Analysis Gaming the Free Agency System

[Enviable Tradition]

If half of the rumours are true it appears to me we are trying to game the free agency system (whether by design or necessity).

i.e. sell players at a high, and before they hit free agency (Polec, Wingard) and bring in free agents (Motlop, Rockliff, Lycett) or players who are undervalued (Watts).

If it works it allows us to maintain the experienced quality of our list and at the same time keep topping up with young talent via the draft using our allocated picks and our traded in picks.

The challenge of course is that the players we lose with value have value for a reason, the free agents are often not locked in by their clubs for a reason and the draft is a lottery.

I am probably just trying to polish a turn here but, there could be some genuine strategy to this.

 

[Alberton Proud]

 

[Grave Danger]

Kochy, KT and Kenny's Kargo Kult

 

[GremioPower]

If half of the rumours are true it appears to me we are trying to game the free agency system (whether by design or necessity).

i.e. sell players at a high, and before they hit free agency (Polec, Wingard) and bring in free agents (Motlop, Rockliff, Lycett) or players who are undervalued (Watts).

If it works it allows us to maintain the experienced quality of our list and at the same time keep topping up with young talent via the draft using our allocated picks and our traded in picks.

The challenge of course is that the players we lose with value have value for a reason, the free agents are often not locked in by their clubs for a reason and the draft is a lottery.

I am probably just trying to polish a turn here but, there could be some genuine strategy to this.

Moneyball is risky, but it might work. However, one can't be daring in list management and cautious on the field. The moneyball mentality must permeate the club as a whole.

 

[thundercloud]

Yes we could have been an early adopter of this strategy. A free get has obvious appeal.

As per individual players each has a personal context, which can be but speculated upon. The coaches, club are in the best posn to judge whether it is a sell or extend trigger.

Hope cripps and davies make good decisions.

I do not think this is the case, but dothey need to do x to justify their brief?

 

[OneGreatClub]

If half of the rumours are true it appears to me we are trying to game the free agency system (whether by design or necessity).

i.e. sell players at a high, and before they hit free agency (Polec, Wingard) and bring in free agents (Motlop, Rockliff, Lycett) or players who are undervalued (Watts).

If it works it allows us to maintain the experienced quality of our list and at the same time keep topping up with young talent via the draft using our allocated picks and our traded in picks.

The challenge of course is that the players we lose with value have value for a reason, the free agents are often not locked in by their clubs for a reason and the draft is a lottery.

I am probably just trying to polish a turn here but, there could be some genuine strategy to this.

Yes their previous plan was keep players and stability at all cost. That hasn’t worked so now we have a plan B : constant disruption.
Shame there’s no plan B in our game plan.

 

[TeeKray]

If free agency is a game then we've been played.

 

[shewho]

That all sounds great but the reality of free agency is you have to pay more for the players you get than you save on those you lose. For instance, assume Wingard and Shiel are of equal on field value- we'd have to pay more to attract Shiel than to keep Wingard. You're better off not playing the game.

 

[Power Raid]

We're becoming to Melbourne what Richmond was once to us

The dees must laugh every time they see us coming

 

[Enviable Tradition]

That all sounds great but the reality of free agency is you have to pay more for the players you get than you save on those you lose. For instance, assume Wingard and Shiel are of equal on field value- we'd have to pay more to attract Shiel than to keep Wingard. You're better off not playing the game.

You may pay more in contract $$ but you should end up well ahead in draft picks.

If you are looking to maintain a top notch list then the former is more important, if you are looking to refresh and rebuild your list then the latter is.

 

[Portology]

We're becoming to Melbourne what Richmond was once to us

The dees must laugh every time they see us coming

Fair enough, because on field we've become what Richmond was once to us. And Melbourne even finished ninth last year.

 

[badbeats]

Polec isn't a free agency ploy, we just don't think he's worth 5 years / 750k per year.

Wingard smells like they are super worried he'll go end of 2019 and we're trying to get something better now.

 

[Power Raid]

Polec isn't a free agency ploy, we just don't think he's worth 5 years / 750k per year.

Wingard smells like they are super worried he'll go end of 2019 and we're trying to get something better now.

I can see wingard pursuing a big pay day, so this makes sense

 

[OneGreatClub]

I actually find it hard to imagine Port without Wingard.

 

[mic59]

One of the big traps with free agency, and it looks like we've fallen for it, is just because a free agent becomes available doesn't necessarily mean they are right for you. Lately we seem to have been more concerned about being seen to be important players in trade than doing the best thing for us. Keeping players on their toes with replacements is all very well but some trades bring into stark relief that some second tier players are going further down the pecking order and give no incentive to play well.

