List Mgmt. 2018 Trade/Draft/FA SuperMegaUltra Thread - The Early Edition

[tigger_ferret]

I think that was more Gold Coast shitting the bed

Maybe we should say it was arrogance to take advantage of someone that weak, rather than being ruthless

 

[twce13]

Last year was us backing ourselves in more then us being ruthless.

I'm not saying we shouldn't match the bid, in particular if its about going home and not about money. but I just think if it's a huge offer we won't. There's no precedent for any club doing this (again danger wasn't a Mammoth bid) in free agency and I doubt we will be the first.

There is however precedent for us being unhappy with the compo and still taking it (Selwood) and that would have been a relatively easy offer to match compared to figures being thrown around for gaff.

 

[Godfather32]

Last year was us backing ourselves in more then us being ruthless.

I'm not saying we shouldn't match the bid, in particular if its about going home and not about money. but I just think if it's a huge offer we won't. There's no precedent for any club doing this (again danger wasn't a Mammoth bid) in free agency and I doubt we will be the first.

There is however precedent for us being unhappy with the compo and still taking it (Selwood) and that would have been a relatively easy offer to match compared to figures being thrown around for gaff.

Yeah but the difference is Selwood was cooked and not worth much anyway, Gaff is in AA form and worth a fair bit more than pick 19

 

[Rowan18]

Last year was us backing ourselves in more then us being ruthless.

I'm not saying we shouldn't match the bid, in particular if its about going home and not about money. but I just think if it's a huge offer we won't. There's no precedent for any club doing this (again danger wasn't a Mammoth bid) in free agency and I doubt we will be the first.

There is however precedent for us being unhappy with the compo and still taking it (Selwood) and that would have been a relatively easy offer to match compared to figures being thrown around for gaff.

From memory, the AFL didn't tell us the compo until after he'd registered to go to Geelong. I think that's why Eagles hit the roof - they'd been given the impression it was end of first round but ended up with second round. Now the AFL tells you upfront what it will be so you can decide whether to match

 

[Obeanie1]

One time we were pretty ruthless was when Mitch Brown wanted to leave but we refused to trade him. I remember we held out quite late on the Cripps deal too and ended up paying fairly little. We can be strong when we need to be, or perhaps only when we’re dealing with the saints.

Anyways, if we managed to turn gaff and lycett leaving into T.Kelly and Powell-Pepper as some are suggesting, I think we’d have made a pretty good fist of a bad situation. Rawlings hasn’t let us down yet, so hopefully he’s still got some tricks left to play.

If we do allow Gaff to go to Norths as a RFA then I bloody well expect our ex Norths boys in Simo and Rawlings to get something else out of them as a sweetener.

The best scenario would be something like.

Gaff to Norths we get pick 18.

Goldy or Pruess to Eagles for pick 70 (cap releif so they can bid for Kelly next year)

We send a future first to Geelong for Kelly as they have FS bidding complications this year.

Lycett to Port for pick 9 ex Norths pick traded for Polac.

So out Gaff, Lycett pick 70 2019 first.

In Kelly, Goldy or Pruess, picks 9 & 18.

Hit the draft with 9, 18, 23, 34 and use 75 on Cameron.

Nice draft hand.

 

[Brave Sir Robin]

Last year was us backing ourselves in more then us being ruthless.

I'm not saying we shouldn't match the bid, in particular if its about going home and not about money. but I just think if it's a huge offer we won't. There's no precedent for any club doing this (again danger wasn't a Mammoth bid) in free agency and I doubt we will be the first.

There is however precedent for us being unhappy with the compo and still taking it (Selwood) and that would have been a relatively easy offer to match compared to figures being thrown around for gaff.

There is no 'this is what will happen because this is what we have done in the past'. The club will evaluate its options and take the one it sees as the best of those.

A lot of the big offers that clubs have not matched has been because it was against their interests to do so due to the stupid FA compo system that exists. That system isn't going to get us near Gaff's value due to our finishing position and it's also unlikely the AFL will let us manipulate the system like it has with other clubs.

So which FAs would you have expected the club to match in order to force a better outcome?

 

[Monocle]

From memory, the AFL didn't tell us the compo until after he'd registered to go to Geelong. I think that's why Eagles hit the roof - they'd been given the impression it was end of first round but ended up with second round. Now the AFL tells you upfront what it will be so you can decide whether to match

This is how I remember the events as well.
The AFL were subsequently pressured by the Clubs to disclose the FA compensation earlier so that it could be factored into the equation during the trade period.

