Opinion Should Clubs Be Able To Trade Contracted Players If They Wish To & The Player Has No Say In It

Remove this Banner Ad

Mar 20, 2002
24,054
24,728
Mosman Village
AFL Club
Carlton



The recently concluded Trade Period has come and gone but this year, there was some unusual anomalies that have got in the way for further player movement.

I'm not going to sit here in judgement of why and how the Hawks went about there business but everyone knows they were strongly trying to trade out O'Meara, Breust, Mitchell, Gunston & Wingard in order to revamp their draft hand. A couple of deals were on the table with Breust & Wingard but the players themselves vetoed the move and the club was left helpless as a result.

Putting aside the vagaries of what may happen across season 2022 in the Hawks locker-room & the selection committee meetings amongst all of the personnel involved, this situation has clearly highlighted why there needs to be a change to the rules that would have allowed the Hawks to make the trades they needed to without the players being able to intervene.

The players (& AFLPA) wanted the introduction of a Free Agency system which gave them the freedom to move to another club when THEY wanted to yet the clubs have no say at all going the other way.

This is far too one-sided and deterimental to the clubs in their quest to rebuild lists or make strategic moves etc.

I for one would like to see some a dramatic change to the system but with some inbuilt 'protectors' for the players who are on the lower end of the pay scale. Having a young guy with a young family earning around $150K per annum being told to move interstate due to a trade deal would be a little unfair.

However, a fully professional player on a contract of $700K per annum shouldn't be able to dictate terms with the club when they wish to trade him out for whatever reasons they deem important.

I'm interested to read other peoples thoughts and some possible 'tweaks' on how the proposed system should operate.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

HTPunter

Brownlow Medallist
Sep 27, 2014
10,767
14,938
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Hill, Lobb weren't traded despite their individual requests because of contracts.

Breust, Wingard weren't traded despite their clubs request because of contracts.

How is it different? Unless contracted players can also walk out at any stage, then they shouldn't be able to have their contracts vetoed.
 

Bald

Premium Gold
Apr 5, 2016
7,219
16,252
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Boston Celtics
I know this might sound like a silly question but if this were the case contracts would effectively be useless right? (They’re not tremendously useful as it is right now)
 

GWT6

Club Legend
Jun 7, 2011
1,595
4,307
Western Sydney
AFL Club
Melbourne
The difference with the major sports in the US is the salaries - NBA players are all on over $1m per year. Could you imagine a base level AFL player on $100k being traded from Melbourne to WA? A lot of the young blokes are still at home or living with family, a big percentage are studying at Uni, or some working part-time for a post-football career. Most of them can't afford nannies, and have family and friends help out with children.

It can't happen unless the contract the player is on is big enough that they are set for life and can afford to live anywhere. There are probably less than 20 of those in the AFL.
 
Jun 14, 2017
3,449
5,489
Adelaide
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
Liverpool, AC Milan, North Adelaide
The difference with the major sports in the US is the salaries - NBA players are all on over $1m per year. Could you imagine a base level AFL player on $100k being traded from Melbourne to WA? A lot of the young blokes are still at home or living with family, a big percentage are studying at Uni, or some working part-time for a post-football career. Most of them can't afford nannies, and have family and friends help out with children.

It can't happen unless the contract the player is on is big enough that they are set for life and can afford to live anywhere. There are probably less than 20 of those in the AFL.

Also NBA players for the most part older when they are drafted and use to travelling across America whilst in the US college system. The go home factor barely exists over there and never understood why it does in the AFL.
 
Mar 20, 2002
24,054
24,728
Mosman Village
AFL Club
Carlton
Hill, Lobb weren't traded despite their individual requests because of contracts.

Breust, Wingard weren't traded despite their clubs request because of contracts.

How is it different? Unless contracted players can also walk out at any stage, then they shouldn't be able to have their contracts vetoed.


