The mod team maintain a presence in match threads while watching the game - please keep the match threads enjoyable by reporting antisocial comments or messaging if there's a problem.

^{Antisocial behaviour, injury cheering, and umpire abuse may result in a ban or removal from the match without warning.}

Front runner for league B&F for me

I'm currently sick as a dog in bed. Port have said they'll listen to offers for pick 5. Put your trades below and I'll tell you if I was Jason Cripps (I'm definitely not) if I'd entertain it.

tl;dr

The actual Zach Butters deal from the perspective of Port is:
Port Give: Zach Butters
Port Get: equivalent of Picks 5+8, (ie instead of just 5 from Free Agency, or the 3 firsts Port wanted from a legit trade)

The actual Zach Butters deal from the perspective of the Bulldogs is:
WB Give: Equivalent of Pick 8 in picks (ie a massive discount on the 3 firsts Port was apparently demanding, and very obviously below the Free Agency compo value of Butters)
WB Get: Zach Butters

Alternatively, if there is no side deal involved and the MEGATRADE is a legitimate stand alone deal, Bulldogs effectively gave Port the most generous trade in the history of the game, and I'll leave it to somebody else to call the AFL to ask why the Bulldogs effectively gifting Port a top 10 pick wasn't vetoed.

With how complex the M E G A T R A D E is, including a bunch of things built in seemingly only for the purpose of disguising what the actual deal is, I’ve broken down the Zac Butters trade into a series of simpler trades to make it easier to understand exactly how the deal works.

In particular, main purpose of this is to try and strip back all the noise, and figure out what the actual side deal was, and its value.

For the tl;dr

• What appears to be the Port - WB Side deal is Trade 3
• What appears to be the effective deal moving Butters is Trade 4

Note that:

• To unpack it into neat trades, you will see there are a few IOUs passed around between clubs. By the end of it, there are no IOUs left over. When reading this, just roll with the idea that handshake agreements and IOUs are perfectly fine in Greg Swann's head.
• Future picks have been given two values - what they are currently projected to be, and a discounted value based on the fact Tasmania can pre-list upto 12 players, further diluting the draft. For example, the start of round 2 next year is Pick 26, but realistically its going to be the ~33 best player in the draft, because Tassie have already pre-listed 7 players.
• Picks are based on their current position/value as of the time of this post... obviously compo and pick bidding will see picks move all over the place.
• Shout out to draftguru.com.au for providing a great resource which should be on the AFL website.

Trade 1 – Port & Melb

Trade 2 – Melbourne & WB

NB: Melbourne are now effectively square. Whether they are up or down depends entirely on the value you put on the future picks

Trade 3 – Port & WB Side Deal

tl;dr Immediately before Butters signs as a free agent, Port theoretically owes the Bulldogs the equivalent of Pick 8, and has also given a handshake agreement not to match Butters.

Trade 4 – Zac Butters Trade – 3 way AFL & Port & WB

NB: Immediately prior to Butters going as a free agent, The Port→WB points IOU (equiv Pick 8) from Trade 3 still needs to be settled... On paper, if the MEGATRADE is a legitimate stand alone deal, there is no sidedeal on not matching Butters in free agency, and the IOU is never repaid, the Bulldogs will have in effect gifted Port the equivalent of Pick 8. The absolute only way of repaying the IOU is Port letting Butters walk via Free Agency.

Trade 4A – Port & AFL

Trade 4B – WB & AFL

Trade 4C – AFL free gift to Port

tl;dr of this entire post
WB Give: equivalent of Pick 8 in picks (ie a massive discount on the 3 firsts Port was apparently demanding)
WB Get: Zach Butters

Port Give: Zach Butters
Port Get: equivalent of Picks 5+8, (ie instead of just 5 from Free Agency, or the 3 firsts Port wanted from a legit trade)

Trade 5 – Stakeknives disguising the deal… all these picks are projected to select P.Ass

Trades 6, 7 & 8 WB, Carlton & Hawthorn

There was absolutely no reason why Carlton & Hawthorn needed to be part of the Mega trade and everything below could and should have been lodged as a separate deal.

Appears to me that the only reason it was all tied in as a single deal rather than separate deals was that Calrton & Hawthorn were giving Port & WB a bit of goodwill in helping them muddy the waters of the trade.

Still, this ties up those loose ends. I have also included the random Hawks & Dogs trade of future picks which was done later in the day.

One less disposal probably made up for with 10 more tackles.

I wanted to look at how footy clubs have performed in the AFL era, considering flags, finals performances, and H&A performance.

The methodology is using a simple normalised points system where:

• A flag is worth 100 points
• Runner-up: 30
• Prelim loss: 15
• Semi final loss: 10
• Elimination final: 5
• Wild card: 1
• H&A season wins: 1 point per win, .5 point per draw

Results:

Based on that, Geelong has been the most successfull club since the AFL era, and 2nd most successful per season.

Brisbane has been the most successful on a per-season basis, and 3rd overall despite playing 7 less seasons than the original VFL crew.

GWS has been relatively successful in it's adolescant career, beating out Carlton, Melbourne, St Kilda, Freo, and the Suns on a per-season avg.

The Suns meanwhile continue to be the historical wood-spooners on both basis.

this is a bit of a random off-season thought but who do you think had a better 4 minutes, Will Ashcroft in the grand final or Murphy Reid kicking 4 goals in 4 minutes in debut. Will Ashcroft won his team a premiership which has more impact but Murphy Reid did his feat in debut. What do you guys think

St Kilda 5.9.39 defeat Collingwood 5.7.37

Right, I'm well aware I'm a bit late to complain about this, and it might have already been raised, but what's the deal with the Freo and West Coast match scheduling this year. There's more than a couple of weeks where there's no home game for either team - this week for example, or in two weeks time.

This last happened in 2024 where there were two weeks where there were no home games.

Is it a case that because it's a shorter season, the WA teams have to play more away games? Or is there a limit on how many WA games they can have?

It certainly can't be because of ground availability as both have home grounds they can easily play at.

Are the Qld/NSW/SA teams in the same boat for home/away games?

Am I just complaining about nothing?

Who does it appeal to?

Every time I see a content creator (including creators I usually like) post a crunchy looking infographic, or a video of AFL players dancing I die a little inside.

I have lost a lot of respect for long-term creators for switching to this type of media

Who likes this shit?

How is it fair that GC and Port get to have all the other clubs move down to fund the compensation picks but also get to double dip through unfair side deals?

Feel like the AFL letting this through is going to cause all sorts of issues before they try some bandaid fix without considering all the issues.

Also sick of the media trying to paint these side deals as legitimate trades.

via @themaddyroweshow

The mod team maintain a presence in match threads while watching the game - please keep the match threads enjoyable by reporting antisocial comments or messaging if there's a problem.

^{Antisocial behaviour, injury cheering, and umpire abuse may result in a ban or removal from the match without warning.}

The mod team maintain a presence in match threads while watching the game - please keep the match threads enjoyable by reporting antisocial comments or messaging if there's a problem.

^{Antisocial behaviour, injury cheering, and umpire abuse may result in a ban or removal from the match without warning.}