Lucifers Hero

Chip.

HS and other AFL websites love it. The ratio of clicks is far higher during trade time then during the season. Each click gets them some money. Orchestrated for max media interests. Edit: Forgot to add Fantasia, Caldwell and Jack Higgins to list of 'juicy' trades. Nearly every Vic club affected by potential trades.

Or the AFL is holding back the 'juicy' trades to create 'drama'. They will love Treloar, Cameron, Stevenson, Cox, Phillips, Dunkley, Brown announcements being delayed. That is a lot of fans hanging on (click baiting) for news.

Incentives do count towards the overall sal cap. But in the overall sal cap clubs have 'money pools' for things like: incentives eg if a player finishes 1st in the BnF they get x$ or x%, finish 2nd and it is $y or y% etc. Similar for Brownlow votes. games played incentives: 'play > x games' and the player gets $x or x%. (Phillips at Colllingwood is an example of this). Clubs have a number of players on these incentives but would 'hedge' (budget) that not all reach them. players on '$ per game' contracts (eg rookies and lower level players) getting a game. The fewer of these payments the lower the demands on the sal cap. A club would again 'hedge' (budget) only a certain part of the sal cap is needed for this. (As an aside this badly hurt our sal cap last year when so many 'contract based' players were injured and we had to pay them and make 'game based' payments to the replacements). Each of these 'pools' would be included in and budgetted as part of the overall sal cap and not a particular player. My point was how a new club can structure TMac's package so that only the 'base component' is guarenteed and a definite part of the sal cap. Any incentives to Tom come from the 'money pools' above which as I mentioned are budgetted separately as part of the overall sal cap.

With my suggestion of an incentive based component and mfc subsidy I would guess his base cost to a club would be around $550/$600 not much more than Phillips is apparently on. My math is $700-$750 k package. $100-$150k mfc subsidy. $50-$100k incentive component (games played, BnF finish) etc. (And/or the other club could add triggers for a contract extension incentive and use that to trade off some base $). Tom is a proud guy. He would give his all so would work hard to get the incentive back and to stay in the team.

If Tom agreed to to an incentive component with the club he goes to, plus our subsidy, it would soften the impact on the receiving club's TPP. It isn't a lower package per se. He can get the same but needs to do more to 'earn' it. It must be preferable to playing two years at Casey. A few candidates that might have another look (in likely order): Sydney will lose Aliir Aliir and were very interested in Tom in 2018 Can GWS rely on Jesse getting on the park each week? Carlton look like they may lose Curnow for the best part of 2021 Collingwood if they lose Cox Ess are taking a punt on Wright to spearhead their rise up the ladder And AvB could be packaged with Tom if he went to a NSW club.

Pick #30 might go to North for Higgins (rejected #38). While that deal is not directly connected to the Brown deal it may help it get done.

I would hope so! But they also seem very keen to trade up the draft and it looks like they want to be higher than the bulldogs pick, which is why they have turned down pick #38 from Geelong for Higgins.

If it were pick 26 and 31 which has also been touted it is equivalent to #10-#11. Even in normal circumstances a pick equivalent in the #10-#14 range looks a bit on the high side. If that is what they want they are doing an Essendon and acting like the player is under contract and they are happy to keep him. Hope we don't weaken especially if we want to trade up the draft.

I don't put much store in what Jon Ralph reports but fwiw: "...Melbourne was “very open” to giving Picks 31 and 33 to North in exchange for Brown". In points that is equivalent to #14 ? Not on in my book for a player they have dumped on the footpath.

Looks like North are playing hard ball. Reports are they have rejected Geelong's offer of #38 for Higgins. Given he wouldn't be on high $, its a 2 year contract and his age, I thought that offer quite reasonable. Hawks have let equivalent players go for picks #60+. May not bode well for what we have to trade for Brown. Hopefully, Mahoney doesn't blink.

Since you asked so nicely..(btw I'm a female ?) Includes latest pick updates and Hannan and Preuss trades. We have 35 Senior players and 3 'A' rookies with 3 senior players and 4 rookies still OOC. We have at least 3 vacant senior spots and 1 vacant rookie spots (final number depends on list size).

Found it! no-more-hidden-picks-afl-alters-the-draft-bidding-system "The AFL has ruled that the number of selections a club holds going into the national draft must match the number of vacant spots on their primary list". Applies to Academy and NGA clubs.

I don't recall the details but a club (I think Sydney) did some dodgy deals a few years back and the AFL closed the loophole. I'll do some checking to confirm (or otherwise) what I wrote.

Not sure how that will work. The AFL has a rule that a NGA/Academy club can't have more draft picks than they have list spots. (Not sure if rule applies to F/S) If I was them I would trade/swap it out for future picks as it is said to be a very strong draft. They get their guy this year and another very good one next year.

Agreed.

Thinking a bit more about how Bulldogs can maximise value of pick 14. There is little value swapping it for later 2020 picks as either way the points get swallowed up by their NGA player. They will get more value if they trade it out for some combo of player/2020 later picks/future picks. So I doubt they will simply swamp it for 2020 picks.

Last year we did both. iirc we traded future 1st to North during the trade period then did a pick swap with Freo before draft night. So we are quite adept at working the system (in an honest way).

I don't think so. I can't recall if his name was raised on here by an 'informed' poster or a wishful thinking poster.

Is Mccrae as our draft target real or has it become DL folklore? Pick #14 is unlikely to get him once the top NGA/FS/Academy picks are taken. It will be pick ~#20. Mccrae is talked about mid 1st round pick so we need to target current picks 6-10. Heaven help us if that means dealing with Essendon... Also it is worth remembering that picks can be traded between when the player trade period closes and draft night. Then again 'live' on draft night.

So are a bunch of other clubs. They all know that Bulldogs want to dump it. I'd be surprised if they trade it now. More value to them if they trade it post Trade close and before Draft night.

Demand and Supply at work: Lots of interest in Preuss. Not much (if any) in Brown. Altho will wait and see if anything is attached to 33 for Brown.

Didn't know that. Has any club done that? I recall that Hawks and Geel received an exemption to take a pick in the 4 year window but that is different to your suggestion. Would imagine a club needs a very good reason.

We can't trade our future 1st unless we get one back or a future 2nd back.

He isn't. Ess played a bit of dirty pool to get Wright cheaply and GCS blinked.