Strategy How would you fix free agency?

[Roby]

What is it meant to be?

A lottery.

 

[Roby]

Forget about what they do in the states. We aren't them.

But change the compo.
FS stays.
Academies stay.
Any compo has to be after the first round. Or at least outside the top 10.

Lets keep some originality in our game that makes it ours. Not everything needs to be like US sports.

"We're not the States". The most redundant and non-sequitur comment used here on Bigfooty.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

NGA's were created to shut up people like Maguire complaining about the Northern academies but those academies were genuinely bringing new talent into the draft pool and assisting the northern clubs with the go home problem as 90%+ of their lists are from the southern states.

We all know NGA's are a rort, all of the players drafted under NGA rules were already playing footy in AFL states, they weren't attracted from other sports.

This year has brought it all home to roost with the best player in the draft being an NGA, plus at least two others in the first round. The addition of so many high compo picks is compounding the NGA problem. Innocent teams like North have had their valuable first round picks diluted by compo and NGA.

The draft as an equalisation measure is failing.

The TPP is no longer working as players will take unders to play for contenders and players want overs to stay interstate or with lower clubs. This effectively hands contending clubs, particularly contending Vic clubs more TPP and stronger draft hands because they double dip keeping their picks and getting players for free. It's why GWS is now in trouble as they've had to overpay their best players to match big offers from particularly Vic clubs of which there's 10 making constant big money approaches.

The Swans Chairman, can't remember his name, threw a bomb at the last Chairmans get together saying the AFL hadn't had a whole of competition revue for over 20 years and one was desperately needed to address these types of issues.

Yes, the draft this year is a joke but it's just symptomatic of much greater malaise destroying the competition. Clubs like North must be really worried, they may now never recover from where they find themselves.

The Northern academies are ridiculous IMO. Sure they are bringing more talent to the game, but the cost is insane. Father son's don't provide top ten talents every second year. With the exception of Geelong's blessed run, you'll be lucky to get one top ten talent a decade.

Brisbane and Sydney seem to have no problem retaining talent currently, even the dial has turned for GC.

The retention problem for GWS is that their list is so over bloated with elite talent, they can't afford to provide financially or even guarantee game time for players that would be top ten prospects at every other club. Of course they struggle to retain talent, but the talent leaving is so strong it's been gifting them great resources every year. They lost Adams, Smith, Treloar and Shiel and made the grand final a year after losing the last one. Any other club would have been starring at bottom 4 finishes for 5 years after that. Losing talent isn't hurting them on field, it's just a rotating door of talent.

 

[Taylor]

So will geelong. So do other teams tring to nab these sorts of players. Brisbane are benefiting from the system. Currently more then any other club this year. It was just a weird choice to pick them as one of the 5 losers. Instead of having to give up their first round pick for daniher (plus more) all that happens to them is their first round pick drifts back a couple of spots.

The primary winner here is Daniher, as is the purpose of the entire process.

The concept is that after eight years, roughly twice the average AFL career length, the club has gained fair value for the service of the player justifying any draft selection they used for them.

If there wasn't a salary cap floor spend requiring 95% of the cap to be allocated each year then we wouldn't have such an issue with lower clubs losing players to big contracts at higher performing clubs, the lower club would be able to pay 2x or 3x the money to keep their stars.

They could even introduce a marquee player system where half the salary for a star isn't included in the cap.

But ultimately GWS had such a wealth of talent they couldn't afford to sign Cameron for his market value, so here we are.

 

[Snarls Barkley]

Not sure I understand the argument for removing compensation. Would just mean large, strong clubs gain while smaller clubs lose out.

My changes:

• Change tiers of compensation to always be end of each round. Band 1 end of 1st, Band 2 end of 2nd, etc. Here, I'd be combining the current band 1 and 2 to become the new Band 1, while 3 and 4 become the new Band 2
• Claiming a free agent requires points to be taken out of your picks, just like matching a FS/academy bid. Would be based on what Band the compensation came under, and only be taken from picks in the 2nd round onwards.

Essentially, I want the first round of the draft to remain pure and fair. I already believe in overhauling the existing FS/academy system to stop compromising the early stages of the draft, as it hurts teams needing to rebuild. At the same time, just because you lost a player, doesn't mean the value needs to be equivalent to their market value. This year, Carlton's Pick 7 will likely move back to the teens thanks to the Daniher, Williams and Cameron picks, not to mention the fact that JUH and Campbell will likely push it even further out. For a team that missed finals, having their pick become what a finals team would have received is just ridiculous.

