is there would be uproar if Hawks lost a player to Melbourne also deemed 1st round and got pick 2, ie disadvantages the teams low on ladder when AFL are aiming to equalise.

Valid point. but equally there should already be an uproar that the Hawks not only secured Frawley via FA, but retained their 1st round pick which enabled them to grab O'Rourke, and it comes at the expense of every other club. That is clearly not was intended when FA was established. At least if it's a transaction between the 2 involved clubs then they can make choices exactly as they do for any other trade. I agree, I'd be horrified if the Hawks got pick 2, but you would at least be more at ease that they've gotten it as fair compensation for an excellent player like a Franklin or Roughead. You could aide the process by evaluating and announcing appropriate compo of all eligible FAs for that year before the season even starts.

 

[mike123]

Sorry, you are correct. As you say, pick 3 was too high. Compensation picks should also be abolished.

What about the compensation we got for Thomas?

 

[jmac70]

What about the compensation we got for Thomas?

What about it? Doesn't change my view. The purpose of free agency is compromised by compensation picks.

 

[Kappa]

What about it? Doesn't change my view. The purpose of free agency is compromised by compensation picks.

Yes, punishing the clubs who don't use Free Agency by giving compo picks is so stupid

The whole idea of Free Agency is when you lose a player that frees up salary cap space to get an equivalent player in

 

[TradeDraft]

There was talk this year about changes to the F/S & Academy bidding systems. Obviously hasn't happened yet but would be surprised if changes aren't in place by next draft. I believe the goal is for price paid to be closer to market value. How this will work in practice remains to be seen but my guess would be (taking Swans as an example from this year) that Heeney might have cost them their 1st and 2nd round picks. Moore may have cost us our 1st & 3rd.

Egs only, please don't waste people's time debating the merit of the examples in this thread.

I doubt Moore would of cost us Extra as there was only 3 Picks between Bidding Team and Our Pick we use

 

[jackcass]

What about the compensation we got for Thomas?

Yep, we were over compensated for Thomas based on 2014 output, but compo was based on his contract so we'll take it and move on. Should Thomas recapture his 2010-11 form, he'll again be worth the compo we got, and the salary they're paying him.

 

[Jelly Bean]

I was referring to the priority pick and whether or not Melbourne deserved it. I don't think they did. I would actually prefer a lottery system similar to the USA. I also think that the interstate academy systems should be abolished.

Melbourne didn't get a priority pick.

 

[Jelly Bean]

Yes, punishing the clubs who don't use Free Agency by giving compo picks is so stupid

The whole idea of Free Agency is when you lose a player that frees up salary cap space to get an equivalent player in

That's just a ridiculous way to measure things though. You can' believe that adequate compensation for losing a gun player is just the salary space they create.... Otherwise you would get far more delisting of gun players to achieve the same benefit - you don't need FA for that.

I do think that there should be no compensation awarded though - it penalises every other club. There needs to be a cost from the FA receiver club paid to the FA loser club. Maybe an atribritration of the appropriate pick of theirs or something?

 

[DWil6]

Melbourne didn't get a priority pick.

That has been pointed out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TradeDraft]

Well we know that Corey Ellis Dad did not want us to pick him

 

[mike123]

Well we know that Corey Ellis Dad did not want us to pick him

Good, Because I didn't want us to pick him up either.

 

[Apex36]

Well we know that Corey Ellis Dad did not want us to pick him

Lol who cares? Not worth getting upset over.

 

[Knightmare]

Well we know that Corey Ellis Dad did not want us to pick him

Interesting insight (video).

His father just joked re. Collingwood but in essence it was really just Ellis' family that wanted him to stay in Victoria to remain close to family so they can see him play regularly. Pretty normal stuff really.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

That's just a ridiculous way to measure things though. You can' believe that adequate compensation for losing a gun player is just the salary space they create.... Otherwise you would get far more delisting of gun players to achieve the same benefit - you don't need FA for that.

I do think that there should be no compensation awarded though - it penalises every other club. There needs to be a cost from the FA receiver club paid to the FA loser club. Maybe an atribritration of the appropriate pick of theirs or something?

But a "cost" from the recieving team to the losing team means that it is not Free Agency - it becomes a trade.

The thing with Free Agency is that the AFL is far from having a situation where true free agency can be effective. The key to free agency, and the salary cap, working is that the amount a club is playing in salary should be a pretty close comparison to how good their team is - which would mean that we must get rid of any payments outside of the cap (COLA, Veterans allowance etc.), get rid of, or lower, the minimum spend, and stop clubs from having the ability to front/back end contracts.
The system should leave you with top clubs having little to no cap space, and bottom clubs having lots... so that when a free agent is available a bottom club is able to offer more (which is a neccesity to attract a player away from top clubs) - a free market will balance itself out and find an equilibrium somewhere... a player will only take so much of a pay cut to sign with a flag contender.

A system like that where the salary cap is effective, and where you would have more free agents hitting the market - would mean that the cap space opened up by a Free Agent leaving would be reasonable compensation. (not great compensation in some cases, but in some cases - such as when the Swan's get to the end of Buddy's contract - it would be more valuable to have the cap space than the player on your list)

 

[TradeDraft]

IF WE WENT JUST BEST AVALIABLE.

It would look like something like this:

5: Peter Wright
9: Darcy Moore
30:Tom Lamb
48:Damien Cavka