Strategy List Management 101

[Caj]

Grundy was always going to retire at the end of this year, I reckon they saw his role this year to help transition/develop Melican as a key defender.
Smith was still playing good footy last year before his injury and looked to have more good footy ahead of him.
Mcveigh has been a legend and if fit this year still had heaps to offer.
Jack was still contracted for this year.
and.. We tried to trade in defenders (Moore & Langdon) but missed.
and yep.. We've now got all that Cash

I don't necessarily have an issue with Grundy, Smith and McVeigh, all warranted a spot on the list in 2019 with the view that 1-2 would be superseded through the year by one of the younger players.

Whoever signed Jack to a 3 year deal made a massive blunder

The question now is how well it is managed in 2020.

Grundy = Gone
McVeigh = Form still solid, body giving way
Smith = Form ? Body giving way
Jack = Body giving way hence drop in form

I respect them and thank them all for the massive effort that they've given the club over the years but personally I think they all should retire. It will be interesting to see where the club goes with it, maybe they retain McVeigh and Smith??

 

[Grand Uncle Horace]

Smith, Grundy, McVeigh (on 1 year contracts) and Jack (last year of his contract) play a big part to help develop our list by sharing their knowledge/experience with the young crew.
How many games has Darcy Moore played the last two years? Happy he didn't sign

They could have done this in an off field role without being on the playing list.

 

[robbieando]

I think the big mistake going in to this season was retaining Grundy, Smith, McVeigh and Jack on the list. Jack was contracted, but the other three all signed new deals for 2019.

Actually, Smith was contracted too. He triggered a clause in his contract signed in 2016 to play on in 2019 that we couldn't just get out of. Sadly his hamstring injury was worse than first thought.

Reliable Sydney defender Nick Smith to go around in 2019

Swans' defender Nick Smith activated a trigger clause in his contract, which means he is off the free agents list and will play again in 2019

www.theage.com.au

So we couldn't dislist Smith or Jack, but retaining McVeigh or Grundy are fair points

 

[SGBeach]

Actually, Smith was contracted too. He triggered a clause in his contract signed in 2016 to play on in 2019 that we couldn't just get out of. Sadly his hamstring injury was worse than first thought.

Reliable Sydney defender Nick Smith to go around in 2019

Swans' defender Nick Smith activated a trigger clause in his contract, which means he is off the free agents list and will play again in 2019

www.theage.com.au

So we couldn't dislist Smith or Jack, but retaining McVeigh or Grundy are fair points

Loyalty goes both ways. Im happy to have all 4 on the list this year. All great Swans, and think they've had a lot to offer in terms of experience and culture. (and maybe we had spots to fill)

 

[sataris]

I would like swansfan51 to go into an aspect of the salary cap that I feel is not well referencd or understood

the salary cap floor.

Countless times I read about 'war chests' and having the cash to spend on players.

The reality is that you will always have 'overpaid' players as we have to reach the floor of 95%.

Which means in 'reality' at any point in time you've got 10% of the cap to play with.

 

[RobbieK]

Smith, Grundy, McVeigh (on 1 year contracts) and Jack (last year of his contract) play a big part to help develop our list by sharing their knowledge/experience with the young crew.
How many games has Darcy Moore played the last two years? Happy he didn't sign

I don't doubt their value around the club. The question is if that role is best played while on the playing list, taking a spot on that list and a fair chunk of the salary cap.

Actually, Smith was contracted too. He triggered a clause in his contract signed in 2016 to play on in 2019 that we couldn't just get out of. Sadly his hamstring injury was worse than first thought.

Reliable Sydney defender Nick Smith to go around in 2019

Swans' defender Nick Smith activated a trigger clause in his contract, which means he is off the free agents list and will play again in 2019

www.theage.com.au

So we couldn't dislist Smith or Jack, but retaining McVeigh or Grundy are fair points

Ah, thanks.

