It’s time to abolish restricted free agency compensation

[oak79]

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.

That was covered in the next line of my post:
"Bids are BEFORE trade window so that teams can't split / downgrade their picks to manipulate the system."

So FS / Academy "draft" is done now - before any pick trades.
Any team that nominates / matches a FS / Academy pick, that pick is locked in and can't be traded before the draft.

 

[Frederico_WA]

Until the AFLPA remove the confidentiality from the player contracts, this system will always be broken. It's too secretive, so we cannot truly know what is 'fair' value for any player.

In the current format, it needs to be removed. It's laughable the league says it's for 'equalisation' when it seems to work against that alot of the time. For example, Eagle were clearly the worst team this year but now instead of having 1st and 19th, they are being pushed out to the mid-20s for their 2nd pick. That goes directly against 'equalisation'.

The modern AFL has had substantial year-on-year increase to player-initiated trades. These do not complement the reverse ladder draft pick order, which should be the uncompromised part of their equalisation efforts.

 

[Caligo]

Until the AFLPA remove the confidentiality from the player contracts, this system will always be broken. It's too secretive, so we cannot truly know what is 'fair' value for any player.

In the current format, it needs to be removed. It's laughable the league says it's for 'equalisation' when it seems to work against that alot of the time. For example, Eagle were clearly the worst team this year but now instead of having 1st and 19th, they are being pushed out to the mid-20s for their 2nd pick. That goes directly against 'equalisation'.

The modern AFL has had substantial year-on-year increase to player-initiated trades. These do not complement the reverse ladder draft pick order, which should be the uncompromised part of their equalisation efforts.

I really liked how the Buddy contract was made public in full. It let the public fully understand exactly what happened. I was hoping it would be a precedent. But it wasn't.

 

[dumb]

i am confused.gif when it comes to trade rules, points, compensation.

i'd be surprised if it hasn't been suggested, and don't even know if it's a good idea. but it seems like compensation could be tied to what the original club offered rather than the hail mary's to bring them in. delisting your spud or offering them a contract should be the first step rather than some matching bid hoo-ha.

 

[The Tilt]

That was covered in the next line of my post:
"Bids are BEFORE trade window so that teams can't split / downgrade their picks to manipulate the system."

So FS / Academy "draft" is done now - before any pick trades.
Any team that nominates / matches a FS / Academy pick, that pick is locked in and can't be traded before the draft.

But clubs would just trade future picks in the previous year, knowing they have a father-son coming down the line. i.e. manipulating the system 12 months out.

The other thing is, forcing clubs to use whatever their first round pick is on a father-son/academy players just means that teams finishing higher on the ladder get these players cheaper. Suppose the best player in this year's draft is a third Daicos brother. Collingwood would get him for pick 18. Likewise, WCE would be forced to use pick 1 to match a bid on a father-son likely to go in 10-15 range.

Here's a suggested change to father-son/academy rules: get rid of the discount, and instead impose a fee when clubs match bids made by other clubs. This would encourage clubs to use the picks they have to select Father-sons/academy players (rather points-harvesting) delivering a less compromised draft.

 

[ferball]

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.

This is ridiculous.

One player isn't gonna help a team build a dynasty any more than any other player.

We got lucky with McKay cos the market dictated his compo (he'd been checked out all year if you watch his games, so he was gone anyway and those rumours have been there since 2021,) and it coincides with a period of bottoming out so we have lots of early first round picks. However Mckay compo was only one of those picks and while it will help it won't make that much difference. (Those other PPs give us a chance to trade or bring in role players that can follow instructions and use their brains. That's about it tho.)

Most of the time compo picks are end of first round or later. If Mckay left Collingwood instead of us it would be an end of first round pick anyway.

Dynasties happen because the coaching staff, the admin and the players (and everyone else at a club) are on the same page and competent enough to build and play to a system that maximises their talents. Star players help but plenty of clubs have stars that weren't part of any dynasty.

 

[Cameron_Jezza]

But clubs would just trade future picks in the previous year, knowing they have a father-son coming down the line. i.e. manipulating the system 12 months out.

The other thing is, forcing clubs to use whatever their first round pick is on a father-son/academy players just means that teams finishing higher on the ladder get these players cheaper. Suppose the best player in this year's draft is a third Daicos brother. Collingwood would get him for pick 18. Likewise, WCE would be forced to use pick 1 to match a bid on a father-son likely to go in 10-15 range.

