Strategy Trade and List Management Thread Part 8 (opposition supporters - READ posting rules before posting)

[_Mike_]

Opposition supporters coming to troll , you have been warned

 

[St 07]

Why?

I loved Scott Welsh

 

[Mojorisin]

They somewhat have too,

They have a lot of average midfielders on their list he is the one OOC

His inability to get on the park doesn't help either. He is "good enough" when fit.

 

[ossie_21]

Of all the duds on Essendon's list they delist Setterfield, who is actually a decent player.

He’s made of glass, so I don’t think any club would fully commit to him unless it’s a rookie spot

 

[Thunderoad]

I understand Warren Tredrea

Warren Tredrea

Age

46

Ht

194cm

Wt

96kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.3

4star

K

10.1

4star

HB

4.2

3star

M

6.9

5star

T

1.4

3star

G

2.2

5star

No current season stats available

D

5.4

2star

K

2.8

1star

HB

2.6

3star

M

1.2

2star

T

0.6

3star

G

1.0

4star

is a free agent and available to join our board.

He does bring a fairly unique set of beliefs to the table.

Should seriously consider it.

 

[Bowski]

Could Andrew Mountbatten Windsor be useful in the forward pocket? We know he is particularly ruthless when it comes to to dealing with inexperienced youngsters on the opposition.



I’ll see myself out.

His cardio is insane, has in fact never broken into a sweat.

 

[BomToydd]

I understand Warren Tredrea is a free agent and available to join our board.

He does bring a fairly unique set of beliefs to the table.

Should seriously consider it.

Think he's more suited to Geelong. Can handle alternative player payments
Would probably increase the IQ of the place too

 

[coxman]

Not sure if it’s been mentioned on here, is there a possibility we trade out our first round pick this year for a future 2026 first rounder next year to help with the butters chase next year?

 

[weltschmerz]

Not sure if it’s been mentioned on here, is there a possibility we trade out our first round pick this year for a future 2026 first rounder next year to help with the butters chase next year?

Yeah I reckon so

 

[_Cerberus_]

Yeah I reckon so

Possible, but I hope we do not. It would mean we would potentially go four straight drafts without having made a single first round pick. Since Butters may wipe out three years of first round picks. That can set any team back awhile.

 

[Mojorisin]

Possible, but I hope we do not. It would mean we would potentially go four straight drafts without having made a single first round pick. Since Butters may wipe out three years of first round picks. That can set any team back awhile.

If there is any time to do it 27 draft is the one to do it in.

 

[doggiesin08]

If there is any time to do it 27 draft is the one to do it in.

I'm getting more confident we can get Butters as a free agent if we play it correctly.

Deal structure:

• You make the actual deal $9.0 mover 6 years so $1.5m per year, but you initially structure it as a 2-year deal for $6.0 million
• We'd basically just need Bont to agree to amend his contact to shift all of this 2027 and 2028 money into 2029 and 2030.
• That would be incredibly challenging for Port to match, and if they do then you can't begrudge Butters making an extra $6.0m over 2-years and then he becomes an unrestricted FA at the end of 2028.
• Then the moment he signs you bang on an extra 4-year extension for another $3.0m to get you back to the $9.0m over 6-year total and re-spread the payments for him and Bont.

As far as I'm aware there was no actual crack-down on this from the AFL post Danniher moving to Brisbane, they simply changed the FA compensation formula to consider the total contract value and not just the average per year - but a $6.0 million contract would still definitely trigger band 1. Carlton did a similarly dodgy structure for Jack Martin through the pre-season draft where he put a $2.0m over 2-year contract on his head, and then immediately renegotiated to $3.0m over 5-years.

Maybe you also just throw Port a little carrot to really make them get out of the way and for Butters to feel like they got value beyond just the compensation pick, like trading an extra first rounder for a role player - possibly including a 3rd club to muddy the waters on the overpay. Basically paying a first rounder for another Budarick type addition with the overpay accruing to Port. And then at the end of it hopefully its dodgy enough that the AFL scraps the FA compensation nonsense.

 

[Golden_6]

I'm getting more confident we can get Butters as a free agent if we play it correctly.

