Traded Devon Smith [traded to Essendon]

[Kegstar]

I

The way we are going Geelong are going to trade their first round pick from 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025

One day we'll go to the draft with a first round pick.

isn't there a rule where a club has to use 2 first round picks in a 4 year cycle? or did that get changed?

 

[Daniel McL]

I

isn't there a rule where a club has to use 2 first round picks in a 4 year cycle? or did that get changed?

Yeah I was joking. There is now at least. There wasn't last year because we traded out first round picks in 2015 for Dangerfield, 2016 for Henderson, 2017 for Tuohy and the AFL said that was fine.

 

[Orange Agent]

Yeah I was joking. There is now at least. There wasn't last year because we traded out first round picks in 2015 for Dangerfield, 2016 for Henderson, 2017 for Tuohy and the AFL said that was fine.

No the rule was there, they just decided not to follow it and nobody knows why. No way Geelong will get away with that again.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

No the rule was there, they just decided not to follow it and nobody knows why. No way Geelong will get away with that again.

It doesnt start until 2019.

 

[Orange Agent]

It doesnt start until 2019.

No.

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2015-08-06/future-trading-given-goahead-but-with-restrictions

 

[Jhye Clark 13]

No.

http://m.afl.com.au/news/2015-08-06/future-trading-given-goahead-but-with-restrictions

Lol.

 

[Orange Agent]

Lol.

Pardon?

 

[aussierulesrules]

Pardon?

He said "lol".

Probably because of this: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/the-new-trading-rules-for-future-1st-round-picks.1162990/

 

[Orange Agent]

He said "lol".

Probably because of this: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/the-new-trading-rules-for-future-1st-round-picks.1162990/

I'll be waiting to see what happens because I think the author of that article has misunderstood. Its weird they dont release the actual document and have no confirmation from AFL house yet only use Wells as the source.

 

[Daniel McL]

No the rule was there, they just decided not to follow it and nobody knows why. No way Geelong will get away with that again.

So it may as well have not been there...

 

[Daniel McL]

''Twas funny tonight:

Jon Ralph on Fox Footy - Geelong are interested but Devon Smith will stay at the Giants.

Mark Stevens on 7 - Devon Smith looking more likely to be at Geelong next year.

 

[Orange Agent]

So it may as well have not been there...

Even when it was introduced it was subject to AFL discretion. I just think its been misread. It was 4 year period and that period has yet to be completed. There was no rule to stop clubs from trading only a restriction will be placed if there is not 2 first rounders used in a rolling 4 year period. No other news source has gone with the Sam Landsberger take on the rule.

 

[tigerwill]

Every AFL club can trade its future first-round pick with stricter rules to take effect in 2019
SAM LANDSBERGER, Herald Sun
April 16, 2017 7:30pm
Subscriber only
EVERY AFL club is free to trade its future first-round pick in this year’s exchange period.

The Herald Sun has clarified future-pick trading rules and the league has for the first time released its formal guideline document.

It had been widely believed that every club must use two first-round draft picks in every rolling four-year cycle.

But the rule addresses trading a future first-round selection only when a club has used fewer than two first-round picks in the past four drafts.

BLOCKBUSTER DEAL: AFL ADMITS TO JAEGER TRADE BLUNDER

Even then, clubs can apply to the AFL for an exemption.

And according to the October 2015 document, Determination for the trading of future draft selections, the first four-year block will not come into effect until the 2019 exchange period.

The delayed introduction of future trading rules was so as not to prejudice clubs’ existing long-term list strategies.

Exemptions will be determined based on the age of players brought in through trades and what draft picks the club has used
The future-pick document also demands that club boards authorise the trading of a future first-round selection before the trade period.

Geelong does not have a first-round pick this year, after trading it last year for Carlton’s Zach Tuohy, and last used one in 2014, drafting Nakia Cockatoo at No.10.

But the Cats are allowed to go another two years without using one.
They would also have a strong case for further leeway, after recruiting Patrick Dangerfield and using an early second-round pick last year.
It was reported last October that the Cats had to acquire an additional first-round selection this year or next year to comply with AFL rulesThe Herald Sun this month made repeated attempts to confirm this with the AFL and, after discussions, believed that was the case.

But the Cats then contacted integrity officer Ken Wood, who confirmed the relaxed rules.

