Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[cmndstab]

Well, the extra COL allowance is actually to try to make things even, since the argument is it's harder to attract people to Sydney for the same money as one of the more established footy states.

Of course, that assumption probably needs revisiting nowadays.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Well I suppose any club could still have drafted Tippett so not really tampering........but wait, Sydney had the COL allowance so all clubs didn't have an even chance. The AFL are really the ones draft tampering! Hypocritical ar...........es.

As i have said ....easy to overcome the abuse of the COL being used to attract Tippett size contracts

Simply give Sydney the same salary cap as everyone else ......management of the COL is done by AFL who apply to all contracts ....problem fixed !!!

 

[Untouchables22]

As i have said ....easy to overcome the abuse of the COL being used to attract Tippett size contracts

Simply give Sydney the same salary cap as everyone else ......management of the COL is done by AFL who apply to all contracts ....problem fixed !!!

It's so simple that it can't possibly be accepted by the AFL as fair.

 

[Sanders]

Still bewildered that we're accused of draft tampering ....but Tippett can refuse to meet with clubs or do medicals ...and construct a salary that guarantees him passage to Sydney

Someone tell me how this is not player tampering with the draft process ....please!!!

The system is not a free market there are always compromises.

The salary cap is a compromise, as long as a team has more spare cap space than any other and is prepared to use it on one player - that is a movement favoured by the system. Clearly not tampering or interfering with it

The other stuff is just not important.
JMac told Port he didn't want to play there, they picked him and knuckled down

Luke Ball would not do a medical for anyone but collingwood, but judging by collingwood's enthusiasm for him everyone else can figure out it went ok

Its really just about the money.

 

[Sanders]

Well, the extra COL allowance is actually to try to make things even, since the argument is it's harder to attract people to Sydney for the same money as one of the more established footy states.

Of course, that assumption probably needs revisiting nowadays.

Do other industries have troubled attracting people to sydney?

Awesome city

 

[Sanders]

on FA will soften the blow from losing all these picks, I can't see it. Maybe someone taking that line can explain it to me?

We lose tippett, creating space so that we can sign a free agent at or above their worth. Lets say Danyle Pearce who we were reportedly interested in, but at 500k and with Tipp's "indecision" we were locked out. But say tipp told us in time and we were winning bidders at 500k, equalling Freo's offer.

What I see is that we get a nice enough player, fills a need, but we pay full tote odds on him, maybe more than he's worth but that's the cost of FA.

Secondly, as far as Tipp compensation goes, we currently have cap space to sign someone. We get that anyway regardless of how he departs.

How is that better than the 2 first rnd picks we get in trade (ref: brisbane offer) and the 2 firsts and 2 seconds we lost

So the deal becomes:
Option (A)
Cap space to sign FA

Or

Option (b)
A bunch of draft picks
And
Cap space to sign FA

How is (A) worth the same as (B)?

Given we get the cap in both cases how does the FA soften the blow of draft picks? When the alternative was having both?

is there something I have forgotten about?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

on FA will soften the blow from losing all these picks, I can't see it.

Exactly.

We would have had access to free agency anyway... and a lot of other cool stuff like money and draft picks.

 

[Tex200]

on FA will soften the blow from losing all these picks, I can't see it. Maybe someone taking that line can explain it to me?

We lose tippett, creating space so that we can sign a free agent at or above their worth. Lets say Danyle Pearce who we were reportedly interested in, but at 500k and with Tipp's "indecision" we were locked out. But say tipp told us in time and we were winning bidders at 500k, equalling Freo's offer.

What I see is that we get a nice enough player, fills a need, but we pay full tote odds on him, maybe more than he's worth but that's the cost of FA.

Secondly, as far as Tipp compensation goes, we currently have cap space to sign someone. We get that anyway regardless of how he departs.

How is that better than the 2 first rnd picks we get in trade (ref: brisbane offer) and the 2 firsts and 2 seconds we lost

So the deal becomes:
Option (A)
Cap space to sign FA

Or

Option (b)
A bunch of draft picks
And
Cap space to sign FA

How is (A) worth the same as (B)?