Deal structure:

• You make the actual deal $9.0 mover 6 years so $1.5m per year, but you initially structure it as a 2-year deal for $6.0 million
• We'd basically just need Bont to agree to amend his contact to shift all of this 2027 and 2028 money into 2029 and 2030.
• That would be incredibly challenging for Port to match, and if they do then you can't begrudge Butters making an extra $6.0m over 2-years and then he becomes an unrestricted FA at the end of 2028.
• Then the moment he signs you bang on an extra 4-year extension for another $3.0m to get you back to the $9.0m over 6-year total and re-spread the payments for him and Bont.

As far as I'm aware there was no actual crack-down on this from the AFL post Danniher moving to Brisbane, they simply changed the FA compensation formula to consider the total contract value and not just the average per year - but a $6.0 million contract would still definitely trigger band 1. Carlton did a similarly dodgy structure for Jack Martin through the pre-season draft where he put a $2.0m over 2-year contract on his head, and then immediately renegotiated to $3.0m over 5-years.

Maybe you also just throw Port a little carrot to really make them get out of the way and for Butters to feel like they got value beyond just the compensation pick, like trading an extra first rounder for a role player - possibly including a 3rd club to muddy the waters on the overpay. Basically paying a first rounder for another Budarick type addition with the overpay accruing to Port. And then at the end of it hopefully its dodgy enough that the AFL scraps the FA compensation nonsense.

I’m not sure Bont would be too keen at playing for free for a couple of years (yes I’m aware he’d receive the money in later years).

 

[Mojorisin]

I'm getting more confident we can get Butters as a free agent if we play it correctly.

Deal structure:

• You make the actual deal $9.0 mover 6 years so $1.5m per year, but you initially structure it as a 2-year deal for $6.0 million
• We'd basically just need Bont to agree to amend his contact to shift all of this 2027 and 2028 money into 2029 and 2030.
• That would be incredibly challenging for Port to match, and if they do then you can't begrudge Butters making an extra $6.0m over 2-years and then he becomes an unrestricted FA at the end of 2028.
• Then the moment he signs you bang on an extra 4-year extension for another $3.0m to get you back to the $9.0m over 6-year total and re-spread the payments for him and Bont.

As far as I'm aware there was no actual crack-down on this from the AFL post Danniher moving to Brisbane, they simply changed the FA compensation formula to consider the total contract value and not just the average per year - but a $6.0 million contract would still definitely trigger band 1. Carlton did a similarly dodgy structure for Jack Martin through the pre-season draft where he put a $2.0m over 2-year contract on his head, and then immediately renegotiated to $3.0m over 5-years.

Maybe you also just throw Port a little carrot to really make them get out of the way and for Butters to feel like they got value beyond just the compensation pick, like trading an extra first rounder for a role player - possibly including a 3rd club to muddy the waters on the overpay. Basically paying a first rounder for another Budarick type addition with the overpay accruing to Port. And then at the end of it hopefully its dodgy enough that the AFL scraps the FA compensation nonsense.

If port finish bottom 4 (Hopefully) they likely wouldn't match anyway.

 

[Bulldogs85]

If port finish bottom 4 (Hopefully) they likely wouldn't match anyway.

Port Adelaide will be matching regardless were they finish

 

[doggiesin08]

Port Adelaide will be matching regardless were they finish

I’m less and less convinced on this. There’s no way matching, with no FA compensation pick created out of thin air, gives them a better outcome than a pre agreed deal that gives them that same pick and more.

If our best true offer would be R1 + F1 + FF1; then it’s in everyone’s interest (using extremes) to instead not match and pre-agree a trade of our F1 + FF1 for their FF4.

• We save our R1 (and get a FF4)
• They get the compo (let’s call it pick 4) rather then our 1R (let’s call it pick 12 to 18) - on the DVI that’s an extra mid-late 1R of value.

There are obviously many ways to do this, and you possibly include other clubs to muddy the waters and not make it look too egregious; but the point is when you can collude to create a top 4 pick out of thin air then there will be a way to make both us and Port better off.

 

[doggiesin08]

I’m not sure Bont would be too keen at playing for free for a couple of years (yes I’m aware he’d receive the money in later years).

He doesn’t, see:

• Then the moment he [Butters] signs you bang on an extra 4-year extension for another $3.0m to get you back to the $9.0m over 6-year total and re-spread the payments for him and Bont.

As soon as Butters joins you put his contract back to where it started, and shift the excess Butters money from 2027 and 2028 into his extension years.