 

[southcoast]

If we keep Lycett and Gaff the 2010 draft ends up being quite expensive with Gaff, Darling, Lycett and Gov.

What a great ‘problem’ to have.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[EagleEgo]

Something wrong with the FA system.
Gaff was a number 4 pick and WCE has developed him into a elite player and now we might be losing him with a compensation worst than a number 4 pick!!??

 

[pantskyle]

Something wrong with the FA system.
Gaff was a number 4 pick and WCE has developed him into a elite player and now we might be losing him with a compensation worst than a number 4 pick!!??

Yes that's how free agency works.

 

[West World]

Something wrong with the FA system.
Gaff was a number 4 pick and WCE has developed him into a elite player and now we might be losing him with a compensation worst than a number 4 pick!!??

Remember the AFL try and use FA as an equalisation tool as well. In some ways it works as we get way unders for a lower team signing a gun.

But it also fails when a team like Richmond can land a Lynch from a team like Gold Coast. The Suns go backwards and the Premiers get stronger and lose nothing but cap space.

Its far from perfect and far from fair. It is what it is unfortunately.

 

[LittleGreekGod]

Not sure what Goldstein's ambitions are post footy.
But may be worth a Sam Mitchell style player come Ruck coach deal for next season.
Worked with Mitchell and Petrie and we have the necessary ex North people in our mix to maybe broker a good deal.

 

[Yamumluvsbigcox]

From memory, the AFL didn't tell us the compo until after he'd registered to go to Geelong. I think that's why Eagles hit the roof - they'd been given the impression it was end of first round but ended up with second round. Now the AFL tells you upfront what it will be so you can decide whether to match

Same thing happened to brisbane that year for leuenberger and they were filthy also .

 

[West World]

North's isn't under pressure at all.

North are already a monty for Polec (this is coming from a bloke who never though Kelly or Martin were coming last year), not including being in the driver's seat for Hall this year and quite possibly Kelly next year. As good as Gaff is (and he's much, much better than Polec), North wouldn't be as desperate once North use its first for Polec.

North don't have the picks to go into a trading war and you guys probably won't have the salary room to go after your targets if you did match the Gaff offer. You're best banking the compo pick and using it to pick up Kelly, who is already a gun and would be looking at coming home, if not now, very s

That's fine. There are six clubs in Melbourne who will trade for Gaff we would be happy to deal with.

Norths can pay more cash and massive overs with pick 9 for Polak who is half the player Gaff is. Fantastic return on investment there!

Eagles look likely to lose Lycett ($600k) as well so that's $1.5m in cap space to play with either to match the Gaff bid or look elsewhere. And that is before MacKenzie retiring plus Kennedy and Naitanui re-signing in 12 months on reduced deals.

Plenty of cap space at the Eagles if one of Gaff or Lycett leave. Massive cap space if both go.

 

[Yamumluvsbigcox]

Something wrong with the FA system.
Gaff was a number 4 pick and WCE has developed him into a elite player and now we might be losing him with a compensation worst than a number 4 pick!!??

With the talk of carlton and gold coast now getting priority picks at the start of the first round the gaff compo could be pushed out as high as 21-22 .
Now thats bullshit

 

[West World]

Sure, I get that and the system does suck, but is he worth destablising your trade/list/salary strategy for this year?

Maybe, maybe not. I would guess that the Lycett situation may be the determinate factor here as he'll give you more wriggle room on the salary front, but even then, you'll need new ruck depth.

Lycett leaves, have more than enough to match, pick 9 plus either Goldy or Preuss traded for Gaff. Fair trade and our ruck issue solved.

Up to Norths to solve the Polac trade with Port.

 

[West World]

With the talk of carlton and gold coast now getting priority picks at the start of the first round the gaff compo could be pushed out as high as 21-22 .
Now thats bullshit

We want to pray the priority picks are end of first round.

 

[twce13]

Yeah but the difference is Selwood was cooked and not worth much anyway, Gaff is in AA form and worth a fair bit more than pick 19

Franklin was worth more then 19 too. That's the system.

And again, we also open up cap space to get another player. So it's not just pick 19. What if because of the extra cap space we get cogs next year. Effectively turning gaff into cogs and pick 19 isn't so bad.

No arguments from me that hes worth more, but if a team offers more then were willing to pay, well matching just to trade defeats the purpose of free agency.