I'm not really too upset about these guys being on the list. I think for the most part the decisions about their capacity to perform were justified, with the exception of Jack who shouldn't have been given such a long contract at his age. Unfortunately all of them have had injury issues, in the case of Grundy (definitely) and Smith (potentially but looking likely) career-ending ones.

Maybe McVeigh or Smith goes around again next year, but in all likelihood all will be off the list for 2020. That frees up a big bit of the list and maybe $1.5 to $2 million in the cap you would think. I suspect last year the club were already planning ahead for this coming off-season knowing that there would be both the need to bring in a quality player or two (or three) and that they would have the money to do it... hopefully that time has been put to good use and the targets are lined up and buttered up for us to make a move.

 

[SGBeach]

I don't doubt their value around the club. The question is if that role is best played while on the playing list, taking a spot on that list and a fair chunk of the salary cap.



Ah, thanks.

I'm not really too upset about these guys being on the list. I think for the most part the decisions about their capacity to perform were justified, with the exception of Jack who shouldn't have been given such a long contract at his age. Unfortunately all of them have had injury issues, in the case of Grundy (definitely) and Smith (potentially but looking likely) career-ending ones.

Maybe McVeigh or Smith goes around again next year, but in all likelihood all will be off the list for 2020. That frees up a big bit of the list and maybe $1.5 to $2 million in the cap you would think. I suspect last year the club were already planning ahead for this coming off-season knowing that there would be both the need to bring in a quality player or two (or three) and that they would have the money to do it... hopefully that time has been put to good use and the targets are lined up and buttered up for us to make a move.

Im sure the club has been planning for all 4 retiring. Remember, no-one knew about Buddy coming, it was a 2 year secret. So what's Kinnear been up to?? I have faith that its exciting

 

[robbieando]

I would like swansfan51 to go into an aspect of the salary cap that I feel is not well referencd or understood

the salary cap floor.

Countless times I read about 'war chests' and having the cash to spend on players.

The reality is that you will always have 'overpaid' players as we have to reach the floor of 95%.

Which means in 'reality' at any point in time you've got 10% of the cap to play with.

If your paying 95% of the cap you have around $650,000 open for that year, thus can over spend by that amount in a following year.

 

[RobbieK]

I would like swansfan51 to go into an aspect of the salary cap that I feel is not well referencd or understood

the salary cap floor.

Countless times I read about 'war chests' and having the cash to spend on players.

The reality is that you will always have 'overpaid' players as we have to reach the floor of 95%.

Which means in 'reality' at any point in time you've got 10% of the cap to play with.

The rules do limit how much of a war chest you can carry over from season to season, that is true.

But if you are in a position like we are now with multiple players on large contracts retiring, or if you trade out a player on a large contract (like we did with Hannebery) you can definitely have more than 10% of the cap spare for a given off-season. There are also the out-of-cap payments to consider too.

The salary cap is current around $12.7 million. We should definitely have more than 10% of that to play with this coming off-season. We have got Tippett and Hannebery's salaries totally gone in addition to the likely retirements of McVeigh, Jack and Smith on top of the already retired Grundy. There has to be at least $2 to $3 million there. I'd say we more likely have 15%, if not 20% of the cap to fill going in to 2020.

 

[swansfan51]

I would like swansfan51 to go into an aspect of the salary cap that I feel is not well referencd or understood

the salary cap floor.

Countless times I read about 'war chests' and having the cash to spend on players.

The reality is that you will always have 'overpaid' players as we have to reach the floor of 95%.

Which means in 'reality' at any point in time you've got 10% of the cap to play with.

robbieando is correct, you can flex up the next year if you are 5% under this year.

My bigger issue with the salary cap is the horseshit provision that salaries are not public, and I don't believe anyone who claims to know what our salary cap position is. For the last few seasons I've been hearing people say we have lots of space, and it hasn't proven to be true.

I strongly suspect we don't have as much space as people think.

