List Mgmt. Contract, Trade & Draftee Discussion, 2023: Picks 1,20,34,39,53 ,58

[Keys]

Link to contract status of all players

The Contracts Thread

Updated (20/3/24) the status of all contracts for people’s reference : Overall List - 44 Players : Main List(37), Rookie List(5), Cat B(2) Contracted until the end of 2027 (2) : Tom Barrass (8/10/95) - Signed a 5 year extension (2023,2024,2025,2026,2027) on an existing contract set to...

www.bigfooty.com

Link to Lore ’s excellent draft order thread that is updated to reflect current ladder positions

2023 Provisional AFL Draft Order (updated live throughout the season)

Every trade as it happens!

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Mop]

Can't teach just plain stupid

That statement's a bit rich coming from a guy consistently missing the point.

 

[bzparkes]

Here we go again.

Not sure we want to go through this again.

 

[bzparkes]

What are you Miguels alias account. Keep digging the hole. It's a dumb suggestion and thing to say. Deal with it. Not in any world could Gaff ever sue and win if Eagles decide they don't want him in the best 22. It's not his choice. Gaff will take his pay and have to deal with it. Performance is what gets games. Gaff would never be able to prove he is warranted of selection. In any circumstance. Regardless it's the match committee decision. It's also a sport and selection isn't forced by courts. Can't teach just plain stupid

You're arguing with a lawyer, probably not going to end well, if at all.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

Here we go again.

Not sure we want to go through this again.

Speak for yourself, I love a good Miguel argument.

Haven't seen one for a while. Might be because we all agree we're s**t.

 

[Free Agent]

You're arguing with a lawyer, probably not going to end well, if at all.

I want to see law degrees. I'm a judge and I'm saying Gaff will never win.

 

[Mop]

I want to see law degrees. I'm a judge and I'm saying Gaff will never win.

More like Ken Judge, amiright?

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

You said something dumb. Its ok too by the way. I have plenty of times. We all do from time to time. Nothing wrong with it. You need admit it and to move on from it.

Someone probably needs to take his own advice here.

 

[Free Agent]

More like Ken Judge, amiright?

I've watched a lot of Judge Judy of the years. I'm pretty sure I got this.

 

[bzparkes]

I want to see law degrees. I'm a judge and I'm saying Gaff will never win.

Prove it.

 

[Mop]

I've watched a lot of Judge Judy of the years. I'm pretty sure I got this.

I'd rather watch Judge Juddy.

In all seriousness, Fivey (or Miguel as he is now known) is a qualified lawyer.
I know people love to cast doubt on the internet, but it is fact. It is known.

 

[Free Agent]

 

[bzparkes]

View attachment 1737062

Well, dunno about anyone else but I'm sold

 

[Mulldogg]

Based on one game sample size?

It’s been noticeable in a number of games this season that players have been deliberately bypassing Gaff while he’s been seeking a cheap possession.

Also, live at the games at Optus there is now a discernible groan from the crowd when Gaff gets the ball and his first instinct is to stop, look sideways and then chip backwards.

Has been a great servant and it’s a shame he missed out in 2018 but he’s as cooked as a Xmas goose.

 

[Feeling Groovy]

Good lord. The argument is tedious. I am a lawyer with almost 30 years experience, employment is a large part of my practice, albeit I don’t practice in Australia anymore. Based on what Fivey said, he is correct, although I would express it as a claim could likely be made and may succeed. The nuance is in how Gaff is told or otherwise he won’t be playing in the seniors and how his contract is structured.

As noted, he is never likely to be told that categorically or directly so it is a non-issue.

Move on.

 

[bzparkes]

Good lord. The argument is tedious. I am a lawyer with almost 30 years experience, employment is a large part of my practice, albeit I don’t practice in Australia anymore. Based on what Fivey said, he is correct, although I would express it as a claim could likely be made and may succeed. The nuance is in how Gaff is told or otherwise he won’t be playing in the seniors and how his contract is structured.

As noted, he is never likely to be told that categorically or directly so it is a non-issue.

Move on.

Yeah, but...

 

[Free Agent]

Good lord. The argument is tedious. I am a lawyer with almost 30 years experience, employment is a large part of my practice, albeit I don’t practice in Australia anymore. Based on what Fivey said, he is correct, although I would express it as a claim could likely be made and may succeed. The nuance is in how Gaff is told or otherwise he won’t be playing in the seniors and how his contract is structured.

As noted, he is never likely to be told that categorically or directly so it is a non-issue.

Move on.

Yeah it's time to put an end to it. Fivey is a lawyer and probably a good one. But this won't go anywhere. It wouldn't be a good case to take though. Rather use that energy fighting the weather man for getting it wrong so many times. Seriously what's with the feels like. It's 20 degrees but feels like 22. Turn it up.

Case closed

 

[flamingEMBERS]

Anyhow I’d say he’ll be on our list next year

 

[bzparkes]

Anyhow I’d say he’ll be on our list next year

After being told he'll be playing WAFL no matter what?

Are you even familiar with employment laws??

He'll sue us for sure.

Prove me wrong.

 

[Miguel Sanchez]

Senior list: (currently 38)

Off (7): Shuey, Hurn, Naitanui retired, O’Neill, Foley, Clark delisted, Rotham demoted

On (7) 5 ND picks, Culley promoted, one player traded in for cheap (Brockman or Ruscoe top of the list)

Cat A Rookie list (currently 5, needs to be reduced by 1)

Off (4): Culley promoted, West, Winder, Trew delisted (Maric retained)

On (3): Rotham demoted, 2 RD picks

Five draftees plus the five from last year (Ginbey/Hewett/Barnett/Burgiel/Long) plus Maric plus four from the year before (Chesser, Hough, Bazzo, Jilliams) plus Culley. That’s 16 youngsters to build around along with Allen, Williams … I thought there’d be more of the slightly older guys to list here. That’s a worry.

