Rumour GFC 2025 Player Trading, Drafting FA, Rumours and Wish lists Pt 2

[Hinkley29]

Thinking on Free Agency comp…. does any other sport competition in the world have comp for Free agents?

Look at StKilda… they mate hate FSon and academies but they certainly have not had a problem with Prioity Picks ..and Free Agency compensation..

The lose Battle and get a comp pick that gets hem Tauru .. then this year this add JackSil. Two for one.

Major league baseball has free agency compo, but it is limited to good players. There are some complex rules around it which will just bore everyone if I go into it too much.

 

[Hinkley29]

He’s a depth player and limited. The Hawks don’t want him for a reason.

All teams need depth.

Hawthorn midfield depth is good, our depth is very thin.

Worpel is more valuable to us than hawthorn.

 

[Lana]

Back up ruckman is like being a back up quarterback.

You get paid good money for being an insurance policy that rarely (if ever) plays. Because you don’t play you never get exposed as not being good enough, which means you stay on a list for 5 years longer than you should.

Call it the Brayden Preuss effect. He stayed on a list for 10 years whilst playing 28 decidedly mediocre games. What a great gig.

If goad and madden go to a club where they will actually play, they will be exposed as either being good enough or not. Usually they are no good. Staying at a club where you can sit behind a quality durable ruckman is often a better career move.

In general the cost of not having an appropriate ruckman in any given game is so damaging that clubs will keep a couple appropriately sized back ups just in case.

 

[Lana]

Major league baseball has free agency compo, but it is limited to good players. There are some complex rules around it which will just bore everyone if I go into it too much.

Please do go on

 

[Reg Hickey]

I cannot count the amount of times we have judged a player before he came to us via draft or trade where we’ve got it totally wrong. How about we trust the list managers who seem to know what they are doing considering we have been perpetually in the mix for the past 20 years.

Myself included, I’ve got it wrong quite a few times. Gladly recognise how we develop and improve the list

This.

So many people in this board underrating Worpel.

 

[Hinkley29]

Please do go on

Ok.

Like afl, mlb players become free agents after 6 years at the major league level. However, because most players don’t get to the highest level until ages 23 or 24, most players don’t get to free agency until ages 29 or 30. Free agents in their mid 20’s are super valuable and will usually get massive contracts.

When a player hits free agency, their club has a decision to make - they either need to let the player walk or they have to make them a 1 year offer that would place them at the mean salary of the top 125 players in the league. In 2025 that was ~USD21m per year. So not an insignificant sum of money.

If they make this offer and the player declines it and signs with someone else, the club losing the player gets a draft pick compensation. Usually it is between the 1st and 2nd round, but it can be impacted by the total salary bill of the club. MLB does not have a hard salary cap but there are escalating taxes the club has to pay as their total salary bill increases. This total salary bill also impacts the free agency compo pick you can get.

Like the afl, mlb teams will also lose their compo pick if they sign a different free agent that has declined a qualifying offer somewhere else.

 

[Lana]

Ok.

Like afl, mlb players become free agents after 6 years at the major league level. However, because most players don’t get to the highest level until ages 23 or 24, most players don’t get to free agency until ages 29 or 30. Free agents in their mid 20’s are super valuable and will usually get massive contracts.

When a player hits free agency, their club has a decision to make - they either need to let the player walk or they have to make them a 1 year offer that would place them at the mean salary of the top 125 players in the league. In 2025 that was ~USD21m per year. So not an insignificant sum of money.

If they make this offer and the player declines it and signs with someone else, the club losing the player gets a draft pick compensation. Usually it is between the 1st and 2nd round, but it can be impacted by the total salary bill of the club. MLB does not have a hard salary cap but there are escalating taxes the club has to pay as their total salary bill increases. This total salary bill also impacts the free agency compo pick you can get.

Like the afl, mlb teams will also lose their compo pick if they sign a different free agent that has declined a qualifying offer somewhere else.

Correct me if I'm wrong but that sounds like the compensation pick would rarely be the deciding factor in how hard the club tries to retain the player.

My understanding on how these long term poaching go is that clubs might be signing a guy on a long term deal till their mid 30s with zero expectation that they'll still be justifying the wage by the end of it, the short term sugar rush and immediate boost is all that matters.

 

[Hinkley29]

Correct me if I'm wrong but that sounds like the compensation pick would rarely be the deciding factor in how hard the club tries to retain the player.

My understanding on how these long term poaching go is that clubs might be signing a guy on a long term deal till their mid 30s with zero expectation that they'll still be justifying the wage by the end of it, the short term sugar rush and immediate boost is all that matters.

It is correct to a point.

Often the club losing the player will know that they are no chance of keeping them simply because they don’t have the financial clout to keep them. Ie. if the Tampa bay rays have a good player hitting free agency, and the dodgers/yankees/mets/any big market club are wanting to sign that player, the rays are simply no chance to compete to sign the player. So they will usually offer the player the qualifying offer knowing full well that they will never accept, simply to ensure they get the compo pick.

