-
The Trade Period
As many will know over the years I've had a huge interest in the draft and trade periods.
The good clubs primary focus was to get the balance right in a never ending search for ways to improve their playing list. This was done after after they had completed an honest assessment of their strengths and weaknesses and they then mapped out a plan for the future.
I suspect the AFL sees both the trade and draft periods as a way of dominating the news stories and have tinkered with the process that had been in place for a number of years to either:
1) Draw it out a lot longer than it needs to be
2) Make it more in line with the hugely popular American professional sports
3) Try and create a buzz that culminates with a rushed final hour or two of the trade period.
I wouldn't even put it past the AFL to encourage teams to defer some of the more critical the trades to the last day to help create that feeding frenzy.
All this might sound like a decent approach for a business competing against sporting competitions with world wide appeal.
The problem for someone like me now is that the trade period has become a lot more than addressing gaps within the playing list of clubs its become more about acquiring points for father son selections or dumping money off the salary cap by trading good footballers for bugger all compensation. That doesn't sit well with me, it just doesn't.
This goes against what I believe to be the essence of the trading period. Contracts are being broken by so many players who are in the infancy of their career's, good draft picks are being traded to acquire later picks to top up draft points for father son or NGA picks. That just isn't right.
There is something fundamentally wrong that we aren't looking to trade Marcus Adams for the best draft pick we can get because it could work against us in our efforts to acquire Rhylee West.
It's wrong that a deal for Jack Scrimshaw can be completed for a basic upgrade in the draft order that might just be a few picks difference and it's especially wrong that Tom Scully can be offloaded for next to nothing because a club has salary cap issues.
How I would fix it:
Father son and NGA will cost each club their natural 2nd round pick moving to the 3rd and 4th picks etc if there is more than one.
This will stop this nonsense of trading draft picks for draft points. It won't be perfect but it's consistent.
If a player who isn't a Free agent etc wants to break a contract and go home then his club can trade with the clubs in that state to acquire the best deal for them. If a player requests for a contract to be broken they automatically lose the right to veto some clubs and the contract that is in place can not be reworked ie upgraded.
Players know the score, they receive an unprecedented amount of education that the the industry they are entering means you can end up playing anywhere. This will also stop players breaking contracts because another club back home can offer them a better deal.
Lift contracts for 1st round picks to a minimum of 3 years
This will give clubs a better chance of settling the player into their environment. Players are being chatted by other clubs before they have completed their first year so no wonder they are developing homesickness in almost epidemic proportions.
We simply have to get back to the trade period meaning something more than a Flight Centre departure lounge
Rant over
Western Bulldogs Football Club "Where it's cool to drool"
-
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 10 Likes
-
Re: The Trade Period
Really good post GVGjr.
I like the contract being a given and not able to be upgraded because you move. Obviously that would not stop movement where a promise for a higher next contract is guaranteed by the incoming club for the moving player.
Not sure on the second round for father/son/NGA players as that is a massive free kick on really good talent, but it would be simple to outlaw pure pick trading or add something that traded picks do not attract the discount that the natural pick gave for those players.
Life is to be Enjoyed not Endured
-
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 1 Likes
-
Re: The Trade Period
Interesting post GVG - I'd change a couple of things though
Instead of reducing the price on NGAs and FS players to a natural second, I'd remove priority access - no priority inside the top 10 for FS and none inside the 1st round for NGAs. The NGA selections are designed to provide pathways for otherwise marginalised players, but the guys like Heeney, Mills, Blakey, Thomas and so on aren't going to be lost to football forever without them. Keep the access open for later in the draft but there's no need for the protections on top-end talent. FS restriction is lesser because it's a cool intricacy of the game. I agree that the points system is undoubtedly flawed but it's better than a player like Hawkins or Tom Mitchell going as late as pick 40. I like BJ's suggestion of banning point trades better as an option too.
Players under rookie contracts should be held to them; your suggestion re: players braking contracts is a good one, and I'd extend rookie contracts to 3 years with a team option for a 4th. The last of my tolerance for players leaving clubs for "personal reasons" vanished as soon as I heard Jack Scrimshaw say that his "personal reason" for wanting to play for Hawthorn was barracking for them as a kid. If the players want the American system so much then give it to them
- I'm a visionary - Only here to confirm my biases -
-
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 4 Likes
-
Re: The Trade Period
With Bulldog Joe. Not being able to specify a club so you can be help over a barrel makes sense, longer contracts for draftees so than can get settled makes sense but the father sons for set picks is what gave Geelong such a big leg up. The current system isn't perfect and can use some refinement but I believe it's fairer than what we had.
Originally Posted by
Happy Days
Interesting post GVG - I'd change a couple of things though
Instead of reducing the price on NGAs and FS players to a natural second, I'd remove priority access - no priority inside the top 10 for FS and none inside the 1st round for NGAs. The NGA selections are designed to provide pathways for otherwise marginalised players, but the guys like Heeney, Mills, Blakey, Thomas and so on aren't going to be lost to football forever without them. Keep the access open for later in the draft but there's no need for the protections on top-end talent. FS restriction is lesser because it's a cool intricacy of the game. I agree that the points system is undoubtedly flawed but it's better than a player like Hawkins or Tom Mitchell going as late as pick 40. I like BJ's suggestion of banning point trades better as an option too.
I like this suggestion but I'd still like the ability for cubs to take F/S in the top 10. If West were looking at being top 10 it'd hurt to see him running around in Essendon colours.
