What value is 'free agency'?

[corowa 216]

Apart from encouraging players not to sue for restraint of trade, I can't see much positive about free agency.

Being a supporter of one of the less successful clubs I see free agency as a means for successful clubs to become stronger by attracting the few long term successful players at clubs like ours.

Of all of the players to leave their clubs via free agency how many of them have come from 'unsuccessful' or 'struggling' clubs?

How many have come from the 'top' teams?

How many have gone to 'top' teams as opposed to 'bottom' teams?

Instead of being a means of evening up the competition, I believe that free agency is doing the opposite.

Can anyone supply answers to the questions above, please?

[Machsy 2,858]

It's for the players, not for the clubs.

It's for the clubs to figure out how to use it to their best advantage.

It won't go away.

[old dee 23,799]

Bugger all for lowly clubs like the dees.

Sylvia and buddy are perfect examples.

Buddy did want to play for easy beats in GWS and Sylvia wants a GF chance.

[H_T 3,049]

Players have the power now, not so much the clubs.

It's now incumbent upon the struggling clubs to be very prudent, strategic and all those things to do what is possible in not being a feeder club for the contending clubs who can pluck FA players to fill their needs.

It it makes it bloody hard.

What was this recent equalisation trip about anyway?

[PJ_12345 1,098]

Apart from encouraging players not to sue for restraint of trade, I can't see much positive about free agency.

Being a supporter of one of the less successful clubs I see free agency as a means for successful clubs to become stronger by attracting the few long term successful players at clubs like ours.

Of all of the players to leave their clubs via free agency how many of them have come from 'unsuccessful' or 'struggling' clubs?

How many have come from the 'top' teams?

How many have gone to 'top' teams as opposed to 'bottom' teams?

Instead of being a means of evening up the competition, I believe that free agency is doing the opposite.

Can anyone supply answers to the questions above, please?

It's a matter of perspective; some see opportunity in threats and some see threats in opportunity.

I've always seen it as a good opportunity for struggling clubs to poach good players at good clubs who struggle to get a game (such as Dawes).

There is a case that compensation does not take into consideration where the club is on the ladder and the difference between the compensation which is a pick at a young player in the draft compared to the existing, experienced player who is leaving but these picks can be traded and as Machiavelli said its up to the clubs to figure how to use this to their best advantage - it's not going to go away.

[demoniac 1,333]

Free Agency will most definitely work in favour of the strong clubs. Sometimes a strong club will lose a player to an equally strong club ie Buddy to the Swans or to a big if not currently strong club ie Thomas to the Blues but generally it will be the weaker clubs like us that lose A or B Grade players to the stronger clubs. Sometimes players will move for money but just as often they'll move to a club that plays finals pretty much every year. Losing Sylvia is not a hammer blow for us but losing Frawley at the end of 2014 would be a brutal loss. We might be able to pick up a few C Graders. Essentially the same teams will play finals every year and we'll divided like the Premier League between the haves and have nots.

There are things the AFL can do to asssist the weaker clubs ie like ensuring they can pay 100% of the salary cap but rest assured the big clubs will fight too and nail against any genuine equalisation measures outside of the salary cap and the draft. So we are in the Commission's hands.

Back to Frawley you can just imagine the Hawks having him as their Number One Free Agency Target in 12 months time to replace Lake and keep themselves in Premiership contention.

[The heart beats true 18,128]

I'm glad we didn't get a priority pick. That would have been unfair on the likes of Sydney and Freo.

Oh, wait......

[demoniac 1,333]

It's a matter of perspective; some see opportunity in threats and some see threats in opportunity.

I've always seen it as a good opportunity for struggling clubs to poach good players at good clubs who struggle to get a game (such as Dawes).

There is a case that compensation does not take into consideration where the club is on the ladder and the difference between the compensation which is a pick at a young player in the draft compared to the existing, experienced player who is leaving but these picks can be traded and as Machiavelli said its up to the clubs to figure how to use this to their best advantage - it's not going to go away.

So you'd be happy if free agency allowed us to recruit a self confessed role player like Dawes (I am pro Dawes by the way) but saw us lose an All Oz CHB in Frawley? Cause thats the reality going forward...

[PJ_12345 1,098]

So you'd be happy if free agency allowed us to recruit a self confessed role player like Dawes (I am pro Dawes by the way) but saw us lose an All Oz CHB in Frawley? Cause thats the reality going forward...

Demoniac you're acting like we have a choice in the matter. It's here to stay. I don't mean to be too blunt but get used to it.

We have the chance to re-sign Frawley until his contract expires and to match another offer (pretty sure he is restricted). The club needs to do everything in their capacity to keep players, and also to take advantages of FA.

PS, if you're going to put in All Australian for Frawley then you should mention that Dawes is a premiership winner... and Cleo Bachelor of the Year

[sue 9,107]

It's a matter of perspective; some see opportunity in threats and some see threats in opportunity.

I've always seen it as a good opportunity for struggling clubs to poach good players at good clubs who struggle to get a game (such as Dawes).

