List Mgmt. 2015 LIST Discussion - trades, free agency etc

[Cringle]

I hate to bring it up but last time we enticed a player with ridiculous coin it was Thomas. Thought it was such a win at the time though....

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

I hate to bring it up but last time we enticed a player with ridiculous coin it was Thomas. Thought it was such a win at the time though....

Yeah but second half of his career and off a year out with an ankle injury ... and being Mick's son and all ... the risk was a lot bigger than with Treloar.

 

[Cringle]

Yeah but second half of his career and off a year out with an ankle injury ... and being Mick's son and all ... the risk was a lot bigger than with Treloar.

Yeah I know the risk is less. But just being a long term deal worth the highest paid player in the team. There really isn't any room for error.

Then again.. Judd paid off.

 

[chipzac]

Season's already stuffed. Send him in now for head reduction surgery.

Or just see a head shrink

 

[therubbernub]

Come on. We could sign ANYONE and have them have a season ending injury first game. That is not possible to foresee or prevent. It is no reflection on thomas the club or malthouse..
Any rational analysis of thomas and his value to the team can inly be based on exposed form to date ie 2014. Most critics were predicting that his ankle was stuffed and that he wouldnt get through his first season. Well they were wrong, and the clubs doctors were right.
Was his form in 2014 great? No. Should we expect it to be. Imo no. He hadnt played for the best part of two years, he was always going to have a struggle in his first year back.
I was expecting great things from him this year, and could easily have envisioned that he was leading our b and f. But not to be. . That is not to say that 2016 cant be a great year for him, and if so the contract will start to look ok.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Or just see a head shrink

Are we talking about Watson or Yarran now?

 

[chipzac]

Are we talking about Watson or Yarran now?

Maybe they both have big heads

 

[Cringle]

How much is Thomas on anyway?

Is it 600k or closer to 700k?

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

Come on. We could sign ANYONE and have them have a season ending injury first game. That is not possible to foresee or prevent. It is no reflection on thomas the club or malthouse..
Any rational analysis of thomas and his value to the team can inly be based on exposed form to date ie 2014. Most critics were predicting that his ankle was stuffed and that he wouldnt get through his first season. Well they were wrong, and the clubs doctors were right.
Was his form in 2014 great? No. Should we expect it to be. Imo no. He hadnt played for the best part of two years, he was always going to have a struggle in his first year back.
I was expecting great things from him this year, and could easily have envisioned that he was leading our b and f. But not to be. . That is not to say that 2016 cant be a great year for him, and if so the contract will start to look ok.

As a player the decision wasn't terrible. He hasn't redone his ankle so as you say we got that right. Anything else is unlucky.

Form wise, you can easily give allowances for his first season so it is an unknown as to where he would have been this year if he wasn't reinjured.

The big issue with Thomas is he does not fit the needs of a rebuilding side, both age wise and salary wise. It's proof positive that Mick wasn't thinking rebuild as early as some of the whispers suggest, so Thomas has become symptomatic of the mixed messages we got from Mick and the club. Unfortunately for Daisy, through no fault of his own, he is linked to the whole Malthouse tenure.

If Daisy is on $700k, and that is what Treloar is being offered, I know where I'd rather we spend the money.

 

[Beer n Skittles]

How much is Thomas on anyway?

Is it 600k or closer to 700k?

2.5mil over 4 years, so 625K

 

[ferrisb]

Says up to 750k in at least some of those years. So if a team has space, you entice a young player over at 750k for the first couple of years, 550-600k for another 5. I don't agree with the contract length. That's crazy and I can't believe how many teams are desperately selling the farm with some of these players. It's a gamble. The mindset is Treloar is a gun, he will probably be a gun for 10 years. Yes he may get injured but not many teams delists a gun because they are injured for a year or two and great strides have been made in knee surgeries and the like. So they figure he will be commanding 700k for much of his career, just over a few contracts. They just cut out the contract tension. Job security ... it's attractive.

It could be $4.5m over 7 years, rather than 6 over 8. It's doable. Very doable for a team with some of its highest earners departing.

The only reason I would approve this kind of offer is that the salary cap will go up significantly over this time.

So you basically save yourself major wage inflation....?

So you don't end up paying as much as it looks like upfront....

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

The only reason I would approve this kind of offer is that the salary cap will go up significantly over this time.

So you basically save yourself major wage inflation....?

So you don't end up paying as much as it looks like upfront....

Bingo. If he continues on this trajectory his salary could exceed the average yearly amount of this contract. And we should have room to front load a chunk of the pain.

 

[Dramoth]

I hate to bring it up but last time we enticed a player with ridiculous coin it was Thomas. Thought it was such a win at the time though....