-
Re: The Trade Period
Originally Posted by
hujsh
With Bulldog Joe. Not being able to specify a club so you can be help over a barrel makes sense, longer contracts for draftees so than can get settled makes sense but the father sons for set picks is what gave Geelong such a big leg up. The current system isn't perfect and can use some refinement but I believe it's fairer than what we had.
I just don't like the fact that cubs are trading draft picks for draft points as it just goes against the value of what is supposed to happen
I also hate all these contracts being broken under the guise of wanting to go home but in turn limiting the club that selected just one club to deal with
I don't believe for one second think things are better now they were before.
The AFL realised that the trade period was a snore fest and now it's become an accounting game
It's a contrived outcome by the AFL that blackmails clubs to break contracts and to create news.
Plough on trade radio now is challenging the points structure.
Western Bulldogs Football Club "Where it's cool to drool"
-
Re: The Trade Period
Originally Posted by
GVGjr
I just don't like the fact that cubs are trading draft picks for draft points as it just goes against the value of what is supposed to happen
I also hate all these contracts being broken under the guise of wanting to go home but in turn limiting the club that selected just one club to deal with
I don't believe for one second think things are better now they were before.
The AFL realised that the trade period was a snore fest and now it's become an accounting game
It's a contrived outcome by the AFL that blackmails clubs to break contracts and to create news.
Plough on trade radio now is challenging the points structure.
100% agree on the bolded.
Perhaps it's just a difference of values re the bidding system. I'd rather clubs pay an appropriate/fair price for what they're receiving. I'm not for some clubs overpaying to continue the family tradition while others get top talent for peanuts. If there's a big of draft point maneuvering as a consequence of that then I can live with it.
I think there's a middle ground somewhere though that might deal with both issues. Happy Days made a good suggestion (even if I don't 100% agree with every aspect)
-
Re: The Trade Period
Guys like Heeney and Mills probably would've gone into rugby had the academies not existed or if there wasn't an easy way to stay in Sydney. Part of that is the fact that the NRL doesn't have a draft and you can bring players through at their local club, which ensures that the players get to stay in their home environment.
-
Re: The Trade Period
I would make another adjustment.
When a club lands a free agent, they lose their next pick immediately after the compensation pick is determined, so the rest of the picks down the line don't keep sliding further and further back, punishing teams that have got no benefit from the move(s).
This effects clubs abilities to bid on FS and academy picks. as more and more teams load up with free agents, you see the value of the picks you initially had, lose more and more currency as the trade week drags on.
So, for example.
This year the Tigers land Lynch.
The compensation pick is pick 3.
Richmond lose their next pick in the draft after pick 3.
They essentially get Lynch for pick 18.
This goes for all free agents.
Each team lose their next pick after compensation is decided.
that sound fair?
-
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 4 Likes
-
Re: The Trade Period
My theory on f/s acquisitions has long been if the father played 100 games then you have to use a first round pick 150 games 2nd round 200 a third round with 250 plus being a free hit. It won fix all the problems but is at least fair and equitable
bulldogs are forever not just when they are winning
-
Re: The Trade Period
Originally Posted by
strebla
My theory on f/s acquisitions has long been if the father played 100 games then you have to use a first round pick 150 games 2nd round 200 a third round with 250 plus being a free hit. It won fix all the problems but is at least fair and equitable
Yeah I like that.
I hate the points system for F/S with a passion. if you want to destroy all the romanticism in footy (and footy is 99% romance) then it's a really good way to achieve it.
They say Burt Lancaster has one, but I don't believe them.
-
Re: The Trade Period
Originally Posted by
Dancin' Douggy
I would make another adjustment.
When a club lands a free agent, they lose their next pick immediately after the compensation pick is determined, so the rest of the picks down the line don't keep sliding further and further back, punishing teams that have got no benefit from the move(s).
This effects clubs abilities to bid on FS and academy picks. as more and more teams load up with free agents, you see the value of the picks you initially had, lose more and more currency as the trade week drags on.
So, for example.
This year the Tigers land Lynch.
The compensation pick is pick 3.
Richmond lose their next pick in the draft after pick 3.
They essentially get Lynch for pick 18.
This goes for all free agents.
Each team lose their next pick after compensation is decided.
that sound fair?
Would get messy now that Clubs are trading away their future picks.
-
Re: The Trade Period
You know what I really think?
Ditch free agency altogether because players just act as if they're free agents anyway.
Contracts don't mean anything at all.
-
Re: The Trade Period
Originally Posted by
Dancin' Douggy
You know what I really think?
Ditch free agency altogether because players just act as if they're free agents anyway.
Contracts don't mean anything at all.
Contracts do mean something , two things 1 you can make the club or player stick to it.
2 it allows a club to bargain or a player to get more money if both agree to break it. Contracts can only be broken if both agree to it.
Bring back the biff
-
Re: The Trade Period
Great post.
The system is out of kilter, but can be balanced out by scrapping the compo pick, scrapping the points system and giving clubs the power to trade with their preferred option. You could argue for FA to start earlier if players rebuked the idea they can get shipped anywhere.
-
Re: The Trade Period
I keep reading people saying to 'Scrap the compensation pick...'.
Ummm - how is it 'FREE' agency if the club to where the player is moving has to give up a pick?
I don't have an issue with the compensation picks - just with the fact that the formula for determining what they are seems to be a complete mystery!
What should I tell her? She's going to ask.