Today’s assignment: understand, and explain, the following sentence.
Pick 29: Essendon received from Melbourne as part of the Michael Hibberd trade, a pick for a player. Simple. So far so good?
Alright then, try this on for size.
Pick 14: Port Adelaide – received from Sydney in a pick exchange, received by Sydney from Hawthorn as part of the Tom Mitchell trade, an on-traded pick that resulted from a prior trade. Still with me?
Fine then. Here’s your ‘Bonus Credit’ task.
Pick 35: Fremantle received from Gold Coast in a pick exchange, received by Gold Coast from Western Bulldogs in pick exchange, received by Western Bulldogs from Fremantle as part of the Joel Hamlin trade, originally received by Fremantle from GWS via a trade for Cam McCarthy, originally received by GWS from Adelaide via a 2015 trade for Curtly Hampton.
A tad confused?
All in all, it appears that in this trade period, Fremantle had the pick, traded it to the Dogs, who traded it to the Gold Cost, who in turn traded it back to Fremantle.
Welcome to 2016, where the rules are made up, and the draft picks don’t matter.
Unless you’re banking points for academy players and father-son selections. Or attempting to ensure you have enough future first and second-round draft picks to adhere to ‘regulations’.
Still confused?
Good. Because that’s apparently the way that the AFL want it.
After all, in news that emerged today the league made a ‘blunder’ as part of the last-minute Jaeger O’Meara deal that sent him to Hawthorn. AFL rules state that once a club trades its future first-round pick, it cannot trade any additional future picks. Which meant that when Hawthorn sent their future first-round pick to the Saints, the trading of a future second-round pick was out of the question.
Except when it’s for Jaeger.
The AFL was able to ‘interpret its own rules’ by saying that it was all hunky-dory, stating that Hawthorn was fine, as long as it acquired another club’s future second-round pick. Which the Hawks were lovingly sent by Carlton via a trade with GWS.
Of course, a short drive down towards the surf coast sees you land at Geelong. The Cats need to acquire another club’s first round selection sometime in the near future to adhere to AFL ‘regulations’ that state a side must use two first-round picks in a four-year period after trading away first-round selections for Patrick Dangerfield and Lachie Henderson in previous years.
So where does this leave us?
Well, with a trade period that saw future draft picks involved in around 35 per cent of all completed deals, and draft picks thrown around with abandon. Notwithstanding the upcoming national draft where the Gold Coast have four picks in the top ten and then have only Pick 73 left, the Hawks don’t select a player until pick 88 (followed by 90 and 108), and GWS has 14 draft picks including picks 42, 55, 57, 58, 59 and 60.
But more importantly, with a dangerous precedent around the league ‘interpreting its own rules’ because a completed trade has been processed before any realised that a potential mistake may have been made. And after practically giving away Mitchell and Lewis to try to land O’Meara, imagine if the AFL had declared the entire ordeal void?
Anyone missing the ‘good ol’ days’ where players were traded for players?
Tricky
Guest
On your side note, how about a pay cut for Derek Hine - unless of course he had no say in the Pies trades which is not out of the question
Cat
Roar Guru
JamesH
Roar Guru
The thing is, no-consent trades only apply to contracted players. A team can simply trade a contracted player to any other team without their consent. The issue we currently have in the AFL is more with uncontracted players demanding a trade to a particular club, knowing that their current club stands to gain nothing if they are forced into the preseason draft. At present I don't think we have a major issue with contracted players trying to force clubs' hands. The Gibbs non-trade is a prime example. I shudder at the idea of introducing no-consent trades. Player pay is not yet anywhere near the level of the NBA or the NFL and in my view is not enough to justify forcing a player and his family to uproot and move across the country. I would rather the AFL look at trialing something that reduces an uncontracted player's bargaining power (e.g. requiring players to nominate multiple clubs to which they will accept a trade, and/or requiring first year players to be contracted for longer than the current minimum). Granted, it would take some thought.
Birdman
Guest
the difference being that the Hawks deal was in the spirit of the rules while the Cats deal (approved or otherwise) is completely against the spirit of the rules. See the difference? I can't fathom what authority the AFL was relying on to approve the Cats deal other than 'we're in the big chair so we'll do what we like".
Cat
Roar Guru
One got approved before it ever happened One happened and then was questioned See the difference? Not everything is some grand conspiracy.
Birdman
Guest
storm in a teacup stirred by anti-Hawks journos at the Hun to fuel salty oppo supporters. How is this a problem if the Hawks keep a second rounder for next year? IMHO the Geelong deal is smellier but I don't see the Hun handing out the torches and pitchforks on that one.
