List Mgmt. OFFICIAL: Dangerfield + Pick 50 for Picks 9, 28 and Dean Gore

Status
Not open for further replies.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Farmer2Goggin

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Posts
5,289
Likes
7,335
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Celtics
Has anyone seen any whispers of players Adelaide are interested in that might complicate them matching? The AFL website has them chasing Curtley Hampton, Paul Seedsman and Michael Talia, none of which would seem to cost too much. Any big fish they're chasing?

Also, early on (400-odd pages ago), I was reading how good a strategy it would be for Geelong to wait until the end of the FA period to lodge an offer (to put some uncertainty into Adelaide's other dealings), but if Adelaide are planning on matching, surely Geelong lodging day one then dragging out trade negotiations until the end of the trade period would make it much harder for them, given that Danger's salary would be on their books for the period of the matched offer...

Given our history, I can't see Geelong acting like this, but an early lodgement seems like a winner all round for mine.
I'm sure both Clubs appreciate the negotiation tactics each could employ to either derail the other party or optimise their results

I imagine Adelaide want to save face and also do better than the one compo , Cats want Danger and ideally keep pick 9 - or at least something close
That is why I believe both Clubs have an MOU as to how it will play out. Crows won't match , will take the compo and we trade #9 for another pick(s) plus a possible upgrade of later picks in our favour.
Either that or Gillon rides in on his white horse and offers a second compo which would be a huge bonus for us !
 

RegHickeyStand

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Posts
13,851
Likes
12,843
Location
Belgrave
AFL Club
Geelong
So "giving in to the popoulist voice" and matching is detrimental to the club? You do know how unrestricted free agency works don't you? To explain it to you simply, if we match Geelong are forced to do a trade. As all the reasonable parties on both sides are saying, a deal will almost certainly get done. At an absolute minimum this will involve at least one first round pick and eveyrone seems to agree there will be additional picks or players involved. Your first is pick 9. The compo is 14.

According to your logic "what's best" is taking pick 14 when we will almost certainly get more if we match. So how on earth is matching detrimental to Adelaide? I'm sure a deal will be done, Adelaide won't get market value for Danger but we'll get more than pick 14.

At some point there will be a "what's best" call for Adelaide, but this will be during the negotiations, not in the matching decision as you imply (by both your comment and the post you quoted). As an example, if we are offered Pick 9 and Murdoch and Geelong say "that's it we can't do any better", then the administration will need to make a call about whether playing hardball or taking the deal is best for the club. Do they (1) push for more and risk getting nothing or (2) take the deal. The "what's best" test will apply equally to Geelong in the negotiations. If Adelaide say "we want pick 9 plus murdoch plus next year's 2nd round or we're walking away", the Geelong guys will need to decide what's best for the club at that point.

If you mean "what's best" for Geelong, then Adelaide taking the compo in best for you as you will get danger for nothing (other than your later picks getting shuiffled down 1 spot). I hate to break it to you but the Adelaide administration will do "what's best" for our club, not yours.

If Geelong come through with a huge offer that we can't match then fair enough, but all the noise seems to indicate this won't happen.
Have you considered Adelaide's position if Geelong refuse to trade? If Geelong think they can still have Dangerfield if he goes into the draft, and Dangerfield is ok with that, what does Adelaide get then?

I only mention this because this possibility has never been mentioned. Endlessly. In this thread. It's never come up. Really.
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Posts
31,425
Likes
55,512
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Thread starter Moderator #22,754
Assuming we are not going to be complete bastards about it (which we are within our rights to be but it looks like we won’t)*, I would play it like this if I was Geelong:

- Trade period opens. Geelong offers pick 9 to Adelaide with a 48 hour deadline, after which the offer is withdrawn and we will seek to acquire Dangerfield via other means (it could be a large RFA offer or trading with other clubs up the order or taking our chances getting him at pick 9).

- If Adelaide accepts, great, deal done and we all move on.

- If Adelaide doesn’t accept, we lodge the RFA offer and make another offer: if you match we will seek to acquire PD through other means (as per first point above); if you don’t match we will trade you 9 for compo (14) and a player of Adelaide’s choice. Adelaide is still no worse off than the first step and can still have pick 9 (at best).

- If Adelaide matches, we again offer pick 9 only as our final offer at the 11th hour. Adelaide can take it or lose him for nothing.

- At no stage would I offer, entertain or consider anything more than pick 9 in a trade. It is irrational for Adelaide to reject pick 9 or even a swap of pick 9 for 14 and any player. They will make the deal at the 11th hour rather than lose him for nothing.

Under my tactics, the worst that happens is we select a player inferior to Dangerfield at pick 9 (under the very unlikely scenario another club picks him in 1-8, as per Connors' remarks). At best we get pick 14 and Dangerfield. Most likely we get Dangerfield for pick 9 and nothing more or less.

