List Mgmt. 2017 Trade & FA Targets Part 1

[Sir Skid]

So Fyfe 1.5/yr. For 5?

Well ok, but only if they throw in Balic and we keep our 2 x 1st tound picks

 

[Joffaboy]

Baines don't give a ****, his time to shine, will get Fyfe & keep our picks. Bookmark it. campaigners a god.

That should be the title of the Baines thread

'Campaigners a God'

 

[Sir Skid]

If Freo start out tanking Carlton we'll know they're not going to match the offer.

When do they play the Hawks?

Imagine Freo getting picks 1 and 2.
Our1st gets pushed to 3 or 4 and we get our marquee player.

 

[PrinceofSeaford]

Except that it actually will have some ability. 2m was an arbitrary example. But for the sake of it lets stick with it ok?
If we offer 2m first year and freo can only offer 1.5 we're up 500k, 2m second year and lets say freo can pay 1.6, still up 900k.
So long as we can maintain more than breakeven over the next 3 years which we really should given most of our contracts aren't even extended to then at this point. It makes every difference as over the last 3 years we should be able to pay anything they can...

not sure if you're taking the piss? if we offer fyfe an average of 1.5 million over 5 years, all freo have to do is make an offer that pays an average of 1.5 million over 5 years.

it doesn't matter if we are up 900k after the first 2 years because if freo pay the same average salary per year it will end up being the same ****ing figure

 

[Dard Ball Get]

Baines don't give a ****, his time to shine, will get Fyfe & keep our picks. Bookmark it. campaigners a god.

If that happens I'm painting this mural on my house, a la Molly Meldrum!

 

[Joffaboy]

Freo's board in a bit of a tizz. Bagging Billings and McCartin like that somehow detracts from the Fyfe rumour.

Nasty bitter little Frockers over there. Must realise they have been had by Lyon and now the hope had gone.
Not so arrogant now.

 

[plugger66]

If the choice is keeping our first rounders and not get him or losing those I vote for losing both. One is a bonus so its just one normal say around pick 10 for a top 3 player in the AFL. Obviously getting him for nothing would be huge. Still think it will be a struggle to get him though.

 

[Glen Buterol]

just because we front load the deal doesn't mean they have to aswell. if we give 1.5 over 5 years and front load it, they still only have to pay 1.5 over 5. they can structure it how they like as long as they match the total of 7.5 over 5 years.

so regardless of weather we pay 2 mil in the first year or 500k it will have no influence on Freo's ability to match the offer, but thats just me.

6 mill over 3 years. A year later renegotiate an extra 3 mill for a further 3 years. Equals 9 mil over 6 or 1.5 per year. Bainesy u did it again campaigner.

 

[PrinceofSeaford]

6 mill over 3 years. A year later renegotiate an extra 3 mill for a further 3 years. Equals 9 mil over 6 or 1.5 per year. Bainesy u did it again campaigner.

hahahaha if the hawks can do it so can we!!

 

[saintbill]

Serious question:

After we get Fyfe through free agency and land Kelly using our 2 first rounders, are we the 2018 flag favorites?

#keepingalidonit

 

[STK2020]

$1.5M per year on a player is the kind of money you'd offer Ablett Jr. at his prime - he was practically a walking Brownlow and if it wasn't for media influence on umpires I suspect he'd have had 4 by now.

Fyfe has had the following:

• Pre 2013: Showing signs but also significant shoulder injury concerns
• 2013: BnF
• 2014: BnF + MVP + AA
• 2015: Brownlow + MVP + AA
• 2016: Broken leg after a poor start

I am not convinced that Fyfe will continue this kind of form on a long term basis. Whilst he should still be elite, he will not be "$1.5M elite". Especially if he goes down with an injury.

And this is all being said under the assumption that he would come across via Free Agency. If a trade is required, or even necessitates the use of our highest first round pick after forcing him into the draft, then that is a categorical no. There are far better uses of the money (and potentially the picks).

For example, imagine having to trade two first round picks and pay Fyfe 1.5M. For the same kind of money and picks, you could net Rockliff (FA @~800k) and the pair of Whitfield and Hopper (two first round picks on ~800K combined). For the same pick outlay and only an extra $100k, we set our midfield up for the short AND long term, plus do not force ourselves into a corner due to having one player on such a large sum of money. And you can bet that Fyfe, being the business focused individual that he is, would have salary protection written into his contract in the event of injury (A.Hamill 2 weeks, anyone?).

