Free Agency Revisited

[Disco08]

With the way Judd is playing the field the question I have is how is this better than free agency?

If players are allowed to basically demand where they want to play as soon as their contracts expire then clubs are receiving almost no protection whatsoever for their investments. As happened with Stevens there is the very real possibility that a player of great value can be lost to a club that drafted and developed him for absolutely no return. Under an intuitive free agency system this would be totally averted.

 

[Dyer'ere]

I suppose the Judd case my change the course of history. But up till now there has been bugger all in the way of no compensation defection.

And Nick Stevens cost Carlton plenty, way too much to lure as a free agent. Gets paid as a #1 mid but hasn't played like one.

Judd is, in his way, a free agent under the current rules. He's probably stronger that if there were a compulsory compensation scheme, isn't he?

 

[Disco08]

At the very least West Coast are in a far worse situation. Under most codes' systems they'd receive compensatory draft picks for losing a player based on the value of the player. The way things are right now they stand to receive the best offer given to them by a club that basically has them over a barrel or lose him for nothing whatsoever.

Stevens might have cost Carlton plenty (as he would have under free agency) but I don't think that fact would really console Port Adelaide who got nothing whatsoever for him.

And totally agree that this is going to change AFL history. This now becomes a precedent for any player to lean on when they decide they want to go home. How wary are clubs going to have to be of drafting interstate talent now?

 

[Dyer'ere]

Yeah, Disco. I guess your right about the free agency. Probably fairer.

I guess we don't know that Judd's move will cause a landslide. But let's just hope it's in before Nance Bloody Flankling goes home. Wouldn't want Freo to get him for nothing with first pick in the PSD. ;D

 

[taraba]

Yeah, Disco. I guess your right about the free agency. Probably fairer.

I guess we don't know that Judd's move will cause a landslide. But let's just hope it's in before Nance Bloody Flankling goes home. Wouldn't want Freo to get him for nothing with first pick in the PSD. ;D

Why Jack? That would be very funny to see the dawks get shafted!

 

[TigerMasochist]

As far as I am concerned West Coast got full value out of Judd while he played for them. Why should they be able to dictate where he continues to play football and demand a kings ransom for him to be able to go.
He is out of contract and he should be able to move on with his life if he so chooses.
They don't have a problem in rugby league with players changing clubs at the end of their contracts.
The only requirement is that the new club can fit the player into the salary cap.
The AFL communist party has that many convoluted restrictions on players that it is almost impossible for players to shift clubs regardless of how good or poor the players ability is.
The trade restrictions on players make it almost impossible for clubs to fill gaps in their list and construct a team to play finals.
The whole current process is a stagnant slow dripfeed that constipates good list management.

 

[Disco08]

The idea isn't that they player's old club can dictate where he goes, it's that they get some return on their investment. You don't think that's fair TM?

 

[TigerMasochist]

The idea isn't that they player's old club can dictate where he goes, it's that they get some return on their investment. You don't think that's fair TM?

What investment? They got him for free in the kids draft. He's more than payed his way in the six years they've had him. Brownlow winner and classed as best player in comp the last few years. Premiership captain. Plenty of Mr. Squeaky clean promotion for a very putrid club in recent years.

With an open, or at least more open movement of players between clubs then all clubs can seriously consider their needs when trying to build a team to get into premiership contention instead of just praying they can pick enough suitable kids over six or seven years to get near it.
As a club gets to its premiership window it also gets squeezed by it's cap maximum and by necessity releases expensive senior players and recruits promising young talent.
This creates a vibrant list management system and gives all clubs the chance to attack the finals.
Just remember one basic point. It's not just one club that would lose a player for nothing, it's swings and roundabouts all clubs would be able to access or lose a player as contracts and caps come into effect.
I haven't seen any major tragedies with the NRL system of player movement.
The AFL should just double the penalties for salary cap cheating so that no-one risks cheating.
It wouldn't hurt if the AFL also lowered the minimum cap amount from 92.5% to about 80 or 85% and this would give clubs a decent amount of manouvering room when they have a young developing list without forcing them to pay overs for limited return.

 

[Disco08]

What investment? They got him for free in the kids draft. He's more than payed his way in the six years they've had him. Brownlow winner and classed as best player in comp the last few years. Premiership captain. Plenty of Mr. Squeaky clean promotion for a very putrid club in recent years.

They were prepared to take the risk on a kid with a history of injuries and they were the ones that developed him. Who's to say how good a player Judd would have been had he developed in another team's system?

And the point isn't only about Judd, it's about all players. What happens now when Shane Edwards for example refuses to sign his next contract and demands to be dealt to Adelaide because he wants to go home? A system that gives clubs a) a minimum amount of control over draftees and b) compensation for losing players averts this problem and provides an even playing field for all clubs.

With an open, or at least more open movement of players between clubs then all clubs can seriously consider their needs when trying to build a team to get into premiership contention instead of just praying they can pick enough suitable kids over six or seven years to get near it.
As a club gets to its premiership window it also gets squeezed by it's cap maximum and by necessity releases expensive senior players and recruits promising young talent.
This creates a vibrant list management system and gives all clubs the chance to attack the finals.

