Hawks get end of 1st round for Brown

[Sockeye Salmon]

OMG!

They have to be kidding!


If that sets the bar Geelong will have to get all the draft picks for Ablett.

Harbrow is 5 years younger and already much better, surely we will get more than that.

[chef]

Is that the same compo Adelaide got for Bock?

[The Bulldogs Bite]

WTF?

That is ridiculous. Hawthorn must be laughing.

On that basis, Harbrow is a dead set lock for two first round picks.

[Ghost Dog]

Agreed. Pretty surprised. Rate Harbrow far above Brown. Hope we do very well out of our deal.

[The Coon Dog]

Wrong forum SS, should be in the AFL talk.

Noobs! ;)

[The Adelaide Connection]

Adelaide may just reconsider their decision not to appeal the compensation offered for Bock.

Are the same geniuses in charge of the MRP deciding compensation?


http://www.fishing4fun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/lucky-dip_lightbox.jpg

[jazzadogs]

Does it have anything to with being a premiership player? If it does, Geelong should shove Mark Blake in the GC direction.

And surely, based on that, we will get two round 1 picks.

[LostDoggy]

what the ************************************************************ .

[Go_Dogs]

AFL logic: It's the best.

[Bulldog Revolution]

On that logic we will get three first rounders for Harbrow

What would Brown have fetched on the open market? Third rounder?

[LostDoggy]

This is precisely what I pointed out earlier in the year when it became clear that for the first time in history an 'independent tribunal' was going to determine player values, when in the past trades had always been determined by MARKET value ie. negotiations between clubs. If they can screw up as straightforward a trade as Campbell Brown, there is no way known that they would have gotten the value right for media personality and superstar as a Barry Hall (they would have said three first rounders or something), or a Luke Ball, both who eventually went for pick 30 and 40-something.

I still don't see why they couldn't have just given the GC more draft picks and forced them to trade the picks for players with clubs independent of AFL intervention. That way they would naturally only be able to pick a range of players as they would have a limited number of picks to trade (so they can't just negotiate with 5 of the best players in the league because they wouldn't have enough picks to trade for them), while balancing that with keeping some in hand for the actual draft -- we would then see far more realistic market values for the players as it would be determined by how much GC wanted them and what they were willing to part with. It would also result in a more 'normal' looking list, with a range of ability, rather than a bunch of the best kids + a bunch of high-priced superstars.

[LostDoggy]

On that logic we will get three first rounders for Harbrow

What would Brown have fetched on the open market? Third rounder?

No trade possible. No one would have traded for Brown -- would have slipped to PSD.

[LostDoggy]

My understanding is that hawks have been awarded such a high pick because Brown was offered a high salary at GC

[Topdog]

He is on $450k a year. Surely Bock is either on the same or higher.

[stefoid]

Salary and age is supposed to be the determining factors, so lets hope harbrows management at least cut him a good deal.

The thing about end of the round is that they can use it this year if they want. pick 26.

Next year, the pick at the end will be 18, and the years after that, pick 19. (extra teams in the comp)

Would you take 26 now in a (supposedly) deep draft, or wait for the pick to drop back to 18 or 19 in subsequent years and hope those years were just as good?

big decision for hawks

[Scorlibo]

Salary and age is supposed to be the determining factors, so lets hope harbrows management at least cut him a good deal.

The thing about end of the round is that they can use it this year if they want. pick 26.

Next year, the pick at the end will be 18, and the years after that, pick 19. (extra teams in the comp)

Would you take 26 now in a (supposedly) deep draft, or wait for the pick to drop back to 18 or 19 in subsequent years and hope those years were just as good?

big decision for hawks

How is the draft deep? The GC have already snatched one third of the best players, and nothing I have seen of the U18s this year suggests they are as good as 2008, or even 2009.

[chef]

Salary and age is supposed to be the determining factors, so lets hope harbrows management at least cut him a good deal.

The thing about end of the round is that they can use it this year if they want. pick 26.

Next year, the pick at the end will be 18, and the years after that, pick 19. (extra teams in the comp)

Would you take 26 now in a (supposedly) deep draft, or wait for the pick to drop back to 18 or 19 in subsequent years and hope those years were just as good?

big decision for hawks

Won't GWS get the same draft concession next year as GC got this year?

And why is this year a deep draft? I would think it would be the opposite.

[Doc26]

Are their any implications for us with the Harbrow compensation pick and the use of the two possible picks for Tom and Mitch if opposition Clubs happen to nominate them as first round selections ? Would we be obliged to use the possible first round compensation pick and our 'normal' first round pick to gain them both if we chose to use the compensation pick this season ? Hope that makes sense.

