RFA - The new trade leverage

[FreeAgent1]

With Tassie entering the comp and the value of draft pick worth less and less, I expect there to be a huge difference in the ways clubs target and plan for RFA vs FA.

2026 example: Zak Butters

9

Zak Butters

Age

25

Ht

181cm

Wt

77kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.3

4star

K

7.7

3star

HB

6.7

4star

M

3.0

3star

T

2.6

4star

CL

0.8

3star

D

14.7

4star

K

8.9

4star

HB

5.9

3star

M

3.9

4star

T

2.9

4star

CL

1.1

3star

D

17.0

5star

K

9.0

4star

HB

8.0

5star

M

3.6

4star

T

1.6

4star

CL

0.6

3star

If he doesn’t stay at Port, they will almost certainly match any offer and force a trade. Now why would they trade him to Geelong who will offer less than another team?

Other than Jeremy Cameron

5

Jeremy Cameron

Age

33

Ht

196cm

Wt

94kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

12.5

3star

K

9.0

3star

HB

3.4

3star

M

5.4

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

2.6

5star

D

10.0

3star

K

7.1

3star

HB

2.9

2star

M

4.6

4star

T

2.0

3star

G

1.9

5star

D

8.2

2star

K

5.0

2star

HB

3.2

3star

M

4.6

5star

T

2.4

4star

G

2.0

5star

situation I can’t remember clubs using the power of RFA to basically force a player to re-sign or the club offer overs for a trade.

FWIW I expect the Swans to do the same for Chad Warner

1

Chad Warner

Age

25

Ht

185cm

Wt

82kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

7.0

2star

K

4.5

2star

HB

2.5

2star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.5

3star

CL

0.0

1star

D

7.0

1star

K

4.5

2star

HB

2.5

2star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.5

2star

CL

0.0

1star

D

7.0

2star

K

4.5

2star

HB

2.5

3star

M

1.5

2star

T

1.5

4star

CL

0.0

1star

in 2027.

I suspect the AFLPA will try to change the rules after a couple of players essentially don’t get to go where they want.

I think clubs will demand star players in return and due to lower value of picks and this will kill deals…..

Will be a super interesting watch as I think the Butters deal will frame the market for RFA.

 

[Scotland]

There is no genuine RFA status in the AFL. It's just another half arsed mechanism introduced to try and appease the AFLPA.

What should happen is that Butters (for example) is a restricted free agent and that means he is free to sign with whoever he wants for as much as they want to pay him. Port then has the right to match the terms offered and keep him, or let him go and get nothing in return. That is how it should work.

There are so many other missing pieces around the salary cap, trade rules, contract rules that RFA doesn't really serve any purpose other than allowing players to maximise their earnings (in theory TDK could've earned $1.7m a year at Carlton) and clubs to weigh up whether a compo pick is better than a potential trade (No one is trading a top 10 pick for Oscar Allen

4

Oscar Allen

Age

27

Ht

196cm

Wt

96kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

9.8

2star

K

6.6

3star

HB

3.2

3star

M

3.8

4star

T

2.4

4star

G

1.1

4star

No current season stats available

D

8.6

3star

K

5.8

3star

HB

2.8

3star

M

3.8

4star

T

2.0

4star

G

1.2

4star

in 2025 yet here we are).

 

[RussellEbertHandball]

Other than Jeremy Cameron situation I can’t remember clubs using the power of RFA to basically force a player to re-sign or the club offer overs for a trade.

I suspect the AFLPA will try to
I think clubs will demand star players in return and due to lower value of picks and this will kill deals…..

Will be a super interesting watch as I think the Butters deal will frame the market for RFA.

Adelaide forced a trade with Geelong for Dangerfield. That's why they got 9 + mid to late 20s pick + Dean Gore a SA kid who never made it at either club.

If it wasn't forced their compo pick would have only been a pick around 14. Was it overs? Probably not but the crows forced Geelong to pay up so they would get more than a compo pick.

 

[Scotland]

Adelaide forced a trade with Geelong for Dangerfield. That's why they got 9 + mid to late 20s pick + Dean Gore a SA kid who never made it at either club.