And I don't think juggling around contracts to accommodate the extra $$$ is as easy as some are making out here.

I hope we match too, but if it's a massive offer, I highly doubt it.

Edit: buddy might have been unrestricted actually ? So perhaps not a fair comparison

 

[Bluke]

That's fine. There are six clubs in Melbourne who will trade for Gaff we would be happy to deal with.

Norths can pay more cash and massive overs with pick 9 for Polak who is half the player Gaff is. Fantastic return on investment there!

Eagles look likely to lose Lycett ($600k) as well so that's $1.5m in cap space to play with either to match the Gaff bid or look elsewhere. And that is before MacKenzie retiring plus Kennedy and Naitanui re-signing in 12 months on reduced deals.

Plenty of cap space at the Eagles if one of Gaff or Lycett leave. Massive cap space if both go.

Not to mention the list clean out last year to make space for these deals. The club will have been planning for Gaff & Gov contract negotiations for a while now.

If it came down it there are also other delisting opportunities to make space. Not saying this should happen but do you necessarily pay Lecras another 300k-400k to go around another season if that’s the difference between Gaff for life / matching Norths offer and getting fair compensation for an AA in career best form and 175 games of experience at only 26.

We have plenty for cards to play and there is no way in hell the eagles will let him walk for an end of first round compo.

The buddy deal was and still is extraordinary - remember the 10 year contract (lol) length he is now only half way through. There was no way the hawks could match that. Swans gaming the system again.

 

[Bluke]

Franklin was worth more then 19 too. That's the system.

And again, we also open up cap space to get another player. So it's not just pick 19. What if because of the extra cap space we get cogs next year. Effectively turning gaff into cogs and pick 19 isn't so bad.

No arguments from me that hes worth more, but if a team offers more then were willing to pay, well matching just to trade defeats the purpose of free agency.

And I don't think juggling around contracts to accommodate the extra $$$ is as easy as some are making out here.

I hope we match too, but if it's a massive offer, I highly doubt it.

Edit: buddy might have been unrestricted actually ? So perhaps not a fair comparison

Buddy got a 10 year contract that was and still is laughable. The AFL went after the swans as a result of gaming the system this way. The Hawks have also proven time and time again they are happy to make the hard calls for the betterment of the team longer term. Ie Mitchell, Lewis, Hodge

Its not so much about the contracts but the underpinning financial model and the payment schedule for each player. Next year we might only have 600k - 800k to pay Gaff. But with Kennedy and Nic Nat out of contract next year and both taking pay cuts you get the opportunity back end his contract.

 

[Shmiddy15]

That would be a disgrace if Gold Coast and Carlton both received first round compos. Along with the tom lynch compo, that’d mean the suns and blues would hold the first 5 picks in the draft. Surely there’s no way this happens.

Hate the idea of priority picks, particularly when it’s up to the afl’s discretion when to award them. why should teams that are crap get an added bonus just because they can’t effectively draft and develop talent like everyone else?

 

[Godfather32]

Franklin was worth more then 19 too. That's the system.

And again, we also open up cap space to get another player. So it's not just pick 19. What if because of the extra cap space we get cogs next year. Effectively turning gaff into cogs and pick 19 isn't so bad.

No arguments from me that hes worth more, but if a team offers more then were willing to pay, well matching just to trade defeats the purpose of free agency.

And I don't think juggling around contracts to accommodate the extra $$$ is as easy as some are making out here.

I hope we match too, but if it's a massive offer, I highly doubt it.

Edit: buddy might have been unrestricted actually ? So perhaps not a fair comparison

I see what your saying but it's just about leverage if he decides to leave, if we can posture enough to make the other team give up more than pick 19 then we should. What if we get pick 9 and still get the extra salary cap space to get cogs? That's a fair bit better than pick 19 and space. And we will have leverage unless he decides to go to Carlton because if he goes to the draft then surely Carlton would pick him up.

 

[amazingjoshy]

http://aflnation.com.au/2018/08/18/lycett-to-st-kilda-going-to-happen/

 

[DickDunn]

http://aflnation.com.au/2018/08/18/lycett-to-st-kilda-going-to-happen/

Just like how Huddo said both Govs were going to Freo. Good commentator but I would be taking this with a grain of salt

 

[squashface]

At the end of the day, I think that we can only afford to keep one of Gaff and Lycett. So that’s on list management to prioritise.