Rumour GFC 2017 Player Trading, Drafting, FA, Rumours, and Wish lists.

[catempire]

How will it affect Brisbane for example or Gold Coast. The young guys they have brought in , but in 4 years clubs can access them if they are not getting the best money. Yes Brisbane is losing players now but it may just set them as a development club.

Totally agree for the struggling clubs it makes life harder. In net terms I think we will benefit though.

 

[Turbocat]

I feel like this leads to the end of equalisation. We're seeing it now with Brisbane, they keep drafting kids but can't get them to stay. These rule changes significantly devalue draft picks both on the draft date and as tools to facilitate trade. After a certain point you might as well throw away the draft (and the minimum cap spend) and just focus on the salary cap.

This is what I mentioned the other day. If players have so much freedom to move it seems to be rather pointless to draft them to clubs. It would make more sense to just let them go to the clubs they want to be at. They would have a better chance at player retention ( although Im not sure Schache shows this is correct).
A system were all those kids that now qualify for the draft get to sign with who they want would prevent this go home factor... but it also would open the door to premium well supported clubs getting the best kids more often than not.

 

[Turbocat]

Totally agree for the struggling clubs it makes life harder. In net terms I think we will benefit though.

I was sort think big picture not just us. I still feel like it was not that long ago when the big 4 loved to kick sand in our face.. so I still feel like we should have a degree of socialism...but this would force a more dog eats dogs attitude. Forget the draft , and target hard the GWS and Brisbane kids 4 year in the system.

 

[Lana]

This is what I mentioned the other day. If players have so much freedom to move it seems to be rather pointless to draft them to clubs. It would make more sense to just let them go to the clubs they want to be at. They would have a better chance at player retention ( although Im not sure Schache shows this is correct).
A system were all those kids that now qualify for the draft get to sign with who they want would prevent this go home factor... but it also would open the door to premium well supported clubs getting the best kids more often than not.

Pre-draft Schache publicly stated that he wanted to go to Brisbane, which almost certainly would have been a factor in them draft him yet 18 months later he could be leaving. Maybe without the draft he wouldn't have made such comments since Brisbane was his likely destination. But with no draft you'd expect that top end talent will be more likely to stay locally while lesser talented juniors will go elsewhere for opportunity. This will increase the importance of the affiliated academies in non-traditional states

One way to prevent top teams from getting the best kids would be to remove the maximum payments available to new players. This should price the top teams out of the market as they have to retain their existing talent. By removing the salary cap floor it should prevent poor teams from being forced to pay able market wages to sub par players in order to meet the cap floor and give them room to attract highly talented juniors. Another possible mechanism is to reduce the cap of teams based on recent success, which will force them to hemorrhage mature talent in order to stay within the cap.

 

[catswhiskers]

Very interesting discussion. If there was no max pay for first year players it would advantage clubs with cap space, agree. But would a Vic kid go to Brisbane for 400k or would they take 250 to stay home? Would you need to stipulate contract length as well eg. up to 250K = 2 years, 250+K = 3 years, 400+ K = 4 years etc or would that just disadvantage Brisbane / GC further?

So Petracca say gets the 250K for 2 years in Vic or goes to Brissie for 400 K for 4 years [with maybe renegotiation of contract payment or extra length (upward) allowed after three years (with Brisbane only).

Player chooses. Brissie get 4 years to turn him into a banana bender.

mmmmmmmmmmmmm what could go wrong?

 

[Turbocat]

Pre-draft Schache publicly stated that he wanted to go to Brisbane, which almost certainly would have been a factor in them draft him yet 18 months later he could be leaving. Maybe without the draft he wouldn't have made such comments since Brisbane was his likely destination. But with no draft you'd expect that top end talent will be more likely to stay locally while lesser talented juniors will go elsewhere for opportunity. This will increase the importance of the affiliated academies in non-traditional states

One way to prevent top teams from getting the best kids would be to remove the maximum payments available to new players. This should price the top teams out of the market as they have to retain their existing talent. By removing the salary cap floor it should prevent poor teams from being forced to pay able market wages to sub par players in order to meet the cap floor and give them room to attract highly talented juniors. Another possible mechanism is to reduce the cap of teams based on recent success, which will force them to hemorrhage mature talent in order to stay within the cap.