We signed Warnock on good coin back in the 2008 trade period... and he missed the whole of 2009 with a foot injury. It isnt like Thomas was the first player who we have recruited that has gone down with a serious injury in their first year at the club... although in Daisy's case, it's his second year and we got 20 games out of him last year (I think that it was 20 games) as he was coming back off a long time out of the game with the ankle injury he suffered against us.

 

[jezzajay]

with all due respect.
i do not want the petulant child Carlisle playing for carlton...
i will spew if we go after him!

 

[BRWB]

Wake Up people - getting Carlisle through the PSD is not going to happen, It will just be used as leverage during negotiations.

Essendon in their current condition CAN NOT afford to let him walk for nothing.

Interesting one of our posters with v good mail (like yourself) said a month or two ago that Carlisle wanted out and wants Carlton precisely because of the PSD leverage. Apparently Carlisle doesn't want the fuss of a protracted trade.

Another one of our posters with v good mail indicated a couple of weeks ago said the Bulldogs haven't targeted Jake because he isn't a good cultural fit (not drugs or bad shit).

I'd guess Jake is headed your way. FWIW it's worth if wada not resolved, P20 sounds fair. Or if resolved favourably then Yarran for Carlisle.

Anyway, Pretty sure Dogs are interested in Hendo. How certain is it that if he goes then it's only Geelong?

And second, I'm assuming Hendo's price is a first rd pick - ours is likely 8 -12? I'd want to swap 2nd rounders as part of that though? Thoughts?

 

[ferrisb]

Now I know we have had really bad luck trading out our 2nd rounders in the past, BUT.....

What do we think of trading out our 2nd pick for a top team's 2nd or 3rd. Particularly one of the northern states that are going to struggle to match academy/fs kids without more picks.

Using Sydney as an example*......

Sydney

If Carlton were to bid on Mills with pick #3, it would cost Sydney their first three picks to match.... They end up with something like Mills, 71, 75, 76. Basically, they get one quality kid and junk. They wouldn't have the firepower to bid on Dunkley (BF Phantom @ 27).

Hypothetical: We give them pick #22 and pick #58, they give us Pick #35 and a decent expendable (let's just say Tom Mitchell or Sam Reid).
Pick #22 gives them some serious points to play with that would allow them to also pick up Dunkley at a nice discount.

Carlton
Out: #22, #58
In: #35, Tom Mitchell

Conclusion: We get Mitchell for the equivalent of pick 38. And we also get an extra mid range pick that could be used for f/s.

Sydney
In: Dunkley
Out: Mitchell

Conclusion: They swap Mitchell for Dunkley. A rough equivalent swap. Syd get reamed a bit, but they also save cap space, possibly help Tom (IF he wants to move for more game time) and bring down midfield age. They don't need Tom given Hanners, Jack, Parker etc in that bracket...

If we needed to sweeten the deal (and we might, but not by much), we could tweak the picks. Eg a late teen pick for Yarran instead of #22. Because of the academy/fs discounts, it is actually possible for both sides to benefit.

The above example is NOT supposed to be a proper hypothetical. I'm not interested in a merits of Tom Mitchell agrument. What it is supposed to illustrate is that you can conjure up win/wins through working with northern states. They have the opportunity to make draft savings through academy. But if they have at least one highly rated prospect, they are unlikely to be able to take advantage of all in the same year. IF we are clever, we can deal with them and get a better deal than a straight trade as they have some goodwill to give away...

Was planning to use GWS as they have multiple top rated prospects (and some really good player offload options) but cbf right now.

*assumed current ladder for simplicity sakes...

 

[Dramoth]

Or just see a head shrink

A witchdoctor?

 

[jezzajay]

Now I know we have had really bad luck trading out our 2nd rounders in the past, BUT.....

What do we think of trading out our 2nd pick for a top team's 2nd or 3rd. Particularly one of the northern states that are going to struggle to match academy/fs kids without more picks.

Using Sydney as an example*......

Sydney

If Carlton were to bid on Mills with pick #3, it would cost Sydney their first three picks to match.... They end up with something like Mills, 71, 75, 76. Basically, they get one quality kid and junk. They wouldn't have the firepower to bid on Dunkley (BF Phantom @ 27).

Hypothetical: We give them pick #22 and pick #58, they give us Pick #35 and a decent expendable (let's just say Tom Mitchell or Sam Reid).
Pick #22 gives them some serious points to play with that would allow them to also pick up Dunkley at a nice discount.

Carlton
Out: #22, #58
In: #35, Tom Mitchell

Conclusion: We get Mitchell for the equivalent of pick 38. And we also get an extra mid range pick that could be used for f/s.

