rpfc

No, Cooney's got a couple years left max.

I said we won't know if it is a good deal. Just like we don't know if the Tyson trade is a good deal. We all knew the McLean deal was a good deal, until it wasn't... And we didn't need Frawley, he proved himself surplus to requirements in 2014. The backline functioned quite well with McDonald, Dunn, Howe, and an out of sorts Garland. Frawley played some very solid games up forward but that forward line is about to be headlined by someone else, and in a few years all he will need is good delivery, some help, and for his teammates to get out of his way. ND3 can be far more useful right now for this club than James Frawley. Let's hope we use it to its full potential.

I'm writing all these down. You guys are quite something. So many varieties... Who knew there were so many different types of loser out there?

I don't get it...

Ok, now you're reaching.

I don't think HL is OOC.

You are thinking about it the wrong way around. Back when the draft started, kids did choose - Darren effing Jarman said 'no, thanks' to us and chose the powerhouse Hawks the next year. That was stopped in favour of the far better solution of a draft in which any kid that didn't want to go to a club was kicked out of the sport for two years. The same attitude change will happen in the next few years if the AFL is to turn truly professional - players will have little to no say in their trade destination and all contracts will be honoured so if we go and get a bloke with two years to go on his deal - we don't have to renegotiate. The NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL and every other regulated sports are run under these rules/guidelines. These are the sports that the AFL honchos look to for emulation. The AFL has to get there too.

Abolish this in the next CBA and the league will right itself in a few years largely because of it.

I really doubt that. Luke Ball got to ND30 and he was a better player, with a more acceptable history of injuries and personal issues.

Yes, for one prospective recruit. Which is why you want to get as many of these deals done now as possible. You only want to go to the Russian Roulette Table of Irrelevance once a year...

We get Dangerfield next year, the Crows get Pick 12 and we lose Pick 4. The Pies get Dangerfield's equivalent next year, the Crows get Pick 12 and the Pies lose Pick 10. The teams down the bottom will be punished more in this scenario. I don't like it at all.

Well behind? We won't know for years. Pick 3 is yet to be used/traded/lost under the couch - until that is known, free agency as it stands isn't the massive evil it is portrayed to be. If we trade it for Shiel - we are immediately far ahead. If Brayshaw comes on in two years time - we are likely ahead. The better run clubs can make the most of Free Agency as it stands. However, remove the compensation and the stakes are changed. The top tier free agents will still look for the bigger clubs. But hopefully it will be the bigger paycheck, and the AFLPA have got to pressure players to not accommodate pressure on them to sign under market value for clubs - equalisation under a salary cap with free agency requires players being paid their market value or higher. If only the small clubs are paying higher than market - we have a problem.

The 'Free' in free agency isn't the nature of the deal - it is the players movement not being hampered. With that said - if Hawthorn gave up their pick we would have Pick 17, not Pick 3. And we would have to surrender Pick 4 next year if we get Dangerfield. That would be a terrible result. The teams up the ladder surrendering less than the teams down the bottom for the same player? That sounds pretty arse about to me.

Who would pick him up before that? Would Collingwood? I think that it is fraught picking up blokes who have committed elsewhere - in the draft, especially ones with his history.

If he went into the draft, he would get to 33.

Just say to people; in the same way that FA wasn't meant to be an equalisation measure, Compensation wasn't meant to be fair. It is there to compensate lower clubs on the ladder more than higher clubs. If maths is a guide and talent is easily measurable - Hawthorn is 100 and Melbourne is 30, and Franklin is worth 10. Hawthorn lost a tenth of their talent, if we were to lose Franklin, we would lose a third of our talent. Of course we should be compensated more. Aven't dey 'erd ova fair go, cobba? It's 'Straya!

So that's what happened; he must have left, his people needed him...

Not only is that OK, that is how Free Agency becomes an equalisation force in a salary cap regulated sport.

OUT: Moloney, Rivers, Sylvia, Frawley IN: Byrnes, Kent, Vince, Pick 3 FA has taken a few players but when you look at how we have used (or not used) FA, it is not the train wreck some think it is. Compensation has helped though...

Yes, get a membership and you want see ads. As an aside, the site doesn't control the ads. The ads are controlled by you, they troll through your search history to give targeted advertising - I see Masters and Bunnings ads everywhere because I recently bought pretty much everything they sell. I need a power sander...

Is Frost OOC?

As Lamashtu implies - it's a hypothetical scenario that can't happen.

Shooting the sh!te with a few friends has got to be different to discussing this with a journo. We are going to let players talk to the friends aren't we? And GD has only said that we are going after him - knew that! Mahoney said it - and that we still have the offer out there.

He spoke about the club he is being kicked out of too... He was also accepting a personal award at the time. I think he can be forgiven for talking about himself and his motivations in his acceptance speech.

I don't disagree. My issue is not with those that question and prod and push, but when the talk goes immediately to the personalities involved and a desire to move on them - I have to roll my eyes. We love a good bloodletting.