Rumour GFC 2022 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this ad.

catempire

Premium Platinum
Mar 20, 2004
39,563
83,270
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
From the Hun:

7B7763E9-181E-49C4-87F0-B7538E465473.jpeg
72A61151-835A-4FDF-8EC0-613FD893C9A3.jpeg
6C0C0C03-AE1E-440A-815B-6B64E7F38EB4.jpeg
When it is asked “hOw CAn tHeY aFfOrD hIm??” this is why.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Vdubs

Hall of Famer
Jan 1, 2008
38,923
38,149
MYOB
AFL Club
Geelong
Grundys yearly games
7
15
19
21
20
26
24
19
20
First 6 games this season

His injury baggage is non excistent, so a 11
If he struggles next year I’d be worried, but his body for a ruckman has been extremely durable, which is rare
HMc
0
0
1
17
25
14
22
20
1
7
0
19
0
He was elite from 2006-11. A PCL injury was the beginning of injuries(2008), but the achilles injuries (2011) really cruelled him.
We got 19 games in 3 seasons.
Bought him as an injured 29yo.
Grundy will also be 29yo if we start him next season- I'd be very wary.
On the McIntosh Injury Baggage scale of 1 to 10 (1 = Hamish) where do you rate Grundy?
 

calder_daddy

Norm Smith Medallist
Sep 11, 2006
5,679
11,775
AFL Club
Geelong
HMc
0
0
1
17
25
14
22
20
1
7
0
19
0
He was elite from 2006-11. A PCL injury was the beginning of injuries(2008), but the achilles injuries (2011) really cruelled him.
We got 19 games in 3 seasons.
Bought him as an injured 29yo.
Grundy will also be 29yo if we start him next season- I'd be very wary.
I agree we have to be wary and do our due diligence, didn’t even remember we got that many games out of HMAC
If you had asked me without looking at stats I would’ve guessed 5-8 if that
 

Turbocat

TheBrownDog
Dec 10, 2003
52,883
58,582
Newtown
AFL Club
Geelong
From the Hun:


When it is asked “hOw CAn tHeY aFfOrD hIm??” this is why.

I love the guy for who he is for our club ... but there is something wrong in the concept of players accepting less to play for success. Not only does it deny what a player is due, it probably undermines the equaliation attempts of the sal cap... which only works based on the fact that player will be paid according to their talent. Imagine if you had twenty AA players all willing to take 50% less.

Its a weird system. The top side pays as much as the bottom in sal cap..., it's the reward of the experience outside of pure football that one probably gets better value from.

All good when we have one of the most aspiration clubs to play for. The blend of big games and small town living appeal to a lot of players.


I wonder if a player is worth ex on the open market should a club be able to match it outside of the cap.. I know cerain comps around the world have variations in payments... I think the Bird rule in the nba might be one of them? it would at least pay according to worth. but it probably doesnt help the likes of Gold Coast... who have to Over pay to compensate for their experience
 
Last edited:

Gunf

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 11, 2019
12,001
18,893
AFL Club
Geelong
They are focusing on youth if anything they will trade their older players like mitchell out. Plus reeves and lynch are good options they wont take grundy.

If you assume grundy wants to stay in vic the only real options are us or melb (if they can afford him). Hawks wont take him, roos he wont go to, saints have marshall, dogs would be a decent fit but english reportedly wants to play no1 ruck not fwd so i doubt they bring grundy in. Richmond have other list holes to fill, i doubt essendon take him with draper there (though they have the cap room if they wanted to). Carlton would be the only other vic club that could use him but i doubt they can afford him cap wise. So we are the obvious destination in most ways if hes not going interstate.
North could easily afford him if he didn't give a s**t about finals
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Turbocat

TheBrownDog
Dec 10, 2003
52,883
58,582
Newtown
AFL Club
Geelong
HMc
0
0
1
17
25
14
22
20
1
7
0
19
0
He was elite from 2006-11. A PCL injury was the beginning of injuries(2008), but the achilles injuries (2011) really cruelled him.
We got 19 games in 3 seasons.
Bought him as an injured 29yo.
Grundy will also be 29yo if we start him next season- I'd be very wary.

We have a situation were we are ...pot committed. One doesnt load up with Cameron with out being onboard with ensuring he has the best mid group to supply him...or thats theory.

I basically agree with you. There is probably a degree of amber light to most guys we are linked with. Its the length of contract that id be hesitant to take on.
 

Gunf

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 11, 2019
12,001
18,893
AFL Club
Geelong
What about all the below average stats
Wouldn’t rate JC as a grader either tbh
Agree he wasn't a complete A grader but you can't and will never have 22 A graders running around. You need your b-b+ players around them all playing roles like JC did and Hopper could be that maybe not as good but still.
 

catempire

Premium Platinum
Mar 20, 2004
39,563
83,270
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
I love the guy for who is for our club ... but there is something wrong in the concept of players accepting less to play for success. Not only does it deny what a player is due, it probably undermines the equaliation attempts of the sal cap... which only works based on the fact that player will be paid according to their talent. Imagine if you had twenty AA players all willing to take 50% less.

Its a weird system. The top side pays as much as the bottom in sal cap..., it's the reward of the experience outside of pure football that one probably gets better value from.

