| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
AN_Inkling
Joined: 06 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: Free Agent Compensation Picks |  |
|
Get rid of 'em.
Devalues the picks of all other teams (ours will probably drop from 7 to 9 this year) and doubly compensates for a player leaving (free up salary and for some reason get a pick). That's not even getting into the silliness of using it as part of equalisation, it's almost as bad as the old priority pick system. A young team loses an older player and gets pick two in the draft? That's not compensation it's incentive, they'd be mad not to take it. Real free agency means you lose a player and can then chase another with the freed up cap, no compensation needed.
Pelchen, in the article below, argues for the signing team to compensate the team that loses a player rather than magically adding in picks, but we'd be better to do away with compensation entirely.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-09-08/firstround-free-agency-picks-unfair-pelchen
_________________
Well done boys! |
|
|
|
 |
derkd
Joined: 29 May 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
AFL does have discretion on what pick is given, i would imagine/hope the AFL takes into account more then just what he is being paid. Original draft order yes, and also injury history...If a player has hardly played senior football for two to three years you could hardly call them a integral cog in the side. Anyone remember how the Hawks got screwed over on the Buddy pick. In that scenario success = penalty. Never mind that he was the best player in the game and that if anyone should have commanded a pick in the top three of the draft he should have. In my mind the system is far too messy.
_________________
"To know nothing of events before your birth, is to forever remain a child" - Cicero (Roman Lawyer/Senator) 46 BCE.
Last edited by derkd on Tue Sep 08, 2015 11:52 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
inxs88
Joined: 17 Aug 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| derkd wrote: | | AFL does have desecration on what pick is given, i would imagine/hope the AFL takes into account more then just what he is being paid. Original draft order yes, and also injury history...If a player has hardly played senior football for two to three years you could hardly call them a integral cog in the side. Anyone remember how the Hawks got screwed over on the Buddy pick. In that scenario success = penalty. Never mind that he was the best player in the game and that if anyone should have commanded a pick in the top three of the draft he should have. In my mind the system is far too messy. |
They have discretion too!
_________________
I love the Pies, hate Carlscum |
|
|
|
|
derkd
Joined: 29 May 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| inxs88 wrote: | | derkd wrote: | | AFL does have desecration on what pick is given, i would imagine/hope the AFL takes into account more then just what he is being paid. Original draft order yes, and also injury history...If a player has hardly played senior football for two to three years you could hardly call them a integral cog in the side. Anyone remember how the Hawks got screwed over on the Buddy pick. In that scenario success = penalty. Never mind that he was the best player in the game and that if anyone should have commanded a pick in the top three of the draft he should have. In my mind the system is far too messy. |
They have discretion too! |
auto text plus poor spelling is a bad combination.
_________________
"To know nothing of events before your birth, is to forever remain a child" - Cicero (Roman Lawyer/Senator) 46 BCE. |
|
|
|
|
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
The AFL are socialists, and like any good socialist they're always happy to give out other people's treasure. They just can't quite get to grips with this free market player movement idea.
They're just lucky nobody launched a restraint of trade case. |
|
|
|
|
Rexy17
Joined: 09 Oct 2006
Location: Ballarat
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I think I posted this before.
If they have to have a compo pick for losing a player, that pick should be the pick before/after the clubs pick that the player has gone too.
eg. Frawley went to Hawks, Melb got pick 2 or 3 for him, under my system they would have had a pick around 18.
Just a tad fairer based on Frawleys value. IMO
_________________
B.U.M.S ROCK...That's Ballarat United Magpies Supporters.....Long trip but even longer hangovers! |
|
|
|
|
piedys 
Heeeeeeere's Dyso!!!
Joined: 04 Sep 2003
Location: Resident Forum Psychopath since 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| derkd wrote: | | AFL does have discretion on what pick is given, i would imagine/hope the AFL takes into account more then just what he is being paid. Original draft order yes, and also injury history...If a player has hardly played senior football for two to three years you could hardly call them a integral cog in the side. Anyone remember how the Hawks got screwed over on the Buddy pick. In that scenario success = penalty. Never mind that he was the best player in the game and that if anyone should have commanded a pick in the top three of the draft he should have. In my mind the system is far too messy. |
Spot on sir.
The AFL f*cked this system with the Franklin debacle.
Not that we care that the Whoreks got screwed, but the value put on hack Frawley last year bordered on farcical.
It's a bigger chooklotto than their tribunal system.
_________________
M I L L A N E 4 2 forever |
|
|
|
|
qldmagpie67
Joined: 18 Dec 2008
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| piedys wrote: | | derkd wrote: | | AFL does have discretion on what pick is given, i would imagine/hope the AFL takes into account more then just what he is being paid. Original draft order yes, and also injury history...If a player has hardly played senior football for two to three years you could hardly call them a integral cog in the side. Anyone remember how the Hawks got screwed over on the Buddy pick. In that scenario success = penalty. Never mind that he was the best player in the game and that if anyone should have commanded a pick in the top three of the draft he should have. In my mind the system is far too messy. |
Spot on sir.