The argument for removing compensation altogether is just a more extreme version of your first change. The argument is why should everyone’s picks go down five or six positions on account for player movements they weren’t involved in. This year for example (assuming Williams/Daniher/etc compo picks are end of first round so that the first round remains the same), a team like Port who has two seconds and three thirds this year, all their picks move back a bunch of spots from nothing done on their behalf.

I don’t mind the second suggestion either to be honest. I think it would work fine but I think he biggest problem with the free agency as it stands is that teams aren’t matching bids for restricted free agents to force a trade because the compensation picks they receive are more valuable than anything they’d get it a trade. So the first suggestion would be an improvement on how things currently work with the team getting a free agent being rewarded, the team losing a free agent being rewarded and the other teams getting told to suck eggs

 

[Taylor]

The Northern academies are ridiculous IMO. Sure they are bringing more talent to the game, but the cost is insane. Father son's don't provide top ten talents every second year. With the exception of Geelong's blessed run, you'll be lucky to get one top ten talent a decade.

The issue with F/S and priority picks etc is that they tend to enjoy the benefits of the talent for over a decade. It's been tidied up a bit lately with the points and bidding systems but I'll give you an example that impacted the league heavily over the last 13 years.

Tom Hawkins

26

Tom Hawkins

Age

35

Ht

197cm

Wt

105kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.2

3star

K

7.9

3star

HB

4.4

3star

M

5.5

5star

T

1.9

4star

G

2.1

5star

D

12.7

3star

K

8.6

3star

HB

4.1

3star

M

5.1

5star

T

2.1

3star

G

1.6

5star

D

7.8

2star

K

5.6

3star

HB

2.2

2star

M

4.2

4star

T

1.0

3star

G

2.2

5star

. Under current rules he is probably the #1 pick in his year, he costs Geelong their top ten draft pick plus more later. Instead they got him for a third round pick AND Joel Selwood. Geelong has enjoyed the benefits of that list concession for three flags.

Adding value to teams via priority picks, F/S picks, NGA discounts etc has long term impacts on the league. When some clubs are effectively adding an end of first round pick to their list each year above what other clubs can access there will be a game of catch up going on.

Nobody is going back to the likes of Sydney to get fair value for the drafting of Heeney etc

You've got to get your own leg up to stay with the pack. That's the argument for NGA's for clubs that don't have a long roll of father son talent coming through.

Freo has 42 players who have played 100 games or more, of that group 23 have finished their football careers in the last five seasons. Of the players who have played 100 games or more there are 2 who have been retired for 18+ years. It's going to be a generation before the F/S works for Fremantle.

Losing our NGA puts us behind, but keeping our NGA puts us too far ahead. There is a solution somewhere.

 

[Red Black and Blue]

The issue with F/S and priority picks etc is that they tend to enjoy the benefits of the talent for over a decade. It's been tidied up a bit lately with the points and bidding systems but I'll give you an example that impacted the league heavily over the last 13 years.

Tom Hawkins

26

Tom Hawkins

Age

35

Ht

197cm

Wt

105kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.2

3star

K

7.9

3star

HB

4.4

3star

M

5.5

5star

T

1.9

4star

G

2.1

5star

D

12.7

3star

K

8.6

3star

HB

4.1

3star

M

5.1

5star

T

2.1

3star

G

1.6

5star

D

7.8

2star

K

5.6

3star

HB

2.2

2star

M

4.2

4star

T

1.0

3star

G

2.2

5star

. Under current rules he is probably the #1 pick in his year, he costs Geelong their top ten draft pick plus more later. Instead they got him for a third round pick AND Joel Selwood. Geelong has enjoyed the benefits of that list concession for three flags.

Adding value to teams via priority picks, F/S picks, NGA discounts etc has long term impacts on the league. When some clubs are effectively adding an end of first round pick to their list each year above what other clubs can access there will be a game of catch up going on.

Nobody is going back to the likes of Sydney to get fair value for the drafting of Heeney etc

You've got to get your own leg up to stay with the pack. That's the argument for NGA's for clubs that don't have a long roll of father son talent coming through.

Freo has 42 players who have played 100 games or more, of that group 23 have finished their football careers in the last five seasons. Of the players who have played 100 games or more there are 2 who have been retired for 18+ years. It's going to be a generation before the F/S works for Fremantle.

Losing our NGA puts us behind, but keeping our NGA puts us too far ahead. There is a solution somewhere.

Solution is capping the number of first round talents you can have priority access to. Say one every five years. At least there is some risk and draft craft involved.