* Complete bastardry as I see it involves trading away all of our currency before lodging the RFA offer – e.g. pick 9 to Carlton for Henderson and pick 20; pick 20 to Gold Coast for Smith and pick 40
 

dazbroncos

Max Rooke Appreciation Society
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Posts
32,648
Likes
48,085
Location
Los Angeles and Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Denver Broncos, Red Bull Racing
Moderator #22,756
It's not poorly thought out at all, it's identical to the US system which has been in place for years where matching is commonplace.

The restriction is that clubs either have to offer the player a contract that their club isn't prepared to match or they have to acquire the player via trade. The whole purpose of restricted free agency is that clubs have to take a hit in some way to obtain a restricted free agent, their either do it through their salary cap through the player taking a massive pay deal or they have to trade.

All Geelong have to do is exactly what Sydney did with Franklin, offer him a godfather deal. We won't match and I am sure that club will just take the compo pick and go home. Saying that we're exploiting the system can also be swung around to also say that if Geelong are attempting to sign restricted free agents through low ball deals and then demanding that the clubs don't match is equally as exploitative of the process.
Which US FA league are you referring to?
I can only refer to the NFL, but very few RFA are signed away from their incumbent teams due to the Rd1 and Rd3 that is enforced as the cost for the guys on the highest level of deals. Very few teams sign players at that level on 80 million dollar 4 or 5 years deals and cough up the picks as well.

Its not so much that they match, but many of the RFA's ( again in the NFL) get Franchised ( 1 yr deal at the value of the average of the top 10 players paid at their position) and THEN pursue their MAX deals as a UFA the following year. And the teams courting said players wait until they get them for salary only.

The player also don't always leave - See Dez Bryant and Demaryius Thomas this year….

But yes, the AFL system needs addressing…

GO Catters
 

FredLeDeux

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Posts
23,196
Likes
33,472
AFL Club
Geelong
Assuming we are not going to be complete bastards about it (which we are within our rights to be but it looks like we won’t)*, I would play it like this if I was Geelong:

- Trade period opens. Geelong offers pick 9 to Adelaide with a 48 hour deadline, after which the offer is withdrawn and we will seek to acquire Dangerfield via other means (it could be a large RFA offer or trading with other clubs up the order or taking our chances getting him at pick 9).

- If Adelaide accepts, great, deal done and we all move on.

- If Adelaide doesn’t accept, we lodge the RFA offer and make another offer: if you match we will seek to acquire PD through other means (as per first point above); if you don’t match we will trade you 9 for compo (14) and a player of Adelaide’s choice. Adelaide is still no worse off than the first step and can still have pick 9 (at best).

- If Adelaide matches, we again offer pick 9 only as our final offer at the 11th hour. Adelaide can take it or lose him for nothing.

- At no stage would I offer, entertain or consider anything more than pick 9 in a trade. It is irrational for Adelaide to reject pick 9 or even a swap of pick 9 for 14 and any player. They will make the deal at the 11th hour rather than lose him for nothing.

Under my tactics, the worst that happens is we select a player inferior to Dangerfield at pick 9 (under the very unlikely scenario another club picks him in 1-8, as per Connors' remarks). At best we get pick 14 and Dangerfield. Most likely we get Dangerfield for pick 9 and nothing more or less.

* Complete bastardry as I see it involves trading away all of our currency before lodging the RFA offer – e.g. pick 9 to Carlton for Henderson and pick 20; pick 20 to Gold Coast for Smith and pick 40
Do I understand the bolded part correctly -
Adelaide ends up with 9
Geelong ends up with Dangerfield (as a FA), plus 14, plus another Adelaide player.
 

Doctor Gero

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Posts
73,564
Likes
94,303
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Tottenham, Bushrangers
Then let's match, stuff up all plans to land another FA, then sign up 8 or so 100k state league players.

Lol.
See this is where not matching could be beneficial. Don't match, take 14 which gives them 2 R1 picks. If we then on good faith trade pick 9 for a fringe player (Lyons,Kerridge etc) they then have 3 R1 picks for which they trade to bring a good player in AND next year will have cap space to get a FA in 2016.
 

