The Frawley Domino

[binman 38,776]

We do not have the option of matching offers.

depends what you mean. Of course we can match an offer but unlike the case for a restricted free agent this does not compelled him to stay (or go into the draft)

[TheoX 1,218]

Yep, the fact that Geelong wouldn't have to 'pay' anything in terms of their current list or draft position makes it a huge gimme for them.

In a standard trade, they'd be looking at having to give up their first rounder and a young player.

As it is, well, fine, we pick up a first round pick, but they lose nothing.

Just imagine if Carlton had been able to recruit Judd without giving anything up. They could have been top-4 the last three years with Kennedy and two extra first round picks in hand.

System is broken.

That said, good luck to Frawley whether he stays or goes. The Melbourne Football Club is now strong enough to cope with losing a quality player. No longer the drowning man pulling down everyone around him in desperation.

If he walks out on us in his prime years, I won't be wishing him luck.

[Rob Mac...... 605]

Well I'd rather keep Chip than get any 1st round pick. He's the real thing and he's great now. We need great players NOW, not in 3 - 4 years when draftees develop. Also his leaving is the wrong message, we'd take a step backward at least in the short term.

[Dockett 32 1,213]

We seem to be getting better with the machinations of the overall list management.

Good to see the club get on the front foot re the extraordinary position of young Hogan . Does he stay? or could there be a bidding war on the horizon? Crank it up Dees.

Re Frawley, personally would love to see him stay, but if not, we will be satisfactorily compensated and Danny might be shown up for telling fibs.

[JV7 2,339]

I've said it in the previous Frawley thread.. What does he get out of signing at melbourne right now ? Apart from stopping the speculation. He can wait till seasons end and say "well club A is offering me this, what can you do ? " if he signed with us now he could be dudding himself 100-150k less. For all we know he's just trying to drag out an extra 100k out of us. I don't see why he would sign now serves no benefit to him whatsoever.

[autocol 448]

It also just proves FA is just a system for lower clubs to be a feeder system for the power clubs.

You're suffering from a fair bit of confirmation bias there mate. List of clubs who have lost a player to free agency (not including delisted free agents for obvious reasons):

Hawthorn x 4

Melbourne x 3

Port Adelaide x 2

St Kilda x 2

Adelaide

West Coast

Geelong

Richmond

Carlton

Collingwood

The two teams that have lost the most players are the worst team of the free agency period (that's us) and the best team of the free agency period (the Hawks). Between, you've got losses from three "power clubs" (Geelong, West Coast and Collingwood), two traditionally strong clubs which are currently floundering (Richmond and Carlton), two interstate sides which have looked both great and average-to-terrible in recent times (Port and Adelaide) and two departures from the currently hopeless Saints.

There's absolutely nothing in that to suggest that Free Agency is doing anything other than helping established players earn their maximum value, if they choose to forgo team loyalty to do so. Yes, the Dees have been hit hard recently because people leave in search of a finals-bound team, but the Hawks have lost just as many who are, ironically, also in search of a finals-bound team (but one which they can actually get on the park for). Franklin and Daisy, both high-profile players at high profile clubs, have left via free agency. On the evidence currently availble, the system does not unfairly disadvantage lower tier clubs, and in fact, now that you can "bank" the salary cap for a few years, it will become a weapon for the lower tier clubs to use to pry underpaid champions away from champion teams.

Edited June 19, 2014 by autocol

[Josh 1,420]

Lawyered ^

[Binmans PA 26,294]

I'm very certain he's gone. There are too many indicators suggesting so and his moving of the goal posts in what he needs to see to stay really shows he committed to leave a long time ago. Problem is the boys keep ruining his reasons for going. A real shame and perhaps he is slightly regretting it at this stage.

Would you please be kind enough to outline those indicators, Munga?

[Binmans PA 26,294]

He's seen the "direction of the club" and it couldn't be better.

In all honesty, I couldn't care less what he does. He's full of excuses. I'd rather someone who wants to be part of a solution rather than someone who wants to be served success on a silver platter.

The FA landscape dictates that players (under advise for management, no doubt) will wait out longer and longer to sign contract extensions. It doesn't mean they're leaving though. The point of FA was to ensure the player's had more...agency. This has afforded it to them, two fold. They can either switch clubs for more money or they can use interest from opposition clubs as leverage to garner a larger contract at their current club.

