2017 Trade and FA thread

[Hollow Knight]

Yep, but it looks like the Bulldogs or nothing (IMO). .

Things can change quickly.

 

[Dylan12]

Are we moving on Martin?

 

[SizeMatters]

Are we moving on Martin?

Wouldn't totally be against it but I honestly can't see it happening. Smith is no here near AFL ready yet. Oscar is an unknown but was towelled up by Currie and Nicholls a few weeks ago so probably not there yet either.

 

[Sanchez365]

Just a thought, not advocating actually doing this but, with the jump in cba could we move someone like Bells contract all to this year and pay him out? Means we would be essentially banking the cba pay jump until next year, when potentially less clubs would have the extra 2mil to throw around on free agents etc.

 

[Fatcat08]

Just a thought, not advocating actually doing this but, with the jump in cba could we move someone like Bells contract all to this year and pay him out? Means we would be essentially banking the cba pay jump until next year, when potentially less clubs would have the extra 2mil to throw around on free agents etc.

Are you talking this year or next year? The salary cap will jump next season not this season. We can't just bank the whole increase, we are still required to pay 95% of the cap each year. So given the cap is $10.37 million or something like that this year then next year it would be about $12.44 (guestimate). We're still required to pay $11.82 million next season in payments. We can bank the difference to the next year, giving us an extra $622,000 the next year above the cap.

 

[SizeMatters]

I honestly don't see the need to pay out anyones contract for a few reasons.

We will probably be moving on 5-6 players at the end of the year who are out of contract either through trade or delisting.
I don't think the club will try to bring in a whole heap of draftees this year considering it's apparently a fairly shallow draft. Should have plenty of list space.
Whether you rate the player or not they are a mature body with experience. Makes no sense to delist/pay out anyone with the youngest list in the comp. At the very least they shelter the youth in the NEAFL.
Salary cap space is required to be filled... paying someone out in effect removes their wage from our 2018 salary cap which will have a 20% boost IIRC. We are struggling to pay the 95% cap now.

 

[carnthemlions]

What's everyone's thoughts on Andrew swallow and jack Trengove, could be handy for what we could get them for and both have good leadership qualities for our young group.

Swallow is ****ing char-grilled, might be lucky to get another year anywhere at this rate.

 

[Sanchez365]

Are you talking this year or next year? The salary cap will jump next season not this season. We can't just bank the whole increase, we are still required to pay 95% of the cap each year. So given the cap is $10.37 million or something like that this year then next year it would be about $12.44 (guestimate). We're still required to pay $11.82 million next season in payments. We can bank the difference to the next year, giving us an extra $622,000 the next year above the cap.

Oooo that would be my mistake. I assumed that the cap increase would be this year seeing as the CBA is finalised, but that doesn't make a huge amount of sense now that I think about it (as people are already playing for contracts now).

The idea (while perhaps not explained too well) would be to move a guy that was on say, $400k in 2018 and 2019 (updated dates to reflect the actual cap changes) $800k in 2018, allowing us to still have the cap bonus available to us in 2019 instead of 2018. This still doesn't make a lot of sense but now what i
m basically describing is just front loading some players contracts so we have extra cap space down the line. So the idea isn't as brilliant as I first thought haha.

 

[Sanchez365]

I honestly don't see the need to pay out anyones contract for a few reasons.

We will probably be moving on 5-6 players at the end of the year who are out of contract either through trade or delisting.
I don't think the club will try to bring in a whole heap of draftees this year considering it's apparently a fairly shallow draft. Should have plenty of list space.
Whether you rate the player or not they are a mature body with experience. Makes no sense to delist/pay out anyone with the youngest list in the comp. At the very least they shelter the youth in the NEAFL.
Salary cap space is required to be filled... paying someone out in effect removes their wage from our 2018 salary cap which will have a 20% boost IIRC. We are struggling to pay the 95% cap now.

The idea would be around if there were more attractive free agents in that year then it could make sense. But as mentioned this is pretty straight-forward cap front loading which I assume we are doing anyways.

 

[Fitzroy bears]

I would like to see us trade pick 1 for a first rounder (7 -12 range) and a first rounder next year. This would still net us 3 picks inside the top 20 and strengthen our draft position for next year. Would certainly do it if there is no clear cut no.1

 

[irish]

wont happen ! we wont trade pick 1. too much prestige , head office would not appreciate a move like that

 

[Fatcat08]

wont happen ! we wont trade pick 1. too much prestige , head office would not appreciate a move like that

Its funny because when you look at it, there's not too many occasions where the number one pick ends up being the best pick of the draft so in reality its actually not a bad move if you can turn one into 2.

