Should first round draft picks be given 4 year contracts

[footyfan1978]

Not sure I want to committ to Beau Dowler and Mitch Thorp for 4 years !!

Do not draft them then. Simple.

 

[quotemokc]

I think having differing draftee contract lengths based on round drafted would be a good idea.

I assume they are already paid on a sliding scale based on when they are drafted.

If the AFL wants an EVEN MORE interesting draft experience then this would help.

In the NFL teams regularly trade back into the end of the first round so that they can have that extra contract year option.

 

[RobbieGray17]

I think the best solution Ivé heard is to allow clubs to have the right to an extra two years. The hard part is if another club offers a ridiculous amount to a 2nd year player.

 

[Freomaniac]

This is an interesting topic.

I mean we are going to the NBA direction of Drafts, salary caps, free agency and now live trading.

I know there are some NBA fans/American Basketball fans on here and will know and understand what I will say next.

In the NBA draft, a 1st round player will get a 3 year deal and more money. A 2nd rounder will get a 2 year deal and less money.

Now I remember back in 1996 or 1997, Philadelphia 76ers got the number 1 pick as they were one of the worst sides in the comp. They Chose Allen Iverson as the number 1 pick. He got a 3 year deal at 3 million a year. the last pick of the 1st round at pick 30 would of got a 3 year deal but at 1.5 million a year. I don't know who the bulls got at pick 60 as that's the last pick and the last pick is given to the NBA champions. the pick 60 gets a 2 year deal at $500,000 a year.


in the 2017 Draft, Markelle Fultz was taken at pick 1 and got a 3 year contract at $5.8 million a year.


now that sounds about right.... the worst team gets pick 1 and a player with a bigger contract. As they need a good player and fill their cap too.


I don't know how much AFL draftees get. I think they get a 2 year deal at $100-150,000 a year. AFL rookies get $65,000 a year.

Personally AFL rookies should get $100,000 a year. 1st round picks should get a 3 year deal at $250,000 a year, 2nd rounders should get a 3 year deal at $200,000 a year. 3rd rounders onwards should get a 2 years deal at $150,000

If Struggling teams in the bottom 4 cant lure players, their 1st and 2nd round picks can fill $500,000 of the cap if that's the case.

Hell if a struggling club cant lure anyone and still has a spare 1 million in the cap, like Gold coast has 3 1st rounders, they can fill their cap with 3 1st rounders at $250,000 a year.

 

[Back Pocket Rocket]

When I was a teenager, I really couldn't care less about leaving the state, hence my years of back packing. I thought teenagers would love the idea of getting out of the state and experiencing a new world with fame, money, new mates, the increased attention of females. Or am I just a product of the 90's?

Yep, I was the same. Anything to get away from parents and dero school friends (I was in country SA). Plus being paid 6 figures in a major city with your choice of whatever punani you desire due to being an AFL footballer. I'd almost run there!

 

[master bate]

Yes draftee contracts should be longer with club options but I also think the TAC cup and National Champs games need to move to under 19 comps even if the draft age stays the same. Most of the top picks will be bottom agers but the system should be designed so more players are being drafted the second year through after an under 19 year.

More players should have a chance to dedicate a year to footy without the stress of school and develop their game that way and then be drafted with a bit more life experience.

These guys work incredibly hard to get drafted but it means a pretty sheltered life. That's why they get homesick in my opinion. They haven't experienced a lot of autonomy and responsibility. So many would benefit from a year learning to make new friends at uni, getting used to driving, learning how, when and where they want to go out on the town.

 

[Coaster2012]

This is an interesting topic.

I mean we are going to the NBA direction of Drafts, salary caps, free agency and now live trading.

I know there are some NBA fans/American Basketball fans on here and will know and understand what I will say next.

In the NBA draft, a 1st round player will get a 3 year deal and more money. A 2nd rounder will get a 2 year deal and less money.

Now I remember back in 1996 or 1997, Philadelphia 76ers got the number 1 pick as they were one of the worst sides in the comp. They Chose Allen Iverson as the number 1 pick. He got a 3 year deal at 3 million a year. the last pick of the 1st round at pick 30 would of got a 3 year deal but at 1.5 million a year. I don't know who the bulls got at pick 60 as that's the last pick and the last pick is given to the NBA champions. the pick 60 gets a 2 year deal at $500,000 a year.


in the 2017 Draft, Markelle Fultz was taken at pick 1 and got a 3 year contract at $5.8 million a year.


now that sounds about right.... the worst team gets pick 1 and a player with a bigger contract. As they need a good player and fill their cap too.


I don't know how much AFL draftees get. I think they get a 2 year deal at $100-150,000 a year. AFL rookies get $65,000 a year.