The only way a small market club can keep their good players long term is to offer them a long term deal at the very start of their mlb career to “buy out” some of their free agency years.

For example, in the first 6 years of a player’s career their earning capacity is restricted by league rules, and then it explodes once they hit free agency. What a small market club can do is sign their rookies to say a 10 year deal which which will pay them more than they would have for their first 6 years, but then they would get less in the last 4 years than if they hit free agency and tested the market.

The attraction to the player is the security of generational money (in case they get injured or don’t reach their potential) but they give up some of their peak free agency years when they could earn crazy money if everything went right. The club takes the risk of having a long term contract on the books for a relatively unproven player, but they have a controllable asset that could be super valuable if the player turns into a star.

You are correct that clubs are signing players on long term free agent deals with little expectation that they will provide value at the end of the deal. The rich clubs can afford this, the small market clubs can’t. That is one positive about the salary cap, it limits “big” clubs from throwing money around that the “small” clubs couldn’t. Theoretically all afl clubs have the same amount to spend (except Geelong who pay in farms, pubs and blocks of land on the surfcoast).

 

[Pure_Ownage]

He’s a depth player and limited. The Hawks don’t want him for a reason.

The Hawks dont want him because they want the extra pick to try and grab petracca and/or Walsh Butters (and they have enough average kicking inside mids anyway) its not a reflection on worpel himself. It's obvious why he will come and why they will let him come.

 

[Lana]

It is correct to a point.

Often the club losing the player will know that they are no chance of keeping them simply because they don’t have the financial clout to keep them. Ie. if the Tampa bay rays have a good player hitting free agency, and the dodgers/yankees/mets/any big market club are wanting to sign that player, the rays are simply no chance to compete to sign the player. So they will usually offer the player the qualifying offer knowing full well that they will never accept, simply to ensure they get the compo pick.

The only way a small market club can keep their good players long term is to offer them a long term deal at the very start of their mlb career to “buy out” some of their free agency years.

For example, in the first 6 years of a player’s career their earning capacity is restricted by league rules, and then it explodes once they hit free agency. What a small market club can do is sign their rookies to say a 10 year deal which which will pay them more than they would have for their first 6 years, but then they would get less in the last 4 years than if they hit free agency and tested the market.

The attraction to the player is the security of generational money (in case they get injured or don’t reach their potential) but they give up some of their peak free agency years when they could earn crazy money if everything went right. The club takes the risk of having a long term contract on the books for a relatively unproven player, but they have a controllable asset that could be super valuable if the player turns into a star.

You are correct that clubs are signing players on long term free agent deals with little expectation that they will provide value at the end of the deal. The rich clubs can afford this, the small market clubs can’t. That is one positive about the salary cap, it limits “big” clubs from throwing money around that the “small” clubs couldn’t. Theoretically all afl clubs have the same amount to spend (except Geelong who pay in farms, pubs and blocks of land on the surfcoast).

I didn't fully appreciate the effect of the soft salary cap. It seems that relative to the NBA there is a lot more variarty in club spending in the MLB. The variety makes it harder to draw lessons from. But we can see some impact of clubs trying to get players locked in early to those 9 years deals, you'd hope that those contracts would be relatively fixed so they aren't impacted by salary cap changes. Going historic Alister Lynch signed a 10 year deal, that was fantastic for the club by the end of it. We gave Ablett a 5 year deal at 21, which was overs at the time and probably one of the most valuable contracts by the time it expired. Some of those crazy contracts might not be so bad, risky as they are. The Gold Coast lost a decade with these types of contracts. GWS had to dump players to keep a competative squad together.

While theorectially all clubs have the same to spend, I think that there is a cost of living gap, which is well in our favour.

 

[Turbocat]

Major league baseball has free agency compo, but it is limited to good players. There are some complex rules around it which will just bore everyone if I go into it too much.

thx for that.

 

[Turbocat]

Back up ruckman is like being a back up quarterback.

You get paid good money for being an insurance policy that rarely (if ever) plays. Because you don’t play you never get exposed as not being good enough, which means you stay on a list for 5 years longer than you should.

Call it the Brayden Preuss effect. He stayed on a list for 10 years whilst playing 28 decidedly mediocre games. What a great gig.

If goad and madden go to a club where they will actually play, they will be exposed as either being good enough or not. Usually they are no good. Staying at a club where you can sit behind a quality durable ruckman is often a better career move.

Its an interesting paradox for a competitor. The one thing id say (from the little id advance as knowledge about the american sport) ..is the the QB is such a central figure which all revolve. I sort of doubt there would be many great teams with ordinary qb’s. As far are getting a shot , yes can see that ..unless you can be the a bliz type.

 

[Turbocat]

I see GC is linked to Curnow .. and that a possible trade involving Walter migh be enough to get a deal done. I could imagine GC could trow another player or a pick into the mix . I cant imagine how we would get to that type of deal

 

[Turbocat]

The Hawks dont want him because they want the extra pick to try and grab petracca and/or Walsh Butters (and they have enough average kicking inside mids anyway) its not a reflection on worpel himself. It's obvious why he will come and why they will let him come.