Here's a suggested change to father-son/academy rules: get rid of the discount, and instead impose a fee when clubs match bids made by other clubs. This would encourage clubs to use the picks they have to select Father-sons/academy players (rather points-harvesting) delivering a less compromised draft.

I think limiting to 2, at most 3 picks to match does this. If 3 picks, one pick must be 45% of the total, or at least 800 points.
This is so a team winning the flag can match a bid at pick 1.
According to Cal Twomey, the clubs have been asked to comment on the current system, Riley Beveridge had an article on how Gold Coast was easily able to turn pick 4 into 6 first round picks.
Hopefully that means at least minor ( hopefully relatively substantial) changes will be made to improve the current situation.

 

[Soggy2112]

This is ridiculous.

One player isn't gonna help a team build a dynasty any more than any other player.

We got lucky with McKay cos the market dictated his compo (he'd been checked out all year if you watch his games, so he was gone anyway and those rumours have been there since 2021,) and it coincides with a period of bottoming out so we have lots of early first round picks. However Mckay compo was only one of those picks and while it will help it won't make that much difference. (Those other PPs give us a chance to trade or bring in role players that can follow instructions and use their brains. That's about it tho.)

Most of the time compo picks are end of first round or later. If Mckay left Collingwood instead of us it would be an end of first round pick anyway.

Dynasties happen because the coaching staff, the admin and the players (and everyone else at a club) are on the same page and competent enough to build and play to a system that maximises their talents. Star players help but plenty of clubs have stars that weren't part of any dynasty.

You’ll notice I said help.

Players in the late first round can absolutely be key contributors towards a premiership side.

Handing out a draft pick as free agency compo gives you a leg up over the rest of the competition in building for the future. Do you not think the pick 19 we got for Doedee has the potential to be hugely valuable for us in 2-3 years time when we’re hopefully pushing for top four?

What a draft pick probably won’t do is help us to stay competitive in the short term, same with pick 3 for you guys. Which is a problem because I think if FA compensation is to continue then that’s what it’s purpose should be.

What do you think FA compensation should be trying to achieve?

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I think it’s simple - just make the compo Round 1, Round 2, Round 3 etc… the compo comes at the end of the round. Take the super high picks out of it.

 

[ferball]

You’ll notice I said help.

Players in the late first round can absolutely be key contributors towards a premiership side.

Handing out a draft pick as free agency compo gives you a leg up over the rest of the competition in building for the future. Do you not think the pick 19 we got for Doedee has the potential to be hugely valuable for us in 2-3 years time when we’re hopefully pushing for top four?

What a draft pick probably won’t do is help us to stay competitive in the short term, same with pick 3 for you guys. Which is a problem because I think if FA compensation is to continue then that’s what it’s purpose should be.

What do you think FA compensation should be trying to achieve?

Whatever the club that gets it wants to achieve. They can use the pick to trade or draft.

 

[Caligo]

Whatever the club that gets it wants to achieve. They can use the pick to trade or draft.

No. He means what did the AFL intend for it to achieve when the AFL made the rule. The point is that the intention for the rule doesn't appear to have worked when clubs are actively trying to push free agents out the door, weakening those clubs further in the short term.

 

[big_e]

North Melbourne didn't actively push McKay out the door, though.

He was approached by the club a year ago to sit down and work out a contract, and he declined. Brady Rawlings

Brady Rawlings

Age

42

Ht

184cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

17.7

4star

K

8.7

3star

HB

9.0

5star

M

3.6

4star

T

2.3

4star

No current season stats available

D

8.6

3star

K

4.6

2star

HB

4.0

3star

M

1.0

1star

T

0.8

3star

said publicly that they went back several times and said that McKay said he wanted to stay, they'd have that contract in front of him the next day. He never did.

But he'd checked out. It was obvious during games that his heart wasn't in it anymore, and there are several reports that he was disinterested in training sessions, etc.

He obviously decided some time ago to leave, and there wasn't anything we could do about it.

At that point, the club has a responsibility to get the best outcome, which is why we made it clear what an acquiring club would have to pay.

I'd prefer to keep him, but getting pick 3 is a pretty good result, all things considered.

 

[Caligo]

North Melbourne didn't actively push McKay out the door, though.