Given we get the cap in both cases how does the FA soften the blow of draft picks? When the alternative was having both?

is there something I have forgotten about?

I don't think anyone in their right mind would be thinking anything other than we are worse off today than we were at the start of trade period.

However there does come a point where you just have to look at the cards your dealt and figure what play you have. FA, trading for players or trading for decent picks is what we have. Positive thinkers figure a way to make that work.

 

[Sanders]

I don't think anyone in their right mind would be thinking anything other than we are worse off today than we were at the start of trade period.

However there does come a point where you just have to look at the cards your dealt and figure what play you have. FA, trading for players or trading for decent picks is what we have. Positive thinkers figure a way to make that work.

I agree, we are where we are

hat's not the same as saying FA softens the blow, which is an often repeated argument.

I don't think it does, in fact I think its largely irrelevant as its a constant in all outcomes.

Having said that, if we used our cap space to get Goddard I wouldn't even worry about how to spell draft picks *














* this is not true

 

[Tex200]

I agree, we are where we are

hat's not the same as saying FA softens the blow, which is an often repeated argument.

I don't think it does, in fact I think its largely irrelevant as its a constant in all outcomes.

Having said that, if we used our cap space to get Goddard I wouldn't even worry about how to spell draft picks *


I absolutely agree FA does not soften the blow.

I think what does is the state of our list. Only 10 players over 25 and yet so much talent and depth. I doubt we will keep them all happy as there are not too many retirements coming up. There will be good players not getting a game and will u.derstanably look elsewhere. This will open up trade opportunity.

As an example i believe the loser of the Jenkins/ McKernan battle will be hard to hold on to.











* this is not true

 

[Sanders]

I think the loser of the jenkins/mckernan battle will be out of the league.

 

[Elite Crow]

The issue with FA is the lack of quality available, and then the problem of enticing them to live in Adelaide

 

[teddys mum]

P.S please hang and quarter Tippsh#t if he is ever brave enough to play in Adelaide again. An absolute zero of a human being and the biggest merc the game has ever seen by a country mile.

I think West Coast supporters might disagree, one of their previous captains comes to mind - perhaps that is where KT got the inspiration from, and the Crows for the dodgy remuneration deal. Who knows, maybe KT will be dislocating shoulders and 'pressure pointing' before season end.

 

[Sanders]

The issue with FA is the lack of quality available, and then the problem of enticing them to live in Adelaide

The problem with FA is it's available to everyone and is not a unique advantage to us.

 

[Tex200]

I think the loser of the jenkins/mckernan battle will be out of the league.

Someone will want one of them. No question.

 

[Sanders]

Someone will want one of them. No question.

Why?

The league scrapyard is full of players who didn't make it

I was sure someone would want Matthew Bate

 

[Elite Crow]

I think West Coast supporters might disagree, one of their previous captains comes to mind - perhaps that is where KT got the inspiration from, and the Crows for the dodgy remuneration deal. Who knows, maybe KT will be dislocating shoulders and 'pressure pointing' before season end.

Did Juddy say he was going home only to go to Sydney for more money?

 

[brazilblue]

I think West Coast supporters might disagree, one of their previous captains comes to mind - perhaps that is where KT got the inspiration from, and the Crows for the dodgy remuneration deal. Who knows, maybe KT will be dislocating shoulders and 'pressure pointing' before season end.

Atleast he went home ya douse.
Your extra cap space is a joke ... how the reigning premier gets to keep all its players and then land sh#theap for nothing with a huge contract is a huge joke.
Karma is a wonderful thing.

You are also forgetting that Judd wanted west coast to be treated fairly, WHICH THEY WERE, left there after he had secured them a premiership as captain and gave them years of excellent service, including a brownlow.

What exactly has Tippet done?

Let me see ... NOTHING! Oh no ... cost the AFC a shedload without the benefit of a cap allowance and made some really sh#tty pie ads.

Never wish harm on a player but another concussion just seems rights for the supreme merc.

