List Mgmt. COLLINGWOOD Trade and F/A Discussion 2023

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Ok

Marginal is your assessment not mine. Prior to 22-23 Billings was a poor man’s Didak and is more than a marginal upgrade on those two. It’s Collingwood that would be basing any recruiting decision on what they think they can get out of him. I’m only trying to interpret the interest. Personally I wouldn’t go there given the recruitment of Schultz and his contract.

Fair enough. My point really was that when we get around to season 2024 lipinski and Ginnivan would be no guarantee in round one of being in our best 22 let alone best 23 even with the current list as it stand. Any experienced recruit would need to be an improvement on more than just those two players.

Totally agree we don’t need him if we land Shultz. Maybe he’s a plan b if that deal falls through but we should negotiate very hard with stkilda on trade and salary subsidy terms

 

[sr36]

Marginal is your assessment not mine. Prior to 22-23 Billings was a poor man’s Didak and is more than a marginal upgrade on those two. It’s Collingwood that would be basing any recruiting decision on what they think they can get out of him. I’m only trying to interpret the interest. Personally I wouldn’t go there given the recruitment of Schultz and his contract.

Did Saints ever play him at half back? I could be wrong, but I think of him as a lovely kick. Someone to help us shift the angles coming out of defence when the running wave isn't on would be handy.

 

[partypie]

Okay well 400K per year then. Bowes did exactly what you’re saying no one would do when arriving at Geelong though I believe.

To be fair Bowes was on really stupid money though.

 

[neilk]

Marginal is your assessment not mine. Prior to 22-23 Billings was a poor man’s Didak and is more than a marginal upgrade on those two. It’s Collingwood that would be basing any recruiting decision on what they think they can get out of him. I’m only trying to interpret the interest. Personally I wouldn’t go there given the recruitment of Schultz and his contract.

Maybe Billings is the fall back plan if the Schultz trade doesn't get done.

 

[sideswipe]

Im quite sure after the 'fire sale', we had over 1m a year free in 2021-2022. I'm sure that cleared owings to Beams and Treloar. And given Grundy could have been kept this year even with our recruits, accoring to GW. You would think 3 years of his wage was paid too. And if those players didn't take pay in advance, I'm sure some of the other 40 players on the list were happy to do so. We should start to have the equivalent of a grundy contract free by next year to play with, and with pendles and Sidebottoms being 1-3 years left, their wages too. But I think we will be targeting an elite mid before a forward.

That’s some weapons-grade Capology there.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Scodog10]

Fair enough. My point really was that when we get around to season 2024 lipinski and Ginnivan would be no guarantee in round one of being in our best 22 let alone best 23 even with the current list as it stand. Any experienced recruit would need to be an improvement on more than just those two players.

Totally agree we don’t need him if we land Shultz. Maybe he’s a plan b if that deal falls through but we should negotiate very hard with stkilda on trade and salary subsidy terms

I think Lipinski’s a lock, but I do agree that if you’re bringing someone in at that age you want them to be better than bottom 6. The caveat being his contract $500k pa is a bit rich for that level of player right now, but if you can smooth that to $400k going into 2026 that becomes significantly below the average wage (by 2027 the league average is expected to be approaching $600k from memory).

Did Saints ever play him at half back? I could be wrong, but I think of him as a lovely kick. Someone to help us shift the angles coming out of defence when the running wave isn't on would be handy.

I don’t remember them ever trialling it and I could see him playing a Whitfield type setup role, but my worry is his physical attributes. He comes across to me as a slow Noble or a less physical Ginnivan…

 

[stormskye]

quick Google, I thought billing’s was soft tissue injuries.

Appears he missed most of the year with a leg fracture, then broken thumb and also a one off hammy.

Lot of that is just * luck rather than a concerning history.

Perhaps I was too harsh in my assessment. As many have said 400k is pushing to be an average wage for most.

If we could smooth his deal, perhaps I’m a bit more open to it.

Only just turned 28. So younger than I thought to

 

[Bianconeri]

He's committed to the club after interest, Adams has left.

It's his turn in 2024. Almost guaranteed.

What interest?

 

[DinoSoar]

We must be close to having Treloar paid off? 2 years to go on his contract and the Dogs reportedly allowed us to do some front loading?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Genuine question - why would we need Dogs to allow us to front load?

The context of the question is around the commentary on Grundy and his trade out of Melbourne in that our requirement to pay him has nothing to do with/is seperate to his contract with Melbourne and therefore the obligation will follow Grundy no matter where he plays (destination club has no real role). So, with that in mind, if Pies owe Treloar a fixed sum then does it matter if we pay him out sooner and isn’t the payment between Treloar and Collingwood? I understand there may be salary cap implications but if for example Bulldogs have a contract with Treloar that pays X for 2 years then it is X+25% for years 3 and 4 (assuming for the sake of argument that the 25% is the Pies subsidy for the first 2 years), then surely it doesn’t matter if Collingwood pay the sum in 1 year instead of 2 if Treloar agrees to that as Bulldogs wouldn’t be picking up the full amount until year 3 as per the contract?

