Brisbane Trades and Draft discussion Thread

[Spite]

The simple solution as I said earlier is for the AFL to decree when the compo picks are taken based on the criteria.

eg Splitting the finishing order 3 ways and if it is deemed a club is entitles to a first round pick then teams finishing 13 - 18 get their priority picks after round 6 Teams finishing 7-12 after team 7 picks and so on through all the rounds as well. That way picks are more equal for teams based on finishing order and will help equalise the competition.

We had this debate last year over FA and compo picks so obviously something is still not right with the rulings.  Like the NFL suggestions that Compo Picks are to be used the following year as well.

BTW Matt that trade for Beams is only suggested and is the one being talked about.  What eventuates remains to be seen. With Patful and Sauce both possibly being able to be traded three way trades could eventuate

Something you said here is very interesting.

If the AFL are going to decide the fixture based on thirds (grouping teams into 3 groups of 6 teams) then I think FA compensation should come after their third.

Eg Dees in bottom group, therefore get pick 7 for Frawley as they are the bottom group of 6, which would have already taken their picks.

What are you thoughts on this?

[dirkdiggler]

I have forumalted a real argument. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it wrong.It's called debating, and it is what a forum is for. My views are the same as the Lions CEO and Mick Malthouse....I guess they can't form a real argument either then.
To start with sarcastic comments using dictionary defintions..and saying I have some hate filled agenda against Melbourne suggests it is you that has troubling debating.

I'll spell it out for you.
- I made an argument and you offered no rebuttal other than a remark which I can only assume was intended to insult me. An insult is not a real argument.
- I was not sarcastic once. The synonyms were used to illustrate what finishing 'below' someone on the ladder actually means.
- The reason I initially entered this debate was because of this remark. "And to think that the Dees also wanted a priority pick as well. Next year they might ask the AFL to just award them a spot in the top 8". You paint the club I support as weak and unwilling to put in any hard work. I understood this to be an insult to the club and indirectly an insult to me because of my emotional investment in the club. I recognise that the use of the word 'hate' may be brash on my part, but I can only assume that you heavily dislike the club if you are willing to insult it on a forum.

the fact that you opted to drag a definition from a dictionary was an insult to my intelligence, you know it and I know it.
If you think any "insult" via a forum to Melbourne is an indirect insult to you personally then I would suggest that you take footy way too seriously.
The reality is that Melbourne are weak if they think that they deserved a priority pick whilst also floating the suggestion that pick 3 for Frawley would be the right compo. They have received numerous priority picks, high end draft picks, have been found guilty of tanking to secure better picks, and received a financial bail out because they made a complete hash of it. So as Melbourne supporter, if another supporter floats the suggestion that maybe just maybe, asking for a priority pick was a little cheeky...it might be good form to at least acknowledge that perhaps there is an argument that they didn't deserve one....rather just assume that the supporter in question "hates" Melbourne.
Let's leave it there   

[Ringo]

The simple solution as I said earlier is for the AFL to decree when the compo picks are taken based on the criteria.

eg Splitting the finishing order 3 ways and if it is deemed a club is entitles to a first round pick then teams finishing 13 - 18 get their priority picks after round 6 Teams finishing 7-12 after team 7 picks and so on through all the rounds as well. That way picks are more equal for teams based on finishing order and will help equalise the competition.

We had this debate last year over FA and compo picks so obviously something is still not right with the rulings.  Like the NFL suggestions that Compo Picks are to be used the following year as well.

BTW Matt that trade for Beams is only suggested and is the one being talked about.  What eventuates remains to be seen. With Patful and Sauce both possibly being able to be traded three way trades could eventuate

Something you said here is very interesting.

If the AFL are going to decide the fixture based on thirds (grouping teams into 3 groups of 6 teams) then I think FA compensation should come after their third.

Eg Dees in bottom group, therefore get pick 7 for Frawley as they are the bottom group of 6, which would have already taken their picks.

What are you thoughts on this?

Only issue could be with tanking eg If in the last game you knew a player was leaving and you would finish 6th rather than win and finish 7th would tanking in that game enter your mind?

[Big Mac]

the fact that you opted to drag a definition from a dictionary was an insult to my intelligence, you know it and I know it.
If you think any "insult" via a forum to Melbourne is an indirect insult to you personally then I would suggest that you take footy way too seriously.
Let's leave it there

I'll ignore what you wrote about the priority pick as i'm not going to hijack this thread anymore than it already has been. I have put my views out there multiple times on the subject and so have many others on here.
I honestly didn't intend to insult you, just pointing out that the two teams would not be equal even if they were only separated by percentage. Sorry if you felt that way though.
I agree to leave it there.

[Ringo]

Anyway to get back on track what should we be chasing for Sauce and Patful.

Sauce is nearing the end of his career so a 2nd or 3rd round pick is appropriate. Patfull is a little more complicated 2 time B & F ever reliable and probably one of the most under rated players in the AFL.  Think we should really try and get a stronmg deal done with GWS to help with Beams.