If it wasn't forced their compo pick would have only been a pick around 14.

Technically they didn't force anything as Danger never signed a free agency offer. But the net result is about the same.

 

[Wild Bill]

With Tassie entering the comp and the value of draft pick worth less and less, I expect there to be a huge difference in the ways clubs target and plan for RFA vs FA.

2026 example: Zak Butters
If he doesn’t stay at Port, they will almost certainly match any offer and force a trade. Now why would they trade him to Geelong who will offer less than another team?

Other than Jeremy Cameron situation I can’t remember clubs using the power of RFA to basically force a player to re-sign or the club offer overs for a trade.

FWIW I expect the Swans to do the same for Chad Warner in 2027.

I suspect the AFLPA will try to change the rules after a couple of players essentially don’t get to go where they want.

I think clubs will demand star players in return and due to lower value of picks and this will kill deals…..

Will be a super interesting watch as I think the Butters deal will frame the market for RFA.

If he picks Geelong - that's the reason they will trade him to Geelong.

Cats got that deal done and Cameron was probably a bigger signature at the time than Butter is now.

Cats gave - 13, 15, 20 and F4
Cats got - Cameron, GWS F2, Ess F2.

Dangerfield and Dunkley were RFA and the clubs forced a trade.

 

[FreeAgent1]

If he picks Geelong - that's the reason they will trade him to Geelong.

Cats got that deal done and Cameron was probably a bigger signature at the time than Butter is now.

Cats gave - 13, 15, 20 and F4
Cats got - Cameron, GWS F2, Ess F2.

Dangerfield and Dunkley were RFA and the clubs forced a trade.

Agree with that’s how it worked.

My point is that with the massively decreased value of picks….the player needs to be super strategic with who they “pick” to RFA with as the chance of being matched and retained is way higher.

If he picks Geelong and port get pick 6 as compo which ends up being pick 8 or 9….. they match and then what happens….

You need to select the club that can ALSO get a trade done if the match occurs… and without draft picks satisfying clubs it’s going to get interesting!!

 

[Wild Bill]

Agree with that’s how it worked.

My point is that with the massively decreased value of picks….the player needs to be super strategic with who they “pick” to RFA with as the chance of being matched and retained is way higher.

If he picks Geelong and port get pick 6 as compo which ends up being pick 8 or 9….. they match and then what happens….

You need to select the club that can ALSO get a trade done if the match occurs… and without draft picks satisfying clubs it’s going to get interesting!!

Same as with Cameron - they work out a deal - most likely completed in the last 10 minutes.

Who is best to make the trade would be very low on the list of priorities for Butters. He wants the right club for him.

 

[FreeAgent1]

Same as with Cameron - they work out a deal - most likely completed in the last 10 minutes.

Who is best to make the trade would be very low on the list of priorities for Butters. He wants the right club for him.

But it’s not he same as Cameron. The market is different. Tassies entrance massively de- values picks so you can just add a future second and make it work.

I honestly think we will have a PSD or two….

 

[Wild Bill]

But it’s not he same as Cameron. The market is different. Tassies entrance massively de- values picks so you can just add a future second and make it work.

I honestly think we will have a PSD or two….

Yeah I don’t think the sky is falling. Port need 1st rounders for DC as well.

A play of Butters calibre isn’t walking to the PSD.

 

[Ash1337]

The Cameron trade. Geelong had 3 first rounders already and were willing to trade them. That's why GWS forced a trade. If they didn't they would have got pick 10 for Cameron and pick 11 for Williams. The main reason for a forced trade is if they value the picks a team has over the Compensation. The reason a Butters will be a forced trade is if they believe they can get more out of him than the compensation pick. Right now it's unclear if this the best course of action.

 

[Robroy22]

Adelaide forced a trade with Geelong for Dangerfield. That's why they got 9 + mid to late 20s pick + Dean Gore a SA kid who never made it at either club.

If it wasn't forced their compo pick would have only been a pick around 14. Was it overs? Probably not but the crows forced Geelong to pay up so they would get more than a compo pick.