1) Franklin is reported to be on $1.4m in 2020
2) We have committed our highest profile players to very long term contracts. These would not be cheap (Mills 2017 - 2023, Blakey to 2022, Heeney 2016 - 2022, Lloyd 2018 - 2022, Rampe 2018 - 2022, Reid 2017 - 2021, Parker 2016 - 2021). These are all 4-5 year contracts for our best players and I'd imagine based on market values they have sucked up a massive amount of the salary cap. That's 7 players who would be expected to be on 500k on average based on the market.
3) If true, that's $5m of the $10.5m cap on 8 players
4) I think the above numbers are optimistic, especially for players like Heeney and Parker
5) The club has shown no signs of recruiting any high salary players in 2016, 2017, 2018
6) The argument about "players leaving the club freeing up salary" has been used every one of those years and has been wrong in every one of those years

As I said, none of us know the salary cap position (which is horseshit) so that's just my opinion and I could well be wrong. But I'm not expecting us to have heaps of room

PS. MOST IMPORTANTLY I didn't really answer your question and had to edit my post. The 95% minimum floor is an absolute load of AFLPA grade-A horseshit and artificially stabilises the market and prevents lower teams from trying to compete. The Gold Coast should not be paying 95% of Geelong, its a load of crap. Abolish the floor, let them load up salary space if they're s**t so they can deploy that money to get good free agents

 

[The King!]

robbieando is correct, you can flex up the next year if you are 5% under this year.

My bigger issue with the salary cap is the horses**t provision that salaries are not public, and I don't believe anyone who claims to know what our salary cap position is. For the last few seasons I've been hearing people say we have lots of space, and it hasn't proven to be true.

I strongly suspect we don't have as much space as people think.

1) Franklin is reported to be on $1.4m in 2020
2) We have committed our highest profile players to very long term contracts. These would not be cheap (Mills 2017 - 2023, Blakey to 2022, Heeney 2016 - 2022, Lloyd 2018 - 2022, Rampe 2018 - 2022, Reid 2017 - 2021, Parker 2016 - 2021). These are all 4-5 year contracts for our best players and I'd imagine based on market values they have sucked up a massive amount of the salary cap. That's 7 players who would be expected to be on 500k on average based on the market.
3) If true, that's $5m of the $10.5m cap on 8 players
4) I think the above numbers are optimistic, especially for players like Heeney and Parker
5) The club has shown no signs of recruiting any high salary players in 2016, 2017, 2018
6) The argument about "players leaving the club freeing up salary" has been used every one of those years and has been wrong in every one of those years

As I said, none of us know the salary cap position (which is horses**t) so that's just my opinion and I could well be wrong. But I'm not expecting us to have heaps of room

PS. MOST IMPORTANTLY I didn't really answer your question and had to edit my post. The 95% minimum floor is an absolute load of AFLPA grade-A horses**t and artificially stabilises the market and prevents lower teams from trying to compete. The Gold Coast should not be paying 95% of Geelong, its a load of crap. Abolish the floor, let them load up salary space if they're s**t so they can deploy that money to get good free agents

we must have paid some big coin to Kennedy jack smith reg parker etc

tippett still paid

but i think you are right that even when they move on the next wave kick in

harley i think didnt have the sum function on his salary spreadsheet picking up every cell and realised mid way through he had a few missing

so cut towers, marsh etc, let rohan hannebery walk just to get under the cap

 

[RobbieK]

robbieando is correct, you can flex up the next year if you are 5% under this year.

My bigger issue with the salary cap is the horses**t provision that salaries are not public, and I don't believe anyone who claims to know what our salary cap position is. For the last few seasons I've been hearing people say we have lots of space, and it hasn't proven to be true.

I strongly suspect we don't have as much space as people think.