I’m curious as to the mechanics of these contracts.

 

[The Phantom]

Contract speculation on the external players we’re paying is futile.
Than can be structured in many different ways.
They could clauses carried over from the original contract about injuries, behaviour and simply showing up.
I guarantee that they will now have substantial clauses about being on traded.

 

[sr36]

They never do - as they compare the new deal against actual contracts for this year. They obviously can’t do it based on actuals for next year because they aren’t all done/available yet.

Although nothing stopping them applying an index increase the board to all of this year’s contract.

North get the double whammy of low finish plus cba boost.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

It seems pretty likely that this year's compo picks are inflated because clubs know that the cap is going up and thus their contracts which are for the future are based on future cap and not present cap. Some sort of index would be appropriate I think. Eg. looking at the percentage of future salary cap rather than the percentage of current cap, which is what it would be if based on current salaries and not indexed at all.

 

[manicpie]

Apparently Freo want our future first because they believe we'll slide. Is there a reason why we prefer to give this year's first

 

[Jafo]

Apparently Freo want our future first because they believe we'll slide. Is there a reason why we prefer to give this year's first

Maybe a play on a big Fish aka JUH or King or someone else.

 

[Jen2310]

Apparently Freo want our future first because they believe we'll slide. Is there a reason why we prefer to give this year's first

probably because next years draft could have a bit of depth, and its a gamble to play with fire with dealing out future picks, as we know from 2021, and by next year we'll lose some players so you need to bring in some talent.

 

[sr36]

Apparently Freo want our future first because they believe we'll slide. Is there a reason why we prefer to give this year's first

Non rating of this year's draft and wanting a first next year for future possibilities seem the most likely.

 

[12kilos]

Apparently Freo want our future first because they believe we'll slide. Is there a reason why we prefer to give this year's first

As the other guys said we are targeting key position forwards next year.
McDonald- Sydney, King-suns , J.U.H- buldogs some of the names mentioned.
So we won't only need our 2024 first rounder but also our 2025 first rounder to do that
Maybe that's why we took 33 for Adams trying to be nice and diplomatic to the Swans in case we chase McDonald next year

 

[Everybody Panic]

Apparently Freo want our future first because they believe we'll slide. Is there a reason why we prefer to give this year's first

Our first this year is the lowest a first rounder can be. I sure hope we have another amazing year next year but it would be crazy to trade a F1 for him. It would mean we would have to finish top 4 to make it a fair trade imo. Not worth the risk. We have depth in the position if not proven like Schultz.

 

[Bramax]

We must be close to having Treloar paid off? 2 years to go on his contract and the Dogs reportedly allowed us to do some front loading?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

For our curiosity, I wish we knew exactly what we will be paying for Grundy and Treloar in 2024 rather than relying on best guess. Not that it would change anything of course.

 

[Dead Eye Didak]

It’s not such a bad thing. Reckon you would rather over-compensate clubs for departing FAs than under. I’d say McKay’s compo very much an outlier.

AFL needs equalisation methods - otherwise we run the risk of bottom-dwellers never getting up. That is not good for the game.

If it wasn’t for us getting a priority pick in 2005 we don’t get Pendles. That was a pretty decent reward for a team that was in the grand final two seasons before. Were you complaining then?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

At that time Pendlebury was taken as a priority pick those were the crazy AFL rules at the time if the club won a certain amount of games over a 2 or 3 year period. So we were given an additional selection 18 years ago. I think our club has more than paid back x 100 to the AFL by more than helping prop up the struggling clubs via the equalisation fund.
With the current North Melbourne package l think its way over the top. They were making consecutive preliminary finals 6 to 7 years ago. Unfortunately they had a poor administration lead by Ben Buckley who sent the club the backwards, they made poor recruitment decisions, most recently Horne-Francis, poor coaching decisions, and a poor CEO. The club self destructed.
The recent rescue package of one end-of-first round selection in the AFL Draft Two end-of-first round selections in the 2024 AFL Draft the Mackay compensation of pick 3, and the continuation of the club's ability to have two additional rookie list spots in season 2024. What's to say while propping up North, doesn't deprive other clubs of obtaining talent, and sending them to the bottom end of the ladder.
We have Tassie coming in and fairly they will receive the cream of the crop in terms of the draft or drafts. So top end talent to the foundation clubs will be restricted, and next year the AFL you would think will be releasing a rescue package for West Coast, so further top end talent will be directed to West Coast over the next year.
Clubs like ourselves will need to continue the moneyball approach and seek talent through the state leagues or older players from rival clubs who may be seeking a change, and who could play a specific role.

