After watching the media keep repeating the bullshit that we were getting pick 3 as compensation for being astronomically awful and not as free agency compensation for Ben McKay, I’m not surprised the media is saying stupid things about free agency compensation for Battle.
Not to mention "North's five first rounders" - a pick for being second last, a compo pick for a player another club overpaid and Port's first in part return for our last pick 1 leaving a year in to his deal. The last two were assisted but we had to trade them in to what ended up being pick 22 and 23.
If I didn't know anything about how this compensation works, I would think the AFL were planning on giving them 2 picks for Josh Battle, and I am assuming that is the reason they wrote it like that.
Yeah I think they worded it like that to deliberately get comments and engagement from people who instantly rage comment instead of realizing they currently have pick 4
Josh fucking Battle is half the player McKay is, and McKay being worth that much was questionable at the time (although he’s proved worth it now).
If Battle is worth 900k, maybe we should shop Ryan Lester around asking for 1.2mil+ so we can get an extra first rounder; because he’s certainly better than Battle lmao
A tried and tested Defender who takes on the 2nd/3rd Best Forward, leaving Wilkie to only have to worry about his man. And even then, he'll break even with the opposition's best Forward. He can mark, he lockdown, he can contest 1-on1s, he can intercept and he can dispose. Spills his guts out for the club, and probably one of the first 5 magnets the coaches would whack onto the board for selections
He might not be a Best and Fairest or All Australian - but I think that's just a case of being an Unsung Hero who keeps his head down, grinds and grits and then clocks out and stays out of the limelight. Him and Rowan Marshall are cut from the same cloth, I reckon
Any club would be lucky to have him
I'd rather have him than take a punt at Pick 5 that could end up being a bust
If you think Battle is half the player McKay is then you don’t watch much footy. They both play slightly different roles but I would argue that Battle is far more skilful and a great mark, he’s been playing really well this season. And I would say he’s better than Lester too. Not to mention he’s six years younger. He’s not prime Alex Rance but there aren’t too many key position players that come up in free agency these days so when they do they are going to be paid a premium.
Battle is not quite a key defender. A little undersized. More of a back flanker. You would want him next to a player like McKay not instead of a player like mckay.
Free agency compo is supposed to be weighted to the lower performing clubs. So someone like James Frawley or McKay being pick 3 because Melbourne and North Melbourne were bottom of the ladder is how the system is designed - even though the oft mentioned example of Buddy Franklin being pick 19 compared to those two, it's more about the position of the club being compensated instead of the absolute value of the player.
I’m referring to the way the compensation is worked out. Free agents attract much more money as clubs don’t have to use a pick, that skews the system as it’s based off every other players salary.
Battle might get $700k a season to stay, which is about right. Hawks might pay $850k to get him to leave though, which is factoring in that we aren’t giving any picks up for him.
The compensation doesn’t equate as it can’t factor in anything other than salary. The baseline for clubs receiving top compensation is too low.
I’d be happy for the saints to get the pick if we got battle, but it’s a frustrating system.
People (rightly) discuss F/S and academy picks to death, but this also needs fixing imo. One club benefits from acquiring a free agent from another club, and the club losing the free agent also benefits from the draft pick, but every other club has their next draft pick pushed back. It's only pushed back one place, but it's one of the many mechanisms that pushed our pick 19 out to 30 last year - feels like death by a million cuts.
At least with the F/s and academy stuff, clubs are having to trade something out to get those picks. Free agency is just magicking a new pick out of thin air. For example one way GC levelled up on points for last draft was by trading out Rankine for future picks
It is for this reason that I think that the club receiving the free agent should have to pay the compensation (picks). This means they aren't getting the player for nothing other than a chunk of their cap and they also don't impact on the clubs not involved in the free agency.
That could be difficult to manage as the destination club would need to provide a decent pick rather than a bunch of junk picks like clubs do with F/S and academies.
If Battle doesn’t leave, we will still end up with either pick 4 or 5 simply because of ladder position. The way this is worded is deliberate, to try and garner some outrage from those who don’t have anything more than a surface level interest in afl news.
Always been that way, sure you’d mostly like to keep the player but when you can get an amazing pick that nobody has to agree to actually give up it’s very tempting. Like no way Melbourne keep James Frawley when pick 3 was the compo. You pack his bags for him, both clubs win whilst everyone else gets nudged down the draft order
Saints knew he was gone the moment he put extension talks on hold.
I’m not sold on playing Caminiti in defence either but we also did switch Keeler to defence in the VFL around the same time Battle canned contract talks so at least we’re trying things before we go to the draft.