With Dawson performing well so far in the combine may be forced to use 2nd rounder to retain under Academy bidding.

[dirkdiggler]

the fact that you opted to drag a definition from a dictionary was an insult to my intelligence, you know it and I know it.
If you think any "insult" via a forum to Melbourne is an indirect insult to you personally then I would suggest that you take footy way too seriously.
Let's leave it there

I'll ignore what you wrote about the priority pick as i'm not going to hijack this thread anymore than it already has been. I have put my views out there multiple times on the subject and so have many others on here.
I honestly didn't intend to insult you, just pointing out that the two teams would not be equal even if they were only separated by percentage. Sorry if you felt that way though.
I agree to leave it there.

No dramas mate.  ;)

[Spite]

The simple solution as I said earlier is for the AFL to decree when the compo picks are taken based on the criteria.

eg Splitting the finishing order 3 ways and if it is deemed a club is entitles to a first round pick then teams finishing 13 - 18 get their priority picks after round 6 Teams finishing 7-12 after team 7 picks and so on through all the rounds as well. That way picks are more equal for teams based on finishing order and will help equalise the competition.

We had this debate last year over FA and compo picks so obviously something is still not right with the rulings.  Like the NFL suggestions that Compo Picks are to be used the following year as well.

BTW Matt that trade for Beams is only suggested and is the one being talked about.  What eventuates remains to be seen. With Patful and Sauce both possibly being able to be traded three way trades could eventuate

Something you said here is very interesting.

If the AFL are going to decide the fixture based on thirds (grouping teams into 3 groups of 6 teams) then I think FA compensation should come after their third.

Eg Dees in bottom group, therefore get pick 7 for Frawley as they are the bottom group of 6, which would have already taken their picks.

What are you thoughts on this?

Only issue could be with tanking eg If in the last game you knew a player was leaving and you would finish 6th rather than win and finish 7th would tanking in that game enter your mind?

Well it would entire my mind personally but I don't think a footy club would do it. I mean, even now dees probably knew frawley would leave and I assume they didn't tank to get a slightly better pick, that's basically the same. Tanking for a better fixture for the next year doesn't seem to be a thing either fortunately (but would for me personally)

[Ziplock]

I think we should just think of it as pick 3 being both frawley compo and a priority pick combined :P

[Nails]

 :-*

[kilbluff1985]

Free agency shouldn't exist at all

[meow meow]

Compensation picks encourage teams to sit on their hands and do nothing. They shouldn't exist. It creates an uneven competition. The salary cap is the true equaliser and there's plenty of players who will chase the almighty $ so fears of a two tiered competition are exaggerated.

Let's assume that Melb are paying Frawley, Jones and Grimes 600K each.
They lose Frawley and get pick 3.

They front load Grimes and Jones' contracts to 900K this season since the space in the cap has opened up. They pay each of these players 300K next year, leaving an extra 1.2mil in the cap next year.

Next year they go out and get free agent Trent Cotchin with that 1.2mil (on a 3 year/ 800k a year contract). The salary cap would have evened things out because they'll have the opportunity to grab Cotchin by losing Frawley. They'd still be paying 1.8 mil every season. Under the current system they also have pick 3 on their list too. It's an unnecessary extra.

Jones and Grimes - 900, 300, 600, 600.
Cotchin - DNP, 1.2mil, 600, 600.

If the AFL didn't hand out compo picks it would encourage Melbourne to a) try harder to keep Frawley or b) try to replace him with other free agents like Waite and Higgins. In effect, handing them pick 3 has encouraged them to not try to replace Frawley with other established AFL players because they'd lose the golden egg that is pick 3.

[kilbluff1985]

And how many key defenders with his experience are on the free agency list to replace him with? I'm sure if there was one they would get them

Waite is useless to them is to old and Higgins is not worth it

They are chasing Danger but have to trade for him and same with Lamumba

How many of the free agencies want to go to Melbourne anyway?

They are not sitting on there hands they don't have a choice

[meow meow]

Frawley didn't even play as a key defender this year so that is a moot point.

There will be plenty of free agents who will chase money instead of success. Melbourne won't always be so unattractive, especially when they are given extra picks that throw the competition out of whack.

[kilbluff1985]

Yeah well I'm not buying the point about how they would rather pick 3 instead of trading Frawley for a player of the same value

Looks like Frawley is going to Geelong I'm sure they would love Blicavs or somebody instead of pick 3

[Ringo]

Heard this idea for Comp picks and do not mind it.

Similar to Father and Son bidding they club the free Agency player is going to must use that Round Pick to get the player. Know it does not compensate the club losing the player and using Frawley as an example and assuming it was decided he is worth the a first round pick would the club be prepared to give up their first round pick..

may help clubs to reatin players and stop players going to Top 4 clubs.