He was approached by the club a year ago to sit down and work out a contract, and he declined. Brady Rawlings said publicly that they went back several times and said that McKay said he wanted to stay, they'd have that contract in front of him the next day. He never did.

But he'd checked out. It was obvious during games that his heart wasn't in it anymore, and there are several reports that he was disinterested in training sessions, etc.

He obviously decided some time ago to leave, and there wasn't anything we could do about it.

At that point, the club has a responsibility to get the best outcome, which is why we made it clear what an acquiring club would have to pay.

I'd prefer to keep him, but getting pick 3 is a pretty good result, all things considered.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

Any way you cut and dice it, pick 3 for a clown like Ben McKay

32

Ben Mckay

Age

26

Ht

202cm

Wt

104kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

7.5

2star

K

3.7

1star

HB

3.8

3star

M

2.7

3star

T

1.7

4star

MG

77.2

1star

D

7.5

2star

K

4.5

2star

HB

3.0

2star

M

2.5

3star

T

1.5

2star

MG

88.5

2star

D

7.0

2star

K

3.4

2star

HB

3.6

3star

M

2.4

3star

T

2.0

4star

MG

67.8

1star

is well over the odds.

 

[big_e]

 

[Soggy2112]

North Melbourne didn't actively push McKay out the door, though.

He was approached by the club a year ago to sit down and work out a contract, and he declined. Brady Rawlings said publicly that they went back several times and said that McKay said he wanted to stay, they'd have that contract in front of him the next day. He never did.

But he'd checked out. It was obvious during games that his heart wasn't in it anymore, and there are several reports that he was disinterested in training sessions, etc.

He obviously decided some time ago to leave, and there wasn't anything we could do about it.

At that point, the club has a responsibility to get the best outcome, which is why we made it clear what an acquiring club would have to pay.

I'd prefer to keep him, but getting pick 3 is a pretty good result, all things considered.

That’s the whole flaw with the compensation system in regards to restricted free agency.

North could have matched the offer and forced a trade, or even kept him potentially if he wasn’t willing to go through the preseason draft. That’s how it’s supposed to work.

Instead they let him walk because they knew they’d get a better result from FA compo than a trade.

We partly did the same with Doedee.

That’s the problem with FA compensation as it stands. It completely undermines the whole system.

Whatever the club that gets it wants to achieve. They can use the pick to trade or draft.

That’s my whole point.

It’s free agency. That means players leave freely, clubs should get nothing.

I understand the AFL is concerned that a lesser club losing one of its key players in their prime will make the league less competitive, so although I disagree I see why they want to compensate the club losing a player.

Adding in another 18 year old is very unlikely to achieve that. But if they could acquire a similar aged player that may help.

But again, my preference would be you get nothing. It’s called free agency for a reason.

 

[ferball]

That's exactly what happened. Rawlings was quoted saying exactly that stuff after the move was lodged with the AFL. We would have matched and probably forced Essendon to trade pick 8 or split it to trade another in the early teens if we weren't so low on the ladder. Or if the contract was lower.

I haven't seen training or games live this year but plenty of people reported that McKay looked disinterested during the year. Some posters who watched training and have a reputation for not being full of s**t reported that he didn't look good all season. Like he wasn't on Clarko's bus.

That's how his games looked on tv as well, except against Essendon and a couple of other games.

No. He means what did the AFL intend for it to achieve when the AFL made the rule. The point is that the intention for the rule doesn't appear to have worked when clubs are actively trying to push free agents out the door, weakening those clubs further in the short term.

The answer is the same. Its for the clubs to decide best how to fill the hole they have when a player leaves. The AFL: gives them assistance to fill that hole. Your argument only stands up when players are forced out the door. We didn't force McKay out the door. He made his mind up at the start of the year.

 

[Soggy2112]

The answer is the same. Its for the clubs to decide best how to fill the hole they have when a player leaves. The AFL: gives them assistance to fill that hole. Your argument only stands up when players are forced out the door. We didn't force McKay out the door. He made his mind up at the start of the year.

I feel like we’re getting lost in the weeds a bit as you feel the need to defend your club, which is completely understandable.

North did nothing wrong, they just played the system and did the smart thing. If they matched the offer they would have gotten less than pick 3. Absolutely fair play, they did what every other club would and should do in their position.

My club did exactly the same thing. If we matched the offer for Doedee then we likely wouldn’t have gotten as good as pick 19.

