Opinion Mandatory three year contracts for top 20 picks - good or bad?

[GC2015]

Three-year contracts loom for top draftees in new CBA

New draftees could be offered an extra year in their first contracts in the next collective bargaining agreement

www.afl.com.au

What do we think of this likely change the AFL is about to implement this year with the new CBA?

Is it good or bad for the league to introduce mandatory three year contracts for top 20 pick and why/why not?

We've got a good example of how this would work this year with Harley Reid likely being tied to West Coast for at least three seasons.

 

[maskmcgee]

I think every draftee would like a 3 year contract, especially the later picks. Is it for the top 20 or for all first round draft picks? Because it should be first round, not some arbitrary number.

 

[kranky al]

Great idea


Ignore team i support.

 

[GC2015]

I think every draftee would like a 3 year contract, especially the later picks. Is it for the top 20 or for all first round draft picks? Because it should be first round, not some arbitrary number.

The article suggests top 20:

The AFL proposed the longer three-year guaranteed contracts for the top 20 picks as part of the CBA talks in an effort for clubs to hold on to their best players and without needing to sign on early extensions.

The bidding system we currently have means the first round can extend past pick 20 so it's not necessarily first rounders who get three year contracts, but rather the best 20 players in each draft class. I think most would agree that taller draft prospects tend to take at least two years of development before they are truly ready for the AFL so it will be interesting to see if this move incentivises clubs to draft taller players with top 20 picks because they know they are guaranteed more years to develop them into AFL level talent.

 

[Orange Agent]

There will still be JHF cases regardless of the length of term. Maybe some might be more upfront with clubs in pre draft interviews. Won't have to overpay to retain a player based on draft position, if they haven't shown anything in 3 years it's a bust.

 

[Truckosaurus]

Most clubs offer their top picks a extension in their first year anyway, might as well make it automatic.

 

[eaglespremiers]

That is all.

 

[The 747]

So a Nick Daicos comes along and dominates for his team. The team are already getting his output at a huge discount as the contracts are fixed price by the AFL. Now he has play a third year for way under market value before he can get paid properly. That is around half or more of the average AFL career.

Then a Tom Stewart drafted outside the top 20 in the same year. Dominates in his second year and is awarded AA. Gets a much deserved large contract.

Now Daicos is playing for way below market value while his peer from the same draft is earning 500K (or whatever).

 

[GC2015]

So a Nick Daicos comes along and dominates for his team. The team are already getting his output at a huge discount as the contracts are fixed price by the AFL. Now he has play a third year for way under market value before he can get paid properly. That is around half or more of the average AFL career.

Then a Tom Stewart drafted outside the top 20 in the same year. Dominates in his second year and is awarded AA. Gets a much deserved large contract.

Now Daicos is playing for way below market value while his peer from the same draft is earning 500K (or whatever).

This is the evolution of the system and you need look no further than the NBA to see where it's going. In the NBA they have an exception that's referred to as the 'Derrick Rose rule'. Essentially it means that any negotiating restrictions that would be imposed on a player on their rookie contract will be removed should they fulfil a high level of criteria which is being named the MVP of the league or having two seasons in which you're voted as an All-NBA team + All Star team starter. You could apply this in the AFL and say if a player wins the Brownlow or makes the All-Australian team in their first two seasons then the third year on the lower amount of money should be able to be negotiated.

 

[kreuze_missile]

So a Nick Daicos comes along and dominates for his team. The team are already getting his output at a huge discount as the contracts are fixed price by the AFL. Now he has play a third year for way under market value before he can get paid properly. That is around half or more of the average AFL career.

Then a Tom Stewart drafted outside the top 20 in the same year. Dominates in his second year and is awarded AA. Gets a much deserved large contract.

Now Daicos is playing for way below market value while his peer from the same draft is earning 500K (or whatever).

The initial contracts for AFL draft picks are shit. Base salary $105k + $4k per game in the seniors. Extending the duration of these arrangements would be criminal.

If clubs want to retain their draft picks for longer this should also coincide with the contracts improving. In particular top draft picks deserve way more.

IMO the AFL should follow the NBA system and scale the contracts based on the pick order.

In the NBA Pick #1 gets a salary that is just above league average. For us that would be roughly $400k.

The scale tapers off pretty quick.. pick #7 gets half of what pick #1 gets.. and then contracts become pretty similar from pick #30 onwards.

 

[EagleMan87]

Honestly, no player manager worth their salt isn't re-negotiating by the rookie's second year if they're that good.

 

[Orange Agent]

How many 20 y/o could complain about earning $150k a year, play 20 games and it's just under $200k. On top of that most are housed with club families and wouldn't have to pay a bill for anything if a club wanted to sweeten the deal, sponsor maybe gets them a car to drive around in, would be other perks as well.

