Pick Purchase System - Valid or Rubbish ??

[Nugett]

Why should Geelong suffer for being a well run organisation. They helped GC by alleviating their salary cap pressure. It shouldn’t matter how or when a player is paid as long as they agree to the deal and get the money they’re entitled to. Bowes didn’t have to agree to anything.

FA is different as they conjure up compensation picks out of thin air.

Why should the rest of the clubs in the competition suffer?

If you’re taking on a player and a high draft pick to alleviate another clubs salary cap, then you’re doing that on the current contract, as a means of a salary dump.

By renegotiating that contract, that then turns into a trade. Gold Coast could have done the same thing, renegotiated Bowes contract by adding an extra 2-3 years at a lesser rate, but still paying him what he was owed.

So Geelong were able to exploit both the AFL’s and Suns incompetence by adding an extra 2 years by adding an extra 200k.

It’s all the other teams that could have paid Bowes his full contract, and have used that high draft pick, that were made to suffer. Kudos to Geelong for being able to exploit the rule and basically buy themselves a high draft pick for 200k of the salary cap for the next 4 years.

 

[MisterMarcus]

That is seriously large money for a VFL player lol

Bowes was best 22 before he got injured.

Would likely still be best 22 (taking Bews or Tuohy's place) even if everyone was fit and firing.

 

[Kreuuuzeurns]

Why should the rest of the clubs in the competition suffer?

If you’re taking on a player and a high draft pick to alleviate another clubs salary cap, then you’re doing that on the current contract, as a means of a salary dump.

By renegotiating that contract, that then turns into a trade. Gold Coast could have done the same thing, renegotiated Bowes contract by adding an extra 2-3 years at a lesser rate, but still paying him what he was owed.

So Geelong were able to exploit both the AFL’s and Suns incompetence by adding an extra 2 years by adding an extra 200k.

It’s all the other teams that could have paid Bowes his full contract, and have used that high draft pick, that were made to suffer. Kudos to Geelong for being able to exploit the rule and basically buy themselves a high draft pick for 200k of the salary cap for the next 4 years.

GC could’ve done the same thing as Geelong but they didn’t because they aren’t well run.

What Bowes and Geelong decide to do after a trade is nobodies business. No one forced Bowes to take the deal either.

It is no different to Riewoldt and Cotchin restructuring to fit in Tom Lynch. Except you are buying a pick and not a player.

Other clubs need to get better instead of complaining.

 

[flipper83]

I think the problem is that some clubs are able to provide financial reward to players through third party arrangements.
I'd imagine gold coast would be limited in this regard.

 

[Nugett]

GC could’ve done the same thing as Geelong but they didn’t because they aren’t well run.

What Bowes and Geelong decide to do after a trade is nobodies business. No one forced Bowes to take the deal either.

It is no different to Riewoldt and Cotchin restructuring to fit in Tom Lynch. Except you are buying a pick and not a player.

Other clubs need to get better instead of complaining.

No there needed to be a clearer definition of what constituted a trade and what constituted a salary dump. The issue was the AFL in allowing this scenario to occur, by not setting a clear definition. Enabling Geelong to exploit that loophole, which has now been closed. so congratulations to Geelong for being able to exploit that rule.

so for other clubs to be better, they need to be on the same playing field, as I’m highly doubtful, that if any other club tried Geelong’s tactic last year, that it would have been as successful.

 

[MisterMarcus]

Why should the rest of the clubs in the competition suffer?

If you’re taking on a player and a high draft pick to alleviate another clubs salary cap, then you’re doing that on the current contract, as a means of a salary dump.

By renegotiating that contract, that then turns into a trade. Gold Coast could have done the same thing, renegotiated Bowes contract by adding an extra 2-3 years at a lesser rate, but still paying him what he was owed.

So Geelong were able to exploit both the AFL’s and Suns incompetence by adding an extra 2 years by adding an extra 200k.