Personally AFL rookies should get $100,000 a year. 1st round picks should get a 3 year deal at $250,000 a year, 2nd rounders should get a 3 year deal at $200,000 a year. 3rd rounders onwards should get a 2 years deal at $150,000

If Struggling teams in the bottom 4 cant lure players, their 1st and 2nd round picks can fill $500,000 of the cap if that's the case.

Hell if a struggling club cant lure anyone and still has a spare 1 million in the cap, like Gold coast has 3 1st rounders, they can fill their cap with 3 1st rounders at $250,000 a year.

Philly traded for that pick. Boston had pick 1 and they won the easten conference the year before. NBAs lottery system means any team can get pick 1, its just less likely.

And i bet Phily are regretting it now.

 

[Freomaniac]

Philly traded for that pick. Boston had pick 1 and they won the easten conference the year before. NBAs lottery system means any team can get pick 1, its just less likely.

And i bet Phily are regretting it now.

Well.... its an 82 game season. Philadelphia have played 24 games: 16 wins, 8 defeats

 

[Coaster2012]

Well.... its an 82 game season. Philadelphia have played 24 games: 16 wins, 8 defeats

The point is: Fultz is not NBA standard, hes averaging like 3 points a game and right now, he's not playing at all because he's so bad, meanwhile Tatum, who they would have gotten, is killing it. With him, they would be a championship caliber team. They are off that atm.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Yes draftee contracts should be longer with club options but I also think the TAC cup and National Champs games need to move to under 19 comps even if the draft age stays the same. Most of the top picks will be bottom agers but the system should be designed so more players are being drafted the second year through after an under 19 year.

More players should have a chance to dedicate a year to footy without the stress of school and develop their game that way and then be drafted with a bit more life experience.

These guys work incredibly hard to get drafted but it means a pretty sheltered life. That's why they get homesick in my opinion. They haven't experienced a lot of autonomy and responsibility. So many would benefit from a year learning to make new friends at uni, getting used to driving, learning how, when and where they want to go out on the town.

If you look at the current landscape I think it's shifting, Paul Ahern and Brodie Mihocek are such examples. Clubs and their scouts you could argue have been forced to be more "efficient" in their recruiting due to an arguably thinning talent pool - or maybe not. The two I referred to have shown that there is mature age talent in the 2nd tier leagues ready for the big stage and you could argue plenty have been missed in past years. Liam Ryan another, Tim Kelly another.

I agree with your sentiment though in regards to the draft age being raised even though easier said than done it would allow young and raw talent to have less distractions to develop.

 

[master bate]

If you look at the current landscape I think it's shifting, Paul Ahern and Brodie Mihocek are such examples. Clubs and their scouts you could argue have been forced to be more "efficient" in their recruiting due to an arguably thinning talent pool - or maybe not. The two I referred to have shown that there is mature age talent in the 2nd tier leagues ready for the big stage and you could argue plenty have been missed in past years. Liam Ryan another, Tim Kelly another.

I agree with your sentiment though in regards to the draft age being raised even though easier said than done it would allow young and raw talent to have less distractions to develop.

Not sure who you mean with Ahern, he was a number 7 draft pick. But yes, there's been a number of good state league pick ups lately. I think the state leagues are refilling themselves after a thinning period in 2010-2012 with the 2 new teams.

I also think the game has changed even in the last few years with a lot of new roles within teams. Mihocek as a CHF who was a VFL defender, who runs both ways, attacks the contest and does the defensive work is a role that probably wouldn't have worked a few years ago. The requirement for speed, defensive efforts and contested work across the ground is making specific players valuable and others liabilities.

That's why I like the idea of at least going to under 19's and allowing the young guys more of a taste of physical footy, stepping up the physical requirements and even a taste for some semi-professional exposure before they become full time players with the hope they can handle AFL intensity.

More time in an elite developmental program has to be good as well. Tim Kelly wasn't good enough or ready at 18 and thankfully for the game (and Cats fans) he developed in the WAFL and became a star. He might've been a star by 20 if he stayed in an elite program instead of relying on his own hard work with some support from his WAFL side.

 

[LordLucifer]

I think these are the changes the AFL should make

1. Lower the minimum cap payments to 85%, allowing teams like Gold Coast and Carlton to actually create a real war chest to go after big named players.
2. Change the rules so a player can specify they want to go to a particular state but they are not allowed to specify a specific club.
3. Make it against the rules for opposition clubs to contact new draftees in the first 18 months.

1. Completely remove the minimum 95% payment and remove the "banking of under payments"
2. 100% agree
3. Make it against the rules for opposition clubs to contact new draftees until they are out of contract
4. First round draftees get an initial three-year contract with their club having an option for a fourth.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Not sure who you mean with Ahern, he was a number 7 draft pick.

I stand corrected, but didn't he go back to the vfl for an extended period of time or am I getting confused with someone else?