It’s just a silly game you play to officially have the cap room to structure the initial 2-year offer to Butters. But it’s a silly game the AFL has precedent on allowing with Joe Danniher and Jack Martin.

 

[flipper83]

I’m less and less convinced on this. There’s no way matching, with no FA compensation pick created out of thin air, gives them a better outcome than a pre agreed deal that gives them that same pick and more.

If our best true offer would be R1 + F1 + FF1; then it’s in everyone’s interest (using extremes) to instead not match and pre-agree a trade of our F1 + FF1 for their FF4.

• We save our R1 (and get a FF4)
• They get the compo (let’s call it pick 4) rather then our 1R (let’s call it pick 12 to 18) - on the DVI that’s an extra mid-late 1R of value.

There are obviously many ways to do this, and you possibly include other clubs to muddy the waters and not make it look too egregious; but the point is when you can collude to create a top 4 pick out of thin air then there will be a way to make both us and Port better off.

The AFL won't allow a trade like that to go through. They have the ability to block trades that are structured like this as a way to facilitate other deals.
We'd have to find some way to make it look more equal, but I do agree it would be silly but to find some way to incorporate free agency compensation into the deal

 

[Mojorisin]

Port Adelaide will be matching regardless were they finish

If they're getting pick 4 as compensation I doubt they match. What will we be able to give them? Likely a pick in the teens that year before a pick in the 20s the following two Tassie affected years.it could of course involve players but that relies on someone wanting to go there.

 

[stefoid]

If they're getting pick 4 as compensation I doubt they match. What will we be able to give them? Likely a pick in the teens that year before a pick in the 20s the following two Tassie affected years.it could of course involve players but that relies on someone wanting to go there.

or 'someone' going to tassie

 

[iambrilliant]

If they're getting pick 4 as compensation I doubt they match. What will we be able to give them? Likely a pick in the teens that year before a pick in the 20s the following two Tassie affected years.it could of course involve players but that relies on someone wanting to go there.

Is there something dodgy we can do like Brisbane always seems to do back door deals . Port let butters go as a free agent and we give them a first rounder for one of there fringe players who’d only be worth a 3rd rounder ? Just spit balling here.

Trade them Bailey Williams for unders . 4th rounder in a separate deal.

 

[Mojorisin]

Is there something dodgy we can do like Brisbane always seems to do back door deals . Port let butters go as a free agent and we give them a first rounder for one of there fringe players who’d only be worth a 3rd rounder ? Just spit balling here.

Trade them Bailey Williams for unders . 4th rounder in a separate deal.

If the AFL let the trade through.

 

[iambrilliant]

If the AFL let the trade through.

We are not one of the cash cows so maybe not then

 

[geoffjennings79]

Not that it matters, but over many years (going back to Eagleton/Montgomery) we've always traded in good faith with Port. Possibly because we're kindred spirits with our relative standing in respective states. Hopefully a Butters move would see both clubs benefit. I'm not sure trying to rort the system as explicitly as suggested above will be let through to the keeper, but I'm sure Power and Regan have time and capability to work some magic along similar lines which won't face too many obstacles.

As long as it doesn't involve David Koch and Warren Tredrea

Warren Tredrea

Age

46

Ht

194cm

Wt

96kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.3

4star

K

10.1

4star

HB

4.2

3star

M

6.9

5star

T

1.4

3star

G

2.2

5star

No current season stats available

D

5.4

2star

K

2.8

1star

HB

2.6

3star

M

1.2

2star

T

0.6

3star

G

1.0

4star

doing a double-act stand-up routine at the CSM next year as part of the deal...!

 

[BigFloppa]

I'm fine with spending a few years with no first round picks. We won't feel the effects of that until 2030+ anyway. Hard to imagine we couldn't snag at least one flag with Butters, Bont and Darcy on the same team. We've got plenty of great young talent under 22 anyway.

 

[doggiesin08]

The AFL won't allow a trade like that to go through. They have the ability to block trades that are structured like this as a way to facilitate other deals.
We'd have to find some way to make it look more equal, but I do agree it would be silly but to find some way to incorporate free agency compensation into the deal

Agree and I was using extremes, but there will be a way to muddy the waters and you can’t compete with a pick 4 being created out of thin air.