After requests from the Herald Sun last week, the AFL handed over the rules, which were signed off by legal counsel Andrew Dillon
The document has never previously been made public.

Under what had been the prevailing understanding, the Cats would have had to trade in an extra first-round pick this year or next, after they traded their 2017 first-round pick for Tuohy last year.

Cats list manager Stephen Wells admitted last October he did not believe Geelong could offload a third consecutive first-round pick to land Tuohy.

“I must admit there was a perception we couldn’t do it here myself,” he said.

“But we did check with the AFL.”

The rules reveal the league is not opposed to clubs trading a string of early selections, as long as they act responsibly.

Hawthorn’s golden era was built on shrewd deals.

From 2009 to 2014, the Hawks used just one first-round pick — taking Isaac Smith in 2010 — as they traded for proven players.

Clubs are always free to trade draft picks in the current year.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...9/news-story/62ac5fa26bb74712ec0a6e84e2e92888

 

[JG22]

AFL just changed the rules for Geelong, ridiculous

 

[markm106]

The trading future first round pick rules were never that clear. Ridiculous really. AFL needed to be clearer from day one. You'd think a lot of planning goes into these decisions.

 

[Orange Agent]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...9/news-story/62ac5fa26bb74712ec0a6e84e2e92888

I think he has misread it. If the 4 year cycle began in 2015, its effect will not take place until 2019. To me this does not mean its just free reign until then, its just that no club can get penalised until the 4 year period is up as the prospect of a club trading in additional picks is yet to expire. The restrictions on trading can only happen after 4 years. I find it very weird no other news source has gone with this Landsberger's version of the rule that its just free trade away time for another year.

 

[tigerwill]

I think he has misread it. If the 4 year cycle began in 2015, its effect will not take place until 2019. To me this does not mean its just free reign until then, its just that no club can get penalised until the 4 year period is up as the prospect of a club trading in additional picks is yet to expire. The restrictions on trading can only happen after 4 years. I find it very weird no other news source has gone with this Landsberger's version of the rule that its just free trade away time for another year.

If he misread it I would have thought the afl would have come out and clarified it. I think it gave the reasons why it wouldn't commence in 2015.
It also states Geelong contacted the afl Integrity Officer Ken Wood, as well as getting the afl rules (signed off by Andre Dillon) pertaining to it all.
I don't believe it was solely the writer of the article who perused it and just gave his opinion on how it worked. I've no doubt there were a few people at the HS (legal eagles included) and at afl clubs would would have given it a good going over.

 

[Stan The Caddy]

I think he has misread it. If the 4 year cycle began in 2015, its effect will not take place until 2019. To me this does not mean its just free reign until then, its just that no club can get penalised until the 4 year period is up as the prospect of a club trading in additional picks is yet to expire. The restrictions on trading can only happen after 4 years. I find it very weird no other news source has gone with this Landsberger's version of the rule that its just free trade away time for another year.

You've got it all wrong. The AFL was never wanting to "penalise" clubs for trading away future picks. The rule is just there as a safe guard in case a club decides to go all Crazy Vossy. That's it. It's really not that complicated and I said it from day dot. People have over blown the rule ever since it was introduced rather than actually taking a step back and thinking about why the rule was introduced in the first place.

 

[Giant Strides]

I think he has misread it. If the 4 year cycle began in 2015, its effect will not take place until 2019. To me this does not mean its just free reign until then, its just that no club can get penalised until the 4 year period is up as the prospect of a club trading in additional picks is yet to expire. The restrictions on trading can only happen after 4 years. I find it very weird no other news source has gone with this Landsberger's version of the rule that its just free trade away time for another year.

Even under that interpretation, Agent Orange, Geelong could trade its 2018 first round pick this year, and even it's 2019 first round pick next year, and the AFL will only step in during the 2019 trade period.

My own view is that I join many others in rolling my eyes at the AFL either not clearly articulating the rules from the start, or changing them after the start. I would also point out that any trading restrictions would be an assessment (if you believe that bit of the Landsberger article) of who a club has brought in with its traded first round picks. So it's entirely possible that AFL would tick off on Geelong bringing in Dangerfield, Tuohy & Smith in lieu of first rounders across 3 of the 4 years of that time period.

