AFL trade rumours update: The great compensation debate

By Josh / Expert

After the first day of trade period saw a number of deals done, day two was a bit of a let down as we all waited anxiously for, well, nothing in the end.

The only real piece of news all day was the most controversial, as the AFL informed Brisbane that, if they choose not to match the offer Matthew Leuenberger accepted from Essendon on Monday, they will receive only a pick at the end of the second round as compensation for his departure.

At the moment that would be pick 38 but with the Eagles and the Hawks also expected to gain compensation picks, it would slide back to at least pick 40.

The Lions would have been confident of receiving at least a pick immediately after their current second rounder, which would have been pick 22, and are not happy with the AFL’s decision.

“He was a first-round draft pick and at his best a strong contender for All Australian selection, so we would expect better than what we have been offered as compensation,” Lions CEO Greg Swann said.

“It’s a matter of fairness and consistency. Given what has happened in recent years in relation to compensation picks, we would have thought that we’d have received something in the second round rather than at the end of it.”

Because of that the Lions are now considering their position and may wind up matching the offer from Essendon in an attempt to force a trade and get something better in return for Leuenberger.

Pick 40 after all is not much chop but the Lions might able to swing pick 23 away from the Bombers, or perhaps a different pick around the same mark depending on how their deals for Jake Melksham and Jake Carlisle pan out.

For me the whole saga highlights the problems the AFL is going through with the free agency compensation system.

I’ve never been a fan of compensation picks for losing free agents, mostly for the reason that they aren’t really compensation picks, they’re incentivisation picks.

It’s essentially become a case of clubs believing that if you push your free agents out the door, you can get a better-than-market-value return for them through AFL hand-outs.

In the first two years of free agency, compensation was relatively reasonable. No one was awarded anything better than pick 11, and the only players who attracted first round picks were Brendon Goddard and Dale Thomas – both accomplished players in their own right.

Then in 2014, the AFL opened Pandora’s box. Melbourne asked for a priority pick and the AFL wasn’t willing to give them one – at least, they weren’t willing to call it a priority pick. But when James Frawley left the Dees they were happy to give them pick 3 in ‘compensation’.

It was a bit of a joke and it has taught clubs that all you need to do to be massively overcompensated for a free agent departure is make some sad puppy dog eyes while quietly telling said free agents to get lost.

Carlton were reportedly considering the same move with Matthew Kreuzer when they thought it would earn them pick 2 in this year’s draft. And the Lions were originally hopeful that Leuenberger would earn them a first-rounder also. Both clubs asked for priority picks this year, following the Melbourne pattern.

The AFL however seems to have realised its mistake and has now drastically toughened up on free agency compensation – it now looks like you’ll have to lose a bonafide superstar to earn a first rounder, and even serviceable players like Selwood, Suckling and Leuenberger will provide little return.

It’s probably for the best. Clubs will be upset but hopefully they will learn that free agency isn’t a vending machine where you push in an average player and out falls a high draft pick.

That said, the fact that the AFL is willing to let the Lions know what kind of compensation they’re in line for before they even make their decision suggests to me they haven’t fully learned their lesson yet.

If it was up to me I’d get rid of compensation picks altogether and tell clubs they should work harder to retain their players – the “shoot ’em all and let God sort ’em out” approach – but the AFL’s current system may eventually work out also.

Anyway, enough time on the soapbox! Let’s get into the trade rumours. There may not have been any movements yesterday, but there was still the odd piece of news springing up here and there.

Where Jeremy Howe wants to go isn’t clear yet but a number of potential deals are showing up. With Melbourne keen to secure Collingwood’s Ben Kennedy, a straight swap could be on the cards if Howe nominates the Magpies.

Alternatively, it’s believed the Gold Coast Suns are willing to offer the Demons a swap of first round picks, which would see Melbourne move from pick 6 to pick 3, if Howe decides to join them.

It was expected that the Demons and the Bombers would close a deal for Jake Melksham for pick 25 yesterday, but nothing came of this. Not sure why, but perhaps the rumoured deal isn’t as set in stone as once thought.

Negotiations between Carlton and Richmond for Chris Yarran are going nowhere fast, the Blues are insisting on a first round pick but Richmond aren’t willing to put their pick 12 on the table.

The Tigers are looking around for a later first round pick to make the trade work but it’s not clear how they’re planning to obtain it.

Richmond are also looking to secure Greater Western Sydney’s Jacob Townsend and it’s believed that a trade has been all but finalised, however it’s not likely to be confirmed until after the Yarran deal is sorted out with that being a higher priority for the Tigers.

Adelaide’s Sam Kerridge is being targeted by Carlton who are offering him a three-year deal. Kerridge has been impressive in his past appearances at AFL level, but managed only one game this season and might consider the move in search of greater oppportunity.

Fremantle are reportedly interested in recruiting Carlton’s Levi Casboult, but only in the event that a deal for Cam McCarthy falls through.

