List Mgmt. Contract, Trade and Draft Discussions - 2024 Post Season

Remove this Banner Ad

  • Thread starter
  • Moderator
  • #2


Quick links



Latest news and rumours

Done deals:



  • Zane Trew, Jamaine Jones and Jordyn Baker delisted


Ongoing discussions:




  • List Manager Matt Clarke appeared on Sept 11 Gettable - Click spoiler below for summary
    On the draft: "We predicted that the draft was strong, but it's probably gotten stronger during the year."

    On top end of draft: "You could probably make five or six different choices and get it right."

    On Pick 3: "I reckon there's five (players) around that mark."

    On splitting: "I think you want to hold an early selection if you can. The depth of this group allows you to maybe have some movement there, and see what you can do to bring in more talent in the first 20-25 picks. Easier said than done, and I think most clubs would be saying the same thing. We'll see what we can do."

    On Liam Baker: "He's still yet to make a decision. They're still weighing up a few things. We'd love to get Liam on board from what he offers from a talent and leadership point of view. We understand where we're at as a group, we're rebuilding our group, we need to add some guys in the middle tier to support our young group."

    On Jack Graham: "We've got a number of players that we're speaking to. A bit of a wait and see on that one as well. We'll talk to a number of guys."

    On Shai Bolton: "I think it will be difficult for anybody, really. He's heavily contracted and a high quality player."

    On James Peatling: "He's heavily involved in a finals series at the moment so I don't want to comment too much on it, but I think there's a number of guys that have been playing really good footy this year that could suit what we do and what other clubs do. He's taken his footy to another level this year."

    On Tom Barrass: "We've had an early discussion with Hawthorn about it, they understand where we're at. He's nominated Hawthorn as his ideal destination. We want what we think he's worth, as a genuine key back in the competition that can do what he can do. We're obviously mindful of getting an appropriate deal for West Coast."

    On Tom Clurey: "Maybe (note: sounded very non enthused). We'd probably need some key back depth, whether that's through the draft or trade and free agency."

    On Jack Darling: "We've had initial discussions with his management group about (moving). We're open to talking, as we are with all of our players, but Jack's contracted with us."

    On Liam Ryan: "I expect him to be at West Coast next year, yes." (The most definitive answer of the day by a mile, a non-starter of a talking point.)

    On out of contact players e.g. Rotham, Witherden, Jones: "We're still working through what it looks like from a list point of view, and how many selections we'll want to have, and players that may come in and potentially may go out. You might want to give a coach an opportunity to look at these guys."

    On Harley Reid: "We've had discussions most of the year with his management group. I think it sits in a really good place. We're open to doing really whatever they want to do to be honest. We're really confident in building the right system around Harley, on and off field, to make sure that he's really comfortable, that he's going to play his best footy, and his long term future."

    On Jake Waterman's new deal: "Yep, really close. We're working really closely with his management on that. I expect that we'll have something done pretty soon."

    On Oscar Allen: "We've been talking with Oscar and his manager most of the year on that one. We're going through some stuff at the moment. I think we'll be ok with that one."



Past rumoured targets:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
3 for 12 and 14 is a horrible deal for us, if we do this just to get 5 years of Baker it would be an all-time dumb-arse trade considering we could have just taken 14 from the Hawks and kept 3.
Clarke can't possibly be this shit at his job to think this is a good idea, I'm choosing to believe this rumour is a load of crap.
 
3 for 12 and 14.

1. There is nothing happening for 2 days before the trade period starts up again on Monday morning. You can expect these kinds of garbage rumours over the weekend to keep the clicks and engagement going.

2. Perhaps we leaked Carlton's offer ourselves in order to get other teams looking to trade up to 3 to increase their offers.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I feel like the constant calls of trading Barrass to other suitors just isn't realistic. Despite everyone crying about it.

It's the connection with Mitchell which is the pull for him to that club. Mitchell wined and dined him, legit when the season was still going to make his pitch.

Whatever it was was clearly a strong enough message (along with the extended contract) to have him abandon his existing contract with WCE despite only just extending it long term what, a year or two ago?

Hawthorn is the club. If it's not them it's staying at WCE. He's obviously under contract so Hawthorn have no PSD threat to leverage. If they want him, and I expect they do, despite the Battle acquisition, they'll make it happen.

Hawk's can play casual all they want and have dipshits in the flog media calling them geniuses, but they're the ones who want him. Mitchell didn't come over here and hit up a contracted KPD during the season for no reason. Means nothing to us if the trade week deadline ends and it doesn't happen. There's absolutely no urgency to make it happen for WCE. Plenty of players have asked for trades previously and ended up sticking around.