Yes obviously the defined wage for new "draftees" would go... Draftees..that word would have to go because we have no draft. Anyway , what a club was willing to offer would play a part in attracting fresh faces from the u18s.

I sort of visualise a cross between "Show me the Money" ..ie the Tom Cruise character walking a Weitering type kid thru Crown casino having a meeting with his favourite clubs and Blind Side where the clubs come courting the player before he chooses..then the big Youtube event where the Weitering type kid puts on the cap for the club he selects.

Its one thing for the clubs to select kids..and the kids who miss feel deflated... but by if certain kids alway want to go to certain clubs... I want to play Anzac day , or I want to stay in Melb or I barrack for this club... certain clubs would really start to feel like the ugly Bridesmaid. But it would really be the truest reflection of the real market. Given a choice certain clubs will find it hard to get the best kids. Just a fact.

The floating SC is not a bad idea but I do think though that money has its own limits as a equalisation factor...as shown in smaller comps where the AFL Victoria PPS is used. In truth... the adage about players taking less to keep a side together... is really cheating the cap. If the whole principle of SC is to equalise the comp then gun players taking less than they should is just another way of distorting the comp.

 

[Turbocat]

Very interesting discussion. If there was no max pay for first year players it would advantage clubs with cap space, agree. But would a Vic kid go to Brisbane for 400k or would they take 250 to stay home? Would you need to stipulate contract length as well eg. up to 250K = 2 years, 250+K = 3 years, 400+ K = 4 years etc or would that just disadvantage Brisbane / GC further?

So Petracca say gets the 250K for 2 years in Vic or goes to Brissie for 400 K for 4 years [with maybe renegotiation of contract payment or extra length (upward) allowed after three years (with Brisbane only).

Player chooses. Brissie get 4 years to turn him into a banana bender.

mmmmmmmmmmmmm what could go wrong?

If people feel that 700 for Schache is over the top , imagine what the offer would be for kids coming into the system from u18's. In a way id imagine the AFL would like aspects of it. Talent looking at options would see the AFL as a good wage from day 1.

 

[Turbocat]

Pure_Ownage ... whats the Harley Balic situation..... is he worth looking at?

Pure..just to re-ask the question .... any idea if has a specific tie to any particular club. I remember him at the champs.. the kid can play...im not sure of his issue though. Just home sickeness or something more serious.

 

[CatsDoItBetter]

I

Does this changes things........

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...ax-player-movement-rules-20170524-gwcck3.html

Fairfax Media understands that the AFL has agreed to introduce at least one of the following free agency platforms as early as next season and definitely by 2019:

• Free agency for life - any player remains a free agent after eight years of service in the game regardless of how many years he has played at his current club;
  
  
• Portable free agency - any player can move to the club of his choice after eight years' service whether or not those years have all been at the one club;
  
  
• Four-year free agency - any player earning on or under the median AFL wage would be free to choose a new club after four years of service.
  
  Players potentially falling into that four-year category at the end of 2017 include Zak Jones (Sydney), Blake Acres (St Kilda), Jarman Impey (Port Adelaide), Daniel McStay (Brisbane) and Tom Barrass (West Coast).
  
  Having pushed for but failed to reduce the free agency eligibility period to six years of service at one club, the AFLPA has succeeded in achieving at least one, but potentially all three, of the above reforms aimed at improving the livelihoods of older players and those younger players struggling for opportunities.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...ax-player-movement-rules-20170524-gwcck3.html


If this comes in id say Zac Jones worth just went up substantially......

I'd say the 4 year free agency is unlikely to me in. Like any good negotiations you throw something in the other side can reject. But the staying a free agent across clubs is only a matter of time.

 

[Lana]

Yes obviously the defined wage for new "draftees" would go... Draftees..that word would have to go because we have no draft. Anyway , what a club was willing to offer would play a part in attracting fresh faces from the u18s.