The Giants aren’t willing to put Adam Tomlinson on the trade table, but his manager has said he’s no guarantee to still be at the club in 2016, with offers on the table from Victorian clubs including Carlton.

Graeme Allen, the Giants’ General Manager of Football, said yesterday that a number of Victorian clubs were interested in Treloar and he was no guarantee to get to Collingwood.

He continued the Giants’ insistence that there would be no trade for Cam McCarthy, but admitted the likes of Tomas Bugg, Curtly Hampton, Lachie Plowman, Jed Lamb, Andrew Phillips and Liam Sumner were all likely to leave.

Dawson Simpson is looking more and more likely to sign with Greater Western Sydney as a free agent, but the Giants say they’re still looking at a number of ruckmen as support options for Shane Mumford.

Collingwood have reportedly shown some interest in both Blake Acres and Ahmed Saad from St Kilda, in what to me feels a bit like an attempt at getting revenge on the Saints for luring Nathan Freeman. I’m surprised Eddie McGuire hasn’t declared war on anything yet.

And speaking of Collingwood, Nathan Buckley sent out the below tweet yesterday.

A meaningful wink in the direction of Brisbane and Greater Western Sydney is heavily implied.

Richmond are reportedly interested in securing Port Adelaide midfielder Andrew Moore. No strong word yet on where Port’s Aaron Young may wind up.

Jed Anderson’s fate remains uncertain as the Hawks are still intent on retaining him if possible, and he hasn’t nominated a destination yet. If he does the Hawks are reportedly looking for a pick around the 20-25 mark.

Rival clubs are reportedly interested in North Melbourne’s Brad McKenzie, who played only one game this year, but which clubs these are isn’t clear.

Adelaide’s Matt Crouch was the subject of some trade rumours but he is staying put, signing a three-year deal with the Crows that will lock him away through till the end of 2018.

The Crowd Says:

2015-10-15T02:21:54+00:00

jax

Guest


Pay is grey because some clubs will pay more for a player than others and some will want a player on their list more than others. I understand market value and economics but I also know that some clubs are renowned for never paying overs and that some players want to play at X club. The Cats, WC and the Hawks are three clubs that never pay overs. Scott wanted to go to one of those clubs and his brother being the captain was a big part of his decision and WC has to pay the price for that. They wanted to help Scottie land at his preferred club because it was the right thing to do but it came at a price. It's the system I know but it's not as black and white and you'd have us believe. It will be changed next year or the year after which will prove my point about it being flawed. If it ain't broke don't fix it is what they say and I am 100% certain that they will try to fix it but I'm less certain that they'll fix it correctly. I've said what I wanted to say and I know others may disagree and that's fine, it's not easy to work out a players value and cover all scenarios using a very basic model like this one. I'm just pointing out that the system is flawed and WC were dudded on this occasion.

2015-10-15T01:49:49+00:00

George

Roar Rookie


Doesn't matter if he is the greatest player ever, as far as compensation (which shouldn't exist at all, IMO) goes, all that matters is where the contract he signed ends up on the pay list. Thats it. Nothing else. No other factors. Everything else is just semantics and left up to someone's judgement, and no matter who that judge is some people will always have a different opinion. Pay scale is black and white.

2015-10-15T01:43:15+00:00

jax

Guest


"even serviceable players like Selwood, Suckling and Leuenberger will provide little return." Unless he plays in Victoria right under your noses like his brother Joel does you guys don't really don't have much of a clue. Nisbett was bang on about the lack of respect shown, out of sight out of mind is what it is. If he hadn't been injured these past few years he might be WC's captain today but hey he's a serviceable player and no mention of him being an outstanding leader of men. Omitting his leadership qualities allows some people to justify the pick 37 compo that WC received but that's a joke. That's the system I know but it's severely flawed and the AFL will eventually wake up and realise that it's flawed but that will be too little too late for some clubs unfortunately. Chris Scott on Selwood. “He is a person of high quality and will also bring exceptional leadership to our club. With Scott's age profile (25) as well, we think that's a really positive thing, not only for our existing leaders but our emerging players as well," Scott said. This is the team that pretty much leads itself due to its strong player driven leadership. Scott says he's an 'exceptional leader' that will add value to the existing leaders which is a big rap coming from the Cattery I would have thought? Josh (and others) call him serviceable and compared him to Suckling and Leunberger, please tell me your just having a lend. They aren't leaders of the highest calibre like Selwood is and teams don't go anywhere without their leaders. Stop trying to put the cart before the horse when valuing a players worth, it's a one-dimensional and short-sighted method. Sucklings grow on trees, leaders like Selwood are very rare which is why Nisbett complained. It's hard to put a price on leadership but surely it has some weighting. He's worth more than the other two guys and by some margin, no team can succeed without leaders. Age and the new contract offer is a 5 years old way of valuing a players worth but that's the AFL for you. Anyone that believes that this is the best system possible is also thinking like a 5yo. It is what it is and WC will live with it but for the record it's a slap in the face from the AFL and from the fans that can't differentiate a leader from a follower. Including his name in the same sentence as the other two is disrespectful - the sweeping under the carpet of his leadership qualities and the justifications for the decisions are in full swing. Everyone else has moved on while WC has to deal with it which they will but that doesn't make it right! If Suckling is pick 39 Selwood is at least pick 20 and if his ankle gets right time will prove that I was right. The Cats got a ripper in Selwood mark my words.