Is he?

The ones I see that are full of excuses, are the ones trying to explain their justification for their certainty that he is leaving, when they're really just feebly trying to protect their own feelings in the event he does leave.

I'd love to know what these imaginary unnamed indicators are that posters keep talking about...

Nail on the head, M.

Frawley I've been confident on all year until a good chat I had with a knowledgeable footy mate of mine last night.

I said I was confident he was Staying, direction etc etc, and he told me to produce a statement where Frawley said I want to stay.

He said footballers will use their buzzwords but until you hear that, they're as good as gone.

Gibbs said it in a statement, Fyfe has said he wants to stay at Freo, the best we've got out of James is his blood bleeds Red and Blue.

I Think he's made up his mind long ago...

I'm sorry, but your mate sounds like a dill. I hate people speaking in definites. So unless a player comes out and says they're staying, they're out the door? So Tommy Mac's out the door is he? I haven't heard him saying he's staying.

Think logically about this, Demonlanders.

[Deemotivated 550]

Lawyered ^

Thanks for getting involved... You've added much to this discussion.

[Machsy 2,858]

You're suffering from a fair bit of confirmation bias there mate. List of clubs who have lost a player to free agency (not including delisted free agents for obvious reasons):

Hawthorn x 4

Melbourne x 3

Port Adelaide x 2

St Kilda x 2

Adelaide

West Coast

Geelong

Richmond

Carlton

Collingwood

The two teams that have lost the most players are the worst team of the free agency period (that's us) and the best team of the free agency period (the Hawks). Between, you've got losses from three "power clubs" (Geelong, West Coast and Collingwood), two traditionally strong clubs which are currently floundering (Richmond and Carlton), two interstate sides which have looked both great and average-to-terrible in recent times (Port and Adelaide) and two departures from the currently hopeless Saints.

There's absolutely nothing in that to suggest that Free Agency is doing anything other than helping established players earn their maximum value, if they choose to forgo team loyalty to do so. Yes, the Dees have been hit hard recently because people leave in search of a finals-bound team, but the Hawks have lost just as many who are, ironically, also in search of a finals-bound team (but one which they can actually get on the park for). Franklin and Daisy, both high-profile players at high profile clubs, have left via free agency. On the evidence currently availble, the system does not unfairly disadvantage lower tier clubs, and in fact, now that you can "bank" the salary cap for a few years, it will become a weapon for the lower tier clubs to use to pry underpaid champions away from champion teams.

Help! For the life of me, I can't figure out who the free agents are that Hawthorn have lost besides Buddy.

I can't even remember 3 from us! Rivers... Moloney... ?

Or Geelong FAs?

I'm honestly struggling.

[Machsy 2,858]

Ok, so...

St Kilda x 2 = Goddard, Dal Santo

Geelong = Byrnes

Collingwood = Dale Thomas

[Machsy 2,858]

Carlton = Eddie Betts

Richmond = Matt White

West Coast = ?

Adelaide = ?

[Machsy 2,858]

Port = Chaplin, ?

Hawthorn = Franklin, Murphy?, ?, ?

Wait... Ok figured these ones out.

Adelaide = Knights.

Melbourne = Rivers, Moloney, Sylvia

[Machsy 2,858]

Oh ok,

So

West Coast = Quinten Lynch

actually Carlton x3 = Betts, Jordan Russell, Bret Thornton

[Machsy 2,858]

So Xavier Ellis and Clinton Young were the others for Hawthorn.

[Ted Lasso 16,930]

Hawks have lost, Murphy, young, buddy

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

This line by Frawley really proves how little he thinks before he speaks...

"At this club we've seen massive improvement over the last few years and if we keep going in the right trend, we'll hopefully be playing finals really soon."

I don't know what improvement 'over the last few years' he's talking about. Does anyone else?

As for Finals, I'm pretty sure he said the lure to leave is from the possibility of playing finals football. Yet he says in the quote above, 'we'll hopefully be playing finals really soon'.

The bloke is an airhead and definitely an overrated player. One year All Australian full back and y'all call him a superstar. Dunn might get it this year, I wonder if he'll suddenly rise up the charts.

He can go. His worth to us as a leader and culture changer is non-existent and his onfield performance is grossly overrated.