FredLeDeux

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Posts
23,196
Likes
33,472
AFL Club
Geelong
Correct. Presumably a player they don't want but one which we "desperately need".
I think 4 things
- that's a good deal for us
- if Hocking could pull it off, he would overtake his brother as one of Geelong's greatest ever
- the Adelaide supporters would go absolutely ballistic if it went through, it might even cost the Committee their jobs at the next election
- if it was the other way round, eg Geelong losing say Selwood, the reaction from Geelong supporters would be even more feral still.
 

darren forssman

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Apr 16, 2006
Posts
14,299
Likes
4,415
Location
The Dirty N-o-r-f
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
One club man
Which US FA league are you referring to?
I can only refer to the NFL, but very few RFA are signed away from their incumbent teams due to the Rd1 and Rd3 that is enforced as the cost for the guys on the highest level of deals. Very few teams sign players at that level on 80 million dollar 4 or 5 years deals and cough up the picks as well.
in the nba, teams can match and keep the player or match and then propose a sign and trade deal...no compo if player isnt matched.

a few teams use the matching process to ascertain a players value.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Posts
31,425
Likes
55,512
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Thread starter Moderator #22,762
I think 4 things
- that's a good deal for us
- if Hocking could pull it off, he would overtake his brother as one of Geelong's greatest ever
- the Adelaide supporters would go absolutely ballistic if it went through, it might even cost the Committee their jobs at the next election
- if it was the other way round, eg Geelong losing say Selwood, the reaction from Geelong supporters would be even more feral still.
I don't disagree with any of that.

One of the perverse outcomes resulting from the balance of bargaining power between the parties is that Geelong's position improves if Adelaide doesn't match where as Adelaide's doesn't. Geelong can extract the benefit of not matching (pick 14) from the negotiations if it plays it right.
 

thegerman

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Posts
10,805
Likes
11,839
Location
Point Cook
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Supersonics, Greenbay
So "giving in to the popoulist voice" and matching is detrimental to the club? You do know how unrestricted free agency works don't you? To explain it to you simply, if we match Geelong are forced to do a trade. As all the reasonable parties on both sides are saying, a deal will almost certainly get done. At an absolute minimum this will involve at least one first round pick and eveyrone seems to agree there will be additional picks or players involved. Your first is pick 9. The compo is 14.

According to your logic "what's best" is taking pick 14 when we will almost certainly get more if we match. So how on earth is matching detrimental to Adelaide? I'm sure a deal will be done, Adelaide won't get market value for Danger but we'll get more than pick 14.

At some point there will be a "what's best" call for Adelaide, but this will be during the negotiations, not in the matching decision as you imply (by both your comment and the post you quoted). As an example, if we are offered Pick 9 and Murdoch and Geelong say "that's it we can't do any better", then the administration will need to make a call about whether playing hardball or taking the deal is best for the club. Do they (1) push for more and risk getting nothing or (2) take the deal. The "what's best" test will apply equally to Geelong in the negotiations. If Adelaide say "we want pick 9 plus murdoch plus next year's 2nd round or we're walking away", the Geelong guys will need to decide what's best for the club at that point.

If you mean "what's best" for Geelong, then Adelaide taking the compo in best for you as you will get danger for nothing (other than your later picks getting shuiffled down 1 spot). I hate to break it to you but the Adelaide administration will do "what's best" for our club, not yours.

If Geelong come through with a huge offer that we can't match then fair enough, but all the noise seems to indicate this won't happen.

Lol. Geelong is forced to trade.....why?
Clearly someone doesn't know how the system works, and it ain't us.
 

Seeds

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Posts
27,900
Likes
23,981
Location
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
Assuming we are not going to be complete bastards about it (which we are within our rights to be but it looks like we won’t)*, I would play it like this if I was Geelong:

- Trade period opens. Geelong offers pick 9 to Adelaide with a 48 hour deadline, after which the offer is withdrawn and we will seek to acquire Dangerfield via other means (it could be a large RFA offer or trading with other clubs up the order or taking our chances getting him at pick 9).

- If Adelaide accepts, great, deal done and we all move on.

- If Adelaide doesn’t accept, we lodge the RFA offer and make another offer: if you match we will seek to acquire PD through other means (as per first point above); if you don’t match we will trade you 9 for compo (14) and a player of Adelaide’s choice. Adelaide is still no worse off than the first step and can still have pick 9 (at best).

- If Adelaide matches, we again offer pick 9 only as our final offer at the 11th hour. Adelaide can take it or lose him for nothing.

- At no stage would I offer, entertain or consider anything more than pick 9 in a trade. It is irrational for Adelaide to reject pick 9 or even a swap of pick 9 for 14 and any player. They will make the deal at the 11th hour rather than lose him for nothing.

Under my tactics, the worst that happens is we select a player inferior to Dangerfield at pick 9 (under the very unlikely scenario another club picks him in 1-8, as per Connors' remarks). At best we get pick 14 and Dangerfield. Most likely we get Dangerfield for pick 9 and nothing more or less.

* Complete bastardry as I see it involves trading away all of our currency before lodging the RFA offer – e.g. pick 9 to Carlton for Henderson and pick 20; pick 20 to Gold Coast for Smith and pick 40
Won't happen. Geelong will give up more than pick 9 because we are soft negotiators. Nothing I've heard on radio the past couple of days has changed that view.
 