Adelaide didn't force anything. Patrick made sure that Adelaide got looked after as he organised the entire move. They'd known all year that it was happening as had all the surfcoast locals back home.

 

[Ash1337]

Adelaide didn't force anything. Patrick made sure that Adelaide got looked after as he organised the entire move. They'd known all year that it was happening as had all the surfcoast locals back home.

I doubt it was that deep.

 

[FreeAgent1]

The Cameron trade. Geelong had 3 first rounders already and were willing to trade them. That's why GWS forced a trade. If they didn't they would have got pick 10 for Cameron and pick 11 for Williams. The main reason for a forced trade is if they value the picks a team has over the Compensation. The reason a Butters will be a forced trade is if they believe they can get more out of him than the compensation pick. Right now it's unclear if this the best course of action.

Sure but if he chooses a top team that makes finals and they don’t want to trade overs. Then port match and then butters doesn’t sign goes to PSD and port pick him back up?

My point is that RFA and FA have mainly gone to top teams… so the PSD threat is nil.

Butters really cant “pick” his spot until he kinda lines up the trade beforehand similar to Dangerfield. If he does a Jeremy Cameron I think it will end in TEARS. I can’t imagine what Port will demand in a trade but I can’t see a team willingly accepting it, not a top team having that draft capital in the first place…..

 

[Ash1337]

Sure but if he chooses a top team that makes finals and they don’t want to trade overs. Then port match and then butters doesn’t sign goes to PSD and port pick him back up?

My point is that RFA and FA have mainly gone to top teams… so the PSD threat is nil.

Butters really cant “pick” his spot until he kinda lines up the trade beforehand similar to Dangerfield. If he does a Jeremy Cameron I think it will end in TEARS. I can’t imagine what Port will demand in a trade but I can’t see a team willingly accepting it, not a top team having that draft capital in the first place…..

He wont go anywhere other than the team he wants to. Players hold all the power and are backed by the player agents and AFLPA. If a team other than the team he wants to go to picks him up then future dealings become very hard. Look at Bailey Smith for example. The agency threatened teams to not pick him if he ever went to the Draft.

 

[Wrenny]

I doubt it was that deep.

 

[FreeAgent1]

He wont go anywhere other than the team he wants to. Players hold all the power and are backed by the player agents and AFLPA. If a team other than the team he wants to go to picks him up then future dealings become very hard. Look at Bailey Smith for example. The agency threatened teams to not pick him if he ever went to the Draft.

I agree it’s totally what happens. Especially with uncontracted players.

My only point is that with a RFA it’s a totally different framing.

You aren’t a free agent. There is this whole mechanism why you are “restricted”. Picks in the 20s in compromised drafts are junk….

I don’t think agents will able to get away with it. Imagine walking an absolute gun to PSD, only for them to get through the entire draft till like pick 15……

AFL commission at this point would step in.

 

[Libbaaaa]

If he picks Geelong - that's the reason they will trade him to Geelong.

Cats got that deal done and Cameron was probably a bigger signature at the time than Butter is now.

Cats gave - 13, 15, 20 and F4
Cats got - Cameron, GWS F2, Ess F2.

Dangerfield and Dunkley were RFA and the clubs forced a trade.

Dunkley was one year short of RFA status, was just uncorrected.

 

[kaiserchief13]

There is no genuine RFA status in the AFL. It's just another half arsed mechanism introduced to try and appease the AFLPA.

What should happen is that Butters (for example) is a restricted free agent and that means he is free to sign with whoever he wants for as much as they want to pay him. Port then has the right to match the terms offered and keep him, or let him go and get nothing in return. That is how it should work.

There are so many other missing pieces around the salary cap, trade rules, contract rules that RFA doesn't really serve any purpose other than allowing players to maximise their earnings (in theory TDK could've earned $1.7m a year at Carlton) and clubs to weigh up whether a compo pick is better than a potential trade (No one is trading a top 10 pick for Oscar Allen in 2025 yet here we are).

That is the American model, but the go home factor seems much more prevelent here than in the US for some reason. Maybe because cities are smaller? Not an even amount of travel? Steph Curry for example grew up in North Carolina and went to college there but has stayed entire career at Warriors instead of going back to Charlotte. Why the difference?