The AFL f*cked this system with the Franklin debacle.
Not that we care that the Whoreks got screwed, but the value put on hack Frawley last year bordered on farcical.
It's a bigger chooklotto than their tribunal system. |
Or kings cross hooker lotto Dyso 😜
But seriously I think they look at the importance of the player in that side also.
Frawley was in th top 2/3 players at the demons in a side running last most years. Franklin was in top 5/6 but the Hawks could still be competitive without him makes a difference when they look at it.
For mine using this principal Kruezer is a second rounder his injury prone and when he does play his impact in minimal. Only scum fans believe is was/is the second coming of Christ.
Dyso you should know full well anything the AFL touch or try to fix or try to legislate becomes a absolute mockery. |
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
what the Blues get for Kruetzer will depend upon how much the AFL wants a competitive Carlton. I suspect they will find a way to make Kreutzer worth a number 2 pick.
_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
derkd
Joined: 29 May 2013
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| E wrote: | | what the Blues get for Kruetzer will depend upon how much the AFL wants a competitive Carlton. I suspect they will find a way to make Kreutzer worth a number 2 pick. |
I have a feeling the AFL will do this too, the problem they fail to reconcile is that by trying to make a "fairer system" they are actually making it increasingly distorted.
Carlton gets Pick.1 and Pick.2 ...Brisbane a side that is struggling just as greatly as the Blues (even more so when you consider how many players and talent are leaving) get pushed back meaning there growth will continue to stagnant. I just dont see it as fair...now that the expansion clubs are settled into the system....lets just put the draft order back to normal...free agent goes....will that is bad luck to the club that loses them...but a win in the salary cap space they re-open. I don't understand why clubs needs to be compensated...And i mean as a club we can't complain we good very well compensated from the Daisy departure...and probably got over his actual worth when you consider his injury.
_________________
"To know nothing of events before your birth, is to forever remain a child" - Cicero (Roman Lawyer/Senator) 46 BCE. |
|
|
|
|
E
Joined: 05 May 2010
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| derkd wrote: | | E wrote: | | what the Blues get for Kruetzer will depend upon how much the AFL wants a competitive Carlton. I suspect they will find a way to make Kreutzer worth a number 2 pick. |
I have a feeling the AFL will do this too, the problem they fail to reconcile is that by trying to make a "fairer system" they are actually making it increasingly distorted.
Carlton gets Pick.1 and Pick.2 ...Brisbane a side that is struggling just as greatly as the Blues (even more so when you consider how many players and talent are leaving) get pushed back meaning there growth will continue to stagnant. I just dont see it as fair...now that the expansion clubs are settled into the system....lets just put the draft order back to normal...free agent goes....will that is bad luck to the club that loses them...but a win in the salary cap space they re-open. I don't understand why clubs needs to be compensated...And i mean as a club we can't complain we good very well compensated from the Daisy departure...and probably got over his actual worth when you consider his injury. |
In the US, the club has to make a qualifying offer to the player in order for the draft pick to be triggered and the salary of the qualifying offer has to be significantly high to justify a first round pick. In the Australian context, I would say the qualifying offer would need to be, say $600k. If the player declines to accept that contract, then the club that loses the player gets a pick at the end of the first round. it is done this way to ensure that only players that are of high quality AND that the club doesn't want to lose, result in compensation to the team.
In my mind, this is the fairest way to do it. For example, if Carlton isn't prepared to pay Kreutzer $600k, then why on earth should they get a draft pick that attracts players oif that caliber.
_________________
Ohhh, the Premiership's a cakewalk ....... |
|
|
|
|
neil 
Joined: 08 Sep 2005
Location: Queensland
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| E wrote: | | what the Blues get for Kruetzer will depend upon how much the AFL wants a competitive Carlton. I suspect they will find a way to make Kreutzer worth a number 2 pick. |
Yes and some here want it to happen by trading Witts and then needing a ruckman get Kreuzer.
_________________
Carlscum 120 years being cheating scum |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| I reckon they're going to give Brisbane a priority pick and then Carlton 2 & 3. |
|
|
|
|
swoop42 
Whatcha gonna do when he comes for you?
Joined: 02 Aug 2008
Location: The 18
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| E wrote: | | what the Blues get for Kruetzer will depend upon how much the AFL wants a competitive Carlton. I suspect they will find a way to make Kreutzer worth a number 2 pick. |
Brisbane are a bigger basket case in a non football state.
I get the feeling the AFL don't want the scum picking up the best two key position players in this years draft when the Lions are desperate for Schache who has a Brisbane connection.
I suspect if Kruezer was to activate band 1 compensation with a free agency move then the AFL will award Brisbane a priority pick assuring that they get pick 1 and Schache. |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