 

[maskmcgee]

Two years is too short, it should be a three year deal for players who are drafted in the first year they are eligible to nominate for the draft.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Not sure who you mean with Ahern, he was a number 7 draft pick. But yes, there's been a number of good state league pick ups lately. I think the state leagues are refilling themselves after a thinning period in 2010-2012 with the 2 new teams.

I also think the game has changed even in the last few years with a lot of new roles within teams. Mihocek as a CHF who was a VFL defender, who runs both ways, attacks the contest and does the defensive work is a role that probably wouldn't have worked a few years ago. The requirement for speed, defensive efforts and contested work across the ground is making specific players valuable and others liabilities.

That's why I like the idea of at least going to under 19's and allowing the young guys more of a taste of physical footy, stepping up the physical requirements and even a taste for some semi-professional exposure before they become full time players with the hope they can handle AFL intensity.

More time in an elite developmental program has to be good as well. Tim Kelly wasn't good enough or ready at 18 and thankfully for the game (and Cats fans) he developed in the WAFL and became a star. He might've been a star by 20 if he stayed in an elite program instead of relying on his own hard work with some support from his WAFL side.

Just possibly you're underating the WAFL clubs systems. There were a number of mature age draftees from there last year.

I dont doubt guys like Liam Ryan, Tim Kelly and Zac Langdon were doing extra work in the hope of getting drafted. They came out of the WAFL ready to have a pre season and play AFL though.

By way of comparison, we rookied Daniel Lloyd from the NSW black diamond league in 2015 and he became ready for AFL last year.

 

[master bate]

Just possibly you're underating the WAFL clubs systems. There were a number of mature age draftees from there last year.

I dont doubt guys like Liam Ryan, Tim Kelly and Zac Langdon were doing extra work in the hope of getting drafted. They came out of the WAFL ready to have a pre season and play AFL though.

By way of comparison, we rookied Daniel Lloyd from the NSW black diamond league in 2015 and he became ready for AFL last year.

WAFL, VFL, SANFL all strong leagues with good clubs that provide solid coaching and development but it's really hard to get on to a list once you miss out at the draft.

There's what 9 teams in the WAFL? So 9 colts programs that I'm guessing provide something like 10-15 draftees every year? After the guys picked in the top 40 of the draft there can't be much talent difference between the guys picked later and the guys who aren't picked, yet there then becomes a huge drop between those who become full time AFL players and those who have to make it on there own. At least an elite under 19's program would give an equal playing field for the guys who miss out at 18 and the best of them would play a lot of senior footy in that year anyway which has to be good for recruiters to see how they stack up.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

WAFL, VFL, SANFL all strong leagues with good clubs that provide solid coaching and development but it's really hard to get on to a list once you miss out at the draft.

There's what 9 teams in the WAFL? So 9 colts programs that I'm guessing provide something like 10-15 draftees every year? After the guys picked in the top 40 of the draft there can't be much talent difference between the guys picked later and the guys who aren't picked, yet there then becomes a huge drop between those who become full time AFL players and those who have to make it on there own. At least an elite under 19's program would give an equal playing field for the guys who miss out at 18 and the best of them would play a lot of senior footy in that year anyway which has to be good for recruiters to see how they stack up.

Interesting idea.

I think it would be very easy for an 18yo who misses out to relax the discipline and ficus on Uni, wine, women and song.
Those that stick it out might not be the cream of natural talent, but more likely to be the kind of tough determined characters that clubs like you'd think.

 

[markr]

The solution to s**t clubs being s**t isn't to force 18 year olds to stay there longer. All that gives you is a s**t club full of kids with terrible morale.

If you don't want your draftees to leave, it's up to the club to be a club they won't want to leave. Brisbane has lost a bunch of players through "homesickness", and what have they done? They've improved their culture and systems and appear to be turning things around.

 

[Milux]

I feel clubs do need more protection. Not sure what form that takes be it a 4 year contract or a minimum trade if 1st round pick (if taken in the first round 2 years prior).

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

I feel clubs do need more protection. Not sure what form that takes be it a 4 year contract or a minimum trade if 1st round pick (if taken in the first round 2 years prior).

I think putting a minimum trade price is just wrong. Clubs wont take players if you arbitrarily overprice them. This means the club is stuck with the player, and the player is denied an opportunity to move on and build a career somewhere else.

 

[master bate]

The solution to s**t clubs being s**t isn't to force 18 year olds to stay there longer. All that gives you is a s**t club full of kids with terrible morale.

If you don't want your draftees to leave, it's up to the club to be a club they won't want to leave. Brisbane has lost a bunch of players through "homesickness", and what have they done? They've improved their culture and systems and appear to be turning things around.

That's true, but they also got some good senior players fit and firing at the same time for the first time in a while.