All good when we have one of the most aspiration clubs to play for. The blend of big games and small town living appeal to a lot of players.


I wonder if a player is worth ex on the open market should a club be able to match it outside of the cap.. I know cerain comps around the world have variations in payments... I think the Bird rule in the nba might be one of them? it would at least pay according to worth. but it probably doesnt help the likes of Gold Coast... who have to Over pay to compensate for their experience
To paraphrase, it’s the worst system except for all the others…

I don’t know of many ways it could be improved. I have raised previously the idea of struggling clubs getting more cap space temporarily to attract talent. I think that would work better than priority picks. Perhaps another thing would be to provide some cap bonus for retained players. Maybe if you have been at a club longer than 5 years only 90% of your salary counts under the cap. Six years = 80%, etc. That might encourage some stability and loyalty to the better run clubs. I’d want to think about that more though.
 

Gunf

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 11, 2019
12,001
18,893
AFL Club
Geelong
To paraphrase, it’s the worst system except for all the others…

I don’t know of many ways it could be improved. I have raised previously the idea of struggling clubs getting more cap space temporarily to attract talent. I think that would work better than priority picks. Perhaps another thing would be to provide some cap bonus for retained players. Maybe if you have been at a club longer than 5 years only 90% of your salary counts under the cap. Six years = 80%, etc. That might encourage some stability and loyalty to the better run clubs. I’d want to think about that more though.
First thing needed is equalising the fixture so smaller clubs get plenty of prime time which could help retain/draw talent.
Second making sure all clubs are run well (harder than it sounds).

From that point it gets harder to do unless you force clubs to pay what the player is perceived to be worth which would be ******* stupid anyway.

I do like your idea of rewarding stability but remember that would work both ways as rewarding it by lowering cap% to say 90% would then allow a club to trade in more A graders e.g Geelong trade in Cameron because half our list is getting a discount due to being loyal. So it could help struggling clubs keep players but could also help top 4 clubs poach players.
 

catempire

Premium Platinum
Mar 20, 2004
39,563
83,270
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
First thing needed is equalising the fixture so smaller clubs get plenty of prime time which could help retain/draw talent.
Second making sure all clubs are run well (harder than it sounds).

From that point it gets harder to do unless you force clubs to pay what the player is perceived to be worth which would be ******* stupid anyway.

I do like your idea of rewarding stability but remember that would work both ways as rewarding it by lowering cap% to say 90% would then allow a club to trade in more A graders e.g Geelong trade in Cameron because half our list is getting a discount due to being loyal. So it could help struggling clubs keep players but could also help top 4 clubs poach players.
Yes, sorry I meant making that concession only for clubs that meet some threshold measure of “struggling”.
 

Gunf

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 11, 2019
12,001
18,893
AFL Club
Geelong
Yes, sorry I meant making that concession only for clubs that meet some threshold measure of “struggling”.
That could work but how do we decide what struggling means? No finals for 5 years? 10 years etc
Or are we basing it on if you can keep talent

And once you are no longer struggling do you get done for salary cap breach due to paying less one year and the next being over by 20% due to cap going back to normal.
E.g 2023 North are paying 6 players 80% under cap 2024 they play finals and are not counted as struggling anymore so those 5 players have to be paid in full under the cap and boom now they are above the cap.

And by the way i am not arguing just to annoy you i actually really like this type on conversation even if sometimes i suck at it :laughing:
 

catempire

Premium Platinum
Mar 20, 2004
39,563
83,270
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
That could work but how do we decide what struggling means? No finals for 5 years? 10 years etc
Or are we basing it on if you can keep talent

And once you are no longer struggling do you get done for salary cap breach due to paying less one year and the next being over by 20% due to cap going back to normal.
E.g 2023 North are paying 6 players 80% under cap 2024 they play finals and are not counted as struggling anymore so those 5 players have to be paid in full under the cap and boom now they are above the cap.

And by the way i am not arguing just to annoy you i actually really like this type on conversation even if sometimes i suck at it :laughing:
How do we decide if a team gets a priority pick? It’s a bit opaque isn‘t it.

It would have to be setup something like saying for the next 3-4 years you are going to get the concession so salary cap planning could occur reasonably smoothly.
 

Gunf

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 11, 2019
12,001
18,893
AFL Club
Geelong
How do we decide if a team gets a priority pick? It’s a bit opaque isn‘t it.

It would have to be setup something like saying for the next 3-4 years you are going to get the concession so salary cap planning could occur reasonably smoothly.
Get rid of the opaque part and i am fine with something like that as long as everyone knows the rules beforehand screw this vibe crap that we have with PP now.
 

CatToTheFuture

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 18, 2018
16,855
26,567
AFL Club
Geelong
To paraphrase, it’s the worst system except for all the others…

I don’t know of many ways it could be improved. I have raised previously the idea of struggling clubs getting more cap space temporarily to attract talent. I think that would work better than priority picks. Perhaps another thing would be to provide some cap bonus for retained players. Maybe if you have been at a club longer than 5 years only 90% of your salary counts under the cap. Six years = 80%, etc. That might encourage some stability and loyalty to the better run clubs. I’d want to think about that more though.
I've been considering an idea that goes the opposite way. Sell a limited amount of cap to other teams for a year for a pick or two.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad