List Mgmt. 2021 Trade & List Management Thread I

Remove this Banner Ad

NewNorth

Debutant
Sep 20, 2020
95
175
AFL Club
North Melbourne
If we were paying 104% of the cap last year, for me that's malpractice. This is why player salaries need to be public, not to know what the players are being paid, but for members to know how the salary cap is being managed. I would be happy to have accurate data without player names.

The club(s) should be held accountable
 

7577969923

Premiership Player
Sep 20, 2018
4,279
10,677
AFL Club
North Melbourne
If we were paying 104% of the cap last year, for me that's malpractice. This is why player salaries need to be public, not to know what the players are being paid, but for members to know how the salary cap is being managed. I would be happy to have accurate data without player names.

The club(s) should be held accountable
Clubs are held accountable. If they break the salary cap rules there are very significant punishments.

We know that clubs are able to manage the total pool over a couple of years. What more do you need to know than North is compliant with AFL regulations. Managing the playing list and player payments is one element of a well-run club. The granular details are commercial in confidence. Even without names attached the industry will work out who is on what pretty quickly.
 

B4Bear

Norm Smith Medallist
Jul 6, 2011
6,486
12,235
Melbourne
AFL Club
North Melbourne
If we were paying 104% of the cap last year, for me that's malpractice. This is why player salaries need to be public, not to know what the players are being paid, but for members to know how the salary cap is being managed. I would be happy to have accurate data without player names.

The club(s) should be held accountable
Nah, much more fun watching big clubs like the Pies and Carlton implode.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Devington

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 4, 2013
9,822
19,319
AFL Club
North Melbourne
If we were paying 104% of the cap last year, for me that's malpractice.
You clearly don't understand how the cap works then. The league allows you to underspend for a given year, but there is a floor to that spending at 95% of the cap, and then you have two years to use that extra space.

This allows for some creativity and greater options when it comes to list management.

For example lets say your squad isn't that great and your TPP is only 96% of the cap. You bank that extra 4% for next year, then spending 104%. That extra 8% could be spent on new contracts for improving players, recruiting established talent on big wages, or even making TPP payments in advance for certain players to free up even more space in the future, or a mix of those three.
 

King Corey

Moderator
Jun 9, 2001
28,380
88,713
Windy Hill Safe Injecting Room
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
St Johnstone
You clearly don't understand how the cap works then. The league allows you to underspend for a given year, but there is a floor to that spending at 95% of the cap, and then you have two years to use that extra space.

This allows for some creativity and greater options when it comes to list management.

For example lets say your squad isn't that great and your TPP is only 96% of the cap. You bank that extra 4% for next year, then spending 104%. That extra 8% could be spent on new contracts for improving players, recruiting established talent on big wages, or even making TPP payments in advance for certain players to free up even more space in the future, or a mix of those three.
Do you know if you have to use up the underspend? Or can a club do 96% one year then never go over after that to balance it up?

This would be a cost cutting measure rather than a list management strategy.
 

Devington

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 4, 2013
9,822
19,319
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Do you know if you have to use up the underspend? Or can a club do 96% one year then never go over after that to balance it up?

This would be a cost cutting measure rather than a list management strategy.
I think that's been an issue in the past, but I believe that the AFL itself now funds the TPP (or at the very least guarantees to HELP fund it, outside of all their other club funding initiatives), and better polices the TPP minimum spend so as to avoid that type situation. I could be wrong on that point though, it's been a while since I've looked up all this stuff.
 

shintemaster

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 24, 2002
15,873
28,719
Ponderama
AFL Club
North Melbourne
That doesn't change the fact that we were at 104% of the cap last year due to overpaying players from when we DID have a warchest. The person that I heard this from is literally one of the people responsible for overseeing how the club operates so you'd think they would know what they are talking about.
It's not necessarily overpaying if we've paid last year so that we have more available this year or future years. It's all about the amount over the full contract.
 