 

[HTPunter]

Honestly, no player manager worth their salt isn't re-negotiating by the rookie's second year if they're that good.

And no club is saying no if they’re Naicos good either.

 

[The 747]

How many 20 y/o could complain about earning $150k a year, play 20 games and it's just under $200k. On top of that most are housed with club families and wouldn't have to pay a bill for anything if a club wanted to sweeten the deal, sponsor maybe gets them a car to drive around in, would be other perks as well.

Missing the point, the average AFL career is 5-6 years. You can't have a system where a lower ranked draftee has greater opportunity to earn than a higher ranked draftee.

 

[Orange Agent]

Missing the point, the average AFL career is 5-6 years. You can't have a system where a lower ranked draftee has greater opportunity to earn than a higher ranked draftee.

If either of those reaches their potential they will get their payday. Do top 1% uni graduates walk into senior roles or do they work their way up? We should not be paying players based on potential.

 

[Orange Agent]

Daicos is an outlier. The exception cannot be the rule.

 

[Freomaniac]

I take it as a good thing.....

I reckon the JHF situation played a certain part in this.

Worse case scenario if the player wants out after 2 seasons, the team can some how make a reasonable trade.

 

[Freomaniac]

The initial contracts for AFL draft picks are s**t. Base salary $105k + $4k per game in the seniors. Extending the duration of these arrangements would be criminal.

If clubs want to retain their draft picks for longer this should also coincide with the contracts improving. In particular top draft picks deserve way more.

IMO the AFL should follow the NBA system and scale the contracts based on the pick order.

In the NBA Pick #1 gets a salary that is just above league average. For us that would be roughly $400k.

The scale tapers off pretty quick.. pick #7 gets half of what pick #1 gets.. and then contracts become pretty similar from pick #30 onwards.

I dont mind that....

Allen Iverson was pick 1 in the 1996 NBA draft. Got paid 3 million dollars a year for 3 years. other 1st round picks got 3 year deals at 2-2.5 million a year.

2nd round picks got 2 year deals. if your pick 60, you got a 2 year deal at $500,000 a year.


To be fair.... I would like a similar structure in the AFL.

1st and 2nd rounders get 3 years at $260,000 a year. or $5,000 a week.

3rd and 4th rounders get 2 years at $208,000 a year or $4,000 a week.

5th rounder onwards and rookie picks get 1 year deals or 2 year deals at $104,000 a year or $2000 a week.

thats easy to work around the minimum 95% of the cap.

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Don’t have a problem with it but by the same token, I also dont have a problem with players tanking their interviews to avoid being locked in for three years at a club they don’t want to be at.

There might be some interesting ramifications though, clubs might consider pick 21 more valuable than pick 20!

 

[Scritchyscroony]

Silly idea. If you're not up to it why should you get an extra year just because you were a top 20 pick ?

 

[Sphynx]

I don't think it changes anything tbh.

Will it stop players requesting trades in contract with an extra year? No.

JHF was contracted for another season also, doesn't really impact much, you aren't going to hold a disgruntled 19 year old kid at your club for 2 years just to prove a point.

 

[HairyO]

Silly idea. If you're not up to it why should you get an extra year just because you were a top 20 pick ?

Wouldnt have wanted one more year to keep Henry and convince him to stay ?

 

[Scritchyscroony]

Wouldnt have wanted one more year to keep Henry and convince him to stay ?

I'm in favour of as much free player movement as possible.
Henry is a good example. He always planned on getting to Geelong as soon as he could. Being forced into an extra year at a club you don't want to be at is not a good thing imv... Not good for player or club.
Its all about the expansion clubs and the North Melbourne's of the world not continually losing first rounders.

 

[Orange Agent]

I dont mind that....

Allen Iverson was pick 1 in the 1996 NBA draft. Got paid 3 million dollars a year for 3 years. other 1st round picks got 3 year deals at 2-2.5 million a year.

2nd round picks got 2 year deals. if your pick 60, you got a 2 year deal at $500,000 a year.


To be fair.... I would like a similar structure in the AFL.

1st and 2nd rounders get 3 years at $260,000 a year. or $5,000 a week.

3rd and 4th rounders get 2 years at $208,000 a year or $4,000 a week.

5th rounder onwards and rookie picks get 1 year deals or 2 year deals at $104,000 a year or $2000 a week.

thats easy to work around the minimum 95% of the cap.

They already have this, figures may have changed slightly due to CBA pay changes but it was,
1-20 - $105,000 plus match payments.
21-40 - $95,000 plus match payments.
41 + - $90,000 plus match payments.
Rookies $85,000 plus match payments.

The difference probably needs to be bigger, I would add a category for top 10 to be $120k. Play 10 games and they have made another $50k.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Fantastic idea anything to stop players wanting to come “home” after a year is a good thing