I'm not an expert on rugby league (in fact I'm barely acquainted with it) but think it operates under a similar system to what we are talking about

I sort of visualise a cross between "Show me the Money" ..ie the Tom Cruise character walking a Weitering type kid thru Crown casino having a meeting with his favourite clubs and Blind Side where the clubs come courting the player before he chooses..then the big Youtube event where the Weitering type kid puts on the cap for the club he selects.

The current draft event is silly enough for me, I imagine that after the 4th or 5th of these reveal people will just stop caring.

Its one thing for the clubs to select kids..and the kids who miss feel deflated... but by if certain kids alway want to go to certain clubs... I want to play Anzac day , or I want to stay in Melb or I barrack for this club... certain clubs would really start to feel like the ugly Bridesmaid. But it would really be the truest reflection of the real market. Given a choice certain clubs will find it hard to get the best kids. Just a fact.

This is why the academies will be really important, it gives those teams on the periphery at pool of players to work with. Ultimately I think opportunity will trump other motivating factors. Talented players might be reluctant to go to a club where they are less likely to get a game in the short and medium term. The things you mention might sway a player to a particular club when the two offers are similar.

The floating SC is not a bad idea but I do think though that money has its own limits as a equalisation factor...as shown in smaller comps where the AFL Victoria PPS is used. In truth... the adage about players taking less to keep a side together... is really cheating the cap. If the whole principle of SC is to equalise the comp then gun players taking less than they should is just another way of distorting the comp.

Given that this is true regardless of a floating SC, it just provides another pressure to prevent top teams from accumulating additional talent. If a premiership winning teams salary cap drops 5% something is going to have to give even without considering the cost of attracting high end talent.

 

[Lana]

Very interesting discussion. If there was no max pay for first year players it would advantage clubs with cap space, agree. But would a Vic kid go to Brisbane for 400k or would they take 250 to stay home? Would you need to stipulate contract length as well eg. up to 250K = 2 years, 250+K = 3 years, 400+ K = 4 years etc or would that just disadvantage Brisbane / GC further?

It could be, but they have there own pool of local players they should find easier to attract and retain. Without a salary cap floor, poorer performing clubs would have a larger war chest available to spend which they could use to attract interstate talent.

So Petracca say gets the 250K for 2 years in Vic or goes to Brissie for 400 K for 4 years [with maybe renegotiation of contract payment or extra length (upward) allowed after three years (with Brisbane only).

Player chooses. Brissie get 4 years to turn him into a banana bender.

mmmmmmmmmmmmm what could go wrong?

Its no different from the draft from a risk perspective, but at least both the players and clubs get to choose when they bury themselves.

 

[CatTricks]

So what did Impey think of the new digs?

 

[Cataholic]

So what did Impey think of the new digs?

Seems Impey isn't rated by a few of the Port fans

 

[Lana]

If we're going to poach someone from another club I'd rather they'd be more ready made then Impey.

 

[Turbocat]

If we're going to poach someone from another club I'd rather they'd be more ready made then Impey.

Does he have much more than speed ?

 

[CatRiot]

Impey looks like a good small defender, Wojo type. He is the type that will be low possessions but could be a high impact player.

 

[Lana]

Does he have much more than speed ?

Can't say I've seen heaps of him. It'd be best to ask a Port supporter. But he has a nice build for his height, no reason he shouldn't be able to use his strength on the inside. Nothing seemed deficient in his disposal.

I just don't think we need his type of player, our injury list is full of them and he doesn't distinguish himself from that pack.

 

[Spazz Cat]

I hope we don't go after Impey. Not what we need and will cost too much for what he'll deliver.
Also with FA, I think a GFL type points system could work to protect teams like Brissy etc.

 

[Turbocat]

As the Tuohy trade affects us this year just thought we should just keep an eye on what it cost us..

The trade was .. IN Zach Tuohy and a 2017 second-round pick OUT 2017 first-round pick , Billie Smedts , pick 63 (2016 )

The main cost query is the 2017 draft pick swap... at the moment its tracking nicely .. at around 16 to 21 ... With the 2 in 4 taken out of the deal consideration.. its looking like a reasonable deal. Obviously Smedts has played games for them and Williamson looks like a handy player.


http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-10-...e-smedts-swap-clubs-as-complex-deal-concluded

 

[Mad_Hatter]

As the Tuohy trade affects us this year just thought we should just keep an eye on what it cost us..