NewNorth

Debutant
Sep 20, 2020
95
175
AFL Club
North Melbourne
You clearly don't understand how the cap works then. The league allows you to underspend for a given year, but there is a floor to that spending at 95% of the cap, and then you have two years to use that extra space.

This allows for some creativity and greater options when it comes to list management.

For example lets say your squad isn't that great and your TPP is only 96% of the cap. You bank that extra 4% for next year, then spending 104%. That extra 8% could be spent on new contracts for improving players, recruiting established talent on big wages, or even making TPP payments in advance for certain players to free up even more space in the future, or a mix of those three.
I understand the underspend, that can be used in future years. See what Carlton have done last year, and how they were underspending under Bolton.
I just cant see why we would ever need to pay 104%
we haven't played finals for 4 years, and the only big "wage"player we have recruited is Polec, or at least should have been.

in terms of keep clubs accountable - if we are paying multiple players above market rate, we should know, as the club is mismanaging resources.

Just to re-iterate, I want this info to hold the club accountable. The player should try and get what they can, but it doesn't mean the club should just give players what they ask for.
Given how the Ben Brown situation played out, I am thinking those days are gone.
 

DrZaius

Oh my god I was wrong! It was Earth all along.
Mar 28, 2016
2,612
6,447
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
norf
It's not necessarily overpaying if we've paid last year so that we have more available this year or future years. It's all about the amount over the full contract.
Agreed, but I just meant in this context specifically we had 'overpaid' certain players as a whole (i.e. giving inflated contracts to players who weren't necessarily worth that much).
 

shintemaster

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 24, 2002
15,873
28,719
Ponderama
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Agreed, but I just meant in this context specifically we had 'overpaid' certain players as a whole (i.e. giving inflated contracts to players who weren't necessarily worth that much).
Possibly. I mean, yeah, by definition if we cut a bunch of players that's a fair argument. You'd have to look at it case by case though. If player x was definitely paid under market value in Y1 of their contract in say 2019 then we massively forward paid them from 21 into last year it all works out in the wash.

I understand the underspend, that can be used in future years. See what Carlton have done last year, and how they were underspending under Bolton.
I just cant see why we would ever need to pay 104%
we haven't played finals for 4 years, and the only big "wage"player we have recruited is Polec, or at least should have been.

in terms of keep clubs accountable - if we are paying multiple players above market rate, we should know, as the club is mismanaging resources.

Just to re-iterate, I want this info to hold the club accountable. The player should try and get what they can, but it doesn't mean the club should just give players what they ask for.
Given how the Ben Brown situation played out, I am thinking those days are gone.
It's fairly simple as a concept, devil in the detail as always.

Say we paid Simpkin, Polec, Thomas and Cunnington an extra 20% each of their remaining contracts taking from 2021 cap to do so. This then pushes us up to 104% and we're arguably "overpaying" but it also conversely frees up say an extra 3-400k this year to bring in new players (such as Corr) or attract FA's this year. We've overpaid on last years performance but we're not overpaying on the term of those contracts. We've paid them the same amount we would have but we have free money in the kitty for this year or next year to retain or attract better players. Leave aside the 104% the alternative is to overpay players that we just cut...
 

the Ziebull

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 14, 2010
22,546
18,875
AFL Club
North Melbourne
those vic country lads are always fairly loyal
gotta be targetting those vic metro interstate players who come home
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

the Ziebull

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 14, 2010
22,546
18,875
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Reckon this years mid season draft will be a ripper. There’ll be a few kids playing in the state leagues that probably would’ve been drafted if given the chance to play last year. Be nice if a young tall bursts onto the sene.
I reckon Comben surely goes on the LTI Right before it to give us 2 mid season draft selections
 

the Ziebull

Brownlow Medallist
Nov 14, 2010
22,546
18,875
AFL Club
North Melbourne
You can add Garner to that list also imo.

If he’s not right by Round 11 he’s placed on the LTI and effectively delisted.
he played on the weekend and got through

hes not injured atm just being managed but i take your point if there are any setbacks
 

Remove this Banner Ad