Think moving on three of the over 30s is enough, there’s plenty of dead wood to cut and five draftees is plenty.

Doubt Barrass goes anywhere. Don’t think Gaff goes either, but if he does that leaves a spot for Naitanui to try to get back on the park for a final farewell.

 

[plays tall 1]

BigLaw

 

[Deepthroat]

After being told he'll be playing WAFL no matter what?

Are you even familiar with employment laws??

He'll sue us for sure.

Prove me wrong.

I didn't want to weigh in, but stuff it.

I reckon Matt Crouch was told he's playing SANFL no matter what last year.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Better Call Grace (KC)

 

[Deepthroat]

Senior list: (currently 38)

Off (7): Shuey, Hurn, Naitanui retired, O’Neill, Foley, Clark delisted, Rotham demoted

On (7) 5 ND picks, Culley promoted, one player traded in for cheap (Brockman or Ruscoe top of the list)

Cat A Rookie list (currently 5, needs to be reduced by 1)

Off (4): Culley promoted, West, Winder, Trew delisted (Maric retained)

On (3): Rotham demoted, 2 RD picks

Five draftees plus the five from last year (Ginbey/Hewett/Barnett/Burgiel/Long) plus Maric plus four from the year before (Chesser, Hough, Bazzo, Jilliams) plus Culley. That’s 16 youngsters to build around along with Allen, Williams … I thought there’d be more of the slightly older guys to list here. That’s a worry.

Think moving on three of the over 30s is enough, there’s plenty of dead wood to cut and five draftees is plenty.

Doubt Barrass goes anywhere. Don’t think Gaff goes either, but if he does that leaves a spot for Naitanui to try to get back on the park for a final farewell.

Someone please pin it. This is as close to realistic as anything I've seen in 489 pages. A great place to start before all the crazy theories appear.

 

[Deepthroat]

Does anyone know what would happen in following scenario?

We hold Picks 35 & 37.

As the draft is played out, these picks get pushed down by bids on 3 x FA compos (Mackay, Gresham & Himmelberg) , 3 x Suns kids, 1 x WB father/son. They effectively become Picks 42 & 44.

We have NGA Academy talent who we can match bids on after 40.

Say a bid comes for one at Pick 41, to match the bid do we effectively then have to use Pick 42 and 44 as they are next available?

 

[dinnaz]

Why would King Nissie I go on record saying we will not ask for a priority pick? Probably because we do not deserve it yet (having been premiers 5 years ago) and because he knows that the AFL do not see us as a priority.

Why am I am so cynical? Rough breakdown on financial strength of clubs

• 9 clubs who represent the cash cows
• 7 who are clubs that appear to be needing a long term propping up (5 of which are based in Melbourne and there are 4 clubs too many there but merging is too hard to manage)
• 2 expanding teams that look like they will need be 50 funding year plans, not the original 20 year funding plans.

Here are the estimated AFL distributions by club for 2023 and which club has received priority picks in the last decade:

View attachment 1736962

The receiving of academy help is a massive bonus as the 4 northern clubs get to use match the top end talent they develop. In the case of the Suns, taking the NGA's directly to their list was a massive help.

Of the cash cows, Carlton last got a priority pick in 2018. I suspect the AFL felt Carlton got whacked hard for the salary breach and it has had a longer than expected impact. The AFL are concerned because it had impacted attendances - average attendances for the Blues dropped from 50,000 in the late 2000's to mid 30,000's in the mid 2010's.

When the big 4 in Melbourne are up, attendances are up. That means the AFL get more money. By big 4 - I mean Pies, Blues, Dons and Tigers. So it is in the AFL best interest to help the Blues. To also be fair, the priority picks to Carlton in 2018 were modest.

We have been crap for 2 seasons now. Yet we continue to sell our full quota of memberships and have a wait list for seats. I am not sure if we have to pay the AFL for ticket sales based on people attending or seated memberships sold. I assume it is on seats sold via memberships plus marginal sales otherwise the AFL would be missing out on their share of 15,000 to 20,000 who are not attending each week. We made a profit in 2021 and 2022 and we have $67 million sitting in cash and financial investments (ie near cash). Until it impacts the AFL, I cannot see them helping us in 2023. If it starts impacting TV deals and their share of gate takings in 2024 and the sports betting "partners" complaining on how it impacts their setting of odds, then maybe we can ask.

North made a preliminary final in 2015 , finals in 2016 and 9th in 2018. They weren't bad (17th) until 2020.
Then received a leg up in 2022 after 3 poor seasons.

So timeline of last playing finals shouldn't concern us- we made a GF in 2018 and finals last in 2020.

If using that timeline then its 3 bad seasons to generate PP to trade out for players.

North chose to gut their list and end up as a basket case. For that reason alone they should receive no assistance as its effectively tanking to gain better/more draft picks. The AFL want North competitive but not profit which is fine.

We are different with massive injuries and we have actually put our best efforts forward not to be s**t. Lack of talent is from the equality measures in place not culling players.

North wanting a top 3 pick is ludicrous considering they have decent youth and require time to get everyone together.

If we were to get assistance it might end up being extra rookie spots and perhaps an end of R1 PP at the end of next year.