Zorko, Beams and Martin were top 3 in their B+F. Hodge played 19 games, so did Mitch Robinson. Christensen played all 22. Rich 18. Josh Walker was handy with 14 games. Charlie Cameron gave them a spark for half a season. Darcy Gardiner, Lewis Taylor, Nick Robertson all filled roles, the first 2 there being talented juniors who might've left earlier but stuck around through the ups and downs and now at 23 are week in week out contributors (I Taylor stinks and Gardiner is great but that's irrelevant). The talented kids had something to build upon.

Why does that matter? Because if you're forced to pay massive overs just to lock in a 3rd or 4th year deal with a kid who hasn't done anything then that's cash you can't pay for senior players or to lock in guys for their 5th and 6th year when they really impact results. The amount the Suns apparently had Jack Scrimshaw signed up to a contract extension for is comical for a guy who had barely played and had no desire to be there. They still let him leave and even got nothing at that trade table because they wanted the contract gone.

For a fair deal I think clubs will still happily trade contracted players if they really aren't happy. Unhappy players don't play well. The Lions traded Schache knowing it was best for both parties. The longer contracts are more about protecting the weaker clubs from being exploited by player managers. It might even help players as well. How many of them sign for a 3rd or 4th year because their manager pressures them to lock in the financial security? This way they know they've got the financial security and they know they are in for the longer term. Kids drafted to the Lions now still face the same challenges as kids did 5 years ago. Better coaching and culture will help but the mindset shift from the kids going in probably helps more than anything.

 

[Bearded Clam]

The solution to s**t clubs being s**t isn't to force 18 year olds to stay there longer. All that gives you is a s**t club full of kids with terrible morale.

If you don't want your draftees to leave, it's up to the club to be a club they won't want to leave. Brisbane has lost a bunch of players through "homesickness", and what have they done? They've improved their culture and systems and appear to be turning things around.

This...

Forcing players to stay even longer at a terrible club is ridiculous.

And in the future the AFL may want to change the rules or they may not... but they’ll have to get any rule change past the AFLPA first. A homesick, and possibly depressed, young lad being forced to stay even longer in a place he doesn’t want to be isn’t a good look for the organisation.

Finally.. everything we have heard this year from both the AFL and the AFLPA is that they want to make player movement even more fluid... not less.

 

[Bearded Clam]

I'd rather bin the draft altogether but if there has to be one, then 1 and 2 make perfect sense. When a player says he had to play for this club he is not legitimately "homesick"

I say disregard all three points and simply go with binning the draft altogether... just have a salary cap. Players can play for any team they want and teams can have any players they want just as long as they stick within their salary caps.

The NRL works fine without a draft and just the cap..... the flag gets “shared” around between the nrl clubs just as much, if not more, than it does in the AFL... and the whole aim of the draft, along with the cap, is to create an equalisation of the clubs right?

 

[Bearded Clam]

The better option would be to fold the suns... give it up now.

QLD is NRL territory and even the NRL can’t get a club to survive on the Gold Coast... yet they can get one to thrive in Townsville with its tiny population.

The Gold Coast is a graveyard for NRL clubs... there have been about 4 of them try an fail in the past 25 or so years... and things aren’t looking that great for the Titans, there was talk of moving them to Brisbane this year.

Gold coasters are fickle supporters when it comes to supporting sporting teams in national comps.. AFL, NRL, A-league... all have struggled to put bums on seats and keep them there.. probably due to the population being made up of a hell of a lot of ex-pats from SA, WA, Vicco, NZ etc and these people still support teams from their states of origin.. I moved her 15 years ago, I still support the crows and would never even consider switching allegiances just because the suns are the local team..

Not all expats are the same as me but most I meet are.. I work with an expat Victorian bloke.. he’s a dogs supporter first and foremost.. but he has been a paid up suns member since their inception. Not anymore though, he said this season was the last straw and he’d no longer pay for the privilege to go see/support a team that isn’t his “real” love getting flogged week in week out..

 

[Bearded Clam]

I feel clubs do need more protection. Not sure what form that takes be it a 4 year contract or a minimum trade if 1st round pick (if taken in the first round 2 years prior).

Which clubs do you feel need protection?... all or just some?.. and does the protection extend beyond just new draftees?.. if no, why?

Do the crows need it?.. they’ve lost some bloody good talent over the past 5-10 years.. one being a Brownlow medalist that would’ve been handy in 2017!..

Should they be given this protection you speak of?.. should there have been some rule bought in to stop them from losing their (and arguably the comps) best player?... which is definately worse than losing a young draftee that’s still green regardless of potentially how good they may end up being..

s**t no.. of course not.. but if you’re giving one club protection you have to give them all the same protection or it’s not only not fair on the other clubs, it is particularly not fair on the players...

Imagine saying to Rankine, king and luko... sorry guys, you have to commit to 4 years before you’re allowed to make choices as to where you want to live your life... but your fellow draftees only have to do 2 years.. because you’ve been picked up by the suns.