Cat
Roar Guru
Which is more likely ... the AFL was going to come out and say 'nothing to see here' or the AFL to come out and say 'We made a mistake'?
Birdman
Guest
AFL has now clarified Hawks were ok as trade period needs to achieve a net result overall which it does by dint of having a second rounder for next year.
Wilson
Roar Guru
So will it be as corruptible as the FIFA :) or is that a bonus
Birdman
Guest
Maybe just because it suits me but the Hawks look to have complied with the spirit of the rule in retaining a future second rounder albeit it was secured from another club.
Tony Abbott - Member for the Shire of Trump
Guest
We need an overseeing body to keep an eye on what the AFL does. I propose an Australian Football Federation(like the name, soccer? That is payback for hijacking the word 'football' without permission), the AFF to maintain the integrity of the laws of the sport not just for the AFL, but for all the countless leagues across Australia and the world. Also they are to oversee the trading of players between leagues. To get this to work we need to get the leagues around Australia that contribute a lot of talent to the AFL to sign on and wrest power off the pro league body. We'll get the Geelong Football League, Ballarat, Eastern Districts, VAFA etc.. on board then look out Gillon, there is a new sherriff in town. Let's make it happen people. Football is for the people, not these money grubbing professionals.
Cat
Roar Guru
Not sure about that. One of the 'use any time in the next 5 years' Ablett compensation picks had a pretty long and twisting journey. There's also the 5 teams in 5 years journey of pick #21 TRADE 1 Brisbane receive pick 5, 25, 27 and Rohan Bewick Gold Coast receive end of first round compensation for Jared Brennan pick, pick 10 and 48 TRADE 2 Gold Coast receive GWS mini-draft pick 1, end of first round compensation for Rhys Palmer GWS receive picks 2, 67 and end of first round compensation for Jared Brennan TRADE 3 GWS receive Joel Patfull Brisbane receive pick 21 (compensation pick for Brennan) TRADE 4 Brisbane receive Allen Christensen Geelong receive pick 21 TRADE 5 Geelong receive Rhys Stanley St Kilda receive pick 21
Cat
Roar Guru
As a compromise any player not yet qualified for FA and requesting a trade can select a number of teams they will not be traded to equal to twice their number of years in the league. EXAMPLES: - A first year player asks for a trade, he can nominate 2 clubs (at the time of the request) to not be traded to, he must accept a trade to any others. - A fifth year player asks for a trade, he can nominate 10 clubs to not be traded to and must accept a trade to any of the others if his current club finds a deal they like. This would give clubs more flexibility in deal with 'wantaways' while still giving players some veto power that is tied to their length of service. Also, any player who is in the final year of a multi-year contract can be traded to any club, at any time. Players would also be allowed to negotiate no-trade/limited no trade clauses into contracts 3 years or longer. This would allow clubs to trade a FA before they lose them for nothing if they know they aren't/can't re-sign them. Under this type of system no compensation picks are necessary.
The Original Buzz
Guest
So if I read this right, here is what was received for pick 35: Originally from Adelaide. To Adelaide for C Hampton (GWS) GWS to Freo for Cam McCarthy Freo to Bulldogs for J Hamlin Bulldogs to GCS for essentially pick 28 GCS to Freo for a future second round pick. So to summarise, 2015 pick 35 has picked up Hampton, McCarthy Hamlin, Pick 28 and will continue its legacy with a second round pick next year. If next years second round pick is traded for a future pick, it will be the longest ever trade from one pick spanning from 2015 to 2018.
Samuel Laffy
Roar Guru
It was fascinating to see Andrew Bogut weigh in with his thoughts on 'no-consent' trades, and the idea that clubs shouldn't be held 'to ransom' by players picking only one destination, and that they should be able to trade players 'for the good of the club'. Will be interesting to see how it develops in future years - especially with the pull that AFL Player's Association seems to have these days. On a side note, I dare say list managers should be up for a pay-rise - negotiating the trade of picks with three clubs, whilst trying to broker a deal for a player who wants out and wants to go to a specific club, whilst trying to keep your coach, club president, and fans happy. Good fun!
Paul D
Roar Guru
I don’t think you could roll it back, not once hands have been shaken and photos published of Sam Mitchell wearing an eagles jersey. I think the AFL handled it pretty well. You assess the situation after the fact and can always penalise a team later on. See innumerable salary cap breaches in the past. The reality is that trading picks and future picks is necessary grease for the wheels of player movement. I think it’s been a good addition. The only thing left to implement is NBA style trades where players can’t veto their destination.