It’s all the other teams that could have paid Bowes his full contract, and have used that high draft pick, that were made to suffer. Kudos to Geelong for being able to exploit the rule and basically buy themselves a high draft pick for 200k of the salary cap for the next 4 years.

This arrangement would literally force a lose-lose-lose situation all around.

GC forced to extend the contract of a player they feel they are overpaying, and don't really want to keep.

Bowes forced to stay at a club that doesn't really want him for an even longer period of time.

Geelong forced to not be able to engage in a way to resolve the issue for Bowes and the Suns.

 

[master bate]

This is an idea so stupid it could only be created by a Scott brother, Shocking, Ned Guy or Champion Data. Maybe all of them together.

It's terrible.

The point of a salary cap is to limit the amount spend on any one team and therefore restrict them to a ceiling of expensive players. It should be the same for all 18 teams.

To be able to purchase extra cap from one of the 17 other teams simply can not be allowed. We've seen that bad teams won't value that cap space and they will trade it for peanuts. Imaging spending the full cap and losing a flag because a top team has purchased 500k for a pair of late second round picks? That's outrageous.

The last thing we should want for a more even comp is to have the better teams getting better and the lesser sides happy to donate cap space away.

In theory it could help rebuilding, but in practice it just makes the divide between the haves and have nots greater, thus further incentivising getting even worse to attempt to close that gap.

 

[master bate]

It's a massive mechanism in the NBA and NFL.

One of the most used ones.

Not only picks for cash, but also players + cash for picks.


It will bridge the gap between the top sides and bottom sides quicker, by way of draft capital.

Team's caught in no mans land can engineer ways to get out.

s**t players are no longer on bad contracts at bottom clubs, because they need to meet the salary cap floor. Bottom clubs will now pay fair value, to say 50% of the cap and sell the rest, rather than overpaying or signing up long contracts to enable them to front load.

Salary Cap Management becomes one of the important aspects in the game, as salary cap space literally = draft capital.


We need it ASAP. I hope it's incorporated for this trade week tbh.

No reason North shouldn't be able to sell Carlton cap space to alleviate their bursting cap space for 2-3 seasons for their next two first round picks.

Carlton in that scenario could hypothetically go after the likes of Ben McKay and Jade Gresham as FA's on the back of the deal.

There can be a bunch of win/win's for teams pushing into the premiership windows and it can help bottom clubs supercharge their rebuilds.

Nothing like this exists in the NBA or NFL.

The NFL has a lot of player movement and complex contracts but is actually very strict on the salary cap. They've actually knocked back salary dump style trades before.

The NBA has a complex salary cap which teams manipulate with sign and trades and trading players as salary dumps, but they can't just up and buy cap space. Maybe you're thinking of teams buying 2nd round draft picks straight up for cash, which does still happen. That's somewhat like this but really it's rare and generally harmless because 2nd rounders rarely impact, and importantly, it's bringing in a rookie. That's far different allowing the best teams to get even better by stretching their cap.

If there was an NBA comparison it might be like the salary cap spike that allowed the Warriors to sign KD. That was terrible for the NBA in terms of competition. Terrible for KD's legacy. Not at all something we'd like to see here.

Your example has Carlton effectively buying success by being way over the cap. And ok, North do well out of it. But 16 other sides are screwed. That's a return to the Brown paper bag era for the cost of some late first rounders, come on now.

The best thing for North improving any time soon is to just use their cap to sign Ben McKay. It's not that hard.

 

[master bate]

This arrangement would literally force a lose-lose-lose situation all around.

GC forced to extend the contract of a player they feel they are overpaying, and don't really want to keep.

Bowes forced to stay at a club that doesn't really want him for an even longer period of time.

Geelong forced to not be able to engage in a way to resolve the issue for Bowes and the Suns.

Bowes did have other clubs interested in him. Personally I wasn't bother by the contract smoothing although I do think it's a valid concern. 50% smoothing could be an option. If Bowes goes from 700k to 500k he still has to count as 600k for the initial 2 years of the deal for example.