I didn't come across one until 2002 and Brendan Goddard.

 

[jackess]

Its funny because when you look at it, there's not too many occasions where the number one pick ends up being the best pick of the draft so in reality its actually not a bad move if you can turn one into 2

Plus with what we just went through with Schache; having the label of very high draft pick increases the media hysteria when you're OOC.

 

[Hollow Knight]

wont happen ! we wont trade pick 1. too much prestige , head office would not appreciate a move like that

I don't agree with this at all.

We traded pick 2 last year for 3 (McCluggage) and 16 (Berry). Incredibly astute recruiting. The AFL aren't going to overrule Noble's judgement if he decides to do similar again. They sent him here because they back his competence.

 

[SizeMatters]

I don't agree with this at all.

We traded pick 2 last year for 3 (McCluggage) and 16 (Berry). Incredibly astute recruiting. The AFL aren't going to overrule Noble's judgement if he decides to do similar again. They sent him here because they back his competence.

Still can't believe that. Essentially got Berry for free as we would have certainly taken McCluggage with pick 2 anyway. Still confused over why GWS done that trade though... It was a huge gamble to think McGrath would be available at 2 considering the noise around McGrath going to Essendon at pick 1 during the trade period.

 

[dlanod]

Still can't believe that. Essentially got Berry for free as we would have certainly taken McCluggage with pick 2 anyway. Still confused over why GWS done that trade though... It was a huge gamble to think McGrath would be available at 2 considering the noise around McGrath going to Essendon at pick 1 during the trade period.

It was basically a free hit for GWS to move from 3 up to 2 because of the points for the lower picks that we sent back their way.

 

[irish]

I don't agree with this at all.

We traded pick 2 last year for 3 (McCluggage) and 16 (Berry). Incredibly astute recruiting. The AFL aren't going to overrule Noble's judgement if he decides to do similar again. They sent him here because they back his competence.

Time will tell I guess. When was pick 1 last traded ?

 

[BRAB]

The trade that got us McCluggage and Berry still makes me so happy. Not often the stars align like they did for us both on draft night and at the trade table.

 

[dlanod]

Time will tell I guess. When was pick 1 last traded ?

Time won't really tell unless the club comes out and explicitly comments... after all the net result of "we were quite willing to trade it but never got a decent offer" and "we were never willing to trade it" is exactly the same.

 

[Fatcat08]

With the 20% increase applying this current year to existing payments if ever there was a year where delisting a player and paying out their contract was a possible option this is the year. Guys like Bell, Bewick and even walker and Frost would have to be a tiny bit nervous, although a widely talked about shallow draft and what will probably be once again a lack of trade targets willing to come to brisbane will probably grant them a reprieve in this case.

 

[Fitzroy bears]

With the 20% increase applying this current year to existing payments if ever there was a year where delisting a player and paying out their contract was a possible option this is the year. Guys like Bell, Bewick and even walker and Frost would have to be a tiny bit nervous, although a widely talked about shallow draft and what will probably be once again a lack of trade targets willing to come to brisbane will probably grant them a reprieve in this case.

Didn't someone already mention that and was shot down by one of the mods. You are right of course.

Edit: bit cheeky I know

 

[Fatcat08]

Didn't someone already mention that and was shot down by one of the mods. You are right of course.

Edit: bit cheeky I know

Clearly that Mod is an idiot and knows nothing about football. bloody amateur

 

[Fitzroy bears]

Clearly that Mod is an idiot and knows nothing about football. bloody amateur

Haha. I think your right though. There is still scope to move one or two on and maybe upgrade barrett and recontract someone like harwood who might miss out other wise

 

[ZoBlitz]

It would still surprise me if contracted players are delisted and paid out because my fuzzy memory is that this has only really happened in the past when players had significant issues off the field, not just because they were just average players. But I'm happy to be corrected.

 

[dlanod]

It would still surprise me if contracted players are delisted and paid out because my fuzzy memory is that this has only really happened in the past when players had significant issues off the field, not just because they were just average players. But I'm happy to be corrected.

It's happened a few times. Austin Lucy would be one, and I think Collingwood did it to someone relatively recently. Every example I can think of falls into two categories though - off-field issues (Lovett, Fev) or someone delisted after one year of their rookie contract. This might be a function of how tight most clubs run the salary cap - paying someone an extra $300-400k or more (if they have multiple years left) in the current year's cap can be trickier than < $100k for a rookie.