I would roll the dice .
Long year to play out and chances are blokes like Whitfield, Hopper ect... will re sign , and if that happens and it works we have worked on Fyfe for the past year and a half to get a Brownlow medallist, multiple all Australian, high profile footballer wearing our sponsers advertising for 1.5 mill .....massive win by our club unlike other clubs ( Nth Melb ) who cant land a BIG fish . I want to be the envy of the competition, hated by other supporters because we can attract their best .

 

[Crusty Undies]

not sure if you're taking the piss? if we offer fyfe an average of 1.5 million over 5 years, all freo have to do is make an offer that pays an average of 1.5 million over 5 years.

it doesn't matter if we are up 900k after the first 2 years because if freo pay the same average salary per year it will end up being the same ******* figure

The point I was trying to make is that given we will be able to pay equal to freo over the last 3 years of his contract the fact that we can frontload it makes a world of difference as it means we can pay more than they can in the first 2. So yes while the value of the contract wouls be the same as spreading it out over 5 years, front loading means we could pay more than they can as we have more money than they do for the next 2 years and a similar amount after that.

 

[Joffaboy]

Serious question:

After we get Fyfe through free agency and land Kelly using our 2 first rounders, are we the 2018 flag favorites?

#keepingalidonit

GWS.

 

[Crusty Undies]

If the choice is keeping our first rounders and not get him or losing those I vote for losing both. One is a bonus so its just one normal say around pick 10 for a top 3 player in the AFL. Obviously getting him for nothing would be huge. Still think it will be a struggle to get him though.

How is one a bonus? We didn't get given the pick for nothing and just cos we bent over Hawthorn doesn't make it a bonus either. It's worth a pick the same way our current one is...

 

[VDS66]

Serious question:

After we get Fyfe through free agency and land Kelly using our 2 first rounders, are we the 2018 flag favorites?

#keepingalidonit

Depends who our ruckman is...

 

[Strahany]

I would roll the dice .
Long year to play out and chances are blokes like Whitfield, Hopper ect... will re sign , and if that happens and it works we have worked on Fyfe for the past year and a half to get a Brownlow medallist, multiple all Australian, high profile footballer wearing our sponsers advertising for 1.5 mill .....massive win by our club unlike other clubs ( Nth Melb ) who cant land a BIG fish . I want to be the envy of the competition, hated by other supporters because we can attract their best .

Absolutely. My contention is that, in the case of "Fyfe @ 1.5M vs Alternative X", said alternative can be any number of better options. However, if it's a matter of "Fyfe @ 1.5M vs Letting the cap space sit there unused" then it's a no brainer. I just hope that the club isn't getting sucked into the hype of a big fish FA much like Hawthorn did whilst chasing O'Meara.

 

[plugger66]

6 mill over 3 years. A year later renegotiate an extra 3 mill for a further 3 years. Equals 9 mil over 6 or 1.5 per year. Bainesy u did it again campaigner.

What if he says I want 6 million again for 3 years after the 3 years? Anyway he isn't going to sign for only 3 years whatever the money.

 

[plugger66]

How is one a bonus? We didn't get given the pick for nothing and just cos we bent over Hawthorn doesn't make it a bonus either. It's worth a pick the same way our current one is...

I think its a bonus. You don't. Settle pettle. Anyway whether its a bonus or not I'm still happy losing both if we have to if that gets us a top 3 player in the AFL. Hopefully we don't have to.

 

[saintbill]

GWS.

Best case scenario is they win the flag this year, get a little ahead of themselves and start hanging out with Buddy and the NRL boys in the offseason. I reckon there is a chance their young list does a Hawks 09 after they snag one.

 

[stavro#4]

If the choice is keeping our first rounders and not get him or losing those I vote for losing both. One is a bonus so its just one normal say around pick 10 for a top 3 player in the AFL. Obviously getting him for nothing would be huge. Still think it will be a struggle to get him though.

i have no knowledge of how or what we will do regarding trading for him. But i cannot understand why we would want to part with BOTH first round picks.
The Danger trade is most likely the most realistic comparison and that cost Geelong pick 9 Pick 28 and Dean Gore. I would happily trade St Kilda's first pick either This year or Next and our Second rounder Next year + Nathan Wright(Insert player of similar Ilk) and Keep the Hawks pick. Not sure why Fyfe is worth more the Danger.