But my real issue with that one was the Suns, complicit with the AFL and AFL media, managed to put Bowes and pick 7 on the market as a done deal. And it quickly became obvious Bowes' contract was hardly a poison pill that needed a top 10 pick outright attached to it. The Suns should've traded that pick down and negotiated a far lesser pick to go with Bowes in the deal.

 

[Sphynx]

Nothing like this exists in the NBA or NFL.

The NFL has a lot of player movement and complex contracts but is actually very strict on the salary cap. They've actually knocked back salary dump style trades before.

The NBA has a complex salary cap which teams manipulate with sign and trades and trading players as salary dumps, but they can't just up and buy cap space. Maybe you're thinking of teams buying 2nd round draft picks straight up for cash, which does still happen. That's somewhat like this but really it's rare and generally harmless because 2nd rounders rarely impact, and importantly, it's bringing in a rookie. That's far different allowing the best teams to get even better by stretching their cap.

If there was an NBA comparison it might be like the salary cap spike that allowed the Warriors to sign KD. That was terrible for the NBA in terms of competition. Terrible for KD's legacy. Not at all something we'd like to see here.

Your example has Carlton effectively buying success by being way over the cap. And ok, North do well out of it. But 16 other sides are screwed. That's a return to the Brown paper bag era for the cost of some late first rounders, come on now.

The best thing for North improving any time soon is to just use their cap to sign Ben McKay. It's not that hard.

The only people apposed to this are those clubs like Melbourne and it's supporters who see a long period of unencumbered challenging.

It's the worst thing about the AFL system. Sides take near on a decade to rebuild and teams that aren't even that good remain challengers for 6-7 years, because it takes so long for the underbelly to improve.


I couldn't care less about strengthening your rivals when I'm not challenging for a flag, the only priority should be to get better by any means possible.

If that's bailing out a top 4 teams salary cap, or strengthen a mid table side so they can challenge, so be it. I don't give a s**t.

Resigning Ben McKay will not improve us a single bit. We have had him for the last 5 years.


Letting him go for a FA compensation pick, then selling the free'd up $700k cap space to a challenging side for further top picks? Essentially netting 2-3 picks for McKay without even having to trade him?

That will outweigh McKay by 3 or 4x his on field value.

Especially as Free Agency to date has been a mechanism for top sides to plunder the bottom sides. (Stephen May anyone.....)


I guarantee you this, Pick Purchasing will be a game changer for the bottom sides. Bookmark it.

It's going to enable bottom sides to go to the draft with multiple first round picks, year on year.

Clubs aren't just going to hand out free lunches with big buckets of salary cap space for second round picks.

Look at what GC had to pay up for the space generated by Bowes....

1.5m-2.0m across 3 years = a top 10 pick.


Now, some bottom clubs could potentially fit 3-4 of those deals in a single offseason in their cap.

 

[Nugett]

This arrangement would literally force a lose-lose-lose situation all around.

GC forced to extend the contract of a player they feel they are overpaying, and don't really want to keep.

Bowes forced to stay at a club that doesn't really want him for an even longer period of time.

Geelong forced to not be able to engage in a way to resolve the issue for Bowes and the Suns.

the main issue is the pick involved in the deal. If Geelong paid Bowes the reportedly 1.4mil over 2 years, then that would constitute a salary dump, and pick 7 would be understandable in that deal. If Geelong restructured Bowes deal, to what it currently is, 400k over four years for a future fourth, that wouldn’t be an issue either, as that would be considered a fair trade. That Geelong were able to restructure Bowes contract, gain pick 7 for a future third is daylight robbery. It was great foresight by Wells and his team, to exploit that loophole, it was poor foresight by the AFL not to have picked up on that loophole. I believe that loophole has now been closed.

so using salary cap space to buy picks, sounds like a great idea in theory. I would like to see it come in effect next season, than this season. To allow teams to fully prepare and for the AFL to see how they can implement it properly. I would like to see a cap being placed on teams, on how much they can receive, or how much they can spend. Have some kind of index that certain picks are worth. How ever with the AFL, they will no doubt go in half arsed, no thought of consequences and a team will exploit a loophole, (More than likely exploiting Gold Coast) and then go we better close that… that is my main concern, is that very little thought Will go in the implementation of it.