[The Coon Dog]

Are their any implications for us with the Harbrow compensation pick and the use of the two possible picks for Tom and Mitch if opposition Clubs happen to nominate them as first round selections ? Would we be obliged to use the possible first round compensation pick and our 'normal' first round pick to gain them both if we chose to use the compensation pick this season ? Hope that makes sense.

I wouldn't have thought so. We aren't obligated to use any compensatory picks in the first year.

[Doc26]

I wouldn't have thought so. We aren't obligated to use any compensatory picks in the first year.

Thanks TCD. I appreciate that we aren't obligated to use the pick until 2014, it was more to do with IF we were considering using the compensation pick this year would we be then 'forced' to give it up to pick up Mitch / Tom IF opposing Clubs nominated them as first round selections. Of course if we were obliged to give it up then I would imagine we would hold out for another year or two. I'm just not aware how the compensation pick regulations work together with the regulations pertaining to father son selections which have also changed in recent years.

[The Coon Dog]

Just thought I'd clarify Doc26's question.

Let's say we receive a first round pick for Harbrow, I guess the question is are we obligated to use it to select Wallis or Libba with our 'next available' pick as part of the F/S bidding process.

The answer is no, we aren't.

F/S bidding occurs, as we all know by now, prior to trade week (starts October 4).

If we do wish to avail ourselves of the pick we receive for Harbrow this year, we only have to notify the AFL of that decision at the end of trade week (by which time F/S bidding would have already been determined).

I suppose the best way to explain it is that GC17 have until October 7 to sign players. Say if they announce a signing on October 7 & assume it's Gary Ablett. On October 7 Geelong are the presented with compensatory picks after the F/S bidding process.

[azabob]

OMG!

They have to be kidding!


If that sets the bar Geelong will have to get all the draft picks for Ablett.

Harbrow is 5 years younger and already much better, surely we will get more than that.

I think we get the same compo as Hawthorn did.

[Sockeye Salmon]

I think we get the same compo as Hawthorn did.

Emma Quayle was supposed to have said she thought we were going to get band 2, Hawthorn got band 3.

Band 2 is immediately after our first round pick.

[azabob]

Emma Quayle was supposed to have said she thought we were going to get band 2, Hawthorn got band 3.

Band 2 is immediately after our first round pick.

I hope you and Emma are right.

[jazzadogs]

I hope you and Emma are right.
We'd have to be at least one band higher than the Hawks. Harbrow is 5 (?) years younger and will earn around about the same, you would think.

[Doc26]

Just thought I'd clarify Doc26's question.

Let's say we receive a first round pick for Harbrow, I guess the question is are we obligated to use it to select Wallis or Libba with our 'next available' pick as part of the F/S bidding process.

The answer is no, we aren't.

F/S bidding occurs, as we all know by now, prior to trade week (starts October 4).

If we do wish to avail ourselves of the pick we receive for Harbrow this year, we only have to notify the AFL of that decision at the end of trade week (by which time F/S bidding would have already been determined).

I suppose the best way to explain it is that GC17 have until October 7 to sign players. Say if they announce a signing on October 7 & assume it's Gary Ablett. On October 7 Geelong are the presented with compensatory picks after the F/S bidding process.

Thanks TCD.

So the wash up is assuming we do choose to go both Mitch and Tom and then assuming our competition do nominate interest in Mitch and Tom for their Round 1 selections, which i'm sure at least Matthew Drain would oblige with one of them :mad:, we effectively forego our 'current' selection 22 (Rd 1) and 40 (Rd 2) to pick them up whilst still holding Harbrow's likely first round compensation pick up our sleeve for use in this National Draft or out to 2014 ? That's my take on the rules anyway.

Would be nice if they incorporated a 'Buy one, Get one free' offer

[chef]

Thanks TCD.

So the wash up is assuming we do choose to go both Mitch and Tom and then assuming our competition do nominate interest in Mitch and Tom for their Round 1 selections, which i'm sure at least Matthew Drain would oblige with one of them :mad:, we effectively forego our 'current' selection 22 (Rd 1) and 40 (Rd 2) to pick them up whilst still holding Harbrow's likely first round compensation pick up our sleeve for use in this National Draft or out to 2014 ? That's my take on the rules anyway.

Would be nice if they incorporated a 'Buy one, Get one free' offer

He's unemployed ATM so he isn't a problem.