The reason Hill & Lobb weren't traded was because the terms of the deal that was offered to GWS & Freo did not suit which is their perogative, had the deals been favourable I'm sure they would have gone.

Breust & Wingard did not get moved on because they had an actual say in it which is completely wrong.

The way you look at we may as well do away with contracts altogether & allow clubs to pay their players what they like from week to week too.


What you are not understanding is that clubs don't 'own' the player, they own the contract, this is the way it works in the US.

What they do sell is the contract, the club who buys it has to take on the terms & conditions of that contract too. We have this stupid system whereby the club can trade a player and then that player's contract can be re-negotiated.
 
Sep 30, 2011
14,345
23,371
Freo
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Whoever is playing WC
The difference with the major sports in the US is the salaries - NBA players are all on over $1m per year. Could you imagine a base level AFL player on $100k being traded from Melbourne to WA? A lot of the young blokes are still at home or living with family, a big percentage are studying at Uni, or some working part-time for a post-football career. Most of them can't afford nannies, and have family and friends help out with children.

It can't happen unless the contract the player is on is big enough that they are set for life and can afford to live anywhere. There are probably less than 20 of those in the AFL.
Yep, if it came in it might have to be contracts of 500k or more.

Still, I don’t see this as a big deal. It goes both ways and clubs go thru stages of missing out and winning later from the rules. Sydney copped it this year but have benefitted in the past from cheap players.

I think the players are people too and should have a say in their life.
 
Mar 20, 2002
24,054
24,728
Mosman Village
AFL Club
Carlton
The difference with the major sports in the US is the salaries - NBA players are all on over $1m per year. Could you imagine a base level AFL player on $100k being traded from Melbourne to WA? A lot of the young blokes are still at home or living with family, a big percentage are studying at Uni, or some working part-time for a post-football career. Most of them can't afford nannies, and have family and friends help out with children.

It can't happen unless the contract the player is on is big enough that they are set for life and can afford to live anywhere. There are probably less than 20 of those in the AFL.

Did you actually read all of my original post ??

I for one would like to see some a dramatic change to the system but with some inbuilt 'protectors' for the players who are on the lower end of the pay scale. Having a young guy with a young family earning around $150K per annum being told to move interstate due to a trade deal would be a little unfair.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mar 20, 2002
24,054
24,728
Mosman Village
AFL Club
Carlton
Yep, if it came in it might have to be contracts of 500k or more.

Still, I don’t see this as a big deal. It goes both ways and clubs go thru stages of missing out and winning later from the rules. Sydney copped it this year but have benefitted in the past from cheap players.

I think the players are people too and should have a say in their life.

I think the average wage in in the AFL is around $350K so I think any player on or above that amount is fair game, any player under it isn't.
 
Sep 30, 2011
14,345
23,371
Freo
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Whoever is playing WC
I think the average wage in in the AFL is around $350K so I think any player on or above that amount is fair game, any player under it isn't.
Maybe they need to have it as a clause in contracts then. Players will put value on being part of the decision, if clubs want control they can pay for the privilege.
 
Mar 20, 2002
24,054
24,728
Mosman Village
AFL Club
Carlton
Here is part of a document that a colleague of mine has created that is aimed at straightening up the whole draft & trade rules within the AFL :


Player Trading

When trading for a player that is in contract, you are to keep the value of his current contract. A team cannot offer a player from another club a higher value contract than he is already on. Ie if Player X has two years to go @ $400,000 per year is traded, then the team he is going to must pay that amount with any conditions.

Basically, you are not trading for a player, you are trading for a contract and the player it contains.

If a player is out of contract, but not a free agent, any team may offer that player an amount of their choosing, and if accepted, trade with the players current team, as it stands now. Maximum of four years.


Player Trading In Contract – Club Orientated

When a player reaches a certain level of salary, 15% above the average player payments, he becomes a tradeable player, a club can trade him to any club in the AFL. The receiving club must honour the current contract in full, plus the traded player has a trade kicker of 15% attached to the remained of his contract.