 

[Ash1337]

I agree it’s totally what happens. Especially with uncontracted players.

My only point is that with a RFA it’s a totally different framing.

You aren’t a free agent. There is this whole mechanism why you are “restricted”. Picks in the 20s in compromised drafts are junk….

I don’t think agents will able to get away with it. Imagine walking an absolute gun to PSD, only for them to get through the entire draft till like pick 15……

AFL commission at this point would step in.

RFA is really no different than UFA in terms of the player getting where they want. Only the club gets to dictate the terms of whether the club wants to trade or not. The other club has the choice when it comes to UFA.

Lions trading Starcevich instead of letting him go to west coast because Allen's compensation would be affected was Eagles decision. Port trading Butters instead of the Compensation is Port's decision.

 

[whatwhatsaywhat]

That is the American model, but the go home factor seems much more prevelent here than in the US for some reason. Maybe because cities are smaller? Not an even amount of travel? Steph Curry for example grew up in North Carolina and went to college there but has stayed entire career at Warriors instead of going back to Charlotte. Why the difference?

there's HEAPS more player movement in the nba obviously, but i assume because the dubs are a super professional and well run organisation and he was winning championships, whereas charlotte have been a basketcase for the majority of their existence?

 

[Pure_Ownage]

But it’s not he same as Cameron. The market is different. Tassies entrance massively de- values picks so you can just add a future second and make it work.

I honestly think we will have a PSD or two….

Clubs wont shoot themselves in the foot which is what a player walking to the psd means. Port will take 3 r1s from the dogs for butters and move on.

 

[Libbaaaa]

RFA is really no different than UFA in terms of the player getting where they want. Only the club gets to dictate the terms of whether the club wants to trade or not. The other club has the choice when it comes to UFA.

Lions trading Starcevich instead of letting him go to west coast because Allen's compensation would be affected was Eagles decision. Port trading Butters instead of the Compensation is Port's decision.

It just shifts the goal posts really in changing the players status from RFA to uncontracted.

 

[Scotland]

That is the American model, but the go home factor seems much more prevelent here than in the US for some reason. Maybe because cities are smaller? Not an even amount of travel? Steph Curry for example grew up in North Carolina and went to college there but has stayed entire career at Warriors instead of going back to Charlotte. Why the difference?

It's an American system to have a draft and salary cap in the first place. The NRL, A-League, NBL, Super Rugby etc. don't have drafts. There is no "equalisation" in the English football pyramid. You settle into your level whether that's winning the Premier League or finishing mid table in League One.

Australia is unique in that there are only 5 major population centres and professional sports teams are concentrated in Melbourne and Sydney. No one ever talks of players from London (of which there are many) going to London. Top players might move to Arsenal or Chelsea (or Spurs, lol) but they're not choosing QPR or West Ham over Man City. And they're not moving to Manchester to play for Wigan or Bolton.

In the US star players join big market franchises. OKC won 68 games last year and the title. There is no 'LeBron/Steph/KD/whoever should join OKC' buzz in the media. The reason their comp stays competitive is that for a 5 a side game with squads of 12-15 the most you can pay any one player is 35% of the cap. So whether you draft, trade, sign free agents etc. you are pretty much capped at 2-3 stars per team and then a bunch of guys making way less. And you can't just pay someone else's #1 pick from the year prior $50m a year, there are rules in place around earning max contracts.

The AFL tries to be everything to everyone. The draft and salary cap are supposed to disadvantage players, that is the point. You don't get to choose where you go and you can either make $1m joining a bottom 4 club or half that joining a top 4 club. The alternative is a much smaller competition because half the teams would've gone under already.

 

[bzparkes]

With the CBA increases then the AFL just need to put their foot down and allow clubs to trade players under contract to wherever they want to send them. They can compromise and have them qualify for free agency from their overall time in the AFL and not at an individual club.

Players seemingly want to have their cake and eat it.

 

[Scotland]

What the AFLPA want is for players to be able to choose where they go and have no restrictions on contract length/value, and for salaries and third party deals to not be made public.