Rumour Bluemour Discussion XXXV - 'Loopy' Season has begun

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
No doubt he wants to play for us. He was part of that semi final loss and thought gees imagine being part of this. The crowd was insane.
Plus the tie in with his cooking aspirations fit perfectly. The home of good food and great coffee. Going to the pies just will not cut it.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

TDK would be at the tippy top of the Melbourne wishlist.

But that's their opening demand now that Melbourne have been told in no uncertain terms that TDK is not on the table.

No chance we're trading TDK either.

Honestly, sense a lot of this player, that player being rumored in the coming weeks. It's Melbourne trying to play as hard ball as possible.

IF TDK ever leaves Carlton it's to get to Geelong.
If TDK does leave via free agency next season we potentially only get one first round draft pick if we can't match the money offered. Interesting times.
 
im trading harry before im trading tdk. He really has the potential to be the best player in the comp.


Episode 5 Reaction GIF by The Office
 
No way any deal includes Petracca staying on his current wage, also no way any of H, TDK or Charles involved; BUT Cera and/or Williams (without a pick) with a swap of 2025 first round picks might do it.....with Petracca taking a reduced wage to fit into our cap or it doesn't happen

No chance Cerra and/or Williams with picks will do it as Melbourne would consider themselves to be paying overs.

Petracca is widely considered a Top 5 player in the league. If a Top 20 or so player is not attached to that deal, it is bound to fail in my opinion.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I rate H highly hes a top 5 key forward. I know champion data gets flack but before tdk went down he was the number 1 rated player in the afl over 6 weeks and that was when he was solo rucking. Hes a special player thats finally coming into his prime

For me both Harry & TDK are untouchable.
 
Cerra + our future second should get it done if he’s willing to take a salary cut otherwise he can find somewhere else to retire.

Contract will probably carry over with the same salary. Cerra + future second is way unders. Attach two to three firsts to that and Carlton paying Petracca’s whole salary and they’d probably take it.
 
Jake lever, perfect fit. Match made in heaven with Weiters.
 
A Question for the collective brains trust in here…

Why does Petracca have to get his full contracted price?
Yes, Melbourne is on the hook for it (& there’s ways to subsidize/reduce that) but if he chooses to renege on the contract, could he not take reduced contract elsewhere?

If he wants out, surely it’s not unreasonable for him to have to take a loss on his contract, especially given his injury & the sheer size of the contract.

If u wanted out badly enough, would it not be plausible to take the loss? Even at $800-900k a season he’s still making a hell of a lot of money & would be set for life after footy?

To be clear, I’m asking about the “mechanics” of a player reducing the contract, not a question about “why would he take less”
 
Petracca is coming from a long way back. He may not start running until close to Christmas. He's openly admitted that it's affected his mental state which is understandable and he's lost alot of physical conditioning. It's a big gamble to take on the remaining contract and the cost of the trade given the circumstances.
 
A Question for the collective brains trust in here…

Why does Petracca have to get his full contracted price?
Yes, Melbourne is on the hook for it (& there’s ways to subsidize/reduce that) but if he chooses to renege on the contract, could he not take reduced contract elsewhere?

If he wants out, surely it’s not unreasonable for him to have to take a loss on his contract, especially given his injury & the sheer size of the contract.

If u wanted out badly enough, would it not be plausible to take the loss? Even at $800-900k a season he’s still making a hell of a lot of money & would be set for life after footy?

To be clear, I’m asking about the “mechanics” of a player reducing the contract, not a question about “why would he take less”

It’s an interesting one, cause on the one hand it can make him look like a selfish arseh*le.

but, the club did give him the contract, so in a sense he’s technically “owed” it, you’d take the money you’re technically owed any day of the week.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top