How would any of the above be effected under a free agency system?

Just remember one basic point. It's not just one club that would lose a player for nothing, it's swings and roundabouts all clubs would be able to access or lose a player as contracts and caps come into effect.

So rather than implement a system that guarantees equality you'd prefer to let chance ensure that all clubs get a fair crack?

I haven't seen any major tragedies with the NRL system of player movement.

The NRL has players moving around at a ludicrous rate. That's why team's performances fluctuate so dramatically year to year in most cases. It doesn't promote good list management and it doesn't promote good junior development.

The AFL should just double the penalties for salary cap cheating so that no-one risks cheating.
It wouldn't hurt if the AFL also lowered the minimum cap amount from 92.5% to about 80 or 85% and this would give clubs a decent amount of manouvering room when they have a young developing list without forcing them to pay overs for limited return.

Agreed on both points.

 

[Stuart]

At the very least West Coast are in a far worse situation. Under most codes' systems they'd receive compensatory draft picks for losing a player based on the value of the player.

Which codes are these?
You must be talking the states I take it. How does it work? Ie, Judd considered a top 3 player in the comp for example- what is WCE looking at as compensation? I've never heard of this type of compo system.

 

[Disco08]

Yeah US sports. For example baseball's system is:

Draft. The draftees then get to negotiate contracts but are essentially under the club's control for a minimum amount of cost controlled years before they can nominate for free agency. The player and team can negotiate a new contract beyond this time frame at any time.

Free agency. Once a player has reached the minimum required service time he can opt for free agency. The player is assigned a value depending on performance and other factors. The team signing these players is then obliged to give a draft pick relative to the player's value to the player's former team. In addition to that the player's former team also receives a supplemental draft pick generally after the first round. The ranking of players is generally into 3 types. The best group demand a first round draft pick be given to the player's former team, the second group a second round pick and the third group a third round pick.

So in Judd's case West Coast would receive Carlton's first round pick and a supplemental pick after the first round.

Baseball obviously has alot more players than AFL and a much deeper minor league system so you would have to change the details quite a bit but IMO the framework is clearly better than what the AFL does now.

 

[TigerMasochist]

What investment? They got him for free in the kids draft. He's more than payed his way in the six years they've had him. Brownlow winner and classed as best player in comp the last few years. Premiership captain. Plenty of Mr. Squeaky clean promotion for a very putrid club in recent years.

They were prepared to take the risk on a kid with a history of injuries and they were the ones that developed him. Who's to say how good a player Judd would have been had he developed in another team's system?
Took no more risk than any other club when it nominates a draft pick.
Players like Judd don't need much development, they've got what they need to make it already.

And the point isn't only about Judd, it's about all players. What happens now when Shane Edwards for example refuses to sign his next contract and demands to be dealt to Adelaide because he wants to go home? A system that gives clubs a) a minimum amount of control over draftees and b) compensation for losing players averts this problem and provides an even playing field for all clubs.

Preferrably there would be a 6 or 7 year period before free trade became available but regardless of the period if a player comes out of contract and wants to move so be it. All clubs would be free to scan other clubs lists and try to pick up uncontracted players. No restrictions or compensation required.

With an open, or at least more open movement of players between clubs then all clubs can seriously consider their needs when trying to build a team to get into premiership contention instead of just praying they can pick enough suitable kids over six or seven years to get near it.
As a club gets to its premiership window it also gets squeezed by it's cap maximum and by necessity releases expensive senior players and recruits promising young talent.
This creates a vibrant list management system and gives all clubs the chance to attack the finals.

How would any of the above be effected under a free agency system?
Not sure of what you are asking here, would of thought the concept of free agency was simple enough.

Just remember one basic point. It's not just one club that would lose a player for nothing, it's swings and roundabouts all clubs would be able to access or lose a player as contracts and caps come into effect.

So rather than implement a system that guarantees equality you'd prefer to let chance ensure that all clubs get a fair crack?
There's no equality in a system that gives priority picks to some clubs over others and biased gameday draws that clearly favour certain clubs.
Give all clubs the same amount of money to spend on players and a draft system for streaming the juniors into the AFL system.
The current trade system is structured to virtually kill off any chance of players getting shifted to a club they want to play for but worse makes it almost impossible for a club to adjust its list to fill certain player requirements. Free agency would allow clubs to negotiate with all uncontracted players and fit players to needs.
The present system barely gets half a dozen players shifted a year as its a forced swap system.

I haven't seen any major tragedies with the NRL system of player movement.

The NRL has players moving around at a ludicrous rate. That's why team's performances fluctuate so dramatically year to year in most cases. It doesn't promote good list management and it doesn't promote good junior development.

Storm have managed their list fairly well, they will lose a bit over summer but this will leave room for them to refresh their list and regroup for another tilt.

The AFL should just double the penalties for salary cap cheating so that no-one risks cheating.
It wouldn't hurt if the AFL also lowered the minimum cap amount from 92.5% to about 80 or 85% and this would give clubs a decent amount of manouvering room when they have a young developing list without forcing them to pay overs for limited return.

Agreed on both points.

Glad I got something right ;D