WXV Discussion

[ossie85]

Good point Holz, yeah its the original price,  but lets set a 'you can only do it 3 times' rule

[JBs-Hawks]

I've just been PM'd by more than one coach telling me they're interested in Patton... If I can't get special consideration for him, he's going to get poached and nothing we can do about it :(. Despite paying #4 for him and watching him sit out for two straight seasons :'(.

Please Oss, help your love-child team :( :( :(.

There would be something you could do about it, you could trade him ;)

Just like in the NBA how Minnesota have to trade KLove otherwise he walks into free agency.

[DazBurg]

few things i do not like
i do like the idea of say 21 years and under being "safe" for our sake and for the lower teams sake

what i do not like
i understand it is to "even" teams out but considering we don't do alot of trades we get punished for other teams screwing themselves up? (realize half the coaches are gone but as i said in another post trade your draft picks you cannot have both young guns and want better players) (also realize most will then say well i won't get such and such for nothing or what i offer that is the case hench why we don't land a fyfe or a deledio etc etc and that is our problem and our choice)

2nd since obviously weather it is liked or not it seems it will go ahead
i can see especially since i'm deemed difficult to deal with most coaches not dealing with me and simply poaching our players
in trade talks they are basically gonna be like oh you need to cut 1.4 mil so throw in him for extra wait you don't like it?
don't worry we'll just poach him since your over the cap (so again because we don't chop and change our side as much as other teams and choose to be happy with our side rather then trading away everyone we still get screwed again)

3rd even if it does go ahead still like that and people do poach our players
(if patton and merrett are safe it still leaves 2 forwards and 2 defenders from the "free agents" let along what is poached from main list)
so 2nd trade period has trade restrictions i imagine though your allowed to trade for the same position as poached?


like i said i know of at least 4 teams chasing forwards and a few have expressed interest in Dawes and knowing how most hate to deal with me will simply go for the poach approach of that i have no doubt

[DazBurg]

also can i add that i can guarantee that when it comes to poaching most coaches will not say "oh i bid to poach trent dennis lane or tyson goldsack"

no if we don't trade away a crapload to get under the cap they will say "i want wingard or jones etc"

but that isn't too equal when say beijing (lowest salary atm) go oh instead of trading we will keep pick 4 or 5 or whatever it is and go and steal wingard as well" (i realize we get a pick for compensation but by no means will say pick 5 for wingard all that does is give us back the pick we paid for him but could turn out no good next time or the fact we traded our pick 4 for patton so we were willing to part with picks like they should be doing)

sorry to go on a big rant Oss but basically we get punished for having great depth
but you tell me a team right now who will take a few of our depth packaged say 4 of them for a out and out star?

that is right none and before they say they are not worth a gun if that is the case why do we want to trade them or delist them only to get players that don't play or are worse

again sorry to rant but i have always enjoyed the WXV's the only one i pay attention too (ask HP how much input i have in the euro's side..lol)

and the best thing about this one and all of them is the freedom of them
this feels like hands are being forced imo

[DazBurg]

i'm being told by HP and Holz only the "free agents" can be poached

but i thought you said if you were over cap then you can be poached which is my point in people not trading since we are so far over

[Purple 77]

This amended version has my support, at the moment, because the compensation pick system hasn't been nutted out yet, so will hold off giving it my full nod of approval. Also think an age restriction is a good idea.

[Ringo]

Another question when we get to drafts will these players be $100k? Or will rookie draft have their prices discounted,

[ossie85]

Hi Daz,

Yeah, it sucks - And I have to agree - the good teams are getting punished for the poor management of other teams. Unfortunately, that's exactly what caps - any kind of cap - is designed to do. So I can't disagree with you there!

2nd since obviously weather it is liked or not it seems it will go ahead
i can see especially since i'm deemed difficult to deal with most coaches not dealing with me and simply poaching our players
in trade talks they are basically gonna be like oh you need to cut 1.4 mil so throw in him for extra wait you don't like it?
don't worry we'll just poach him since your over the cap (so again because we don't chop and change our side as much as other teams and choose to be happy with our side rather then trading away everyone we still get screwed again)

Yeah, that's a risk - but any player that gets poached goes to Auction - so teams shouldn't take that risk at all.

also can i add that i can guarantee that when it comes to poaching most coaches will not say "oh i bid to poach trent dennis lane or tyson goldsack"

no if we don't trade away a crapload to get under the cap they will say "i want wingard or jones etc"

but that isn't too equal when say beijing (lowest salary atm) go oh instead of trading we will keep pick 4 or 5 or whatever it is and go and steal wingard as well" (i realize we get a pick for compensation but by no means will say pick 5 for wingard all that does is give us back the pick we paid for him but could turn out no good next time or the fact we traded our pick 4 for patton so we were willing to part with picks like they should be doing)

sorry to go on a big rant Oss but basically we get punished for having great depth
but you tell me a team right now who will take a few of our depth packaged say 4 of them for a out and out star?

that is right none and before they say they are not worth a gun if that is the case why do we want to trade them or delist them only to get players that don't play or are worse

again sorry to rant but i have always enjoyed the WXV's the only one i pay attention too (ask HP how much input i have in the euro's side..lol)

and the best thing about this one and all of them is the freedom of them
this feels like hands are being forced imo

Sorry Daz, struggle to follow a lot of that, please let me know if I've misinterpreted anything!

But currently you are $1.431m over the cap. Luke Ball's probably done, that's $412,000 you don't need to worry about. Corey Enright ($481,000) and Luke McPharlin ($398,000) can't be far away from retirement, and if you delisted a couple of players like Trent Dennis-Lane ($258,000) and Matthew Watson ($334,000), trade a Matt Thomas ($388,000) away for a pick or 2.. and suddenly you are $840,000 BELOW the salary cap, which you could use to sure up all your free agents.

i'm being told by HP and Holz only the "free agents" can be poached

but i thought you said if you were over cap then you can be poached which is my point in people not trading since we are so far over

No, if you are over the salary cap you can have players poached.

Btw, this is the reason the Pacific and PNL have such large salary caps, have so many forwards/rucks playing for them:

Team, Forwards, Rucks, Forward-Rucks, Total AFL games played:

Poor London's ruck woes... New York have had 48 Forwards play across 18 rounds. Let that seep in!

Team   For   Ruck   For-Ruc   Total
Pacific Islanders   153   31   0   184
PNL Reindeers   146   17   0   163
Mexico City Suns   108   43   0   151
Sao Paulo Pumas   114   42   7   149
Cairo Sands   124   38   16   146
Toronto Wolves   114   21   0   135
Buenos Aires Armadillos   104   44   14   134
Moscow Spetsnaz   88   45   0   133
Tokyo Samurai   97   35   0   132
Cape Town Cobras   118   17   7   128
Berlin Brewers   102   25   3   124
Dublin Destroyers   103   30   13   120
London Royals   120   5   5   120
Wellington Warriors   99   18   0   117
Seoul Magpies   87   9   0   96
Beijing Thunder   79   15   0   94
New Delhi Tigers   68   12   0   80
New York Revolution   48   29   4   73

This amended version has my support, at the moment, because the compensation pick system hasn't been nutted out yet, so will hold off giving it my full nod of approval. Also think an age restriction is a good idea.

Next on the agenda

Another question when we get to drafts will these players be $100k? Or will rookie draft have their prices discounted,

All players under 10 games from the last 3 years will be $100k, just so I don't go crazy really.

[Ricochet]

Its funny that in real life we worry about the top teams poaching all the good players in free agency, but in WXVs its the top teams worried about being poached :P

[Holz]

Its funny that in real life we worry about the top teams poaching all the good players in free agency, but in WXVs its the top teams worried about being poached :P

To make it more realistic let's change it so the strong teams poach stars on the weaker teams. Who wants to come to Dublin for a premiership?

[ossie85]

Another thought...

Would people be adverse to naming one key (I.e. tall) defender or forward as a dual position ruck? The catch being they would score at 75% whether or not they play ruck or forward/defence.

So Chris Dawes is named a forward next year.  But PNL name him a ruckman also. So if he scores 100 he'd only get 75 in either forward or ruck

[Holz]

Another thought...

Would people be adverse to naming one key (I.e. tall) defender or forward as a dual position ruck? The catch being they would score at 75% whether or not they play ruck or forward/defence.

So Chris Dawes is named a forward next year.  But PNL name him a ruckman also. So if he scores 100 he'd only get 75 in either forward or ruck

I do like it if we are starting a new comp but since this is established its a little unfair to teams that have worked hard to get a ruck and completely devalues back up rucks who score like 50-70.

[ossie85]

Another thought...

Would people be adverse to naming one key (I.e. tall) defender or forward as a dual position ruck? The catch being they would score at 75% whether or not they play ruck or forward/defence.

So Chris Dawes is named a forward next year.  But PNL name him a ruckman also. So if he scores 100 he'd only get 75 in either forward or ruck

I do like it if we are starting a new comp but since this is established its a little unfair to teams that have worked hard to get a ruck and completely devalues back up rucks who score like 50-70.

not really,  I doubt you'd give a 90 averaging defender this. It would be more the 50 to 70 averaging defenders/forwards,  meaning the back up rucks would still be preferential.

[Purple 77]

I'd back away from that idea, but love the creative thinking oz.

[Nige]

I'd back away from that idea, but love the creative thinking oz.