Wood_Duck

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 12, 2004
Posts
10,812
Likes
10,505
Location
Not in Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
CDFC, Arsenal
See this is where not matching could be beneficial. Don't match, take 14 which gives them 2 R1 picks. If we then on good faith trade pick 9 for a fringe player (Lyons,Kerridge etc) they then have 3 R1 picks for which they trade to bring a good player in AND next year will have cap space to get a FA in 2016.
Its a great theory if the AFL don't sin bin both of us for trying to get a fringe player through for pick 9.
 

FredLeDeux

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Posts
23,196
Likes
33,472
AFL Club
Geelong
I don't disagree with any of that.

One of the perverse outcomes resulting from the balance of bargaining power between the parties is that Geelong's position improves if Adelaide doesn't match where as Adelaide's doesn't. Geelong can extract the benefit of not matching (pick 14) from the negotiations if it plays it right.
I agree that 14 can fall through to us, but it may need some more complex pick/player trades, and the inclusion of a third or even a fourth club..

At a pinch, I can see Adelaide supporters (very unhappily) being prepared to wear a swap of Dangerfield and 9.

I simply cannot see the Club being prepared to try and sell to its supporters the idea that they've received pick 9 for Dangerfield and another player; and then, to rub salt into the wound "oh, Geelong also gets pick 14".
 

Wood_Duck

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Aug 12, 2004
Posts
10,812
Likes
10,505
Location
Not in Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
CDFC, Arsenal
Won't happen. Geelong will give up more than pick 9 because we are soft negotiators. Nothing I've heard on radio the past couple of days has changed that view.
This makes me laugh hard. Both boards are saying this about their respective list management teams.

Could be a case of 'you have him, no you have him, no seriously here are our first 2 picks for the next 2 years, no thats way too much, etc etc'
 
Last edited:

fpm84

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 7, 2005
Posts
10,138
Likes
20,781
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Dallas Mavs, West Ham
This makes me laugh hard. Both boards are saying this about their respective list management teams.

Could be a case of 'you have, no you have him, no seriously here are our first 2 picks for the next 2 years, no thats way too much, etc etc'
Adelaide will throw Sloane into the deal. Geelong will give up its first round picks for the next six years.

Everyone ends up unhappy.
 
Joined
Mar 20, 2004
Posts
31,425
Likes
55,512
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Thread starter Moderator #22,771
I agree that 14 can fall through to us, but it may need some more complex pick/player trades, and the inclusion of a third or even a fourth club..

At a pinch, I can see Adelaide supporters (very unhappily) being prepared to wear a swap of Dangerfield and 9.

I simply cannot see the Club being prepared to try and sell to its supporters the idea that they've received pick 9 for Dangerfield and another player; and then, to rub salt into the wound "oh, Geelong also gets pick 14".
I seem to place less weight in the significance of supporter reactions than you.

Adelaide should be indifferent between:

1. Receiving pick 9 for Dangerfield
2. Receiving pick 9 for [player that was to be delisted anyway] and compensation pick 14

As they finish both scenarios in exactly the same position:

Gain: pick 9
Lose: Dangerfield and delisted player
 

Doctor Gero

TheBrownDog
Joined
Oct 28, 2012
Posts
73,564
Likes
94,303
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Tottenham, Bushrangers
Its a great theory if the AFL don't sin bin both of us for trying to get a fringe player through for pick 9.
Could have some sort of sweetener attached. could have later picks swapped etc to make it easier to get passed the AFL.

Who knows with this afl though. They make the rules up as they go. Let Delaney through for 77 as a lop sided side trade for example.

I'm just looking at it that you could do what Hawthorn have done, use your free cap space to get a player in yourself (possibly for free) and at the same time have 2-3 R1 picks. That's better than your current 1 draft pick and can see this expedited given our reluctance to use 2016 R1. Who knows if the other clubs can't get deals done you could try and enter the race for Aish/Redden/Treloar or could dangle 1-2 of those picks for another mid elsewhere. Whilst keeping a R1 pick for the draft
 

Seeds

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Posts
27,900
Likes
23,981
Location
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
I think 4 things
- that's a good deal for us
- if Hocking could pull it off, he would overtake his brother as one of Geelong's greatest ever
- the Adelaide supporters would go absolutely ballistic if it went through, it might even cost the Committee their jobs at the next election
- if it was the other way round, eg Geelong losing say Selwood, the reaction from Geelong supporters would be even more feral still.
You last two points make me think the crows will match even if it's not in the best interest of the club as its in the best interest of the committee keeping their jobs and ultimately that is what matters to the people making the decisions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom