Player Watch #6 Logan McDonald

[dosser]

I think of the club as Ford, the players as production line workers and agents as unions.

Or the club as a cafe with the players as the sandwich and the agents as the toaster.

 

[Jewelsbon]

I'm getting bored with Logan's contract shenanigans. I've decided that he's leaving and I no longer care (I previously did). That way my emotional investment is now zero.
Same with Chad. He stays, he goes, the club goes on. I'll focus on the players who are straight up Bloods, old or new.

A very healthy and far less stressful way of looking at things I think Chris

 

[Ticky009]

I'm getting bored with Logan's contract shenanigans. I've decided that he's leaving and I no longer care (I previously did). That way my emotional investment is now zero.
Same with Chad. He stays, he goes, the club goes on. I'll focus on the players who are straight up Bloods, old or new.

It's all about what you can control. Player contracts is nothing I can control. Deal with it when announcements are made and move onto the next steps of what that announcement means to the team and the club.

Regurgitating the same unknown achieves nothing.

If you can't be Zen then be Zen'ish

 

[Wolfgang West]

lol how dramatic. Writing individual’s character off using their Bigfooty content.

Go easy, we will get philosophies on Life next.

 

[GreyGooseGuy88]

Would we consider trading Logan for Jake Waterman

2

Jake Waterman

Age

26

Ht

192cm

Wt

92kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

11.3

3star

K

7.9

3star

HB

3.4

3star

M

5.2

5star

T

1.2

3star

G

1.0

4star

D

9.8

2star

K

7.8

3star

HB

2.0

1star

M

5.8

5star

T

0.3

1star

G

1.5

5star

D

12.2

3star

K

7.6

3star

HB

4.6

4star

M

4.6

5star

T

1.6

4star

G

0.8

4star

at West Coast? Possibly some pick swaps also.

 

[dosser]

Would we consider trading Logan for Jake Waterman at West Coast? Possibly some pick swaps also.

Nope. Waterman is at his peak while Logan has more years left and will possibly go past him.

 

[tombomb]

Would we consider trading Logan for Jake Waterman at West Coast? Possibly some pick swaps also.

Some will laugh on here, but it isn't the worst suggestion.

It's only a short sample, but he is a really good player and would be an upgrade on Logan at least in the short term.

But player for player swaps are so rare. You would have to be working on it well in advance and basically know Logan is not going to re-sign and be talking to Waterman's agent now. Plus West Coast would hold all the power as he is contracted.

 

[kickthething]

Logan is a victim of a PM who saw his stocks on the rise and advised to hold off awaiting the big offers…business is business, he may want to be a Swan but other forces are at play as well. Hopefully he does everything to the end of this year to push his price sky high….

 

[The King!]

I'm getting bored with Logan's contract shenanigans. I've decided that he's leaving and I no longer care (I previously did). That way my emotional investment is now zero.
Same with Chad. He stays, he goes, the club goes on. I'll focus on the players who are straight up Bloods, old or new.

But we don't know what's actually going on, they may barely discuss it?

Media crap always goes on

 

[SM]

Been 3 weeks since 'He's signing this week'. I stand by my earlier comments. Each week it goes by is hurting him rather than benefitting him. Either he wants out or has a poor agent.

 

[The King!]

Been 3 weeks since 'He's signing this week'. I stand by my earlier comments. Each week it goes by is hurting him rather than benefitting him. Either he wants out or has a poor agent.

How's it actually hurting him? He or the club never said they were signing "this week."

 

[SM]

How's it actually hurting him? He or the club never said they were signing "this week."

It's hurting his leverage in negotiations.

 

[The King!]

It's hurting his leverage in negotiations.

How? his leverage hasn't changed .

You the think the clubs desire to keep him fluctuates week to week?

 

[SM]

How? his leverage hasn't changed .

You the think the clubs desire to keep him fluctuates week to week?

No I think at the start of the year he could trade off the potential with him as the number one forward without Buddy a lot better than he can now 18 rounds into the season. In the same way that he only re-signed for two years to back himself into being worth substantially more than he would have got just trading on 'potential' he's now in a position where the contract will be based on actual output, which hasn't come on as strongly this season as either party would have liked.

I mean, I don't think this is particularly revolutionary stuff. Gulden re-signing at the start of the year was because we were aligned on valuation based on his runs on the board off the back of a third place in the Brownlow, he didn't need to 'prove himself' this year by putting off negotiations. Contrast with Chad who had somewhat of a down year last year and is having a blinder this year, it's in his interests to put off negotiations so he can use his 2024 body of work to improve his negotiating position. Logan would have been better served signing early in the season when he still could have had some leverage in regards to how his year was perceived to play out.

 

[The King!]

No I think at the start of the year he could trade off the potential with him as the number one forward without Buddy a lot better than he can now 18 rounds into the season. In the same way that he only re-signed for two years to back himself into being worth substantially more than he would have got just trading on 'potential' he's now in a position where the contract will be based on actual output, which hasn't come on as strongly this season as either party would have liked.

I mean, I don't think this is particularly revolutionary stuff. Gulden re-signing at the start of the year was because we were aligned on valuation based on his runs on the board off the back of a third place in the Brownlow, he didn't need to 'prove himself' this year by putting off negotiations. Contrast with Chad who had somewhat of a down year last year and is having a blinder this year, it's in his interests to put off negotiations so he can use his 2024 body of work to improve his negotiating position. Logan would have been better served signing early in the season when he still could have had some leverage in regards to how his year was perceived to play out.

He is a number 4 pick , who is a regular in the top forward line in the comp, clearly attracting interest from rival clubs, so he has options. Even with a poor season he would attract options giving his high selection and perceived potential. The season performance doesn't matter that much in terms of his future , unless he bombed out completely.

He almost has nothing to lose, he would be valued like all promising tall forwards as worthwhile at such a young age and if he dominated the year it only went up.

If you think AFL clubs , and Sydney watched the season and have walked back their desire to sign him then I think you are well off the mark.

He is a 22 year old forward with arguably 10 years of quality in front of him, 17 other clubs will sign him if we don't. Sam Reid, Jarrad Waite all traded on potential for a decade.

Either way it sounds like you think the club opened at say 4 years at 600k , then have gradually adjusted up and down each week.
Not sure you are thinking it through.

By your logic if Chad finished the year poorly from this week his leverage will go down and we get him cheaper .

 

[SM]

He is a number 4 pick , who is a regular in the top forward line in the comp, clearly attracting interest from rival clubs, so he has options. Even with a poor season he would attract options giving his high selection and perceived potential. The season performance doesn't matter that much in terms of his future , unless he bombed out completely.

He almost has nothing to lose, he would be valued like all promising tall forwards as worthwhile at such a young age and if he dominated the year it only went up.

If you think AFL clubs , and Sydney watched the season and have walked back their desire to sign him then I think you are well off the mark.

He is a 22 year old forward with arguably 10 years of quality in front of him, 17 other clubs will sign him if we don't. Sam Reid, Jarrad Waite all traded on potential for a decade.

Either way it sounds like you think the club opened at say 4 years at 600k , then have gradually adjusted up and down each week.
Not sure you are thinking it through.

By your logic if Chad finished the year poorly from this week his leverage will go down and we get him cheaper .

So why not come out and say contract negotiations will be reviewed at the end of the year? Why the drip feed of 'might sign might not sign' week after week?

No I didn't say they've walked back their desire to sign him, I'm suggesting the $ offered or the length of the deal may start to move further away from the numbers he and his camp are after.

If you're suggesting that we're desperate to sign him and that it's him holding off on signing, why do you think he'd be doing that? Could it be my suggestion above that started this conversation?

No that isn't what I think or what I said but you can read into this conversation however you want.

That's not my logic at all and is a bizarre conclusion to draw.

I'll put it this way: do you think Logan's demands at the start of the year are more likely to be met (assuming we weren't willing to meet them at the start of the season) or less likely to be met after the season he's had?

Do you think Chad's demands at the start of the year are more likely to be met or less likely to be met after the season he's had?

For Logan - if less likely (I'd love to hear your logic around why he would have gone UP in value in our eyes) why would Logan be continuing to hold off other than because he wants to test the market and potentially leave the club?

 

[The King!]

So why not come out and say contract negotiations will be reviewed at the end of the year? Why the drip feed of 'might sign might not sign' week after week?

No I didn't say they've walked back their desire to sign him, I'm suggesting the $ offered or the length of the deal may start to move further away from the numbers he and his camp are after.

If you're suggesting that we're desperate to sign him and that it's him holding off on signing, why do you think he'd be doing that? Could it be my suggestion above that started this conversation?

No that isn't what I think or what I said but you can read into this conversation however you want.

That's not my logic at all and is a bizarre conclusion to draw.

I'll put it this way: do you think Logan's demands at the start of the year are more likely to be met (assuming we weren't willing to meet them at the start of the season) or less likely to be met after the season he's had?

Do you think Chad's demands at the start of the year are more likely to be met or less likely to be met after the season he's had?

For Logan - if less likely (I'd love to hear your logic around why he would have gone UP in value in our eyes) why would Logan be continuing to hold off other than because he wants to test the market and potentially leave the club?

They don't have to run the contract negotiations in public, both the club and Mcdonald gave the usual answers. There's the other bullshit leaking, half of it could be true who knows. But they didn't set an official date, they also don't have to set one.

Yes your suggestion the dollars offered and length of the deal are moving further away from what his camp is after is saying the clubs desire to sign him has changed. You can word it however you want . But if it's moved further away presumably they are offering less in your mind, not more than Logan's camp want.

I didn't suggest anything about desperate to sign him, we may not care either way, I just said whatever the desire was it won't change for a 22 year old top prospect over 15 games of footy. I also don't think the club have done anything to suggest they aren't happy with his performance . The continued selection suggests he is progressing quite well.

But I made no comment on our desire versus him holding out, I just questioned your claim he has lost leverage in negotiations and his manager has performed poorly by not signing yet.

To answer your questions :


I don't think Logan has had a poor year which seems to be your claim. I don't think the clubs desire to sign him has changed , this isn't a week to week performance negotiation, this is a long term investment the club has already spent significant time and draft capital on. Are you telling me if we signed him before opening round the club would regret it now?
The season has been fine , and the desire to sign him would be the same as before, they would want him to stay, and understand his potential .

Do I think Chad's desires are more likely to be met , sure he has broken out as a star, but also at his age after making an all australian squad do you think a down year would have led the Swans to think ahh well **** it go to Freo. You are paying for what you think both players can do more than what they given you. But Chad as a midfielder is a different prospect. He is also clearly more of a star in his area than Logan is and probably will ever be. So not really a great comparison .


Do I think Logan's value has gone up, not really, didn't say it had, he is tracking close to other forwards at the same age, it would be a big loss to the Swans structure and investment and potentially strengthens a rival so you could make the case based on that.


Why is he continuing to hold off? I have no idea, none of us do. We aren't in the room, but suggestion it's because he has lost leverage is just odd.

Again if he kicks 10 on the weekend should he sign next week because his leverage went up?

This conversation is bloody hard to follow on a phone sorry . Looks it's interesting , I just think we are both, well all of us, missing all the key information that only the club and Logan and his camp have.

 

[SM]

They don't have to run the contract negotiations in public, both the club and Mcdonald gave the usual answers. There's the other bullshit leaking, half of it could be true who knows. But they didn't set an official date, they also don't have to set one.

Yes your suggestion the dollars offered and length of the deal are moving further away from what his camp is after is saying the clubs desire to sign him has changed. You can word it however you want . But if it's moved further away presumably they are offering less in your mind, not more than Logan's camp want.

I didn't suggest anything about desperate to sign him, we may not care either way, I just said whatever the desire was it won't change for a 22 year old top prospect over 15 games of footy. I also don't think the club have done anything to suggest they aren't happy with his performance . The continued selection suggests he is progressing quite well.

But I made no comment on our desire versus him holding out, I just questioned your claim he has lost leverage in negotiations and his manager has performed poorly by not signing yet.

To answer your questions :


I don't think Logan has had a poor year which seems to be your claim. I don't think the clubs desire to sign him has changed , this isn't a week to week performance negotiation, this is a long term investment the club has already spent significant time and draft capital on. Are you telling me if we signed him before opening round the club would regret it now?
The season has been fine , and the desire to sign him would be the same as before, they would want him to stay, and understand his potential .

Do I think Chad's desires are more likely to be met , sure he has broken out as a star, but also at his age after making an all australian squad do you think a down year would have led the Swans to think ahh well **** it go to Freo. You are paying for what you think both players can do more than what they given you. But Chad as a midfielder is a different prospect. He is also clearly more of a star in his area than Logan is and probably will ever be. So not really a great comparison .


Do I think Logan's value has gone up, not really, didn't say it had, he is tracking close to other forwards at the same age, it would be a big loss to the Swans structure and investment and potentially strengthens a rival so you could make the case based on that.


Why is he continuing to hold off? I have no idea, none of us do. We aren't in the room, but suggestion it's because he has lost leverage is just odd.

Again if he kicks 10 on the weekend should he sign next week because his leverage went up?

Where did I suggest he was holding off BECAUSE he's lost leverage? You have an amazing ability to write a wall of text without actually reading what others have written sometimes. Your concession that Chad would be worth more now than at the start of the year at least shows the point is within your grasp.

All I started by saying is that there are limited reasons why Logan wouldn't have signed yet, and as the months pass it strengthens our hand not his.

If he'd kicked 60 for the year it would have strengthened his position. It's not rocket science. To make out I'm suggesting we're adjusting our offer weekly is just silly.

 

[Olian]

How? his leverage hasn't changed .

You the think the clubs desire to keep him fluctuates week to week?

Agee it’s not the ASX, players value is measured on more than a week’s performance. Amartey’s value didn’t sky rocket after the Crows game and the plummet after the Giants game .

 

[The King!]

Where did I suggest he was holding off BECAUSE he's lost leverage? You have an amazing ability to write a wall of text without actually reading what others have written sometimes. Your concession that Chad would be worth more now than at the start of the year at least shows the point is within your grasp.

All I started by saying is that there are limited reasons why Logan wouldn't have signed yet, and as the months pass it strengthens our hand not his.

If he'd kicked 60 for the year it would have strengthened his position. It's not rocket science. To make out I'm suggesting we're adjusting our offer weekly is just silly.

Ok then

 

[SM]

Agee it’s not the ASX, players value is measured on more than a week’s performance. Amartey’s value didn’t sky rocket after the Crows game and the plummet after the Giants game .

Don't believe anyone suggested otherwise. Bit of a strawman.

 

[grimlock]

Re signed for four!

 

[The King!]

Oh looked he just signed

must have got over the leverage and value /risk issues.


Whatever just good news.

 

[BloodySwan]

Signed for 4 years! Love it!

 

[Callipygian]

McDonald commits to Sydney

Logan McDonald has signed a four-year contract extension until at least the end of the 2028 season.

www.sydneyswans.com.au