 

[Chaisa]

I think they should just scrap it altogether for RFA's. Can afford to match the bid? Do so and force a trade without ******* up the draft for everyone else. Can't afford to do so? Too bad, manage your cap better.

For UFA's, make the first round exempt from any compensation, so Band 1 comes at the end of the first round. Or perhaps tier compensation ala the point system. I'd be in favour of scrapping it too but while the salary floor remains as high as it is it basically just exaggerates the gap between the haves and the have nots as the have nots can't effectively use the money to sign another player in return.

 

[Lore]

Can't afford to do so? Too bad, manage your cap better.

If you can’t afford to match then you probably have enough talent on your list anyway, and therefore don’t need the pick.

 

[Lore]

For UFA's, make the first round exempt from any compensation, so Band 1 comes at the end of the first round. Or perhaps tier compensation ala the point system. I'd be in favour of scrapping it too but while the salary floor remains as high as it is it basically just exaggerates the gap between the haves and the have nots as the have nots can't effectively use the money to sign another player in return.

UFAs are either in the system for 10 years or they’re role players at 8 that don’t command top 10 pay cheques at their clubs, so they aren’t necessarily worth much picks wise anyway. Basically just fringe players looking for opportunities and security, or older guys chasing success. Usually easier to replace too, and you’re happier to wish them well if they want to go.

I’d be happy for that comp to just be whatever pick the destination club has in that round being automatically credited to the original club too, doesn’t need to be tied the original club’s ladder position or muck around with points.

 

[Messenger]

Maybe, maybe free agency just allows teams to be in the window for a longer period of time and likewise the bottom clubs to be out of the race for a longer period of time.

I'm still not sure that's what the AFL or fans are after

It can have that effect, yes. Ultimately the best tool for a bottom team to rise to the top is good drafting.

 

[100action]

See post here:

There are two options to fix the broken FA system.

1. Allow trades without player consent & remove compo. Clubs can auction players off on the trade table the year before the contract ends for best value if the player doesn't re-sign.
2. The club that signs the player is docked draft points equal to the compensation pick.

Apparently 1. can't be done in Australia; you can only laugh at how backwards Australia's labour laws are. Option 2 must be pushed through so that everyone else isn't pushed down the draft order.

It is unfathomable a club can sign a 60 goal a year forward and push 17 other clubs down the draft order.

 

[danielG]

Solution is capping the number of first round talents you can have priority access to. Say one every five years. At least there is some risk and draft craft involved.

The system is absolutely shambolic and the AFL hasn’t had the foresight to see the problems that arising.. Clearly clubs have got their hands on the AFLs secret herbs and spices formula... The Lions knew the Daniher Contract was going to get bombers and free hit and now AFL clubs can use the same contract and just change the name to get a free hit for a free agent, at the expense of other struggling clubs..If it’s not closed up now we’ll see up to 20 first round combo picks awarded next year.. The cross could get one for Smith, M.Crouch & Laird .. it thru fjiished bottom they’d have picks 1,2, & 4..That’s outrageous..it’s really not a hard fix either..Keep compo but reduce significantly.. non finalists loses an elite player (not based on contract but on player achievements and top 3 at the club) they get a mid 1st compo.. top 8 gets end of 1st.. IF Blues lose Cripps or Bombers lose Merrett it’s fair something goes back their way..
NGA academy’s are removed.. Northern states academy’s remain but only after first round selections...
Father Son stays.. it’s a nice tradition..
Get rid of the restricted and unrestricted aspect of FA..
Get Rid of PSD..
Get rid of rookies.. all players on the main list..

 

[Chaisa]

UFAs are either in the system for 10 years or they’re role players at 8 that don’t command top 10 pay cheques at their clubs, so they aren’t necessarily worth much picks wise anyway. Basically just fringe players looking for opportunities and security, or older guys chasing success. Usually easier to replace too, and you’re happier to wish them well if they want to go.

Usually, yeah. The one big exception was James Frawley

24

James Frawley

Age

35

Ht

193cm

Wt

96kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.2

4star

K

9.2

4star

HB

5.1

4star

M

5.1

5star

T

1.9

4star

MG

135.4

2star

D

8.7

2star

K

6.0

2star

HB

2.7

2star

M

3.0

3star

T

0.9

2star

MG

135.4

2star

D

9.0

3star

K

4.0

2star

HB

5.0

4star

M

1.8

2star

T

1.2

3star

who fell into the UFA bracket because of significant front-loading due to Melbourne needing to pay 95% of their cap. Given who signed him not gaining any compo for him would be ****ed.