 

[tribey]

Lol.

I'd be on board with this as a base concept if we didn't pay a premium for a guy who was last worth it in 2014.

 

[TheFVK]

Great in principle, but feels like we're playing with fire. If we had a list management team that could negotiate trades like Weller for Pick 2 or Cameron for Pick 12 then I'd feel more confident, but instead we're trading a guy getting offered a $3.75million contract for Pick 10.

 

[Janus]

If you really want to game free agency...

1. Trade a player to a rival club with a year to go before FA hits.

2. Draft kids with resultant draft picks.

3. Reaccquire player in 4 years when they are 29 after ten years of service as UFA thanks to free agency for life rule.

4. Win flag with returned star and gun kids who are now 22.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

I can't trust a mob to try and game a more complex free agency strategy, who can't even implement a simple ruck list management strategy and don't understand the simple concept of triple redundancy.

******* up 4 and 5 year contracts dosent give you an out now that you try and use free agent rules as a way of covering up your * ups.

 

[raptalia]

If half of the rumours are true it appears to me we are trying to game the free agency system (whether by design or necessity).

i.e. sell players at a high, and before they hit free agency (Polec, Wingard) and bring in free agents (Motlop, Rockliff, Lycett) or players who are undervalued (Watts).

If it works it allows us to maintain the experienced quality of our list and at the same time keep topping up with young talent via the draft using our allocated picks and our traded in picks.

The challenge of course is that the players we lose with value have value for a reason, the free agents are often not locked in by their clubs for a reason and the draft is a lottery.

I am probably just trying to polish a turn here but, there could be some genuine strategy to this.

So what you are saying is our strategy is to trade out talented 25 year olds and trade in 29 year olds? I think we ****ed it up last year because we thought we had a better basic list than we have. Then again if you haven't got a Coach worth a cup full of cold water it really doesn't matter what your strategy is.

 

[Power Raid]

I can't trust a mob to try and game a more complex free agency strategy, who can't even implement a simple ruck list management strategy and don't understand the simple concept of triple redundancy.

******* up 4 and 5 year contracts dosent give you an out now that you try and use free agent rules as a way of covering up your **** ups.

frampton, ladhams and hayes

according to our club, they were triple redundant

 

[Enviable Tradition]

So what you are saying is our strategy is to trade out talented 25 year olds and trade in 29 year olds? I think we ****** it up last year because we thought we had a better basic list than we have. Then again if you haven't got a Coach worth a cup full of cold water it really doesn't matter what your strategy is.

No.

Trade out a 25 year old.

Bring in a 26 year old free agent and a 18 year old first round draft pick.

As REH said I am not sure that I trust us to get it right and I am not sure we are trying to do it.

Just floating it as a possible explanation for our approach.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[raptalia]

No.

Trade out a 25 year old.

Bring in a 26 year old free agent and a 18 year old first round draft pick.

As REH said I am not sure that I trust us to get it right and I am not sure we are trying to do it.

Just floating it as a possible explanation for our approach.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

The real explanation is more likely to be a problem with Wingard's future direction and asking price than any strategy on our part.

We can get an RFA without trading players and first round draft picks do not always work out. One only need look at our 2009 draft effort to see what I mean.

if we are going to trade a class player like Wingard we need to replace him with a class player or we risk going backward.

 

[MrChow]

We have no other option but to play free agency.

Our leaders are poor, and until they are transitioned out, 4/5 years from now we will not be a flag threat.

Our list is super shallow. We could turnover/gut another 10-15 this year based on ability.

So the only way we can build more capital into our list is via free agency. Hence why Ken was contracted for three years. His extension last year gave us Motlop and Rocky alone.

The other model is bottoming out - like Carlton, Brissy, etc. this is a tough canvas to get off. Financially even harder.

This is where teams lists that were strong pre free agency/expansion clubs are laughing. The quality in their lists overall were high, and they have been able to top up via free agency and stay competitive.

 

[longdonkey]

After trading in Ryder and Dixon for our top end picks the only way we can improve the list and still prepare for the future is by finding some free agents. I'm not sure we are gaming the system but are gambling that we can get more out of players that have a question mark over their heads.
We kind of got screwed by Gold Coast and GWS expansions (and we weren't alone) so we don't have a lot of aged 24-27 year old top end talent.
Since 2010 we have had very little top end draft talent drafted and I think we are doing this by necessity because there is a good chance that we could bottom out if we don't. Not drafting kids is now not an option and we can't use high picks to trade for established players.

Top 20 drafting since 2010

Top 10
Wines 7
Wingard 6

10-20
Marshall 16
Powell-Pepper 18
Jacobs 16