The point is that a free agency system that allows clubs to do this is a broken system.

It’s free agency. The point is to allow players to freely move between clubs for whatever reason they like. There should be no compensation offered if a player leaves.

Especially when they’re a restricted free agent. You want something in return then match the offer, if you’re not willing to do that then you don’t value the player as much as another club and shouldn’t get compensation. If you are unable to match the offer then that’s the salary cap working, no compensation should be provided.

The worse part about compensation is that unlike a trade, it affects the whole competition. Why should Ben McKay moving to Essendon or Tom Doedee moving to Brisbane effect the other 16 clubs?

 

[ferball]

I feel like we’re getting lost in the weeds a bit as you feel the need to defend your club, which is completely understandable.

North did nothing wrong, they just played the system and did the smart thing. If they matched the offer they would have gotten less than pick 3. Absolutely fair play, they did what every other club would and should do in their position.

My club did exactly the same thing. If we matched the offer for Doedee then we likely wouldn’t have gotten as good as pick 19.

The point is that a free agency system that allows clubs to do this is a broken system.

It’s free agency. The point is to allow players to freely move between clubs for whatever reason they like. There should be no compensation offered if a player leaves.

Especially when they’re a restricted free agent. You want something in return then match the offer, if you’re not willing to do that then you don’t value the player as much as another club and shouldn’t get compensation. If you are unable to match the offer then that’s the salary cap working, no compensation should be provided.

The worse part about compensation is that unlike a trade, it affects the whole competition. Why should Ben McKay moving to Essendon or Tom Doedee moving to Brisbane effect the other 16 clubs?

Why should F'S picks? Academys? etc etc. The draft is hopelessly compromised.

But I get where you're coming from and if all of that was fixed at once it might be better.

Clubs should also be able to trade players against their will, with possible limitations on interstate trades for family reasons.

Say with McKay (or other FAs) ... he might pick Essendon but we match and Hawthorn offer their first rounder for him. We should be able to deal with Hawthorn provided they match his or our deal.

 

[Soggy2112]

Why should F'S picks? Academys? etc etc. The draft is hopelessly compromised.

But I get where you're coming from and if all of that was fixed at once it might be better.

Clubs should also be able to trade players against their will, with possible limitations on interstate trades for family reasons.

Say with McKay (or other FAs) ... he might pick Essendon but we match and Hawthorn offer their first rounder for him. We should be able to deal with Hawthorn provided they match his or our deal.

Topic for a different thread but if it were up to me I’d completely overhaul the whole trade/free agency system.

At the moment we’ve got a weird hybrid between the old system and a more NBA style system that is super messy.

 

[peetoo]

For sure. It’s like trading in three different currencies, whose relative value changes each year

 

[Only Forwards]

Topic for a different thread but if it were up to me I’d completely overhaul the whole trade/free agency system.

The level of interconnectedness between free agency compensation and the other mechanisms in the draft is so significant that there is no way to just fix free agency compensation.

if you wanted to fix it you would need to fix

• Father Sons
• Northern academies (including addressing the "go home factor" that created them)
• Next Gen Academies
• Picks/points and paying for elite kids with junk picks
• Grass roots pathways into to game because these feed the need of some of the above.

I'd go so far as to say we even need to fix the language on the way draft rounds are spoken about. The draft rounds should not be something that can expand.

round 1 - picks 1-18
round 2 - picks 19 -36 and so on.

this year we are looking at a first round that is 22 picks long currently with a heavy likelihood of 6 or so picks being added to it (GC academy & F/S & compo)

the first round of the draft will go to pick 28? its nuts. Pick 28 is not a first round draft pick, its a mid second.

I get why this in unpalatable, the AFL simply would not want the volume of clubs that would need to be taking their first pick in the second round because of the current compromises.

 

[Elmer_Judd]

To be honest, the compo for Gresham and Doodee were bigger eyebrow raisers for me than McKay's.

Seems to me that's its mainly based on financial and length of contrqct considerations more than anything else.

 

[LordLucifer]

If free agency compensation is to continue then it should be compulsory to trade that draft pick for a player.

Thats nice in theory but it still makes the other clubs pay a penalty in the draft order.

Just boot all compo for good and be done with the skullduggery that goes with it.

 

[pz5151]

Approximately 10 drop punts away as the crow flies ..it is.

Haven't seen many McKay drop punts travel as the crow flies to be fair.