2015-10-14T20:39:55+00:00

TomC

Roar Guru


I don't know if I'd go that far. Even up the competition by all means, but be transparent about it.

AUTHOR

2015-10-14T19:45:15+00:00

Josh

Expert


My bad, thanks for the heads up. I saw he had 're-signed for 2016' and took that to mean one-year deal but obviously it just meant he's staying on next year and more. Cheers.

AUTHOR

2015-10-14T19:44:08+00:00

Josh

Expert


I reckon pick 22 and next year's first rounder would still be a reasonable offer for McCarthy.

AUTHOR

2015-10-14T19:43:45+00:00

Josh

Expert


Agree George. Being given free picks is bad enough but the fact it pushes down other clubs picks is very annoying.

AUTHOR

2015-10-14T19:43:06+00:00

Josh

Expert


Reckon he's headed to South Australia if he's headed anywhere. He has played some good games this year but seems shot for confidence.

AUTHOR

2015-10-14T19:42:23+00:00

Josh

Expert


Aish has great form on the board, Freeman has nothing. Aish is definitely worth a lot more than Freeman.

AUTHOR

2015-10-14T19:40:28+00:00

Josh

Expert


Another case of the AFL circumventing it's own rules to try and 'even up' the competition and once again it goes drastically wrong. Need to stop being such a nanny state and let clubs sink or swim, I think.

AUTHOR

2015-10-14T19:39:09+00:00

Josh

Expert


I'd look at a second rounder but yeah given Yarran's problems I wouldn't pay a first for him, no way no how.

AUTHOR

2015-10-14T19:38:31+00:00

Josh

Expert


I reckon the Hawks get something in the second round if he does leave, probably a little later than that 20-25.. Obviously he's highly-rated but in the end he's neither a high draft pick himself nor has he had any massive showings at AFL level. Definitely the best possible result for the Hawks is that he stays.

AUTHOR

2015-10-14T19:36:17+00:00

Josh

Expert


Trouble there Edgar is you're looking at Free Agency as something that's meant to help clubs, when really it is meant to help players. No loyalty gets tossed around a lot but I don't buy it. Robbie Tarrant for example was eligible for Free Agency this year and got some huge offers but knocked them back to stick with North who've stuck by him in his injury-plagued past. There is still an enormous amount of loyalty in footy.

AUTHOR

2015-10-14T19:34:23+00:00

Josh

Expert


I reckon Lennon has a right to be a little pissed at Richmond after being dropped for the elimination final despite playing some quality footy in the lead-up to it. But I agree, don't like seeing players walk out on the club that drafted them without giving it a red hot go.

2015-10-14T10:02:28+00:00

Macca

Guest


Lesser than who Don you have just 2 players on the list with a higher average goals per game this year than Casboult (Pavlich who may not even be playing next year and Walters) and only 3 with more goals, and Casboult played in a side that finished dead last. But at least you finally realize you have a scoring issue.

2015-10-14T07:06:03+00:00

Dalgety Carrington

Roar Guru


The 2016 Brownlow medallist thing is a bit of artistic licence from Don I'd say. He won't win the Brownlow next year for a few reasons. Expectations on Harley for 2016 are best scaled back at this stage, because he will need some time to adjust to a new environment and way of playing. Saying he lacks ticker doesn't really hold much validity, especially for the fact he's been a young kid playing in a team full of young kids. A more matured team, where players have taken more varied paths to get there will be a different experience and he'll have more of an opportunity to be a more rounded player.

2015-10-14T06:53:52+00:00

Don Freo

Guest


I'd say Casboult's impact was probably in the negatives. I'd be more interested in Fraser McInnes or Mason Shaw but our boys are still better.

2015-10-14T06:32:44+00:00

Don Freo

Guest


So why would we recruit a lesser player like Casboult? You don't get the basic argument that Casboult is no good.

2015-10-14T06:26:18+00:00

Macca

Guest


"What has being a high scoring team got to do with anything?" You really do struggle don't you Don. We are talking about Freo needing to find another tall forward to make them a more dangerous team because they will be a higher scoring side, being a higher scoring side will make them better equipped to win finals. So what does being a high scoring team have to do with being a high scoring team? Everything.

2015-10-14T06:23:09+00:00

Macca

Guest


On what basis was Casoult impact on the season greater than Apeness'? Well Apeness didn't play an AFL game so his impact was 0 - Casboult had an impact greater than 0. I don't know why you bother trying to interact with other people Don when you have such an aversion to reality.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar