Off Season Trade Rumours

[Big Mac]

Cheers JB. Don't like that system but if thats how it works then so be it.

It's more of an equalisation thing because stronger teams are far less reliant on their star players than a weak team is. So stronger teams would receive a lesser pick than a weak team would for the same player (even though they would both be awarded the same compensation in the AFL's eyes i.e. 'first round').

[Grazz]

Cheers JB. Don't like that system but if thats how it works then so be it.

It's more of an equalisation thing because stronger teams are far less reliant on their star players than a weak team is. So stronger teams would receive a lesser pick than a weak team would for the same player (even though they would both be awarded the same compensation in the AFL's eyes i.e. 'first round').

Thanks Mac, i understand the sentiment behind it but i dont see how it's working. We now have players saying i'll go here or here but nowhere else, of course their choices are top clubs or those with a finals chance. So the bigger clubs are loading up on this available talent and the equalisation as it were meant to be isnt really equalising the comp. The comp was more equal 5-6 years ago than it is now. I dont think this system is working as it was designed to do, my two cents worth.

[Mr.Craig]

If the compensation is truly based around age and the size of the contract as the AFL claims then I would love to hear their justification for Buddy being worth Pick 19 and Frawley 3. I think it's just a sneaky way of essentially handing Melbourne a priority pick.

What? Buddy got the highest compensation possible, you just won the flag so you got it after your first pick. If you came last that year, you would get pick 2. It's all the formula, the formula has its flaws but there was no sneaky business, just a flawed forumula

These are the rules as published by the AFL.

"A club that has a net loss of players transferring to/from other clubs as free agents in one transfer period is entitled to compensation via National Draft picks allocated by the AFL.

The compensation formula produces a points rating for players based on:

1. The new contract of the free agent;
2. The age of the free agent.

Draft picks are allocated to clubs based on the net total points for free agents lost and gained during the transfer period.

Draft picks will be allocated to one of five places:

1st round
end of 1st round
2nd round
end of 2nd round
3rd round

In applying the formula, an expert committee reviews the formula outcomes. The committee has the power to recommend alternative outcomes to GM - Football Operations where the formula produces a materially anomalous result."

Nowhere in that does it stipulate that the compensation is tied to final ladder position or has to come after a team's selection in any given round. Hawthorn was given a pick at the end of the first round because that's what the AFL judged was fair compensation. You can argue that in the committee review stage it was suggested that due to Hawthorn's strong list they weren't deserving of a higher selection but it is not a specifically outlined in the rules.

[Spite]

If the compensation is truly based around age and the size of the contract as the AFL claims then I would love to hear their justification for Buddy being worth Pick 19 and Frawley 3. I think it's just a sneaky way of essentially handing Melbourne a priority pick.

What? Buddy got the highest compensation possible, you just won the flag so you got it after your first pick. If you came last that year, you would get pick 2. It's all the formula, the formula has its flaws but there was no sneaky business, just a flawed forumula

These are the rules as published by the AFL.

"A club that has a net loss of players transferring to/from other clubs as free agents in one transfer period is entitled to compensation via National Draft picks allocated by the AFL.

The compensation formula produces a points rating for players based on:

1. The new contract of the free agent;
2. The age of the free agent.

Draft picks are allocated to clubs based on the net total points for free agents lost and gained during the transfer period.

Draft picks will be allocated to one of five places:

1st round
end of 1st round
2nd round
end of 2nd round
3rd round

In applying the formula, an expert committee reviews the formula outcomes. The committee has the power to recommend alternative outcomes to GM - Football Operations where the formula produces a materially anomalous result."

Nowhere in that does it stipulate that the compensation is tied to final ladder position or has to come after a team's selection in any given round. Hawthorn was given a pick at the end of the first round because that's what the AFL judged was fair compensation. You can argue that in the committee review stage it was suggested that due to Hawthorn's strong list they weren't deserving of a higher selection but it is not a specifically outlined in the rules.

Haha nah man, its because they published it incorrectly :P

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-02-03/press-for-changes-to-fa-compensation

"The first year of free agency saw clubs awarded compensation picks that were tied with the club's respective finishing ladder position. This meant St Kilda was awarded pick 13 for losing restricted free agent Brendon Goddard because the Saints already held pick 12.

But under the revised system discussed by some clubs, picks would only be allocated to the end of each round of the draft, meaning the Saints would have still received a first-round pick for Goddard but it would have been used at the end of the round (pick 24 overall in 2012.)"

The system was reviewed but there hasn't been any changes so I assume the first scenario still stands. It is tied to finishing order. Also in the formula there are other criteria such as where the player has finished in the clubs past best and fairest awards. I know that is one of the criteria because the media keep mentioning it for Frawley and they have mentioned it in the past but it isn't in you link either. I don't know why that article isn't up to date or showing correct information...

[Big Mac]

Cheers JB. Don't like that system but if thats how it works then so be it.

It's more of an equalisation thing because stronger teams are far less reliant on their star players than a weak team is. So stronger teams would receive a lesser pick than a weak team would for the same player (even though they would both be awarded the same compensation in the AFL's eyes i.e. 'first round').

Thanks Mac, i understand the sentiment behind it but i dont see how it's working. We now have players saying i'll go here or here but nowhere else, of course their choices are top clubs or those with a finals chance. So the bigger clubs are loading up on this available talent and the equalisation as it were meant to be isnt really equalising the comp. The comp was more equal 5-6 years ago than it is now. I dont think this system is working as it was designed to do, my two cents worth.

I definitely agree with you there.

[Mr.Craig]

If the compensation is truly based around age and the size of the contract as the AFL claims then I would love to hear their justification for Buddy being worth Pick 19 and Frawley 3. I think it's just a sneaky way of essentially handing Melbourne a priority pick.

What? Buddy got the highest compensation possible, you just won the flag so you got it after your first pick. If you came last that year, you would get pick 2. It's all the formula, the formula has its flaws but there was no sneaky business, just a flawed forumula

These are the rules as published by the AFL.

"A club that has a net loss of players transferring to/from other clubs as free agents in one transfer period is entitled to compensation via National Draft picks allocated by the AFL.

The compensation formula produces a points rating for players based on:

1. The new contract of the free agent;
2. The age of the free agent.

Draft picks are allocated to clubs based on the net total points for free agents lost and gained during the transfer period.

Draft picks will be allocated to one of five places:

1st round
end of 1st round
2nd round
end of 2nd round
3rd round

In applying the formula, an expert committee reviews the formula outcomes. The committee has the power to recommend alternative outcomes to GM - Football Operations where the formula produces a materially anomalous result."

Nowhere in that does it stipulate that the compensation is tied to final ladder position or has to come after a team's selection in any given round. Hawthorn was given a pick at the end of the first round because that's what the AFL judged was fair compensation. You can argue that in the committee review stage it was suggested that due to Hawthorn's strong list they weren't deserving of a higher selection but it is not a specifically outlined in the rules.

Haha nah man, its because they published it incorrectly :P

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-02-03/press-for-changes-to-fa-compensation

"The first year of free agency saw clubs awarded compensation picks that were tied with the club's respective finishing ladder position. This meant St Kilda was awarded pick 13 for losing restricted free agent Brendon Goddard because the Saints already held pick 12.

But under the revised system discussed by some clubs, picks would only be allocated to the end of each round of the draft, meaning the Saints would have still received a first-round pick for Goddard but it would have been used at the end of the round (pick 24 overall in 2012.)"

The system was reviewed but there hasn't been any changes so I assume the first scenario still stands. It is tied to finishing order. Also in the formula there are other criteria such as where the player has finished in the clubs past best and fairest awards. I know that is one of the criteria because the media keep mentioning it for Frawley and they have mentioned it in the past but it isn't in you link either. I don't know why that article isn't up to date or showing correct information...

If you're saying the AFL don't know their own rules, well that I can believe. :D

Okay well, all I can say is that they misled me. :-[

[Spite]

If the compensation is truly based around age and the size of the contract as the AFL claims then I would love to hear their justification for Buddy being worth Pick 19 and Frawley 3. I think it's just a sneaky way of essentially handing Melbourne a priority pick.

What? Buddy got the highest compensation possible, you just won the flag so you got it after your first pick. If you came last that year, you would get pick 2. It's all the formula, the formula has its flaws but there was no sneaky business, just a flawed forumula

These are the rules as published by the AFL.

"A club that has a net loss of players transferring to/from other clubs as free agents in one transfer period is entitled to compensation via National Draft picks allocated by the AFL.

The compensation formula produces a points rating for players based on:

1. The new contract of the free agent;
2. The age of the free agent.

Draft picks are allocated to clubs based on the net total points for free agents lost and gained during the transfer period.

Draft picks will be allocated to one of five places:

1st round
end of 1st round
2nd round
end of 2nd round
3rd round

In applying the formula, an expert committee reviews the formula outcomes. The committee has the power to recommend alternative outcomes to GM - Football Operations where the formula produces a materially anomalous result."