EXAMPLE – Player X is earning $480,000 per season, and has two years left on his contract. He is treaded from team 1 to team 2. Player x’s salary then increases to $ 552,000. The amount is allowed to be shared between the two teams. Ie Team 1 will pay the $72,000 for two seasons which comes out of their salary cap.

These players who qualify are allowed to be traded on draft night as part of draft night deals.


Player Trading In Contract – Player Orientated


A player may ask for a trade, in which case he is not paid a kicker and for the level of player who is paid 15% over the average salary, the club losing the player gets a trade exemption of 20% of the leaving players salary, for the length of the contract.

Using the above player as an example, player is on $ 480,000 per season with two years remaining, the club losing the player has a trade exemption of $ 96,000 each season for the remaining two seasons.

This enables the club to help sign a free agent, or front load an existing contract, which will help in years to come with the TPP.
 

Bald

Premium Gold
Apr 5, 2016
7,219
16,252
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Other Teams
Boston Celtics
How do you arrive at that theory ??
Well because being able to trade a player without their consent is about balancing the power of players moving clubs, or so I assume.

If either party is able to dump the other then what’s the point of having a written agreement.
 
Mar 20, 2002
24,054
24,728
Mosman Village
AFL Club
Carlton
So this would require A) Contracts to be completely useless and B) Either the club has to pay out entire contracts (Often a million+ on their books) OR convince the other club to pay the players entire contract. Or meet half way.

Nah, wont happen.

You are trading for the contract, if the club wants the player bad enough then they pay the contract value existing.
 
You are trading for the contract, if the club wants the player bad enough then they pay the contract value existing.

How often are clubs bent over with trading contracted players requesting specific clubs? And how many clubs would want to take on another clubs front loaded contract when they would rather their own contract structures?

Only way this works is if contracts themselves are torn up and players become rotated assets on a year to year basis.
 

Happy Mastenator

Chris Masten's Sock Puppet
Apr 16, 2010
19,460
27,528
Sydney
AFL Club
West Coast
Also NBA players for the most part older when they are drafted and use to travelling across America whilst in the US college system. The go home factor barely exists over there and never understood why it does in the AFL.
Not only that the NBA season is one of constant travel, players aren't necessarily living in the city they play in long term. Once the season is over they all head off to LA or elsewhere anyway. Come back for the short preseason, then back into the travel.

AFL players (non-Vic) the most they travel is 3 or 4 days ever fortnight.
 
Sep 30, 2011
14,345
23,371
Freo
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
Whoever is playing WC
Here is part of a document that a colleague of mine has created that is aimed at straightening up the whole draft & trade rules within the AFL :


Player Trading

When trading for a player that is in contract, you are to keep the value of his current contract. A team cannot offer a player from another club a higher value contract than he is already on. Ie if Player X has two years to go @ $400,000 per year is traded, then the team he is going to must pay that amount with any conditions.

Basically, you are not trading for a player, you are trading for a contract and the player it contains.

If a player is out of contract, but not a free agent, any team may offer that player an amount of their choosing, and if accepted, trade with the players current team, as it stands now. Maximum of four years.
This won't protect teams players being offered more money. Take Dawson, apparently offered 500K, 3 year deal at Sydney. Crows offered 650K for 5 years = 1.75m difference. If Dawson had signed the three year deal and the trade went through (Much higher trade price), Crows would just pay 500K for 3 years and then 875K for the remaining 2 years.

Clubs have control with contracts, a club could make a point to never trade someone in contract they want to keep and never let a contract lapse unless they are on the outer. If they won't sign by trade week with 1 year to go, they get offered up for trade or told to extend. Power still rests with the player but a club could easily develop a culture around a model like this if they wanted, except they don't want to. Having more flexibility is more useful than occasionally getting left with a player they don't want or having one leave they do want.

Contracts offer a mix of power, giving that power to the clubs with 100% rights to use players as commodities is not the right move.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back