Trade News

[Jeanette54]

Is anybody else noting that all we seem to see in the media is news of players leaving, ie. Sean Higgins, Jason Tutt and Liam Jones.

The other thing I notice is that the more powerful clubs are just seeming to become stronger, and have been very active players in the trade race.

Hopefully this is just because we are flying under the radar, and the announcement will be made shortly that Patrick Dangerfield and Jake Carlisle are headed to Western Oval.

[Bornadog]

Re: Trade News

Is anybody else noting that all we seem to see in the media is news of players leaving, ie. Sean Higgins, Jason Tutt and Liam Jones.

The other thing I notice is that the more powerful clubs are just seeming to become stronger, and have been very active players in the trade race.

Hopefully this is just because we are flying under the radar, and the announcement will be made shortly that Patrick Dangerfield and Jake Carlisle are headed to Western Oval.

You happy to lose first round pick plus one good player for Patrick?

[F'scary]

Re: Trade News

Is anybody else noting that all we seem to see in the media is news of players leaving, ie. Sean Higgins, Jason Tutt and Liam Jones.

The other thing I notice is that the more powerful clubs are just seeming to become stronger, and have been very active players in the trade race.

Hopefully this is just because we are flying under the radar, and the announcement will be made shortly that Patrick Dangerfield and Jake Carlisle are headed to Western Oval.

Re your first two paragraphs, J54: so true, sometimes I feel that clubs like ours are just being treated as nurseries for the advantaged clubs like Sydney, GWS & GC in particular. We mop up whatever we can get after the advantaged clubs take the cream; if we happen to land or develop a star, next contract they'll come in with the offer that can't be refused.

[FrediKanoute]

Re: Trade News

Re your first two paragraphs, J54: so true, sometimes I feel that clubs like ours are just being treated as nurseries for the advantaged clubs like Sydney, GWS & GC in particular. We mop up whatever we can get after the advantaged clubs take the cream; if we happen to land or develop a star, next contract they'll come in with the offer that can't be refused.

This is the reality of Free Agency - just look at the Premier League in the UK (well football generally). When you give players free agency rights to "choose" which club they want to go to you effectively create 2 classes - developers and users. We the Bulldogs are developers. We draft young talent, nurture them as footballers and then see them walk to "Users" who can pay more and offer regular finals football.

As a consuming public we have been conditioned for the last 25 years that AFL is cyclical. Clubs draft young talent, it is developed, emerges and ultimately drags the club up the ladder into finals footy, then as the absence of high draft picks stacks up and talent ages, the club drops back down into a rebuild - we have even developed terminology around this.

Free Agency is a dynamic which will alter this. If you are a successful club, why develop? Yes you will draft and develop a solid core of players, but if you are regularly playing finals then just like a team in the UEFA Champions League you will naturally attract top talent, perpetuating your successful cycle. Clubs like the Bulldogs will have to pay "way, way, way" over to attract the same talent, so instead of the salary cap acting as a ceiling for rich clubs, it acts as a net, holding back poorer clubs.

For example, Frawley from Melbourne is a free agent and a good player. Not a great player. If the Bulldogs were to chase him they would probably need to offer somewhere around $750k to $1m to entice him to the club - clearly overs! A club like Geelong or Hawthorn could probably offer $500k and the promise of immediate finals football - they will get the player and have more cap room to chase potentially another.

Worse is what we are seeing with our young talent leaving - not so much Jones and Tutt, but Higgins is a classic example. Lets pretend that Higgins wasn't injured for half of his career and had become a player bordering on Elite. His walking to a successful club because they offered more cash or the chance to play finals football, would have a twofold effect 1) set back our playing list by removing an elite player; and 2) send a signal to other developing players that the Bulldogs are just a nursery.

The solution.....if we are going to get ahead of the game, then the solution is to really chase hard players in the 21/22/23 year old bracket, as they are not likely to become free agents until the latter part of their career. They are right now the "moneyball" buys. Yes you will pay more for potential because they are still unfinished, but if they make it you will have them for the cream of their career - this is why Jones and Tutt leaving for nix is such an issue - ideally in list management terms we have to be able to make a call earlier on guys and be prepared to trade them out before they walk.

[bulldogtragic]

Re: Trade News

This is the reality of Free Agency - just look at the Premier League in the UK (well football generally). When you give players free agency rights to "choose" which club they want to go to you effectively create 2 classes - developers and users. We the Bulldogs are developers. We draft young talent, nurture them as footballers and then see them walk to "Users" who can pay more and off regular finals football.

As a consuming public we have been conditioned for the last 25 years that AFL is cyclical. Clubs draft young talent, it is developed, emerges and ultimately drags the club up the ladder into finals footy, then as the absence of high draft picks stacks up and talent ages, the club drops back down into a rebuild - we have even developed terminology around this.

Free Agency is a dynamic which will alter this. If you are a successful club, why develop? Yes you will draft and develop a solid core of players, but if you are regularly playing finals then just like a team in the EUAFA Champions League you will naturally attract top talent, perpetuating your successful cycle. Clubs like the Bulldogs will have to pay "way, way, way" over to attract the same talent, so instead of the salary cap acting as a ceiling for rich clubs, it acts as a net, holding back poorer clubs.

For example, Frawley from Melbourne is a free agent and a good player. Not a great player. If the Bulldogs were to chase him they would probably need to offer somewhere around $750k to $1m to entice him to the club - clearly overs! A club like Geelong or Hawthorn could probably offer $500k and the promise of immediate finals football - they will get the player and have more cap room to chase potentially another.

Worse is what we are seeing with our young talent leaving - not so much Jones and Tutt, but Higgins is a classic example. Lets pretend that Higgins wasn't injured for half of his career and had become a player bordering on Elite. His walking to a successful club because they offered more cash or the chance to play finals football, would have a twofold effect 1) set back our playing list by removing an elite player; and 2) send a signal to other developing players that the Bulldogs are just a nursery.

The solution.....if we are going to get ahead of the game, then the solution is to really chase hard players in the 21/22/23 year old bracket, as they are not likely to become free agents until the latter part of their career. They are right now the "moneyball" buys. Yes you will pay more for potential because they are still unfinished, but if they make it you will have them for the cream of their career - this is why Jones and Tutt leaving for nix is such an issue - ideally in list management terms we have to be able to make a call earlier on guys and be prepared to trade them out before they walk.

There needs to be a 'like thought and expression of same' and 'not like' what the topic is.

[Remi Moses]

Re: Trade News

I think one of the few things I agreed with Sockeye on was F/A
It's the work of the footy devil.
We won't attract anyone until we're decent and on the way up.
Anyone now , and we'd be overpaying

[Eastdog]

Re: Trade News

Jones
Tutt
Higgins

All 3 have left us so who in your opinions would we get for these players.

[Nuggety Back Pocket]

Re: Trade News

This is the reality of Free Agency - just look at the Premier League in the UK (well football generally). When you give players free agency rights to "choose" which club they want to go to you effectively create 2 classes - developers and users. We the Bulldogs are developers. We draft young talent, nurture them as footballers and then see them walk to "Users" who can pay more and offer regular finals football.

As a consuming public we have been conditioned for the last 25 years that AFL is cyclical. Clubs draft young talent, it is developed, emerges and ultimately drags the club up the ladder into finals footy, then as the absence of high draft picks stacks up and talent ages, the club drops back down into a rebuild - we have even developed terminology around this.

Free Agency is a dynamic which will alter this. If you are a successful club, why develop? Yes you will draft and develop a solid core of players, but if you are regularly playing finals then just like a team in the UEFA Champions League you will naturally attract top talent, perpetuating your successful cycle. Clubs like the Bulldogs will have to pay "way, way, way" over to attract the same talent, so instead of the salary cap acting as a ceiling for rich clubs, it acts as a net, holding back poorer clubs.

For example, Frawley from Melbourne is a free agent and a good player. Not a great player. If the Bulldogs were to chase him they would probably need to offer somewhere around $750k to $1m to entice him to the club - clearly overs! A club like Geelong or Hawthorn could probably offer $500k and the promise of immediate finals football - they will get the player and have more cap room to chase potentially another.