There is a case that compensation does not take into consideration where the club is on the ladder and the difference between the compensation which is a pick at a young player in the draft compared to the existing, experienced player who is leaving but these picks can be traded and as Machiavelli said its up to the clubs to figure how to use this to their best advantage - it's not going to go away.

By definition those who are struggling to get a game are worse than the ones getting a game. So while there may be exceptions, on average we would always have a team weaker than the top teams.

It's all very well to see opportunity in threats, but I'm afraid the same can be said by the man on the gallows seeing the opportunity of entering heaven when they open the trapdoor.

[rpfc 28,530]

Didn't one of the best players from the Premiers leave in FA?

It is only a disaster if you don't work out how to use it to your advantage.

I will let you whinge for a couple years, but at some point you are going to have to build that bridge because it is here to stay.

[PJ_12345 1,098]

By definition those who are struggling to get a game are worse than the ones getting a game. So while there may be exceptions, on average we would always have a team weaker than the top teams.

It's all very well to see opportunity in threats, but I'm afraid the same can be said by the man on the gallows seeing the opportunity of entering heaven when they open the trapdoor.

You've failed to take into account the standards of the teams where players are struggling to get a game at compared to the team they are going to.

Ie, Dawes - struggled to get a game at Collingwood but definitely in our best 22.

Same can be said for a number of free agents out there this year (Cross, Chapman, Thomas, Ellis ect.)

RPFC has said the rest.

[T-34 409]

Dawes didn't come through free agency, we paid a heavy price to lure this role player through the door.

If we had to compete for his services in free agency he would have finished up as a role player at a higher ranked club.

We do need to get our heads around it as it is going nowhere but we also need to acknowledge that it was not brought in to assist clubs like us, it was brought in to assist players leave clubs like us.

[sue 9,107]

You've failed to take into account the standards of the teams where players are struggling to get a game at compared to the team they are going to.

Ie, Dawes - struggled to get a game at Collingwood but definitely in our best 22.

Same can be said for a number of free agents out there this year (Cross, Chapman, Thomas, Ellis ect.)

RPFC has said the rest.

While the Dawes-like players may make our team better than it would otherwise be, it will still be made up of second-raters (on average) who couldn't displace better players at top clubs. Of course there will be occasional players who can't get a spot for other reasons, but they will be snapped up by the richer more attractive clubs. And there may be some who will suddenly develop when moved to the weaker clubs. But on average, the weaker clubs will have second-raters and lose any picks they get when they develop into A-graders.

Edited October 3, 2013 by sue

[bing181 9,246]

Dawes didn't come through free agency

It's an important difference, simply because he's (a lot) younger than FA players.

FA players are usually looking at their last contract, and as such, are not really interested in taking a long-term view of their future, or of the club they go to. Thus, clubs that are at/near the top of the ladder will always be more attractive.

If a player like Sylvia moves from a club like Melbourne, it will always be to a club that will play in finals. Otherwise, he might as well stay.

[rufus 1,162]

We're stuffed under the current model. It's actually funny how players are moving clubs with the excuse of looking for a premiership. How is it a genuinely earnt premiership as a player when you cherry pick onto a well established ship? How about showing loyalty to the club that stuck by you during your lower years of output and using your prime years to try and get YOUR club into contention? These blokes are kidding themselves with their demands for free agency. At least 6 of the 9 games every weekend are almost unwatchable for the poor quality, created mostly by the gap in talent (created in turn by the talent being spread too thin). The product these guys have been putting out doesn't justify them now having control of the future of the clubs like they do.

Having said that, the only hope for clubs like ours is for the compensation for free agency to be significantly improved. And why shouldn't it be? The poor compensation is the biggest killer because we have now lost probably our mos capable player and we will get nothing for him. At least if we were to get high draft picks for all the players we will continually lose to free agency we might get lucky (e.g. Hawthorn in '08, Essendon '93) and get high output out of our kids before their true prime years and maybe just maybe fluke one.

[Demoneyes 562]

James is a restricted FA next year but will be uncontarcted at the end of it. We do need to re-sign him but I take a little comfort in the fact he has said in the last few days his heart beats red and blue! Him and Garland are extremely close and I am not concerned about him going elsewhere as I believe he will stay. In response to the post, we have been down for a little (!) while so it is difficult to attract the FA's when after serving 8-10 years all they want is a premiership or at least finals. We just need to rise, and the FA's will come and then the other clubs will have the same complaint!

[rufus 1,162]

James is a restricted FA next year but will be uncontarcted at the end of it. We do need to re-sign him but I take a little comfort in the fact he has said in the last few days his heart beats red and blue! Him and Garland are extremely close and I am not concerned about him going elsewhere as I believe he will stay. In response to the post, we have been down for a little (!) while so it is difficult to attract the FA's when after serving 8-10 years all they want is a premiership or at least finals. We just need to rise, and the FA's will come and then the other clubs will have the same complaint!