 

[Mstr Strokesman]

Dont know how many times I have to say it on this board..

1. Minchington and Wright performed to a standard that deserved a 2 year contract extension and ensured their safe position in our squad in the future. Recognition needs to be provided where its due.

2. If it comes down to it, a player will be moved to the rookie list (if it still exists) to make enough room on our list come the end of the year with drafting and trading. We have done this in the past and we will do it again, just as other clubs have.

This strategy is widely used in the industry and is far more equitable and appropriate than paying someone out. We did it with Saunders and Schneider and we will do it again if necessary.

No hoohaa regarding the extension of those boys contracts and it won't hamper our pursuit of talent come the end of the year.

Not trying to be smart but what other clubs have placed contracted players on the rookie list .
Just can't think of any ?

 

[PrinceofSeaford]

The point I was trying to make is that given we will be able to pay equal to freo over the last 3 years of his contract the fact that we can frontload it makes a world of difference as it means we can pay more than they can in the first 2. So yes while the value of the contract wouls be the same as spreading it out over 5 years, front loading means we could pay more than they can as we have more money than they do for the next 2 years and a similar amount after that.

what your not understanding is if we front load the contract and Fremantle don't we won't be able to pay the same as them over the last 3 years because we've already spent it.

 

[Crusty Undies]

I think its a bonus. You don't. Settle pettle. Anyway whether its a bonus or not I'm still happy losing both if we have to if that gets us a top 3 player in the AFL. Hopefully we don't have to.

How do you think of it as a bonus? Did we get it for free? No, it's worth the lion's share of the picks we traded to Hawthorn. Therefore not a bonus. Also as Stavro said, the cats didnt even pay 2 for Danger, and the only reason they paid anything is cos the compo pick Adelaide would've gotten through just FA was going to be terrible given they finished 2nd if memory serves. Given Freo look likely to finish at least bottom 8 and probably bottom 6 they'd then have to picks in the top 7 if they let him go through FA.

 

[Crusty Undies]

what your not understanding is if we front load the contract and Fremantle don't we won't be able to pay the same as them over the last 3 years because we've already spent it.

How do you figure that? Unless I'm missing something we can pay the same as Freo can over the last 3 years.

 

[Periphery]

If we can't force Fyfe to be a FA (seems highly unlikely) then the idea of working another Freo player into the deal is really interesting imo. It seems like a good way to leverage the deal in our direction while still being a win:win.

I'll use Weller as an example because he's awesome and exactly what we need:

<Picks used are based on current ladder position. I doubt the Hawks pick will be so high - it'll be more like pick 4-5 imo>

Freo is planning on matching the Fyfe deal. This would force us to trade - almost certainly 2 firsts.

So we offer Weller a big deal and get him to nominate us. He's contracted and was originally a pick 13 so we'd have to trade and it'd have to be a decent offer. Probably worth our first by himself. But this also gives us leverage in the Fyfe deal.

It would allow us to offer Freo 2 first round picks for Weller but on the condition that they don't match the Fyfe deal. Lets say we offer them both our firsts this year (picks 2 and 10) with maybe a few late picks coming back our way (this helps keep the AFL off our backs). The AFL might question why we are paying so much for him, but the fact that he's contracted means we have to pay what is needed to make the deal happen (they've shown they are willing to let ridiculous shit though if the team is fully aware - thanks Hawthorn!).

Freo then get picks 2, 10 and a FA compo pick after their first (currently would be pick 9) for Fyfe and Weller. This is a better position Freo would be in if we traded for both (as the 3rd first round pick they'd be getting would be our 2018 one which would probably be worse than the Fyfe compo pick). However, that doesn't factor in the risk to Freo of Weller asking for a trade next year when they'd get a lesser deal for him as he'd be OOC. That just makes it better for Freo. Overall it'd leave Freo with picks 2,8,9,10 in this years draft. For a club in their position that's massive - particularly if the draft is good for talls.

From our point of view it's a way better option as the net result is Weller and Fyfe for picks 2, 10 and a boat load of cash. That's a massive win. The main problem for us is that we'd need to find a way back into this years draft, but I'm sure we can figure that out.

Overall, despite forcing Freo's hand it ends up about as good for them as anything they could hope to get for when trading those players.

Of course, none of this is going to happen because we almost certain get either of them to nominate us, let alone both.