Like I said enjoy karma you twat its coming your way.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I think the loser of the jenkins/mckernan battle will be out of the league.

so we lose 4 talls in 4 years ......with no draft picks to replace quality??

doesn't make any sense at all to trade off a 22YO tall McKernan .......it's impossible to think Jenkins would be traded

We trade a a 22 YO with a 4 year investment with a view of getting a 1st round draft pick for another KPP that we have to put another 3 years into .......doesn't make any sense

Sure, trade a mid with a view of getting a KPP thru the draft ....that does make sense

 

[cmndstab]

FA does make up for losing our draft picks in a very slight way, in the sense that we would normally have several options available to us but would only realistically choose to exercise some of them. It's possible that a free agency option we might have chosen to ignore in 2013 in favour of bringing in a new draftee will now be taken, and so instead of simply losing the pick, we lose the difference between that pick and the free agent we end up chasing.

Of course, realistically, if the free agent was worth a damn we'd do it anyway so in practical terms it's a rubbish to imply that it will in any way make up for losing picks. It's almost as bad as claiming that adding Crouch to our list this year makes up for losing draft picks, when we already had him signed beforehand.

 

[Sanders]

so we lose 4 talls in 4 years ......with no draft picks to replace quality??

doesn't make any sense at all to trade off a 22YO tall McKernan .......it's impossible to think Jenkins would be traded

We trade a a 22 YO with a 4 year investment with a view of getting a 1st round draft pick for another KPP that we have to put another 3 years into .......doesn't make any sense

Sure, trade a mid with a view of getting a KPP thru the draft ....that does make sense

I think the context may have been lost.

Peter was suggesting that someone would poach the bloke who doesn't make it, and they would still be in demand

My counter proposition is that after a certain point if a guy doesn't make it we should not assume anyone else will want them either

 

[brazilblue]

Do you still have to take 3 kids in the ND?
Losing the first two rounds would most likely mean picking up deadwood that you would have to keep on the list for 2 years?
If so do you have any rookies that could be elevated in their place?

 

[Sanders]

FA does make up for losing our draft picks in a very slight way, in the sense that we would normally have several options available to us but would only realistically choose to exercise some of them. It's possible that a free agency option we might have chosen to ignore in 2013 in favour of bringing in a new draftee will now be taken, and so instead of simply losing the pick, we lose the difference between that pick and the free agent we end up chasing.

Ignoring cap implications, we draft for 3-5 years down the line; FA's are for help now.

Of course, realistically, if the free agent was worth a damn we'd do it anyway so in practical terms it's a rubbish to imply that it will in any way make up for losing picks. It's almost as bad as claiming that adding Crouch to our list this year makes up for losing draft picks, when we already had him signed beforehand.

Yup. The crouch argument frustrates me too. We paid for him last year, and not at give away prices.

I think we'd do that deal again with hindsight too, but he was an expensive buy back in 2011. In no way can he be seen rationally as a freebie in 2012

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I think the context may have been lost.

Peter was suggesting that someone would poach the bloke who doesn't make it, and they would still be in demand

My counter proposition is that after a certain point if a guy doesn't make it we should not assume anyone else will want them either

Talls tend to be given many more chances .....look at the way ruckmen are recruited these days

Why is it that some talls show nothing till mid career ......then flourish at a second club (Jolly, Ottens, ....even Maric)

Why so quick to get rid of 22YO talls that obviously has talent ......its IMO just every fan wants instant results

last year we had a dream run with injury ......won't happen again ...McKernan will get plenty of opportunities, and he knows that it'll only be because of his own performances if he fails in 2013
Players leave only if the opportunities aren't present .....clearly this won't be the case with McKernan ....obviously Iam a long suffering fan of his

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Do you still have to take 3 kids in the ND?
Losing the first two rounds would most likely mean picking up deadwood that you would have to keep on the list for 2 years?
If so do you have any rookies that could be elevated in their place?

You can use draft picks to upgrade rookies ...but yes you have the mandatory 3 draft picks

can also improve a draft pick by way of trade .....so there are ways, but in essence you're correct if you have dud rookies or are unable to trade in better draft picks