It's nice to think that Frawley's heart beats red and blue. I guess we've heard pretty much every player that has moved over the last few years state during their last season that they want to be a one club player and stick with their current club. Has to be taken with a grain of salt evidently.

My belief is that clubs like North, Bulldogs, Demons and Saints will never get the benefit from free agency that the bigger clubs will get. Even when one of these 4 teams gets up and going they generally don't have the resources in place to make it a really sustained period of opportunity (look at how quickly the Saints and Dogs fell away after their premiership tilts). This makes these clubs significantly less attractive to the player who wants to move for a shot at success. This is just my opinion but I don't like where it's heading for us.

[ThreeOneSix 954]

There appears to be almost zero benefit for the lower clubs in regards to free agency.

The AFL needs to give overs in regards to compo for the poorer clubs.

As it stands, the only players Melbourne will get through FA, are players that no other clubs want.

And... Even then we'll be paying through the teeth to get these players.

[deejammin' 2,370]

Thought I would put this together to make the results of Free Agency clear, many players who were trades (like Brian Lake and Chris Dawes) are being used against FA. I have not included Delisted free agents as i think this is irrelevant to any discussion regarding teams losing required players. Also I have put the results in ladder order to make it clear which teams are most affected. I will do 2013 when its finished but here is 2012:

Lost Gained

2012

Hawthorn Tom Murphy, Clinton Young Pick 64

Adelaide Chris Knights Nothing

Sydney None None

Collingwood None Quinten Lynch, Clinton Young

West Coast Quinten Lynch Pick 60

Geelong Shannon Byrnes, Jared Rivers

Freo None Danyle Pearce

North None None

St Kilda Brendon Goddard Pick 13

Carlton None None

Essendon None Brendon Goddard

Richmond None Troy Chaplin

Brisbane None None

Port Danyle Pearce, Troy Chaplin Pick 29, Pick 30

WB None None

Melbourne Brent Moloney, Jared Rivers Shannon Byrnes, Pick 48

GC None Tom Murphy

GWS None None

Needless to say we have not been well served by FA, as it stands we have lost Brent Moloney, Jared Rivers and Colin Sylvia for a net gain of Shannon Byrnes, Pick 48 and most likely another 3rd round pick. Not a good return for three experienced players who would all be best 22 when they left.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,400]

Great post, whole lot of worry about nothing.

[deejammin' 2,370]

Didn't one of the best players from the Premiers leave in FA?

It is only a disaster if you don't work out how to use it to your advantage.

I will let you whinge for a couple years, but at some point you are going to have to build that bridge because it is here to stay.

RPFC while I respect and admire your contribution to this board I think you have actually made the opposite point than you intend. Franklin left the Premiers for the 4th ranked team, if FA was going to work in a way that was fair for the comp it would have aided lower teams GWS or another lower ladder side in being able to outbid top sides with extra cap room in order to better their list and make the comp more equal. The fact free agency helped Franklin to go to a successful side that he liked rather than aiding those who need him most shows that this system serves the players and strong clubs more than any others. In fact I think this is the first clear example of free agency being bad for the comp.

If, by contrast, Franklin went into a trade system most low clubs would have more assets to outbid Sydney for Franklin, or Sydney would have had to lose a good player or draft pick to gain him. As it stands they have lost nothing and gained an extremely valuable player while the poorer clubs get poorer.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,400]

Geelong have shown what's needed to remain competitive in terms of moving players on. This year they weren't afraid to make the tough calls. If you don't your young emerging players will seek opportunities else where. Players will/should be aware of this.

[rpfc 28,530]

DJ - Sydney got him because of their allowance. Otherwise, he would be at GWS where he is sorely needed. I wouldn't put it past The Bloated One to stop it even this late and send him there.

FA is without bias, the clubs that have room and a good pitch can get good players. We haven't had a good pitch, but that tone will change with Roos will it not?

Moloney was not wanted by the MFC and while we can all hide behind Neeld ruining him, I don't think his departure hurt at all. His lack of leadership, finger pointing, front running, and inability to get to contests wore thin with me as I wrote in his last couple of years.

Rivers was playing forward for us in his last year for all those revisionists - we had moved past him.

The Sylvia situation was played well by the club. Roos wants to imprint a culture on this place and Colin would be more of a hindrance than a help. Of all his transgressions I know that not all were actually reported.

And the club, and FA, should deliver us Pick 22 for Colin so don't just dismiss that chance to suit your argument.

Should Frawley leave next year he will net is a top 5 pick or a very good trade.

FA rewards smart clubs, oddly enough I think that Port has been the smartest; they got two second round picks for Chaplin and Pearce, traded for FA Monfries, and have already been on the attack with the signing of Matt White.

We are worried because we have been a terribly run club, but how about we try and be a well run club instead of worrying about a system that will not leave.

[monoccular 17,432]

If you are a top 4 club, especially if not constrained as others are by a real salary cap ala $ydney, it is great.

If you are struggling and are constrained, there is very little to offer.

All part of the AFL's equalization program, that is equalizing the top of the table and equalizing the also rans. Two unequal levels of equality