If we get Picks 4 and 5 you better believe we’ll take a midfielder and tall defender
So if his contract will put him in the top 5% of earnings, then it becomes a first round pick for St Kilda. As St Kilda is currently in 15th, they get the 5th pick.
Similar to when Buddy left, when Hawthorn got a compo pick after their natural pick.
Terribly written headline. It really does imply that they'd be getting two picks. Would have to have existing knowledge about how the system works to understand otherwise.
Judging by all the downvotes I was the only one who read it as both picks as compensation lol. Guess I should have read it twice before quickly commenting.
Yeah this reads as though they get both for Battle. I’m no expert but I’d have written it - “St Kilda are a real chance at getting pick 4 (ladder position), and pick 5 via Josh Battle compensation”.
I will keep saying this until the day I die, get rid of all elements that compromise the draft. FA compensation, F/S, draft academy. Get rid of it all.
I get warm and fuzzy about the dynastic nature of the Silvagnis, but the father son rule feels like a quaint hold-over from the old VFL suburban league. I'm not sure about its place anymore, so I wouldn't be upset if it was scrapped.
And while I don't think you'd say Ashely McIntosh is a "generational talent"- he was AA. I thought he was captain at one stage too but no mention on that on his wiki, so maybe I am remembering that wrong.
No free agency. No pick trading. No compensation picks. Nothing. Just 5 picks in the draft based on finishing position and that’s it.
Player trades can only be initiated as player to player only. (Give a player, get a player).
Every club has an academy, can take two of those every year outside the draft - one before the draft, one after. Further players can be taken with your picks if they’re still available.
Would be fair on successful Vic teams and that’s about it. A lot of those compromises exist to balance the competition.
FA compensation is a bit cooked at the moment but its intention was good; it exists to stop teams down the ladder getting screwed when FA players leave to go to more successful teams; and becoming eternal cellar dwellers because anyone half good just leaves.
Northern academies exist to counter the “go home” factor that very much favours Vic/SA/WA teams.
Collingwood is a bad example because they essentially got N Daicos for market value, and hubris meant that they screwed themselves out of getting him AND another top 3 player (presumably Finn Callaghan)
They still got him when they shouldn't have because of the aforementioned hubris, also Moore, while not being "generational" is still pretty fuckin handy
They finished 2nd last that year so were entitled to pick 2; but had traded their pick out the year earlier for a hand of garbage later picks (ie points) assuming they’d finish much higher on the ladder. So essentially they traded out pick 2 to take Nick at… pick 4 with their points picks. The club that benefited the most was GWS who got the pies original pick and took Finn Callaghan at 3.
If the points matching system didn’t exist they’d still have taken Nick at pick 2; so realistically they got him at market value and only screwed themselves out of ALSO getting Callaghan
Ah I did not know that, it does change things then. It's purely up to Josh then - but obviously Saints can sort-of force it with counter offers, no guarantee he takes them of course.
Saints losing Josh Battle is half the joke that Ben McKay left in the North backline. It’s the rules, so if he gets a contract worth band 1 they should definitely get the pick.
AFL should find a way to incentivise people to stay at clubs who develop them though. Would take Ben McKay over pick 3 any day. Sounds like Saints fans feel the same way about Battle.
As an avid Josh Battle fan, this is ridiculous. In the open market he’s probably a late first early second rounder at best. I wouldn’t spend anymore than 600-700k if I were serious about contending. I don’t even know who’s interested just the fact he’s gonna get paid for life soon.
If there were a team a suspect would get him it’d be Carlton. Reckon he’s an upgrade on McGovern. He’d fit Hawks backline really well. As much as i love to watch frost go, sometimes seeing him go can be real frustrating.
At this point we should be asking for a priority pick of our own. I cant think of another team who has been bumped down the order like us in recent years.
Burn the draft to the ground and start again... Compo is broken, NGA/FS bidding system is broken, endless handouts to poor performing teams, it's all fucking cooked.
And more and more people are starting to agree with him. But until AFL House wake up and tweak the concessions (unlikely though that is), the Saints have to play the system like every other club, so nobody can be outraged about this.
They’re pushing for those changes because they are the right thing to do. Whether or not you believe on limits to accessing players in some way or another there has to be changes that see teams pay real currency for early picks. The suns loading up mostly a bunch of slop for 4 good kids and banking 2 extra picks was outrageous.
Now, if other teams get serious about free agency compo and removing the ability to get a top 10 pick and otherwise tightening it up that will be great too. The Saints should probably be consistent and fight for that too but it doesn’t mean they’re wrong fighting for the other stuff to be tightened up. Any club who’s keen on a fair comp should want the same.
Lock up your daughters, lock up your wives, lock up your key defenders cause the market is bare and everyone is worth $1mil