Merrit?

 

[Lana]

I see GC is linked to Curnow .. and that a possible trade involving Walter migh be enough to get a deal done. I could imagine GC could trow another player or a pick into the mix . I cant imagine how we would get to that type of deal

Fantastic trade opportunity for both, GC should also provide some change

Walters is surplus to needs, Carlton could get started on the rebuild

 

[nohairandfair]

The Hawks dont want him because they want the extra pick to try and grab petracca and/or Walsh Butters (and they have enough average kicking inside mids anyway) its not a reflection on worpel himself. It's obvious why he will come and why they will let him come.

I'd prefer the Cats target quality too. Worpel is bog average.

 

[cats_09]

I'd prefer the Cats target quality too. Worpel is bog average.

As in bog = 'best on ground' average?

 

[dudusmaximus]

Right now the major stakeholders of the AFL are all local, but with foxtel and Kayo being sold to a Russian oligarch, it wouldn't surprise me if the next AFL rights get spread over a bunch of US based streaming services. Increased exposure to the US betting markets are going to be so lucrative

International markets/exposure will be great. Lots to like about our game.

 

[Pure_Ownage]

I'd prefer the Cats target quality too. Worpel is bog average.

I get this but there is not a lot on the market this year (some of the bigger name players are not realistic for us due to lack of draft picks to trade) and because we dont know how long tanners court case will go on for we need to bring in a ready to go midfielder now (same with the ruck issue). We can't wait and worpel is the best thats gettable on the market. It's the right call and I'm pretty confident he will work as a decent role player in our team.

 

[Hinkley29]

I see GC is linked to Curnow .. and that a possible trade involving Walter migh be enough to get a deal done. I could imagine GC could trow another player or a pick into the mix . I cant imagine how we would get to that type of deal

Walter for curnow would be a big win for Carlton.

Curnow is perfect for a team ready to win now, but he is brittle and can be inconsistent.

Walter is talented, but he is a few years away from being ready to really contribute. He fits Carlton’s timeline much better than GC, and he would way cheaper than curnow in the short term. If they can get that done Carlton should take it and run.

 

[Boxhead_31]

He’s a depth player and limited. The Hawks don’t want him for a reason.

He is a known commodity.

Atkins is 30 next year, and inside mid help is what we need.

Holmes and Smith are our outside carry, but they need grunt players to get the ball out to them and that is what Worpel can do

 

[year of the cat]

He is a known commodity.

Atkins is 30 next year, and inside mid help is what we need.

Holmes and Smith are our outside carry, but they need grunt players to get the ball out to them and that is what Worpel can do

* when he hits a target

 

[Hinkley29]

I didn't fully appreciate the effect of the soft salary cap. It seems that relative to the NBA there is a lot more variarty in club spending in the MLB. The variety makes it harder to draw lessons from. But we can see some impact of clubs trying to get players locked in early to those 9 years deals, you'd hope that those contracts would be relatively fixed so they aren't impacted by salary cap changes. Going historic Alister Lynch signed a 10 year deal, that was fantastic for the club by the end of it. We gave Ablett a 5 year deal at 21, which was overs at the time and probably one of the most valuable contracts by the time it expired. Some of those crazy contracts might not be so bad, risky as they are. The Gold Coast lost a decade with these types of contracts. GWS had to dump players to keep a competative squad together.

While theorectially all clubs have the same to spend, I think that there is a cost of living gap, which is well in our favour.

The soft salary cap and escalating taxes creates some really interesting challenges. It is not enough of a disincentive to stop the biggest clubs from having payrolls 5+ times as large as the smallest clubs. Also, the taxes get distributed to clubs based on revenue, so it disproportionately goes to the smaller clubs. The theory is that the smaller clubs can use this money to spend more on players, but in reality the smaller clubs often just pocket the cash to put in their owner’s pockets through profit.

the bigger clubs spend more money to increase the size of their brand and generate revenue through tv rights, overseas revenue etc. the larger clubs are usually owned by syndicates that are independently wealthy and just looking to grow the value of their asset (rather than needing cashflow profit from the club), whereas the smaller clubs are often owned by less wealthy owners who actually want the club to generate a cashflow for them. So the bigger clubs continue to spend more, and the smaller clubs continue to pocket tax revenue for their owners benefit. It is a vicious cycle.

The only saving grace is that baseball on a game to game basis is highly random, so any team has a chance to beat anyone else. So the goal is to make the playoffs and then you have a punchers chance. Over the course of the regular season the sheer number of games takes some of the randomness out of it (162 games means the better teams will more often than not come out on top), but in a 3,5 or 7 game playoff series the underdog will often win if they have a few things go their way. It is why the dodgers and Mets can spend so much more than everyone else but don’t win the World Series every year.

 

[Gee Class Loco]

All teams need depth.

Hawthorn midfield depth is good, our depth is very thin.

Worpel is more valuable to us than hawthorn.

And... for me the best way to weaken your opponent is by taking away something they value.

 

[nohairandfair]

As in bog = 'best on ground' average?

Nope, like