1) Franklin is reported to be on $1.4m in 2020
2) We have committed our highest profile players to very long term contracts. These would not be cheap (Mills 2017 - 2023, Blakey to 2022, Heeney 2016 - 2022, Lloyd 2018 - 2022, Rampe 2018 - 2022, Reid 2017 - 2021, Parker 2016 - 2021). These are all 4-5 year contracts for our best players and I'd imagine based on market values they have sucked up a massive amount of the salary cap. That's 7 players who would be expected to be on 500k on average based on the market.
3) If true, that's $5m of the $10.5m cap on 8 players
4) I think the above numbers are optimistic, especially for players like Heeney and Parker
5) The club has shown no signs of recruiting any high salary players in 2016, 2017, 2018
6) The argument about "players leaving the club freeing up salary" has been used every one of those years and has been wrong in every one of those years

As I said, none of us know the salary cap position (which is horses**t) so that's just my opinion and I could well be wrong. But I'm not expecting us to have heaps of room

PS. MOST IMPORTANTLY I didn't really answer your question and had to edit my post. The 95% minimum floor is an absolute load of AFLPA grade-A horses**t and artificially stabilises the market and prevents lower teams from trying to compete. The Gold Coast should not be paying 95% of Geelong, its a load of crap. Abolish the floor, let them load up salary space if they're s**t so they can deploy that money to get good free agents

The cap isn't $10.5 million.

It was raised from $10.37 million to $12.45 million in 2017 when the new collective bargaining agreement was made. It raises a little each year of that agreement, which should have it around $12.75 million for this season by my calculation.

Source: https://www.afl.com.au/news/2017-06-20/players-get-20-per-cent-pay-rise-in-new-cba

Agree on the salary cap floor being a big issue for equalisation, though. The power is definitely with the players these days - they got the cap floor, they got free agency, they can just walk out of contracts and choose their destination for the most part, clubs are giving longer and longer contracts to try to retain players... it is hard to see that balance of power swinging the other way any time soon.

 

[robbieando]

The cap isn't $10.5 million.

Your right its not

Total Player Payments Limit 2017 - 2022

2017 - $12,445,028
2018 - $12,594,368
2019 - $12,758,095
2020 - $13,013,257
2021 - $13,273,522
2022 - $13,538,993

Still I don't buy that we'll have $2 to 3 million in salary cap room opening up. As players leave or retire that money is or get allocated to other players who get their contracts renewed. I think last year we traded Hannebury and Rohan with the view to trade in a player or two going forward (and that money will likely still be there) but any money from the retirements will be allocated elsewhere already.

 

[SGBeach]

Your right its not

Total Player Payments Limit 2017 - 2022

2017 - $12,445,028
2018 - $12,594,368
2019 - $12,758,095
2020 - $13,013,257
2021 - $13,273,522
2022 - $13,538,993

Still I don't buy that we'll have $2 to 3 million in salary cap room opening up. As players leave or retire that money is or get allocated to other players who get their contracts renewed. I think last year we traded Hannebury and Rohan with the view to trade in a player or two going forward (and that money will likely still be there) but any money from the retirements will be allocated elsewhere already.

I reckon last year Hanners and Rowan in part were finalising COLA. GWS had to do the same. But it seemed we had money spare as we went after Langdon and Moore. You're probably (Im hoping) only partly correct in regards to the cash from the retirements. Some will certainly already be allocated but surely some will be spare

 

[RW]

I think swansfan51 is right, I don’t think we have much salary cap room at all, otherwise why would we make what appears to be a concerted effort to focus on the draft. Getting Tippett and Hannebery off the books will provide some relief. How much I have no idea, I don’t have access to that spreadsheet.

And yes, the salary cap floor is horseshit.

The best way to get the s**t teams to improve is by removing market imperfections, not by making them worse.

 

[The King!]

Im sure the club has been planning for all 4 retiring. Remember, no-one knew about Buddy coming, it was a 2 year secret. So what's Kinnear been up to?? I have faith that its exciting

you should look up the kinnear v the average recruiter thread by our leader

 

[RobbieK]

Your right its not

Total Player Payments Limit 2017 - 2022

2017 - $12,445,028
2018 - $12,594,368
2019 - $12,758,095
2020 - $13,013,257
2021 - $13,273,522
2022 - $13,538,993

Still I don't buy that we'll have $2 to 3 million in salary cap room opening up. As players leave or retire that money is or get allocated to other players who get their contracts renewed. I think last year we traded Hannebury and Rohan with the view to trade in a player or two going forward (and that money will likely still be there) but any money from the retirements will be allocated elsewhere already.