 

[Nugett]

This is an idea so stupid it could only be created by a Scott brother, Shocking, Ned Guy or Champion Data. Maybe all of them together.

It's terrible.

The point of a salary cap is to limit the amount spend on any one team and therefore restrict them to a ceiling of expensive players. It should be the same for all 18 teams.

To be able to purchase extra cap from one of the 17 other teams simply can not be allowed. We've seen that bad teams won't value that cap space and they will trade it for peanuts. Imaging spending the full cap and losing a flag because a top team has purchased 500k for a pair of late second round picks? That's outrageous.

The last thing we should want for a more even comp is to have the better teams getting better and the lesser sides happy to donate cap space away.

In theory it could help rebuilding, but in practice it just makes the divide between the haves and have nots greater, thus further incentivising getting even worse to attempt to close that gap.

that’s where they should plan. Have a set amount that clubs can spend and receive, Have an index of what certain picks should be worth.

It should help the bottom clubs, as they will no longer need to overpay players, it will also help the top clubs, as they may be able to retain certain players. If done right, it could be a great implementation, if it’s done in typical AFL fashion it will probably be a balls up. So I do share your concerns.

 

[craffles]

Bowes was best 22 before he got injured.

Would likely still be best 22 (taking Bews or Tuohy's place) even if everyone was fit and firing.

Year one, AKA $550K well spent.

 

[LordLucifer]

Would this 'Pick Purchase' system really to be a good equalisation tool ??

Or is there a better alternative that does provide equalisation ??

 

[Korol Mira]

How about we remove the yank rubbish that is the draft entirely.

 

[WillHayward]

This will be terrible for footy fans as rebuilding teams will sell off their cap space and the top teams will dominatw even more and the poor teams will be worse

How so?
Lower teams now are forced to pay 96% of their cap for s**t players.

Lets look at North the last 5 years - they are restricted to only one single first round draft pick and then being forced to over-pay for average players (Polec, Logue, Corr).

Id much rather see them not be forced over-pay for s**t players but instead have access to more actual genuine talent in the first round of the draft.

I like the idea a lot. Its valid.

 

[WillHayward]

While were at it, they need to fix the first round of the draft to a 3 division ballot.

1. Bottom 6 get randomly allocated picks 1-6
2. Middle 6 randomly allocated picks 7-12
3. Top 6 randomly allocated picks 13-18

Removes any temptation for silly buggers in the back half a season.

After Round 2 it can go back to usual ladder order. 18th get pick 19 and so on.

 

[Elmer_Judd]

I would be okay with it, as long as clubs (buyers or sellers) are limited to doing 2 such transactions over a 4 year period or so, otherwise its a case of Rich clubs getting richer, and that's not what equalisation is for.

 

[master bate]

The only people apposed to this are those clubs like Melbourne and it's supporters who see a long period of unencumbered challenging.

It's the worst thing about the AFL system. Sides take near on a decade to rebuild and teams that aren't even that good remain challengers for 6-7 years, because it takes so long for the underbelly to improve.


I couldn't care less about strengthening your rivals when I'm not challenging for a flag, the only priority should be to get better by any means possible.

If that's bailing out a top 4 teams salary cap, or strengthen a mid table side so they can challenge, so be it. I don't give a s**t.

Resigning Ben McKay will not improve us a single bit. We have had him for the last 5 years.


Letting him go for a FA compensation pick, then selling the free'd up $700k cap space to a challenging side for further top picks? Essentially netting 2-3 picks for McKay without even having to trade him?

