List Mgmt. List Management 2017 -Who Stays, Who Goes?

[Janus]

Final lists had to lodged with the AFL today 2pm. Guess it will be confirmed soon what Houston's status is.

Unless there is an anti-avoidance type clause I think Janus theory on using the TPP exemption on a rookie is correct. There used to be a rule around the 2007-11 and I think for some of 2012-16 CBA period that you had to let a rookie go into the draft after 3 years because rookies were only paid 50-60% of what primary list players and it was there to stop clubs ripping them off. Plus football match payments to rookies used to be 50% outside the TPP cap and 50% inclusive.

The original discussion around this CBA ie 2017-22 was that rookies would be abolished but because the AFLPA didn't agree to the CBA until after 1st November 2016 the AFL has had to keep them and structure better pay for them.

But there now is more options to manipulate. How many club's are doing what Janus suggested I have no idea. If what he suggested is indeed happening then the question is are we getting $80k outside the cap of $80k + Houston's match payments?? From the 2017-22 CBA

10. Total Player Payments
(a) The amount of Total Player Payments for each AFL Club shall be as set out in item 1 of Schedule B.
(b) In calculation of the Total Player Payments for each AFL Club, the following payments will not be taken into account:
.....
(ix) Football Payments to Rookie Players except to the extent that this Agreement provides otherwise;

16. Player Lists – 2018 - 2022
(a) Each AFL Club shall maintain their Lists during the Term as follows:
......
(b) Any amount paid to a Rookie Player in excess of the base payment payable to a 1st year, 41+ choice selection shall be included in the relevant AFL Club’s Total Player Payments. For the avoidance of doubt, the minimum base payment payable to a 1st year, 41+ choice selection shall be excluded in the relevant AFL Club’s Total Player Payments for each Rookie Player.

So the question is, does match payments paid to a rookie fit the meaning of payments in excess to of the base payments ie $4k per game + bonuses for games played?? Part of me says they aren't payments in excess of base payments as the phrase base payments and Senior Match payments are used throughout the CBA to distinguish between the 2 and another part of me says this seems to generous to leave open for upto 2 rookies who are going to play just about every game and provided another $100k x 2 players = $200k of TPP exemptions to pay extra top line players on top of the potential $80k x 2 players = $160k already exempt from the TPP.

Pretty sure it’s just the base payment of $80k that’s exempt and once you play a rookie you’re starting to rack up the money against the TPP due to their match payments.

This is because the maximum match payments is $2.42m ($5000 x 22 senior listed players x 22 matches) and the minimum (if all rookies played all matches) is $2.28m ($4000 x 6 rookies + $5000 x 16 senior listed players)...so the most a club would save is $140k.

Play two rookie players for all 22 games and you’re only saving $44k on top of the $160k that sits outside the cap.

So the reality is that if Thomas and Houston play every game, that is $204k we don’t have to pay if they were senior listed players. In cap terms, it would mean we are spending 98.4% of the cap just by doing this.

Add guys like Trengove and McKenzie who are on one year contracts and it’s pretty easy to see how we’d spend only 95% of the cap, since all we’ve got to find is another $420k in savings...like getting rid of Trengove, Lobbe, Austin and Impey, for example, and signing four draftees past pick 41.

If we play this right, we can consistently fluctuate between 95% cap spend for three years (rebuild phase) and 105% for three years (premiership phase) in perpetuity...except we'll still have gun player on our list like Wines, Wingard and Marshall when we are rebuilding due to the TPP going up every year regardless.

We can be one of those annoying clubs like Sydney who are always making finals and contending for flags

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Pretty sure it’s just the base payment of $80k that’s exempt and once you play a rookie you’re starting to rack up the money against the TPP due to their match payments.

This is because the maximum match payments is $2.42m ($5000 x 22 senior listed players x 22 matches) and the minimum (if all rookies played all matches) is $2.28m ($4000 x 6 rookies + $5000 x 16 senior listed players)...so the most a club would save is $140k.

Play two rookie players for all 22 games and you’re only saving $44k on top of the $160k that sits outside the cap.

So the reality is that if Thomas and Houston play every game, that is $204k we don’t have to pay if they were senior listed players. In cap terms, it would mean we are spending 98.4% of the cap just by doing this.

Add guys like Trengove and McKenzie who are on one year contracts and it’s pretty easy to see how we’d spend only 95% of the cap, since all we’ve got to find is another $420k in savings...like getting rid of Trengove, Lobbe, Austin and Impey, for example, and signing four draftees past pick 41.

If we play this right, we can consistently fluctuate between 95% cap spend for three years (rebuild phase) and 105% for three years (premiership phase) in perpetuity...except we'll still have gun player on our list like Wines, Wingard and Marshall when we are rebuilding due to the TPP going up every year regardless.

We can be one of those annoying clubs like Sydney who are always making finals and contending for flags

See that 16 (b) clause in the CBA is vague. I suspect the club has sought a ruling from the AFL if they are trying to do something that maximises their benefit.

The old CBA said exemptions to TPP clause 10 (b)
(iv) the Football Payments made to a Rookie temporarily promoted to the Primary List of an AFL Club to replace a Player transferred to the Long Term Injury List

(x) 50% of Football Payments to Rookie Players nominated under clause 18(h);

Clause 18 re nominated rookies if have a primary list of 38 or 39
(h) One half of the Football Payments in respect of a Rookie Player nominated under clause 18(e) shall be excluded from the relevant AFL Club’s Total Player Payments.
(i) Any amount paid to a Rookie Player nominated under clause 18(f) in excess of the base payment payable to a 1st year, third round draft choice selection shall be included in the relevant AFL Club’s Total Player Payments.

and from Schedule C – Minimum Terms and Conditions

(f) In the event that a Rookie is promoted or drafted to the Primary List of an AFL Club, the following provisions shall apply:
(i) if the Rookie has previously been on the Primary List of an AFL Club for any period of time (other than being temporarily promoted under item 4(b) of this Schedule C) or has been temporarily promoted under item 4(b) of this Schedule C in two years or more or nominated under the AFL Rules in two years or more, he shall be paid the base payment and Senior Match Payments as set out under item 1(a) of this Schedule C in the relevant year or pro-rata for periods less than the full AFL Season, provided that he cannot be paid less than he would have earned as a Rookie;
(ii) if the Rookie has been temporarily promoted under item 4(b) of this Schedule C in one year or nominated under the AFL Rules for one year, he shall be paid the base payment and Senior Match payments for a third round draft choice, second year player, under item 3(a) of this Schedule C in the relevant year or pro-rata for periods less than the full AFL Season, provided that he cannot be paid less than he would have earned as a Rookie.
(iii) save for a Rookie that is drafted by an AFL Club as a first or second round draft choice, for any other Rookie he shall be paid the base payment and Senior Match payments for a third round draft choice first year Player under item 2(a) of this Schedule C in the relevant year or pro-rata for periods less than the full AFL Season, provided that he cannot be paid less than he would have earned as a Rookie.

(g) Football payments to a Rookie:
(i) while on the Rookie List; and/or
(ii) while on the Primary List to replace a long term injured Player,
shall not be included in the Total Player Payments of an AFL Club provided that if the Rookie remains on the Primary List when the long term injured Player is reinstated to the Primary List, Football Payments received by the Rookie in respect of the period after the long term injured Player is reinstated (“the date of reinstatement”) will be included in the Total Player Payments. Those amounts shall include a monthly pro-rata amount of the base payment calculated from the date of reinstatement and also include all Senior Match payments for Matches played on or after that date.

(h) Where a Rookie is promoted to the Primary List, other than as a replacement for a long term injured Player, Football Payments received by the Rookie after the date the Rookie is placed on the Primary List shall be included in the Total Player Payments of the AFL Club. These amounts shall include a pro rata amount of the base payment, calculated from the date the Rookie is placed on the Primary List and also includes all Senior Match payments for Matches played on or after that date.

So the old CBA isn't that clear either.

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

According to draft guru our total list compared with other total lists so those with 3 cat b rookies and 47 vs 44 squad is a bit of skewing but its consistent

2017 Port were 13th oldest average age list (23.9 vs 1st 24.8 WCE), 9th for average games played (62.2 vs 1st WCE 81.0) and 6th for average goals kicked (42.4 vs 59.9 1st WCE).
https://www.draftguru.com.au/lists/2017

2018 Port were 6th oldest average age list (24.2 v 1st 24.6 Adel), 2nd for average games played (72.5 vs 1st Haw 74.1) and 2nd for average goals kicked (55.2 vs 59.0 1st Haw).
https://www.draftguru.com.au/lists/2018

So whilst Thomas had kicked 67 goals Monfies 325v248, it was getting Watts 143, Motlop 175 and Rockliff 87 that has helped our average. Trengove has kicked 39, McKenzie 22, Barry 0 and the other 4 dfraftees 0.

Others who have left after Monfries, White 98, Young 62, Jacko 30, Impey 34, Krak 24, Ah Chee 17, Lobbe 21, Eddy 3, Palmer 1, Austin 0.

Irony is Jacko went from 13 to 30 and Impey 19 to 34 in 2017.

 

[VineValerian]

So our newbies are:
Rockliff
Watts
Motlop
Trengove
Thomas
Barry McKenzie
Hayes
Garner
Farrell
Patmore

Sorry - had to do that!

 

[Jack Grange]

So our newbies are:
Rockliff
Watts
Motlop
Trengove
Thomas
Barry McKenzie
Hayes
Garner
Farrell
Patmore

Sorry - had to do that!

I think plus Barry?

 

[VineValerian]

I think plus Barry?

He's there already

My "Dad Joke" sense of humour is clearly too subtle.

 

[Thetrader15]

Hi all. Sorry for the intrusion (Crows scarfe taken off at the door), but what's the consensus of who is the better defender at Port...
Hombsch or Jonas?
Doing a draft comp and want to know who to keep or not.
Thanks....commence lifesavers jokes now

 

[Doctor Feel]

Hi all. Sorry for the intrusion (Crows scarfe taken off at the door), but what's the consensus of who is the better defender at Port...
Hombsch or Jonas?
Doing a draft comp and want to know who to keep or not.
Thanks....commence lifesavers jokes now

Jonas. Hombsch has had a poor few years through injury.

 

[Magus]

Jonas. Hombsch has had a poor few years through injury.

Few years? I don't think so. Before 2017 Hombsch was clearly ahead of Jonas.

 

[Thetrader15]

Jonas. Hombsch has had a poor few years through injury.

Few years? I don't think so. Before 2017 Hombsch was clearly ahead of Jonas.

Well that's cleared it all up for me!

 

[Doctor Feel]

Few years? I don't think so. Before 2017 Hombsch was clearly ahead of Jonas.

I don't think so. Jonas really had one very poor year. Hombsch has been on the slide for several now. Hombsch's last good year was in 2015 where he was forced to hold the fort while all of our defenders were dead.

 

[Magus]

I don't think so. Jonas really had one very poor year. Hombsch has been on the slide for several now. Hombsch's last good year was in 2015 where he was forced to hold the fort while all of our defenders were dead.

So what you're saying is that Hombsch was good in 2015 and Jonas was rubbish in 2016, which means that Hombsch has had a few poor years?

Granted he has battled a few injuries but I think at his best he is our best defender. 2018 should tell us a fair bit.

 

[Turiyasangitananda]

Jonas ahead of Hombsch without a doubt. If Hombsch overcomes his injury concerns as returns to his best form, then that's another argument.

 

[Magus]

Jonas ahead of Hombsch without a doubt. If Hombsch overcomes his injury concerns as returns to his best form, then that's another argument.

The question was "who is the better defender?"

 

[Zakk Wylde]

Jonas the better one on one defender.

Hombsch, when fit and in form, is the better all round player.

 

[robbo1981]

Hombsch

 

[Jonts]

If you had to cut one from the list right now you'd pick Hombsch
That answers your question

 

[Schulzenfest]

Hi all. Sorry for the intrusion (Crows scarfe taken off at the door), but what's the consensus of who is the better defender at Port...
Hombsch or Jonas?
Doing a draft comp and want to know who to keep or not.
Thanks....commence lifesavers jokes now

When you say 'draft comp', is it a stats based comp, or is it just a comp where you try to get the best players? If it's stats based I'd keep Hombsch, if it's just 'who's the better player' I'd keep Jonas.

 

[Forzaport]

Jonas the better one on one defender.

Hombsch, when fit and in form, is the better all round player.

Hopefully we’ll get to see Hombsch at full flight again.

 

[GreyPower]

Jack Watts is a better defender than both.

 

[Adz2332]

hombsch is our best defender out of the lot when fit. his hip seems to be a major problem. will be interesting to see how he goes. if he can get his body right hes a walk up 22 start

 

[TeeKray]

hombsch is our best defender out of the lot when fit. his hip seems to be a major problem. will be interesting to see how he goes. if he can get his body right hes a walk up 22 start

Whilst all of this is very true, it's actually hard to believe because it's been so long since Hombsch was fully fit and playing good footy. He's only 24 but almost seems like an injury plagued 30 year old on his last legs.

 

[Thetrader15]

When you say 'draft comp', is it a stats based comp, or is it just a comp where you try to get the best players? If it's stats based I'd keep Hombsch, if it's just 'who's the better player' I'd keep Jonas.

Best player - if port had to keep only one, which would it be

 

[GremioPower]

Best player - if port had to keep only one, which would it be

Ask on the Buddy Draft thread. People will cheerfully answer it to you!

https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/port-board-buddy-draft-2018.1183128/

 

[Ford Fairlane]

Speaking of Flynny, I was at a State Premier League basketball game a few weeks back and did some reading into one of the gun imports for North Adelaide - Alex Starling. Evidently, we were looking at him around the same time we signed Flynn. This guy is seriously athletic, Paul Roos compared his movement to Lance Franklin, could've turned out alright. Oh well.

Redirect Notice (Article is from last year when he was with Southern Tigers)

Alex Starling now a naturalised Australian and newly signed with the 36ers.