I think swansfan51 is right, I don’t think we have much salary cap room at all, otherwise why would we make what appears to be a concerted effort to focus on the draft. Getting Tippett and Hannebery off the books will provide some relief. How much I have no idea, I don’t have access to that spreadsheet.

And yes, the salary cap floor is horses**t.

The best way to get the s**t teams to improve is by removing market imperfections, not by making them worse.

Some of it will have been used, but Hannebery + Tippett + Rohan + McVeigh + Grundy + Smith + Jack is a substantial amount of cap space to be cleared at once. When you factor in that swansfan51 underestimated the cap by $2 million, it has to mean that there is money there to spend. We wouldn't have gone after Moore last year if we couldn't afford him. There is every reason to beleive that with the additional retriments we have the capacity to bring in a couple of high quality players.

Sure, money will have been added to a few of the contracts for those who have extended like Dawson or Alliir, but that is a hundred thousand or so here and there. These whole contracts coming off the cap represent at least a few million.

 

[robbieando]

I reckon last year Hanners and Rowan in part were finalising COLA. GWS had to do the same. But it seemed we had money spare as we went after Langdon and Moore. You're probably (Im hoping) only partly correct in regards to the cash from the retirements. Some will certainly already be allocated but surely some will be spare

Last season the only player with a contact signed during the COLA era was Buddy. So none our moves last trade period were COLA related. The 4 retirements and Tippett's money coming off the books would be closer to a $1million than the $2million people believe and signing the likes of Dawson, Blakey, Rowbottom, McInerney and Sinclair to new contracts would eat into that money. Re-signing Jones and/or Cunningham will eat in further.

As I said some money would be available but not millions of dollars. Keep in mind the gap between the salary cap floor (95%) and the cap limit in dollar terms is $650,000 only and we are close to the cap as it is. People are creating space that isn't there. My reading is that the money available (which we used to go after Moore/Langdon and VDB, but got Thurlow and Clarke in return) is the money freed up by trading Hanners and Rohan last year.

 

[RW]

Some of it will have been used, but Hannebery + Tippett + Rohan + McVeigh + Grundy + Smith + Jack is a substantial amount of cap space to be cleared at once. When you factor in that swansfan51 underestimated the cap by $2 million, it has to mean that there is money there to spend. We wouldn't have gone after Moore last year if we couldn't afford him. There is every reason to beleive that with the additional retriments we have the capacity to bring in a couple of high quality players.

Sure, money will have been added to a few of the contracts for those who have extended like Dawson or Alliir, but that is a hundred thousand or so here and there. These whole contracts coming off the cap represent at least a few million.

You could be right, I’m not disputing that, what we do in this off season will be telling.

 

[RobbieK]

Last season the only player with a contact signed during the COLA era was Buddy. So none our moves last trade period were COLA related. The 4 retirements and Tippett's money coming off the books would be closer to a $1million than the $2million people believe and signing the likes of Dawson, Blakey, Rowbottom, McInerney and Sinclair to new contracts would eat into that money. Re-signing Jones and/or Cunningham will eat in further.

As I said some money would be available but not millions of dollars. Keep in mind the gap between the salary cap floor (95%) and the cap limit in dollar terms is $650,000 only and we are close to the cap as it is. People are creating space that isn't there.

The average player wage in the AFL is $370k or something like that. Now, it is arguable whether that is a particularly useful stat, maybe median would be better, but the AFL doesn't let us know what that is. Still, you would think that the guys retiring would not be significantly lower than that, if at all. All in all I'd think that with Tippett, Rohan and Hannebery off the books too there will easily be more than $2 million shed from the TPP from the major trade outs/retirements of 2018 and 2019.

