It’s time to abolish restricted free agency compensation

[big_e]

I find it hard to believe that there wouldn’t be a single option available.

And if somehow that does happen then so be it. The idea of free agency compo is to help mitigate the loss of an 8-10 year player. I don’t see how drafting another 18 year old achieves that. All it does is allow clubs a leg up to build a dynasty in 4-5 years time.

OK, so free agency compensation simultaneously doesn't help a club but also helps them too much. Is that the argument?

 

[Caligo]

OK, so free agency compensation simultaneously doesn't help a club but also helps them too much. Is that the argument?

No. The argument it is doesn't usually help them much right then (sheezel and daicos pretty extreme exceptions) but does help them a lot in 5 years, which isn't the point of the compo (or PP).

Forcing a trade for an experienced player at least gives a better chance of help now, but it is still not a great solution to the problem.

 

[oak79]

What if they don't replace that player? That's the whole point of compensation. Particularly if they lose a player late in the window. It's compensation for a net loss of players. This is required.

For me, the big issue with compo isn't just the selection awarded, but that it's also generated from thin air as an additional pick in the draft for the club.

My solution:
1 - All 18 clubs have a compensation pick in the draft, but these are allocated after Round 5, so essentially, they are the Round 6 selections. They can't be traded.

2 - If a club, such as NM and McKay, have a net loss in FA, then their Round 6 selection (compensation pick) is bumped up to a higher end of round - end of Rd 1, end of Rd 2, etc., depending on the formula bands. Compo picks aren't inserted within a round.

3 - Clubs who don't have net loss in FA can choose to use their compo pick for selections (round 6) if the draft gets there.

Overly complicated

Keep it simple:

NO compensation picks.
RFA only available to bottom 10 teams (top 8 sides must use normal trade process)
Solves everyone being penalised for a club unable to keep a player, and stops players just moving to the top teams.

F/S & Academies should be simplified too - clubs must use next available pick after a nomination.
Bids are BEFORE trade window so that teams can't split / downgrade their picks to manipulate the system.

 

[go_the_dockers]

F/S & Academies should be simplified too - clubs must use next available pick after a nomination.
Bids are BEFORE trade window so that teams can't split / downgrade their picks to manipulate the system.

This or a max of two picks used.

RFA only available to bottom 10 teams (top 8 sides must use normal trade process)
Solves everyone being penalised for a club unable to keep a player, and stops players just moving to the top teams.

Aflpa won't allow this.

 

[Underarm]

Overly complicated

Keep it simple:

NO compensation picks.
RFA only available to bottom 10 teams (top 8 sides must use normal trade process)
Solves everyone being penalised for a club unable to keep a player, and stops players just moving to the top teams.

F/S & Academies should be simplified too - clubs must use next available pick after a nomination.
Bids are BEFORE trade window so that teams can't split / downgrade their picks to manipulate the system.

Mckay to Essendon was a FA move only involving bottom 10 clubs.

 

[oak79]

Mckay to Essendon was a FA move only involving bottom 10 clubs.

Which is all good - and no need for compensation picks

 

[Soggy2112]

OK, so free agency compensation simultaneously doesn't help a club but also helps them too much. Is that the argument?

Sorry I don’t explain myself well enough.

The goal of free agency compo should be to help clubs replace the loss of a key player in the short term. Handing out a draft pick does not do this. It may help build a dominant side in 4-5 years time but that should not be the aim of a compo pick.

 

[big_e]

Sorry I don’t explain myself well enough.

The goal of free agency compo should be to help clubs replace the loss of a key player in the short term. Handing out a draft pick does not do this. It may help build a dominant side in 4-5 years time but that should not be the aim of a compo pick.

I disagree with the assertion that handing out draft picks doesn't help a club in the short term. Exhibit A is our B & F this year, won by an 18-year-old.

Meanwhile, the best of the experienced recruits was Liam Shiels in 9th. The others were Howe in 33rd, Tucker in 24th and Logue in 17th. And even Logue was only 12th when injured. And Darcy Tucker was one place behind George Wardlaw, despite playing 18 games to Wardlaw's 8.

Leaving that to one side, Ben McKay could conceivably have another 8-10 years on an AFL list, and would likely have been a significant player in our team for most of that period. Why shouldn't the compensation be used on someone who'll have an equivalent value? And how do you get a fair trade when 17 other clubs know that you have a particular pick that you have to get rid of?

Or a slightly different point - in a free agency system that is already ridiculously complicated and impossible for people to understand, why add yet another layer of complexity? Or more simply, why shouldn't a club be able to pick whoever the * they want to?

 

[Caligo]

I disagree with the assertion that handing out draft picks doesn't help a club in the short term. Exhibit A is our B & F this year, won by an 18-year-old.