Nowhere in that does it stipulate that the compensation is tied to final ladder position or has to come after a team's selection in any given round. Hawthorn was given a pick at the end of the first round because that's what the AFL judged was fair compensation. You can argue that in the committee review stage it was suggested that due to Hawthorn's strong list they weren't deserving of a higher selection but it is not a specifically outlined in the rules.

Haha nah man, its because they published it incorrectly :P

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-02-03/press-for-changes-to-fa-compensation

"The first year of free agency saw clubs awarded compensation picks that were tied with the club's respective finishing ladder position. This meant St Kilda was awarded pick 13 for losing restricted free agent Brendon Goddard because the Saints already held pick 12.

But under the revised system discussed by some clubs, picks would only be allocated to the end of each round of the draft, meaning the Saints would have still received a first-round pick for Goddard but it would have been used at the end of the round (pick 24 overall in 2012.)"

The system was reviewed but there hasn't been any changes so I assume the first scenario still stands. It is tied to finishing order. Also in the formula there are other criteria such as where the player has finished in the clubs past best and fairest awards. I know that is one of the criteria because the media keep mentioning it for Frawley and they have mentioned it in the past but it isn't in you link either. I don't know why that article isn't up to date or showing correct information...

If you're saying the AFL don't know their own rules, well that I can believe. :D

Okay well, all I can say is that they misled me. :-[

Haha i think they posted a simple version for people to try and understand. I remember reading a few years ago in the Herald Sun the whole thing explained but it was really complicated! I cant find that same article again :(
They may have changed it and I could very well be wrong!

[Purple 77]

flower me Frawley, the one club I didn't want you to go to!

It would really be the icing on the flower-you-cake if we didn't get Pick 3 because the pay is less  >:(

Tbh Purps i can't see how Frawley is worth pick 3, a second round pick is more realistic. Do you think he's worth pick 3 when the likes of Buddy and Goddard were only worth second rnd picks. Dudge was saying having two years to run on his contract boost's his compo pick but to me that isn't right either. I just don't see him being worth that high a compo pick.

I think it's a joke that Frawley would attract Pick 3, but Mac and JBs make the good points regarding it. Realistically he is worth a pick in the 20s IMO.



IMO, melbourne desperately need this pick anyway to cover the structural loss Frawley, and to some extent Clark left us with.

[Nige]

Carlton are closing in on securing Kristian Jaksch, whilst the Hawks look close to gaining Jonathan O'Rourke with the Saints cooling interest in the pair of Giants.

St Kilda at this stage look as though they will be holding on to their first round pick.

[Nige]

The Western Bulldogs are looking at trading their First Round Pick (#5) and a player to Melbourne for the James Frawley Compensation Pick (If it is Pick #3) to recruit a Key Forward in this years National Draft according to Brett Anderson from Inside Footy.

[Nails]

The Western Bulldogs are looking at trading their First Round Pick (#5) and a player to Melbourne for the James Frawley Compensation Pick (If it is Pick #3) to recruit a Key Forward in this years National Draft according to Brett Anderson from Inside Footy.

sounds like a few dicks are getting wet over McCartin

[Spite]

The Western Bulldogs are looking at trading their First Round Pick (#5) and a player to Melbourne for the James Frawley Compensation Pick (If it is Pick #3) to recruit a Key Forward in this years National Draft according to Brett Anderson from Inside Footy.

sounds like a few dicks are getting wet over McCartin

I read this as;

"Carlton are the only team that can bid on Moore to stop Pies getting him at pick 28"

[Grazz]

flower me Frawley, the one club I didn't want you to go to!

It would really be the icing on the flower-you-cake if we didn't get Pick 3 because the pay is less  >:(

Tbh Purps i can't see how Frawley is worth pick 3, a second round pick is more realistic. Do you think he's worth pick 3 when the likes of Buddy and Goddard were only worth second rnd picks. Dudge was saying having two years to run on his contract boost's his compo pick but to me that isn't right either. I just don't see him being worth that high a compo pick.

I think it's a joke that Frawley would attract Pick 3, but Mac and JBs make the good points regarding it. Realistically he is worth a pick in the 20s IMO.



IMO, melbourne desperately need this pick anyway to cover the structural loss Frawley, and to some extent Clark left us with.

Yep fair enough mate, not having a go at the Dee's or you i just think the system is fast becoming flawed. The way it has been explained the Dee's should be granted pick 3 and fair enough.

[kilbluff1985]

free agency begins ;D

[Ricochet]

talking about Schoenmakers atm and how he'd be a great get for Freo. Really don't mind that