We need players that can change our club, and if Frawley goes, our chances of nabbing one improve greatly.

Edited June 19, 2014 by stevethemanjordan

[rpfc 27,590]

He can go, but that doesn't mean it will make us a better team.

We will be worse if he does leave and if we can finagle a trade that gets us a great young mid we may be better off pretty much immediately but that is a big 'if'...

I think you talking him down so much does your argument a disservice - we will not be better for his departure.

[stevethemanjordan 6,952]

He can go, but that doesn't mean it will make us a better team.

We will be worse if he does leave and if we can finagle a trade that gets us a great young mid we may be better off pretty much immediately but that is a big 'if'...

I think you talking him down so much does your argument a disservice - we will not be better for his departure.

Obviously not if we don't get anything back for letting him go. But we will be won't we. A compo pick. Which will help in either trading for a seriously good mid. Or going to the draft again with another opportunity to strike gold. And we know with our current recruiting team, our chances would be fairly good you'd think..

We will be a better team next year. Without Frawley.

[rpfc 27,590]

Obviously not if we don't get anything back for letting him go. But we will be won't we. A compo pick. Which will help in either trading for a seriously good mid. Or going to the draft again with another opportunity to strike gold. And we know with our current recruiting team, our chances would be fairly good you'd think..

We will be a better team next year. Without Frawley.

That draft pick will not fill the void left in 2015.

There are no definites in this game.

Frawley is a good player and 2015 will most likely be tougher for his absence.

[monoccular 16,281]

Because merging threads is a pain in the arse, and locking them is one single press of a button. If posters are going to be lazy and start new threads when there's clearly at least one other appropriate thread ON THE FIRST PAGE, then I am going to be lazy when I dispose of them.

Is it as easy to delete them as to lock them? IMVHO that is a better way to handle them.

I've said it in the previous Frawley thread.. What does he get out of signing at melbourne right now ? Apart from stopping the speculation. He can wait till seasons end and say "well club A is offering me this, what can you do ? " if he signed with us now he could be dudding himself 100-150k less. For all we know he's just trying to drag out an extra 100k out of us. I don't see why he would sign now serves no benefit to him whatsoever.

like Lynden done??

Ok, so...

St Kilda x 2 = Goddard, Dal Santo

Geelong = Byrnes

Collingwood = Dale Thomas

Wasn't Byrnes delisted ?

[Machsy 2,858]

Is it as easy to delete them as to lock them? IMVHO that is a better way to handle them. like Lynden done??

Wasn't Byrnes delisted ?

Nope.

He was the reason we lost both Rivers and Moloney and received a pitiful single 3rd round compensation pick.

Should have waited for him to be delisted at the least.

[Macca 16,173]

We drafted Dean Kent with that 3rd round compensation pick ... a more than handy late pick by the looks of it.

We've drafted quite well in the last 2 off seasons ... when Toumpas and Hogan start firing, that 2012 draft will look even better.

Viney and Matt Jones are progressing well and Terlich just needs to improve his disposal and decision making - we know he can go at the ball hard.

... 2012 National Draft

[ignition. 1,413]

Obviously not if we don't get anything back for letting him go. But we will be won't we. A compo pick. Which will help in either trading for a seriously good mid. Or going to the draft again with another opportunity to strike gold. And we know with our current recruiting team, our chances would be fairly good you'd think..

We will be a better team next year. Without Frawley.

That draft pick will not fill the void left in 2015.

There are no definites in this game.

Frawley is a good player and 2015 will most likely be tougher for his absence.

Look at any AFL premiership side and they are or have been filled with men like that of Frawley. Not 18 - 19 year old recruits (sure there may have been the odd one or two, but generally speaking a premiership side is men in their prime).

Look at our side and the best and most consistent players are men. Not the younger guns showing promise or glimpses of the future.

If we were to lose Frawley and take whatever compensation pick we receive to the draft, we would be going backwards.

If we were to lose Frawley and trade whatever compensation pick for a player that will perform week in week out (or at least 2 years away from entering the start of their prime) we would be breaking even or even possibly finish ahead - that is if a decent deal can be struck during trade week.

Anyway a line must be drawn and the club must now start retaining their free agents (as a continuation from Dunn) and better yet start poaching and obtaining quality free agents.