Meanwhile, the best of the experienced recruits was Liam Shiels in 9th. The others were Howe in 33rd, Tucker in 24th and Logue in 17th. And even Logue was only 12th when injured. And Darcy Tucker was one place behind George Wardlaw, despite playing 18 games to Wardlaw's 8.

Leaving that to one side, Ben McKay could conceivably have another 8-10 years on an AFL list, and would likely have been a significant player in our team for most of that period. Why shouldn't the compensation be used on someone who'll have an equivalent value? And how do you get a fair trade when 17 other clubs know that you have a particular pick that you have to get rid of?

Or a slightly different point - in a free agency system that is already ridiculously complicated and impossible for people to understand, why add yet another layer of complexity? Or more simply, why shouldn't a club be able to pick whoever the * they want to?

Sheezel (and daicos and palmer) are insane outliers. The vast majority of top 10 picks drafted to bottom 3 clubs do not have dominant debut seasons that have material impact.

You can't use an outlier to prove a point.

 

[Soggy2112]

I disagree with the assertion that handing out draft picks doesn't help a club in the short term. Exhibit A is our B & F this year, won by an 18-year-old.

Sheezel is the exception not the norm. The average 18 year old is not going to fill the hole of an 8-10 year player.

Meanwhile, the best of the experienced recruits was Liam Shiels in 9th. The others were Howe in 33rd, Tucker in 24th and Logue in 17th. And even Logue was only 12th when injured. And Darcy Tucker was one place behind George Wardlaw, despite playing 18 games to Wardlaw's 8.

What did you give up though? If you’re trading pick 3 I guarantee you’re getting someone quality in.

And how do you get a fair trade when 17 other clubs know that you have a particular pick that you have to get rid of?

Because if other clubs want that pick 3 they know that they have to offer better than another club.

Leaving that to one side, Ben McKay could conceivably have another 8-10 years on an AFL list, and would likely have been a significant player in our team for most of that period. Why shouldn't the compensation be used on someone who'll have an equivalent value?

Why should you be entitled to compensation anyway? He’s restricted, if you wanted him just match the offer, that’s the advantage of being a young, bottom tier side.


If we’re going to keep compensation, the goal should be to minimise the immediate effects of the loss of that player to keep the league competitive.

At the moment, just handing picks out is only helping teams to try and build dynasties 4-5 years down the track.

 

[big_e]

So if North Melbourne was forced to trade pick 3 this week, what does that trade look like? Who are we bringing in?

 

[Marat]

I’m sure it’s been said, but if the AFL is interested in equalisation (and more importantly fairness to all teams) the team picking up the free agent should at least be required to give up the value of the compensation pick in draft value points. If a team thinks the free agent is worth the big contract, and if that drives a high compensation pick, then that team will be required to give up more points. Under the current system, the team that gets the free agent wins, the team that loses the free agent is compensated, and the other teams pay the price by being pushed back in the draft order

 

[Soggy2112]

So if North Melbourne was forced to trade pick 3 this week, what does that trade look like? Who are we bringing in?

No idea, clubs would be falling over themselves to trade for it.

Off the top of my head, someone like Dougal Howard would be an upgrade on McKay and the Saints would definitely be open to that deal I think.

Petty potentially?

Plenty of mature bodied guys out there that would fill the gap of McKay, if not be a better option and help make North competitive.

 

[Soggy2112]

I’m sure it’s been said, but if the AFL is interested in equalisation (and more importantly fairness to all teams) the team picking up the free agent should at least be required to give up the value of the compensation pick in draft value points. If a team thinks the free agent is worth the big contract, and if that drives a high compensation pick, then that team will be required to give up more points. Under the current system, the team that gets the free agent wins, the team that loses the free agent is compensated, and the other teams pay the price by being pushed back in the draft order

Teams signing a player have to have cap room.

They’ve done their part in managing their cap to create room for who they deem their key target is. All other clubs are free to do the same.

 

[Caligo]

So if North Melbourne was forced to trade pick 3 this week, what does that trade look like? Who are we bringing in?

Someone seriously good. Barrass maybe? Tim English? Naughton?

If NM had been given warning months ago they could have lined up someone. It would be tricky now I suspect.

 

[big_e]

No idea, clubs would be falling over themselves to trade for it.

Off the top of my head, someone like Dougal Howard would be an upgrade on McKay and the Saints would definitely be open to that deal I think.

Petty potentially?

Plenty of mature bodied guys out there that would fill the gap of McKay, if not be a better option and help make North competitive.

Pick 3 is massive overs for Dougal Howard.

Would Petty want to come to NMFC when he's also being offered a million bucks to play in his home state?