 

[vozzon]

The AFL Draft has become complicated and compromised where it's a become a complete mess and a joke.
Imagine if you're Dogs, St Kilda, Collingwood, Brisbane or Richmond and have your first pick 2 picks later because of free agency compensation to other teams?
They've tinkered away with it year after year where it bares little resemblance to what it's meant to be.
Major turn-off.

This year especially with the free agent compensation it is looking pretty bad.

Mind you on the flip side all those teams you have named have benefitted in the past from priority picks and/or father sons, so its just one of those situations where you have to make the most of the opportunity when your club can get those benefits.

The only team I feel sorry for is North Melbourne, they clearly need it the most.

 

[longdonkey]

The concept of Free Agent compensation is right but its administered badly by the AFL. If it wasn't there the top teams would plunder the bottom teams for their best players in search of success which happens enough anyway. They still would get their draft picks as well and strong get stronger and the weak get weaker. I like the idea of taking the gaining clubs 1st Round pick and the giving that to the losing club. That would make clubs very selective about who they take as free agents because they are losing something.

 

[markr]

Scrap compensation entirely. The reward is the salary cap to entice another free agent. To make sure there is plenty of free agents, bring in free agency way earlier. Also scrap academies and father/son. I like the concept of father/son but it's had its day. If clubs want that club champion's kid they can draft him like everyone else.

If the AFL need to prop up their favoured clubs just make them do it with the salary cap like they used to so everyone can see what's happening.

Unpopular, but I'd go further and just scrap the draft and every player is a free agent. Clubs can sign any player who is out of contract. A club at the bottom should be able to turn over their whole list for next season rather than spend five years trying to rebuild three draft picks at a time.

 

[Savage Kent]

Band 1 compensation starts after all non finals teams' picks (after pick 10). Don't like that non finals teams are punished by having their picks pushed out.

I also like the idea of the number of games played in the last 3 years as part of the criteria.

 

[longdonkey]

Band 1 compensation starts after all non finals teams' picks (after pick 10). Don't like that non finals teams are punished by having their picks pushed out.

I also like the idea of the number of games played in the last 3 years as part of the criteria.

Non-Finals are being disadvantaged by the Academy picks as much as the compensation picks. That's why the best way to do this is to make these clubs pay with their draft choices. It's not totally fair but better than what we have now.

 

[frank99]

Why should a club be compensated after a player has given 8 years and decides to leave? That's more than enough return on the initial investment (draft pick). If clubs want to cash in they can try to orchestrate a trade a year out. Compensation is stoopid, it compromises the draft which is the ultimate equalisation tool.

 

[longdonkey]

Why should a club be compensated after a player has given 8 years and decides to leave? That's more than enough return on the initial investment (draft pick). If clubs want to cash in they can try to orchestrate a trade a year out. Compensation is stoopid, it compromises the draft which is the ultimate equalisation tool.

The reason is because at 26 he is in his prime and playing his best football. Some guys don't play a game in their first year.

 

[archiemoses]

I think the intent from the afl was giving bottom teams early pick so they can essentially trade for what they lost. Unfortunately they take it straight to the draft and get it wrong.

 

[Dangerousfield]

It can have that effect, yes. Ultimately the best tool for a bottom team to rise to the top is good drafting.

and not have all your pics diluted in the first place by compo picks and NGAs to other clubs.

North in a desperate situation have had their rightful pick 2 pushed out to pick 4 by Crouch compo and JUH being matched. Their first rounder via Dees will be pushed out 4 or 5 spots, that's a big impost on a club that's not involved iny any of these shenanigans.

 

[frank99]

The reason is because at 26 he is in his prime and playing his best football. Some guys don't play a game in their first year.

Agreed that's why players demanding a trade and dictating terms in there first few years annoys the hell out of me, but by year 8 if still on the list he's played a lot of footy.

 

[longdonkey]

and not have all your pics diluted in the first place by compo picks and NGAs to other clubs.

North in a desperate situation have had their rightful pick 2 pushed out to pick 4 by Crouch compo and JUH being matched. Their first rounder via Dees will be pushed out 4 or 5 spots, that's a big impost on a club that's not involved iny any of these shenanigans.

Yeah but the Crows rightfully should have had access to Pick 1 but they could never get access to the likely number 1 pick. But that wasn't an issue. It's only become an issue since the Cows could get access to number 2 for Crouch. North will get a good player. The first year of GWS Port only won 3 games and we only got access to Pick 6. But of course that's Port and nobody could give a s**t.