Sydney
In: Dunkley
Out: Mitchell

Conclusion: They swap Mitchell for Dunkley. A rough equivalent swap. Syd get reamed a bit, but they also save cap space, possibly help Tom (IF he wants to move for more game time) and bring down midfield age. They don't need Tom given Hanners, Jack, Parker etc in that bracket...

If we needed to sweeten the deal (and we might, but not by much), we could tweak the picks. Eg a late teen pick for Yarran instead of #22. Because of the academy/fs discounts, it is actually possible for both sides to benefit.

The above example is NOT supposed to be a proper hypothetical. I'm not interested in a merits of Tom Mitchell agrument. What it is supposed to illustrate is that you can conjure up win/wins through working with northern states. They have the opportunity to make draft savings through academy. But if they have at least one highly rated prospect, they are unlikely to be able to take advantage of all in the same year. IF we are clever, we can deal with them and get a better deal than a straight trade as they have some goodwill to give away...

Was planning to use GWS as they have multiple top rated prospects (and some really good player offload options) but cbf right now.

*assumed current ladder for simplicity sakes...

there is some merit to what youre suggesting.
i understand that brandon jack is smashing the reserves and chomping at the bit to play senior footy...easy replacement for mitchell.
amazing how deep sydney bat!

 

[Blue__Balls]

Now I know we have had really bad luck trading out our 2nd rounders in the past, BUT.....

What do we think of trading out our 2nd pick for a top team's 2nd or 3rd. Particularly one of the northern states that are going to struggle to match academy/fs kids without more picks.

Using Sydney as an example*......

Sydney

If Carlton were to bid on Mills with pick #3, it would cost Sydney their first three picks to match.... They end up with something like Mills, 71, 75, 76. Basically, they get one quality kid and junk. They wouldn't have the firepower to bid on Dunkley (BF Phantom @ 27).

Hypothetical: We give them pick #22 and pick #58, they give us Pick #35 and a decent expendable (let's just say Tom Mitchell or Sam Reid).
Pick #22 gives them some serious points to play with that would allow them to also pick up Dunkley at a nice discount.

Carlton
Out: #22, #58
In: #35, Tom Mitchell

Conclusion: We get Mitchell for the equivalent of pick 38. And we also get an extra mid range pick that could be used for f/s.

Sydney
In: Dunkley
Out: Mitchell

Conclusion: They swap Mitchell for Dunkley. A rough equivalent swap. Syd get reamed a bit, but they also save cap space, possibly help Tom (IF he wants to move for more game time) and bring down midfield age. They don't need Tom given Hanners, Jack, Parker etc in that bracket...

If we needed to sweeten the deal (and we might, but not by much), we could tweak the picks. Eg a late teen pick for Yarran instead of #22. Because of the academy/fs discounts, it is actually possible for both sides to benefit.

The above example is NOT supposed to be a proper hypothetical. I'm not interested in a merits of Tom Mitchell agrument. What it is supposed to illustrate is that you can conjure up win/wins through working with northern states. They have the opportunity to make draft savings through academy. But if they have at least one highly rated prospect, they are unlikely to be able to take advantage of all in the same year. IF we are clever, we can deal with them and get a better deal than a straight trade as they have some goodwill to give away...

Was planning to use GWS as they have multiple top rated prospects (and some really good player offload options) but cbf right now.

*assumed current ladder for simplicity sakes...

Probably best to keep it simple.

Mitchell for 22 is already weighted in our favour. Can't see them throwing in a 23 pick upgrade for us as well.

You're right though that they're the kinds of clubs we should be working with - Sydney and GWS - as they'll be looking for ways to capitalise on their Academy selections. The tough part is that we should either trade for established best 22 types under 23, or just keep the picks for ourselves. No point getting 26/27+ year olds who will decline over the coming years, and fringe players are going to be just as speculative as draft picks, but we lose a few years on them if they do work out.

The type of deal I'd be looking at is (assuming Hendo goes for 10-ish), 10 + 20 for Treloar if he nominates us. They get a guarantee on a few of their most highly rated Academy kids, and potentially a top 10 pick if nobody else bids on their players earlier. We lose Hendo and 20 for a proven performer who dominates in our midfield from day one.

EDIT: Hell - if Hendo's open to it, Hendo and 20 to GWS for Treloar. Might suit their needs too...

 

[ferrisb]

True that BB. Pick for player much easier than my suggestion.

Under normal circumstances, I doubt Syd would settle for pick #22 for TM. But there's more at play here with academy/fs.

I reckon GWS would be a better counterparty, given they seem to love getting the high picks. Like your Treloar idea, but I reckon we have better value aiming for the next level down. Their top shelf is going to cost a packet, but their reserve young talent is more expendable for them. Basically I think the strategy is like Pick #7 trade all over again, but this with us starting with pick #22 or picks received for Hendo/Yarran.

