Makes you wonder when the AFL will follow the US sports in teams being allowed to ‘sell’ players under contract - club makes a trade, player goes to the new club under same terms as their existing contract ($s and years)
Make it that players can say no to clubs that arent offering enough money. Hill asks for trade to vic, essendon offers 450k, Hawks offer 300k, Hawks have to match 450k or Hill can say no. You can also have the opposite situation. Essendon offers 300k, North offers 1.8 million, Hill still happy to go to Essendon because who would want to go to North???
2 Likes
Don’t players just sign a new contract when a player breaks their contract? They don’t trade the contract like in the NBA.
Ahh another trade period, yet another year Big money Ma$e doesn’t get shifted.
If clubs want to take a “them’s the breaks” attitude with contracted players, it’s super easy: don’t trade them. Done. No new rules required.
1 Like
I’m talking about the player though. If they want to break their contract because of personal reasons (which is the excuse used all the time), then that may require a financial sacrifice to get them to the city they want in combination with the best deal for the club.
The players don’t make enough money to take away that right to refuse a trade from them.
1 Like
Sure, but that doesn’t have to be mandated by some new rule requiring a number of clubs put in tenders. The giants could tell Hill today “find someone who’ll give us a good deal or we’re not trading you”.
1 Like
Oh I wasn’t talking about a rule mandating a set number of clubs, and apologies if that was what you were responding to. I think it should just be a case of nominate a city and then your club trades you to that city for the best deal they can.
1 Like
It’s to account for the salary cap. Ie, a team cannot induce a player to cancel their contract to free up room in their own cap
They either delist the player and pay them out, or trade the player to a team whereby their contract value is accounted for at the new team
Ah yeah that makes sense. And the deal can be changed in terms of length though right? Like we smoothed Peter Wright’s money out, which is fine because he still gets the dollar amount even if its over more years.
Yeah it can be over however many years, it just has to be factored in at some point
1 Like
Do you think us going for Bobby is us resigning ourselves to the fact that we’re unlikely to bring in another high draft pick this trade period as we stated we were keen to do? Or do we think Jackets has another trick up his sleeve?
2MP and Mason Cox.
TWIN TOWER FORWARDS
1 Like
LOL. What a beat up over the least inspiring list of trade targets of all time (minus our Bobby, of course).
1 Like
What this tells me is that to have a ruck duo of Draper and Bryan is going to be absolute gold. So many clubs so desperate to get any sort of half decent ruck…
1 Like
Midfield if brought in Tarranto
c: Merrett Parish Langford
Foll: Draper Tarranto McGrath
Int: Caldwell, Shiel, Cox
2 Likes
The other important detail is that the pick we ended up receiving was used to draft Zach Merrett.
Has anyone tried to do an estimate on how many picks it might take to get the Davey twins?
For eg. late first and 2nd round bids = 5x3rd rounders
Or is it too difficult to work out right now.
How petty is this opening line from Ralph? I can only imagine the raging hate boner he had whilst coming up with it, wouldn’t surprise me if he writes erotic fanfic about us. What a ■■■■.
3 Likes