But yeah, this is all just speculation, we don't know for certain and will have to wait until the end of the year to see exactly what the plans of the club are. The age spread in our list is crying out for a a couple more players in their prime, and with all of these losses to the list I would be pretty disappointed if we aren't targeting at least two significant player signings, the kinds of players that would be immediate locks in the best 22.

 

[robbieando]

Some of it will have been used, but Hannebery + Tippett + Rohan + McVeigh + Grundy + Smith + Jack is a substantial amount of cap space to be cleared at once.

Problem is that isn't all being cleared at once. Hannebery, Rohan plus the majority of Tippett's contracts came off the cap last year which freed us up at the 100% mark and allowed us to attempt to bring in two of Moore/Langdon/VDB. Some of that money will still be available this year I believe. But I think people overestimate how much McVeigh, Grundy, Jack and Smith will be on and that will be the biggest factor come trade time.

When you factor in that swansfan51 underestimated the cap by $2 million, it has to mean that there is money there to spend. We wouldn't have gone after Moore last year if we couldn't afford him. There is every reason to beleive that with the additional retriments we have the capacity to bring in a couple of high quality players.

swansfan51 back of the envelope maths (and he did underestimate our high earners) can't be used as proof that we have money to spend.

 

[robbieando]

All in all I'd think that with Tippett, Rohan and Hannebery off the books too there will easily be more than $2 million shed from the TPP from the major trade outs/retirements of 2018 and 2019.

Those are moves done over TWO years. With the salary cap floor it is meaningless what we made available off the books last year. Only what we plan for this year capwise does. Of course we should be targeting two to three players for the Best 22 but people should be realistic of the type of market we will be playing in this trade period.

 

[Olian]

Some of it will have been used, but Hannebery + Tippett + Rohan + McVeigh + Grundy + Smith + Jack is a substantial amount of cap space to be cleared at once. When you factor in that swansfan51 underestimated the cap by $2 million, it has to mean that there is money there to spend. We wouldn't have gone after Moore last year if we couldn't afford him. There is every reason to beleive that with the additional retriments we have the capacity to bring in a couple of high quality players.

Sure, money will have been added to a few of the contracts for those who have extended like Dawson or Alliir, but that is a hundred thousand or so here and there. These whole contracts coming off the cap represent at least a few million.

I’m not sure if the rule still exists but at one stage players with 10 years service had part of their salary excluded from the cap. If that is the case then the retirements of Jack and co may not provide as much relief.

 

[robbieando]

I’m not sure if the rule still exists but at one stage players with 10 years service had part of their salary excluded from the cap. If that is the case then the retirements of Jack and co may not provide as much relief.

No longer the case, but clubs use to over pay players who were eligible for the rule so they could reward them and only have to pay them for 50% of the amount. Since then these players are paid lower amounts so its balanced out

 

[RobbieK]

Problem is that isn't all being cleared at once. Hannebery, Rohan plus the majority of Tippett's contracts came off the cap last year which freed us up at the 100% mark and allowed us to attempt to bring in two of Moore/Langdon/VDB. Some of that money will still be available this year I believe. But I think people overestimate how much McVeigh, Grundy, Jack and Smith will be on and that will be the biggest factor come trade time.

True, it isn't all being cleared at once, but it was cleared last year and then it wasn't used on bringing players in. Some of that money will have gone in to improved deals for players already on the list, but not all of it.

swansfan51 back of the envelope maths (and he did underestimate our high earners) can't be used as proof that we have money to spend.

He underestimated the cap by $2 million, a significant amount, when he came to the conclusion that we wouldn't have much to spend. Adding the extra $2 million to the equation doesn't necessarily mean we have that amount to spend because we are working with very incomplete information on what amount different players are actually on, but I think it is reasonable to conclude that with the salaries dumped last year and a large number of retirements this year there should be more than $1 million of cap space to use on new signings, which should be enough to pay for two key best 22 players.