The bottom line, though, is that I don't believe that Geelong are restricted from trading its 2018 first round pick in the 2017 trade period, which is pertinent to their chances of securing players - including Dev Smith.

 

[Ichabod Noodle]

''Twas funny tonight:

Jon Ralph on Fox Footy - Geelong are interested but Devon Smith will stay at the Giants.

Mark Stevens on 7 - Devon Smith looking more likely to be at Geelong next year.

Saw that. Interesting that Ralph said "his manager told me he would stay at the Giants" whereas Stevo didn't name his source. Wonder who would be a better source than the guy negotiating the paperwork.

 

[Orange Agent]

You've got it all wrong. The AFL was never wanting to "penalise" clubs for trading away future picks. The rule is just there as a safe guard in case a club decides to go all Crazy Vossy. That's it. It's really not that complicated and I said it from day dot. People have over blown the rule ever since it was introduced rather than actually taking a step back and thinking about why the rule was introduced in the first place.

They have put quota's on it for a reason. IMO if Geelong trade it out again they will get a trade ban but really its not much of penalty because there is no way they will take picks off. They want clubs to have decent youth coming through.

 

[aussierulesrules]

They have put quota's on it for a reason. IMO if Geelong trade it out again they will get a trade ban but really its not much of penalty because there is no way they will take picks off. They want clubs to have decent youth coming through.

The only "penalty" would be that they would not be allowed to trade any more future firsts until they had used two in a 4 year period again.

If the AFL can see that a club is spending its future firsts wisely though there would be no reason to stop them from continuing to do so.

 

[Stan The Caddy]

They have put quota's on it for a reason. IMO if Geelong trade it out again they will get a trade ban but really its not much of penalty because there is no way they will take picks off. They want clubs to have decent youth coming through.

I'm not trying to sound like a smart ass but you still don't get it mate.

 

[Turbocat]

Even under that interpretation, Agent Orange, Geelong could trade its 2018 first round pick this year, and even it's 2019 first round pick next year, and the AFL will only step in during the 2019 trade period.

My own view is that I join many others in rolling my eyes at the AFL either not clearly articulating the rules from the start, or changing them after the start. I would also point out that any trading restrictions would be an assessment (if you believe that bit of the Landsberger article) of who a club has brought in with its traded first round picks. So it's entirely possible that AFL would tick off on Geelong bringing in Dangerfield, Tuohy & Smith in lieu of first rounders across 3 of the 4 years of that time period.

The bottom line, though, is that I don't believe that Geelong are restricted from trading its 2018 first round pick in the 2017 trade period, which is pertinent to their chances of securing players - including Dev Smith.

Pretty much. Its more the ability to use a firebreak than prevention to start the fire , and the AFL want to see that the fire is under control.

If I use a GWS player for an example .. I doubt that any club trading with GWS for a Hooper type of player would be prevented from doing so... whether they have traded their last 4 or 5 picks or not. What they would have serious concerns about would be trading 2 R1's for a Deludio type to ice the cake.. Sell the future situation. And then whether it worked or not , ones list is young talent deprived. In reality its probably more likely to be something in the middle and not as obvious.

If Geelong , after trading R1's for Danger, Henderson and 2E would then trade a Deludio or an Ablett or any good player thats 30+ , I'd expect the AFL to be less lenient if Geelong asked for exemption unless Geelong could show proof that i had young players, no matter where they have been drafted , that are showing they will be AFL types. So in this example the success of players like Stewart at 23 would help the AFL be more lenient.

So I see the 2019 date as a bit fluid anyway. The closer a side is to the pointy end , the more its try for now the more likely it is to recruit for now and be willing to trade R1's. That can be fine but they must have a plan for introducing youth as well and must use them responsibly , and they must have luck that it all works and the players remain injury free.

 

[Turbocat]

They have put quota's on it for a reason. IMO if Geelong trade it out again they will get a trade ban but really its not much of penalty because there is no way they will take picks off. They want clubs to have decent youth coming through.

I agree ..the key is they want a side to have enough youth.. thats different to compelling them to have R1 picks.
A case could be made that you may actually have more and better youth trading it in. Anyway , if and when we don't comply with the set criteria.. which will be a post draft assessment , it will only be the next trading period thats affected. With the approach of in draft trading you will not know what picks a club has till post that draft.