 

[barrackers]

At that time Pendlebury was taken as a priority pick those were the crazy AFL rules at the time if the club won a certain amount of games over a 2 or 3 year period. So we were given an additional selection 18 years ago. I think our club has more than paid back x 100 to the AFL by more than helping prop up the struggling clubs via the equalisation fund.
With the current North Melbourne package l think its way over the top. They were making consecutive preliminary finals 6 to 7 years ago. Unfortunately they had a poor administration lead by Ben Buckley who sent the club the backwards, they made poor recruitment decisions, most recently Horne-Francis, poor coaching decisions, and a poor CEO. The club self destructed.
The recent rescue package of one end-of-first round selection in the AFL Draft Two end-of-first round selections in the 2024 AFL Draft the Mackay compensation of pick 3, and the continuation of the club's ability to have two additional rookie list spots in season 2024. What's to say while propping up North, doesn't deprive other clubs of obtaining talent, and sending them to the bottom end of the ladder.
We have Tassie coming in and fairly they will receive the cream of the crop in terms of the draft or drafts. So top end talent to the foundation clubs will be restricted, and next year the AFL you would think will be releasing a rescue package for West Coast, so further top end talent will be directed to West Coast over the next year.
Clubs like ourselves will need to continue the moneyball approach and seek talent through the state leagues or older players from rival clubs who may be seeking a change, and who could play a specific role.

Priority picks aren’t going to make NM competitive overnight and they still rely on NM getting the development right. If a boost was to be given picks that had to be traded for experienced players, an increased footy department cap or additional list spots would have achieved the objective quicker. Don’t think they should have got anything though as they got themselves into this position.

 

[Jelly Bean]

At that time Pendlebury was taken as a priority pick those were the crazy AFL rules at the time if the club won a certain amount of games over a 2 or 3 year period. So we were given an additional selection 18 years ago. I think our club has more than paid back x 100 to the AFL by more than helping prop up the struggling clubs via the equalisation fund.
With the current North Melbourne package l think its way over the top. They were making consecutive preliminary finals 6 to 7 years ago. Unfortunately they had a poor administration lead by Ben Buckley who sent the club the backwards, they made poor recruitment decisions, most recently Horne-Francis, poor coaching decisions, and a poor CEO. The club self destructed.
The recent rescue package of one end-of-first round selection in the AFL Draft Two end-of-first round selections in the 2024 AFL Draft the Mackay compensation of pick 3, and the continuation of the club's ability to have two additional rookie list spots in season 2024. What's to say while propping up North, doesn't deprive other clubs of obtaining talent, and sending them to the bottom end of the ladder.
We have Tassie coming in and fairly they will receive the cream of the crop in terms of the draft or drafts. So top end talent to the foundation clubs will be restricted, and next year the AFL you would think will be releasing a rescue package for West Coast, so further top end talent will be directed to West Coast over the next year.
Clubs like ourselves will need to continue the moneyball approach and seek talent through the state leagues or older players from rival clubs who may be seeking a change, and who could play a specific role.

Pendlebury wasn't taken as a priority pick - Dale Thomas was. We most likely would have had Pendles even without the PP - it is Thomas we wouldn't have had.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

Not sure you can say with any certainty if we only had pick 2 we would have taken pendles and not Thomas. Either way the priority got us a flag. Without either of them we don’t win.

I see we will still be paying Grundy? Thoughts?


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

My thought is that while we still pay him, I can retain my username.

 

[magpies42]

Our first this year is the lowest a first rounder can be. I sure hope we have another amazing year next year but it would be crazy to trade a F1 for him. It would mean we would have to finish top 4 to make it a fair trade imo. Not worth the risk. We have depth in the position if not proven like Schultz.

Absolutely ludicrous, to trade our best pick next year or even this year for a player we don’t need. I would much rather take another mid or key position player. We are stacked with small forwards!!

 

[Masked Magician]

Have to state this because people keep saying
“Salary cap goes up x meaning extra cash to spend”

This is not correct.

All bar 2 clubs (Essendon is 1 of them either ADE/WCE the other) have % increase included in player contracts. This is league wide standard practice for clubs and managers.

That means that no, when the cap goes up we don’t suddenly have more to spend, it’ll only be relevant if we have players coming off contract/retire the season prior to the uplift.

Therefore if billings is on 500k now, his money will % rise with the cap % rise.

 

[The Royal Sampler]

Apparently Freo want our future first because they believe we'll slide. Is there a reason why we prefer to give this year's first

Because we can’t finish any higher than premiers.