The trade was .. IN Zach Tuohy and a 2017 second-round pick OUT 2017 first-round pick , Billie Smedts , pick 63 (2016 )

The main cost query is the 2017 draft pick swap... at the moment its tracking nicely .. at around 16 to 21 ... With the 2 in 4 taken out of the deal consideration.. its looking like a reasonable deal. Obviously Smedts has played games for them and Williamson looks like a handy player.


http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-10-...e-smedts-swap-clubs-as-complex-deal-concluded

The only way it isn't a decent win for the Cats is if the blues finished higher than we did, which won't happen.

 

[year of the cat]

The only way it isn't a decent win for the Cats is if the blues finished higher than we did, which won't happen.

Not sure about that. I think an assessment of the deal is more going to be determined by our finishing position. We were always going to finish above Carlton, but if we were to have had a bad run of injuries seeing us finish out of the eight (let's say 11th) then we are giving up a pick 8 for Tuohy and only getting back pick 21. Aside from it being a 13 pick downgrade, the quality of player you can pick up at 8 could be excellent. I think that's too much for Tuohy.


If we were to win the flag however this year with Tuohy (as he has been up until this point) being an important contributor then it probably wouldn't matter what pick you ended up giving up for him!

I reckon par is about a 7-8 pick downgrade, assuming the talent pool doesn't drop off a cliff in this year draft between what we would have had and what we end up with. As it stands at the moment, as Turbocat has said, things are looking good.

 

[dazbroncos]

As the Tuohy trade affects us this year just thought we should just keep an eye on what it cost us..

The trade was .. IN Zach Tuohy and a 2017 second-round pick OUT 2017 first-round pick , Billie Smedts , pick 63 (2016 )

The main cost query is the 2017 draft pick swap... at the moment its tracking nicely .. at around 16 to 21 ... With the 2 in 4 taken out of the deal consideration.. its looking like a reasonable deal. Obviously Smedts has played games for them and Williamson looks like a handy player.


http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-10-...e-smedts-swap-clubs-as-complex-deal-concluded

16 - 21 is a bargain IMO.

Id even happily take 14 - 24 or so.. still well in our favour.

Thumbs well up at this stage.

Go Catters

 

[Turbocat]

16 - 21 is a bargain IMO.

Id even happily take 14 - 24 or so.. still well in our favour.

Thumbs well up at this stage.

Go Catters

Thats right on the edge for mine ... we have had very few picks less than that for a long while Id be disappointed to see Carlton really gather extra form and for us to drop away. But who do Car get ahead of? Suns? North?... good chance they are around where they are now.

 

[year of the cat]

I'd have a look at Tim Kelly from the WAFL if today's state game is anything to go by.

 

[catempire]

Not sure about that. I think an assessment of the deal is more going to be determined by our finishing position. We were always going to finish above Carlton, but if we were to have had a bad run of injuries seeing us finish out of the eight (let's say 11th) then we are giving up a pick 8 for Tuohy and only getting back pick 21. Aside from it being a 13 pick downgrade, the quality of player you can pick up at 8 could be excellent. I think that's too much for Tuohy.


If we were to win the flag however this year with Tuohy (as he has been up until this point) being an important contributor then it probably wouldn't matter what pick you ended up giving up for him!

I reckon par is about a 7-8 pick downgrade, assuming the talent pool doesn't drop off a cliff in this year draft between what we would have had and what we end up with. As it stands at the moment, as Turbocat has said, things are looking good.

The last 10 picks at 8/21:

Henderson-A.Maric
Vickery-Ballantyne
Butcher-Bastinac
Heppell-Lamb
Longer-Mitchell
Mayes-Hrovat
McDonald-Impey
Wright-Goddard
Ah Chee-McKay
Logue-Hayward

I reckon Tuohy >>> the average difference in quality between those picks.

And that is very much a worst case scenario.