Moloney Compensation

[Guest fitness]

... do we get any? Or does compensation only get applied for unrestricted free agents? And finally, does the fact that the club has stated its intention not to retain him change anything from a compensation perspective?

If it transpires that we are entitled to a pick, what do people think we'd receive for him? What about Rivers or Bate?

[RalphiusMaximus 6,101]

As far as I know any player who leaves his club through FA scores them a compo pick, unless they bring in a free agent of roughly equal merit. Chances are that we won't see anything for Beamer because we are looking at bringing FAs into the club and they will be considered fair compensation for his loss.

[rpfc 28,848]

... do we get any? Or does compensation only get applied for unrestricted free agents? And finally, does the fact that the club has stated its intention not to retain him change anything from a compensation perspective?

If it transpires that we are entitled to a pick, what do people think we'd receive for him? What about Rivers or Bate?

Yes, no, no, yes, my guess would be Pick 35ish, Pick 28ish and Pick 66ish.

[Jordie_tackles 354]

Yes, no, no, yes, my guess would be Pick 35ish, Pick 28ish and Pick 66ish.

Getting picks for Rivers and Moloney could be very handy in aquiring a Wellingham type imo, and even MD picks with picks inside 30 still be very desirable.

Also just going to the draft with 6 picks inside 30 is a BIG get. Players like Beams being taken in the second round ect.

[rpfc 28,848]

I will temper this by saying that we don't know how the comp is 'pooled' if we lose 3 and gain two.

I would hazard a guess that the AFL has not worked this through and they will make it up on the fly.

My 'points' system (similar to tribunal points system) could see us lose Moloney and Rivers sign ONE FA at the 5th band and score Pick 5 in the ND so I wonder what they are going to do...

And remember, we won't get those picks until the FA period is over, which is TWO weeks into the THREE week Trade period.

[pm24 451]

I believe this is the rule that would be applied to Moloney (source: http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/89809/default.aspx):

3. A player has served eight or more seasons of AFL football at one club, is one of the 10 highest-paid players at his club, and is now out of contract for the first time since reaching eight seasons of service.

The player is eligible to field offers from all rival AFL clubs.

If he wishes to change clubs, the player must decide on the best offer of his choice from one rival club.

His club has the right to match the presented offer.

If the club matches the offer, he may choose to remain with his original club, seek a trade or enter the Draft.

If the club does not or can not match the offer, the player can move to the new club of his choice.

His original club will receive a compensation pick for the loss of the player, on an AFL-determined formula to apply where clubs lose more free agents than they gain in any single transfer period.

The bolded section is obviously the section that RM is referring to. So if we do not bring in as many players that go out, we get a compensation pick. If we bring in as many as we lose, we get nothing. That's my reading of it anyway.

[Deestroy All 14,266]

I believe a front rower from the storm would be compensation for losing Moloney.

[King Kunta 97]

I will temper this by saying that we don't know how the comp is 'pooled' if we lose 3 and gain two.

I would hazard a guess that the AFL has not worked this through and they will make it up on the fly.

My 'points' system (similar to tribunal points system) could see us lose Moloney and Rivers sign ONE FA at the 5th band and score Pick 5 in the ND so I wonder what they are going to do...

And remember, we won't get those picks until the FA period is over, which is TWO weeks into the THREE week Trade period.

Yeah I agree, I don't think they want to reveal too much so they can't be held accountable to previous statements if they over/under compensate clubs

[Guest fitness]

Whilst I don't disagree with clubs receiving compensation for losing free agents, the aspect I don't like about it is the fact that the draft will continue to be diluted from this year onward. I was looking forward to next year when GC and GWS had finished their draft concession windows and the draft might have reverted to 18 teams getting picks 1-18, and so on and so forth in the second and subsequent rounds.

Seems the national draft will now be forever diluted with extra compensation picks... surely would be an administrative nightmare for the AFL, particularly if/when a lot of those picks are then traded as well.

[Dee*ceiving 1,699]

That reads as though its the volume of players in and out that will determine whether a pick is awarded and the quality of the players in vs players out isn't taken into account. Doesn't really seem fair to me.

I would have thought Riv and Moloney, being top 10 paid at our club we'd atleast get something should we lose them and gain Byrnes and Jordan Russell (for arguments sake)

[rpfc 28,848]

That reads as though its the volume of players in and out that will determine whether a pick is awarded and the quality of the players in vs players out isn't taken into account. Doesn't really seem fair to me.

I would have thought Riv and Moloney, being top 10 paid at our club we'd atleast get something should we lose them and gain Byrnes and Jordan Russell (for arguments sake)

That is an old article and it has changed - I have quoted an Age article about 5 times in the last fortnight that has AFL input and says that the difference in players will be rewarded with a pick should a club deserve one.

Again, this is not set in concrete and I await all the articles in the week leading up to FA all saying different things.

[RalphiusMaximus 6,101]

That is an old article and it has changed - I have quoted an Age article about 5 times in the last fortnight that has AFL input and says that the difference in players will be rewarded with a pick should a club deserve one.

Again, this is not set in concrete and I await all the articles in the week leading up to FA all saying different things.

At the AFLs discretion? Sounds a lot like the priority pick rule to me. No transparency in the system, just rewarding whoever they want to reward.

I have a sneaking suspicion that we will be underpaid for our players this time around; The AFL has to be aware that they gave us over the odds for Scully, especially in comparison to what other clubs were given. I would expect a bit of a square-up this time around.

[beelzebub 23,389]

"The bolded section is obviously the section that RM is referring to. So if we do not bring in as many players that go out, we get a compensation pick. If we bring in as many as we lose, we get nothing. That's my reading of it anyway."

Thats pretty well as to my reading on it as well. i.e theres a pick if a club experiences a residual loss afterr all the FA dust settles.. Thats ONE pick.

[Guest Rassilon]

... do we get any? Or does compensation only get applied for unrestricted free agents? And finally, does the fact that the club has stated its intention not to retain him change anything from a compensation perspective?

If it transpires that we are entitled to a pick, what do people think we'd receive for him? What about Rivers or Bate?

You can't look at compensation on isolated players ie Moloney. Its NET losses vs Net Gains.

I have said it elsewhere but I will say it again. The rules are quite specific and designed to assist lower finishing sides.

You did not get this off me - when down the bottom you are best to be a net losser of free agents .... when up the top you are best to be a net gainer of FA.

However, the implications are up to you to work out.

Edited September 17, 2012 by Rassilon