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

True that BB. Pick for player much easier than my suggestion.

Under normal circumstances, I doubt Syd would settle for pick #22 for TM. But there's more at play here with academy/fs.

I reckon GWS would be a better counterparty, given they seem to love getting the high picks. Like your Treloar idea, but I reckon we have better value aiming for the next level down. Their top shelf is going to cost a packet, but their reserve young talent is more expendable for them. Basically I think the strategy is like Pick #7 trade all over again, but this with us starting with pick #22 or picks received for Hendo/Yarran.

The concern for me is their reserve young talent carries no guarantee. Treloar is a lay down misere for mine. Will Hoskin-Elliot and so forth, may or may not get to that elite level. My guess is probably not. Serviceable to very good.

 

[Blue__Balls]

The more I think about it, the more I'm liking the idea of trading Hendo to GWS rather than Geelong (if he does want out). They've got much more talent to offer in return, and our List Manager has first hand experience with most of those players, so should know who fits the bill for us and who doesn't.

GWS are right in the frame for finals this year, and if Mumford hadn't gone down I could certainly see them troubling teams like Richmond, WB and Collingwood, hell, even Freo and West Coast would be vulnerable. They should be pushing for top 4 next year, and expecting to challenge for a premiership over the next couple of years.

They've got a few young tall defenders in the wings (Marchbank and Plowman), but they're probably still a few years off really demanding selection. They're giving games to Patfull, who Hendo should certainly have covered as a defender. Past that their best defenders are serviceable at best. If he's open to a move to Sydney, Hendo could be playing in a flag favourite side very soon.

 

[ferrisb]

The concern for me is their reserve young talent carries no guarantee. Treloar is a lay down misere for mine. Will Hoskin-Elliot and so forth, may or may not get to that elite level. My guess is probably not. Serviceable to very good.

True ODN, but there's a BIG difference in the compensation we would be paying. Middling picks for prospects is very different to selling half the farm for a bona fide star.

I would also argue that GWS are in a unique position (even accounting for GC) of having 'surplus' young talent. And because of that their priorities, focus, value and list balance is out of whack with every other team. Which means there is chance for opportunities/mispricing.

The best trading opportunities always come from a simple principle. Bring in what you need and what is surplus to others' needs/preferences. And give off what you need the least and other want/need the most. Follow this path and every trade should be 'theoretically' a good deal. Not every player will kick on or stay healthy, but at least the deal should initially stack up well....

 

[The Old Dark Navy's]

True ODN, but there's a BIG difference in the compensation we would be paying. Middling picks for prospects is very different to selling half the farm for a bona fide star.

I would also argue that GWS are in a unique position (even accounting for GC) of having 'surplus' young talent. And because of that their priorities, focus, value and list balance is out of whack with every other team. Which means there is chance for opportunities/mispricing.

The best trading opportunities always come from a simple principle. Bring in what you need and what is surplus to others' needs/preferences. And give off what you need the least and other want/need the most. Follow this path and every trade should be 'theoretically' a good deal. Not every player will kick on or stay healthy, but at least the deal should initially stack up well....

Moneyball huh?

Served us well with Everitt and Docherty. Remains to be seen with Jaksch and Whiley. Not so good with Tutt and Jones.

 

[ferrisb]

The more I think about it, the more I'm liking the idea of trading Hendo to GWS rather than Geelong (if he does want out). They've got much more talent to offer in return, and our List Manager has first hand experience with most of those players, so should know who fits the bill for us and who doesn't.

GWS are right in the frame for finals this year, and if Mumford hadn't gone down I could certainly see them troubling teams like Richmond, WB and Collingwood, hell, even Freo and West Coast would be vulnerable. They should be pushing for top 4 next year, and expecting to challenge for a premiership over the next couple of years.

They've got a few young tall defenders in the wings (Marchbank and Plowman), but they're probably still a few years off really demanding selection. They're giving games to Patfull, who Hendo should certainly have covered as a defender. Past that their best defenders are serviceable at best. If he's open to a move to Sydney, Hendo could be playing in a flag favourite side very soon.

I mentioned Hendo to GWS recently (IF he was happy to go there). For GWS he is instant plug and play CHB. They really struggle against the top KPF. As for Hendo, he would probably taste quite a bit of footy success and I reckon he would thrive on leading kids.

Was actually going to mention Patfull trade in my previous post. I think GWS paid overs because they needed experience more than most. And they need early-mid picks less than most. That creates opportunity for other teams. We have little to offer GWS, but I think Hendo would be perfect for them. 4-5+ years of elite(ish) key back while Marchbank etc grow and mature.