Try again.

 

[big_e]

Someone seriously good. Barrass maybe? Tim English? Naughton?

If NM had been given warning months ago they could have lined up someone. It would be tricky now I suspect.

Naughton is not available, nor is English.

We asked Barrass and he said no.

We also asked Ratugolea, Grundy, and several other players, all of whom said no.

Which leaves us in a position where we'd lose our full back and not get anything at all in return.

Remind me how this helps anyone?

 

[Soggy2112]

Pick 3 is massive overs for Dougal Howard.

Would Petty want to come to NMFC when he's also being offered a million bucks to play in his home state?

Try again.

The point of free agency compensation is to compensate a club for the loss of an experienced player.

The two players I mentioned are equivalent if not better than McKay.

I mentioned those players because they are two rumoured to be on the move and who fill the hole McKay has left.

Who gives a * that pick 3 might be overs? You as the club losing the player has been compensated more than fairly.
This isn’t a priority pick system, it’s a compensation system.

My ideal scenario you would get nothing anyway. He’s a restricted free agent. You’re a bottom club, you can afford to match the offer, and you have the second pick in the PSD. You could keep him if you want, or you can trade too. North chose to let him walk, why should they get anything in return?

Naughton is not available, nor is English.

We asked Barrass and he said no.

We also asked Ratugolea, Grundy, and several other players, all of whom said no.

Which leaves us in a position where we'd lose our full back and not get anything at all in return.

Remind me how this helps anyone?

I guarantee you that if pick 3 was on the table and clubs knew they had to offer a player, someone of worth would come forward.

Also remember you’ve just had 800k on a long term deal leave your salary cap. You don’t think that kind of coin would shake anyone loose?

 

[Soggy2112]

Naughton is not available, nor is English.

We asked Barrass and he said no.

We also asked Ratugolea, Grundy, and several other players, all of whom said no.

Which leaves us in a position where we'd lose our full back and not get anything at all in return.

Remind me how this helps anyone?

North made a big song and dance about how losing a mature, big bodied player was going to hurt them.

Go out and get one, and if you can’t then surely you’re up s**t creek anyway if what you said was genuine, what’s getting another 18 year old in going to do to help?

 

[Caligo]

Naughton is not available, nor is English.

We asked Barrass and he said no.

We also asked Ratugolea, Grundy, and several other players, all of whom said no.

Which leaves us in a position where we'd lose our full back and not get anything at all in return.

Remind me how this helps anyone?

Did you ask with pick 3? That is a pretty huge lure.

 

[peetoo]

Overly complicated

Keep it simple:

NO compensation picks.
RFA only available to bottom 10 teams (top 8 sides must use normal trade process)
Solves everyone being penalised for a club unable to keep a player, and stops players just moving to the top teams.

F/S & Academies should be simplified too - clubs must use next available pick after a nomination.
Bids are BEFORE trade window so that teams can't split / downgrade their picks to manipulate the system.

Or make it all points based and just trade in points including auctions replacing drafting

 

[Cameron_Jezza]

I’m sure it’s been said, but if the AFL is interested in equalisation (and more importantly fairness to all teams) the team picking up the free agent should at least be required to give up the value of the compensation pick in draft value points. If a team thinks the free agent is worth the big contract, and if that drives a high compensation pick, then that team will be required to give up more points. Under the current system, the team that gets the free agent wins, the team that loses the free agent is compensated, and the other teams pay the price by being pushed back in the draft order

This is the way to do it. I said something similar on trade radio, Damien Barrett didn't really agree.

 

[Soggy2112]

F/S & Academies should be simplified too - clubs must use next available pick after a nomination.

Problem with this is if clubs know they have a high level F/S they could trade out all but their last pick and then waltz in and take that player.

Imagine if Collingwood could’ve done that with Daicos, they’d have gotten a bunch of value out of their draft picks, and gotten the best/second best prospect in the draft for a fourth round selection.

 

[Daka]

I think it needs to go, if you do not value a player what another club thinks he is worth than there should be no compensation. it also allows the club to replace that player in coming seasons. also clubs should be able to trade players without consent would also help more movement.
It's been all about the player power way too long this compensation garbage this isn't even true free agency like the American sports.

The AFLPA wanted this silly system that is in massive favor of the players without any cons. clubs need more power.

 

[Saab NLAW]

Get rid of everything that compromises the draft, FA compensation picks, NGA, Academies, F/S picks and anything else the AFL has created to * the draft up.

The draft was introduced because zoning didn't work, now we have certain clubs with a zone plus a whole bunch of other ridiculous things. Since introducing FA compensation picks and academies the AFL have had to continually go back and change the rules to try and fix the mess they've created.