Worse is what we are seeing with our young talent leaving - not so much Jones and Tutt, but Higgins is a classic example. Lets pretend that Higgins wasn't injured for half of his career and had become a player bordering on Elite. His walking to a successful club because they offered more cash or the chance to play finals football, would have a twofold effect 1) set back our playing list by removing an elite player; and 2) send a signal to other developing players that the Bulldogs are just a nursery.

The solution.....if we are going to get ahead of the game, then the solution is to really chase hard players in the 21/22/23 year old bracket, as they are not likely to become free agents until the latter part of their career. They are right now the "moneyball" buys. Yes you will pay more for potential because they are still unfinished, but if they make it you will have them for the cream of their career - this is why Jones and Tutt leaving for nix is such an issue - ideally in list management terms we have to be able to make a call earlier on guys and be prepared to trade them out before they walk.

A good post FK. The 3 players in question have all been given plenty of opportunities to succeed at senior level but have been too inconsistent. We need to get a lot better with our draft selection which is just now beginning to bear fruit with the likes of Bontempelli Macrae Stringer and Hrovat. There is still the need to cut our list even further to enable us to become truly competitive against the better sides.

[chef]

Re: Trade News

Jones
Tutt
Higgins

All 3 have left us so who in your opinions would we get for these players.

At a guess..............

Higgins will get us a 2nd round pick straight after our existing pick.
Jones will get us Carltons third rounder (40somethingish?)
Tutt and our 5th rounder for Carltons 4th rounder

[Webby]

Re: Trade News

This is the reality of Free Agency - just look at the Premier League in the UK (well football generally). When you give players free agency rights to "choose" which club they want to go to you effectively create 2 classes - developers and users. We the Bulldogs are developers. We draft young talent, nurture them as footballers and then see them walk to "Users" who can pay more and offer regular finals football.

As a consuming public we have been conditioned for the last 25 years that AFL is cyclical. Clubs draft young talent, it is developed, emerges and ultimately drags the club up the ladder into finals footy, then as the absence of high draft picks stacks up and talent ages, the club drops back down into a rebuild - we have even developed terminology around this.

Free Agency is a dynamic which will alter this. If you are a successful club, why develop? Yes you will draft and develop a solid core of players, but if you are regularly playing finals then just like a team in the UEFA Champions League you will naturally attract top talent, perpetuating your successful cycle. Clubs like the Bulldogs will have to pay "way, way, way" over to attract the same talent, so instead of the salary cap acting as a ceiling for rich clubs, it acts as a net, holding back poorer clubs.

For example, Frawley from Melbourne is a free agent and a good player. Not a great player. If the Bulldogs were to chase him they would probably need to offer somewhere around $750k to $1m to entice him to the club - clearly overs! A club like Geelong or Hawthorn could probably offer $500k and the promise of immediate finals football - they will get the player and have more cap room to chase potentially another.

Worse is what we are seeing with our young talent leaving - not so much Jones and Tutt, but Higgins is a classic example. Lets pretend that Higgins wasn't injured for half of his career and had become a player bordering on Elite. His walking to a successful club because they offered more cash or the chance to play finals football, would have a twofold effect 1) set back our playing list by removing an elite player; and 2) send a signal to other developing players that the Bulldogs are just a nursery.

The solution.....if we are going to get ahead of the game, then the solution is to really chase hard players in the 21/22/23 year old bracket, as they are not likely to become free agents until the latter part of their career. They are right now the "moneyball" buys. Yes you will pay more for potential because they are still unfinished, but if they make it you will have them for the cream of their career - this is why Jones and Tutt leaving for nix is such an issue - ideally in list management terms we have to be able to make a call earlier on guys and be prepared to trade them out before they walk.

Pretty much spot on. Free Agency slows down the cycle. You stay a contender for longer and you stay a battler for longer. The only way to climb out is to keep the head down and build slowly and surely with a core of good young draftees. The Port Adelaide way. Now that they've broken into the "Champions League" zone, they're finding players wanting to join them. I'm hopeful that we can break into that territory in two years time.

Until then, trade the dead wood for picks and draft as much quality young stocks as we can. It's the only logical approach. Play the cards you're dealt. Play the percentages. From the outside looking in, so far so good this off-season.