That will outweigh McKay by 3 or 4x his on field value.

Especially as Free Agency to date has been a mechanism for top sides to plunder the bottom sides. (Stephen May anyone.....)


I guarantee you this, Pick Purchasing will be a game changer for the bottom sides. Bookmark it.

It's going to enable bottom sides to go to the draft with multiple first round picks, year on year.

Clubs aren't just going to hand out free lunches with big buckets of salary cap space for second round picks.

Look at what GC had to pay up for the space generated by Bowes....

1.5m-2.0m across 3 years = a top 10 pick.


Now, some bottom clubs could potentially fit 3-4 of those deals in a single offseason in their cap.

My opinion has nothing to do with how my club is going.

The only part of why I don’t like it for Melbourne is because this will further help the big clubs that stock pile mature talent, making it easier for them to stay at the top. Melbourne aren’t a destination club.

Rebuilding takes 7-10 years because teams decide to be bad for minimum of 4 years, stock pile massive amounts of picks and then hope they come good.

The Crows have pulled off a rebuild in 4 years because they kept most of their core players, went to the draft for a few years and targeted Dawson and Rankine to get them better in a hurry.

If you widen the period of time for which clubs are doing nothing but drafting then you widen the length of the rebuild.

The last thing North need is more picks who might be good in 5 years time. They’ve got plenty of talent.

The big issue is not enough players move every year because free agency is cooked and trading is very costly (for the club and for the player too with how painful the system is). If you want to fix the length of rebuilds you should allow more free agency and let bad teams weaponise their cap for actual players who will improve them now not in 5 years.

That will also lead to more salary dumps which will once again allow bad teams to use their cap on picks and players who make them better.

 

[Elmer_Judd]

Why should the rest of the clubs in the competition suffer?

If you’re taking on a player and a high draft pick to alleviate another clubs salary cap, then you’re doing that on the current contract, as a means of a salary dump.

By renegotiating that contract, that then turns into a trade. Gold Coast could have done the same thing, renegotiated Bowes contract by adding an extra 2-3 years at a lesser rate, but still paying him what he was owed.

So Geelong were able to exploit both the AFL’s and Suns incompetence by adding an extra 2 years by adding an extra 200k.

It’s all the other teams that could have paid Bowes his full contract, and have used that high draft pick, that were made to suffer. Kudos to Geelong for being able to exploit the rule and basically buy themselves a high draft pick for 200k of the salary cap for the next 4 years.

Gold Coast got the last laugh, the player the Suns drafted with the pick they got from the Crows (Bailey Humphrey) is a sure fire winner and a far better prospect than Bowes or the local player Geelong got with pick 7.

They also cleared up valuable cap space which enabled them to re-sign Noah Anderson.

Its hard to believe, but the footy dept at the Gold Coast actually know what they are doing these days.

 

[theasian]

This will also remove the need for priority picks

 

[El Doederino]

Can only work if players salaries are made public

Otherwise, I don't trust the AFL to not help out one of its favourite clubs with a nod and a wink that their cap space is fine.

 

[Elmer_Judd]

This will also remove the need for priority picks

Actually I would prefer it if we got rid of F/A compo picks. Its an absolute shemozzle

 

[banzai]

Definitely a good concept.

Rebuilding teams won't have to use salary cap space to pay mediocre players.

And they can get extra picks to either draft new young players or even go after a established player.

Whether the AFLPA will agree to it is another question.

They would almost always use them on new players, its good for young teams to load up with talent, bad if you want an even comp and not having 4 or 5 unwatchable games every week.

 

[theasian]

Actually I would prefer it if we got rid of F/A compo picks. Its an absolute shemozzle

I Would also agree with removig F/A Compo picks.

However one benefit from F/A compo picks is that it facilitates player movement.

F/A compo pick removal should come together with perhaps allowing more future picks trading (up to 2 or 3 years) and more player eligibility for free agency.