| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
SwansWay
Joined: 13 May 2015
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| MightyMagpie wrote: | | K wrote: | | ^ Well, if we somehow convince a club to pay a fortune, then the compensation is better. |
Lol ... so Bucks saying he is a required player would make them pay more when he hasn’t been selected regularly and he is free to go wherever he wants? |
How else would you have liked him to answer the question? "Nah, Fas isn't part of our future plans." |
|
|
|
 |
inxs88
Joined: 17 Aug 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
All we need is two competing clubs who want himand suddenly contract and thus compo pick rises accordingly
_________________
I love the Pies, hate Carlscum |
|
|
|
|
MightyMagpie
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Location: WA
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| SwansWay wrote: | | MightyMagpie wrote: | | K wrote: | | ^ Well, if we somehow convince a club to pay a fortune, then the compensation is better. |
Lol ... so Bucks saying he is a required player would make them pay more when he hasn’t been selected regularly and he is free to go wherever he wants? |
How else would you have liked him to answer the question? "Nah, Fas isn't part of our future plans." |
I had no issue with how Bucks answered the Q. If you care to read my post again, I took issue with the suggestion it somehow raised the trade value of Faz. It doesn’t.
_________________
All We Can Be |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| ^ He may not be able to raise it, but it's possible with a careless answer to lower it. |
|
|
|
|
MightyMagpie
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Location: WA
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| K wrote: | | ^ He may not be able to raise it, but it's possible with a careless answer to lower it. |
I don’t see how. Actions (non-selection) speak louder than words if another club cares what Bucks thinks.
Again, he is an unrestricted free agent. Unless he chooses a club trying to protect FA compensation of their own then he has no trade value.
_________________
All We Can Be |
|
|
|
|
K
Joined: 09 Sep 2011
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| By the AFL's rules, if he gets a Mayne contract (for example), we are better off than if he gets a packet-of-chips contract. (Not saying whether either is likely.) |
|
|
|
|
MightyMagpie
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Location: WA
|
| Post subject: | |
|
You are talking about FA comp value rather than trade value (the original point raised) and as I said above actions speak louder than words. What Bucks says just isn’t going to affect what another team offer him as salary. What we offer him as salary might though.
_________________
All We Can Be |
|
|
|
|
SwansWay
Joined: 13 May 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| MightyMagpie wrote: | | You are talking about FA comp value rather than trade value (the original point raised) and as I said above actions speak louder than words. What Bucks says just isn’t going to affect what another team offer him as salary. What we offer him as salary might though. |
Oh I see, we're doing the whole petty semantics thing. Okay allow me to correct and amend my original comment to free agent compensation value as opposed to trade value. Trade value being a figure of speech for any kind of player movement.
Hypothetically if another club thinks Fas is on the outs, if he's uncontracted (don't know his status), then he could walk out and get picked up in the draft. As a general rule, perception has a lot to do with player value. Think back on former high profile trades with players that weren't getting a game like Ted Richards. |
|
|
|
|
dalyc 
Joined: 02 Mar 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Fas uninjured and motivated is a 26? Year old semi-goal freak. In the right side he’s a match winner.
_________________
Four legged animals good, two legged animals better |
|
|
|
|
MightyMagpie
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Location: WA
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| SwansWay wrote: | | MightyMagpie wrote: | | You are talking about FA comp value rather than trade value (the original point raised) and as I said above actions speak louder than words. What Bucks says just isn’t going to affect what another team offer him as salary. What we offer him as salary might though. |
Oh I see, we're doing the whole petty semantics thing. Okay allow me to correct and amend my original comment to free agent compensation value as opposed to trade value. Trade value being a figure of speech for any kind of player movement.
Hypothetically if another club thinks Fas is on the outs, if he's uncontracted (don't know his status), then he could walk out and get picked up in the draft. As a general rule, perception has a lot to do with player value. Think back on former high profile trades with players that weren't getting a game like Ted Richards. |
1 The quoted response was for K.
2 Faz is uncontracted for 2019 and an unrestricted FA. The draft is irrelevant for him.
3 Different types of player movement have different consequences so it matters to be clear what you are talking about, trade value is trade value, salary is salary and FA comp is FA comp.
4 What Bucks says is nowhere near as significant as what Bucks does (not select him) in shaping perception. To what extent that affects how other teams value Faz is open to debate.
5 In terms of affecting Faz’s salary and therefore FA comp we might receive it will be what we end up offering Faz that matters most (opportunity will no doubt come into his decision, but we have closed that door apparently).
_________________
All We Can Be |
|
|
|
|
Boogie Knights
Joined: 18 Sep 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Would FA compensation be a moot point if we sign Lynch as a FA? i.e. there would be no compensation? |
|
|
|
|
MightyMagpie
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Location: WA
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Boogie Knights wrote: | | Would FA compensation be a moot point if we sign Lynch as a FA? i.e. there would be no compensation? |
FA comp is based on a net position (FAs in and out) so it would affect it. If just Lynch and Faz, then likely yes it would be eliminated.
That is what gives rise to Faz having some possible trade value as an unrestricted FA in the circumstance where the club he chooses wants to protect their own FA comp they may decide to trade for Faz rather than sign him as a FA.
_________________
All We Can Be |
|
|
|
|
MatthewBoydFanClub
Joined: 12 Feb 2007
Location: Elwood
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| MightyMagpie wrote: | | Boogie Knights wrote: | | Would FA compensation be a moot point if we sign Lynch as a FA? i.e. there would be no compensation? |
FA comp is based on a net position (FAs in and out) so it would affect it. If just Lynch and Faz, then likely yes it would be eliminated.
That is what gives rise to Faz having some possible trade value as an unrestricted FA in the circumstance where the club he chooses wants to protect their own FA comp they may decide to trade for Faz rather than sign him as a FA. |
I'd happily swap Faz for Lynch with no net difference in draft picks. We now have to just come up with two other player salaries to find the money to pay for Lynch. |
|
|
|
|
SwansWay
Joined: 13 May 2015
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Let's hope that Wells had a 3rd season trigger clause in his contract. That's a ton of money we could save if we could cut him. |
|
|
|
|
MagpieDynasty 
Joined: 09 Oct 2004
Location: Adelaide
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I’ve always likened Faz to Wellingham, play different roles admittedly but only ever seemed to play well when the team was! I’ll add Blair to that mix also!
Whilst it would be sad to see him move on, I wouldn’t necessarily lose sleep over it.
_________________
The new Magpie Dynasty is just a season away!! |
|
|
|
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