Yall remember when Papley tried going to Carlton?

Baker we've got our pick 26, if that isn't enough for Richmond then oh well, they can deal with an OOC Baker either signing up with them again or walking to the PSD.

I'm just going to naively assume WCE and Clarke realise there's no rush and to just ignore the background noise. Dev for pick 63/68 is more pressing tbh, he's at least still under contract with Brisbane.
 
3 for 12 and 14 is a horrible deal for us, if we do this just to get 5 years of Baker it would be an all-time dumb-arse trade considering we could have just taken 14 from the Hawks and kept 3.
Clarke can't possibly be this shit at his job to think this is a good idea, I'm choosing to believe this rumour is a load of crap.

12, 14 plus Baker for 3?

Take 12 and 14 to the draft to use. Or we live trade on draft night to upgrade using those and future picks.
 
[emoji[emoji6]][emoji6][emoji[emoji6]]" data-quote="Priddis Is Done" data-source="post: 0" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">
WC give [emoji6] and Carlton F for Baker

Still a turd of a deal for us

No

Carlton’s F will likely be in the [emoji[emoji6][emoji6]]’s, [emoji6] will be in the [emoji[emoji6][emoji6]]’s and it’s a hell of a lot better than giving up a first for Baker, which is going to happen.
 
Watching this whole trade period so far be like


View attachment 2139658


There’s a horrible sense of impending doom that we’re about to do something really stupid based solely on speculative media reports and our own negative perceptions, real or imagined, of our trading history. Which it must be said was under different management to who we have now

The only significant thing we’ve done, or more precisely haven’t done, so far is refuse to roll over for a tummy tickle from Hawthorn and accept their lowball offer for Barrass. That should, and has been on this board at least, viewed as a positive

In media land, however, we’ve apparently dropped the ball by not accepting that offer of either pick 14 and an exchange of of our F3 with Hawthorns F2 or possibly just 14 on it’s own

For whatever reason, it’s been determined that we’re the only club that should be accepting whatever is put in front of us for a contracted player when the likes of Richmond are actively encouraged to push for the maximum return for Rioli and Bolton. Plus the contracted Baker because we’ve promised to bring him in

No mention that Hawthorn actively and quite publicly pursued Barrass, offering him a generous contract extension in the process, only to put the bare minimum on the table after having weeks to prepare a trade offer. Then blew up negotiations because they didn’t get their answer inside the first week when they have no other deals to get done

It’s all quite pathetic

Yet the fear of us doing something stupid just won’t go away despite Pyke barely putting a foot wrong since taking over
There's a lot of residual trade trauma to work through. Hopefully that will decline over the years but this is still a hangover from 2006-08.
 
I feel like the constant calls of trading Barrass to other suitors just isn't realistic. Despite everyone crying about it.

It's the connection with Mitchell which is the pull for him to that club. Mitchell wined and dined him, legit when the season was still going to make his pitch.

Whatever it was was clearly a strong enough message (along with the extended contract) to have him abandon his existing contract with WCE despite only just extending it long term what, a year or two ago?

Hawthorn is the club. If it's not them it's staying at WCE. He's obviously under contract so Hawthorn have no PSD threat to leverage. If they want him, and I expect they do, despite the Battle acquisition, they'll make it happen.

Hawk's can play casual all they want and have dipshits in the flog media calling them geniuses, but they're the ones who want him. Mitchell didn't come over here and hit up a contracted KPD during the season for no reason. Means nothing to us if the trade week deadline ends and it doesn't happen. There's absolutely no urgency to make it happen for WCE. Plenty of players have asked for trades previously and ended up sticking around.

Yall remember when Papley tried going to Carlton?

Baker we've got our pick 26, if that isn't enough for Richmond then oh well, they can deal with an OOC Baker either signing up with them again or walking to the PSD.

I'm just going to naively assume WCE and Clarke realise there's no rush and to just ignore the background noise. Dev for pick 63/68 is more pressing tbh, he's at least still under contract with Brisbane.

If we can get Dev in early in the week for a late pick we should then just sit on our hands and wait.

If we can bring in pick 6 do it.

Then just let Richmond and Hawks stew and sweat until Friday. Oh and the Vic media to say nasty things about us. F#*&@ers.

On a side note go read what the Vic media are saying about the Swans being dicks with the Parker trade request. Giving it to them. And in this instance they are right. Swans demanding a 2nd rounder is a joke.
 
The rumour those Carlton people were posting was 3 plus later picks from us for 12 and 14, not extra from them back to us.

Who cares what Blues posters think? Of course they want a one sided deal.

They tried to shop Kennedy around with little interest. Tigers need big bodied mids to help the rebuid and 27 is a great age to bring in experience.

Kennedy helps both Tigers and Eagles get deals done. He gets an extended career.

In reality Kennedy is close to the same value as Baker. A F3rd, pick 40, seperating them at most. That 2025 pick 40 will slide back into the 30s due to points reductions chewing up more earlier picks.
 
Who cares what Blues posters think? Of course they want a one sided deal.

They tried to shop Kennedy around with little interest. Tigers need big bodied mids to help the rebuid and 27 is a great age to bring in experience.

Kennedy helps both Tigers and Eagles get deals done. He gets an extended career.

In reality Kennedy is close to the same value as Baker. A F3rd, pick 40, seperating them at most. That 2025 pick 40 will slide back into the 30s due to points reductions chewing up more earlier picks.
I couldn't give a shit what they think, but they were posting the rumoured trade, not what they thought the trade should be.
And the rumoured trade was 3 plus later picks from us for 12 and 14. Which is the Birds of Tokyo club song of trades
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

If 3 doesn’t get traded there will be the hand-wringing about the prospect of doing that on draft night.

Not to mention the lamenting about not winning trade week!
oh yeah, forgot you can trade right up to the pick.

FFS

Sent from my SM-S908E using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
No offence but it has been fuelled by your own recruiting manager who declared Baker an early teens pick. It anchored his value. Vic media didn’t say he was worth that. Your club did.

There should be better deals out there than 12+14 however. It’s also not being shut down by your club and has floated out there for 2 days. Usually by now one of many reporters would have got a “no WC are not interested” by now. Vic media may just be putting one and one together and making two.

My point: I agree there is often bias….but in this case they’re being given plenty to go on…
No offence, and I remain here in peace, but regarding the bold, you don’t really follow our clubs usual media strategy, do you?

West Coast rarely comment in the media to confirm or deny what is being reported. I wouldn’t read anything into our silence either way, to be honest.

Unfortunately, your version of the AFL (Vic) media reporting 1+1 = 2 comes across to me as the media creating narratives consistently biased to getting Vic eyeballs reading their tripe, with trade period bringing out the worst in them.

Other clubs love to throw out the blow by blow negotiations going on, and usually the sources come from those West Coast are negotiating with. So, your point that they have plenty to go on is moot, because what they have to go on is likely driven by Victorians for a Victorian audience.

West Coast hasn’t bowed to any such trades in this period yet, and I expect you can read more into that in terms of what West Coast think about what is being reported on our trade options to date.
 
No offence but it has been fuelled by your own recruiting manager who declared Baker an early teens pick. It anchored his value. Vic media didn’t say he was worth that. Your club did.

There should be better deals out there than 12+14 however. It’s also not being shut down by your club and has floated out there for 2 days. Usually by now one of many reporters would have got a “no WC are not interested” by now. Vic media may just be putting one and one together and making two.

My point: I agree there is often bias….but in this case they’re being given plenty to go on…
No offence, and I remain here in peace, but regarding the bold, you don’t really follow our clubs usual media strategy, do you?

West Coast rarely comment in the media to confirm or deny what is being reported. I wouldn’t read anything into our silence either way, to be honest.

Unfortunately, your version of the AFL (Vic) media reporting 1+1 = 2 comes across to me as the media creating narratives consistently biased to getting Vic eyeballs reading their tripe, with trade period bringing out the worst in them.

Other clubs love to throw out the blow by blow negotiations going on, and usually the sources come from those West Coast are negotiating with. So, your point that they have plenty to go on is moot, because what they have to go on is likely driven by Victorians for a Victorian audience.

West Coast hasn’t bowed to any such trades in this period yet, and I expect you can read more into that in terms of what West Coast think about what is being reported on our trade options to date.
 
No offence, and I remain here in peace, but regarding the bold, you don’t really follow our clubs usual media strategy, do you?

West Coast rarely comment in the media to confirm or deny what is being reported. I wouldn’t read anything into our silence either way, to be honest.

Unfortunately, your version of the AFL (Vic) media reporting 1+1 = 2 comes across to me as the media creating narratives consistently biased to getting Vic eyeballs reading their tripe, with trade period bringing out the worst in them.

Other clubs love to throw out the blow by blow negotiations going on, and usually the sources come from those West Coast are negotiating with. So, your point that they have plenty to go on is moot, because what they have to go on is likely driven by Victorians for a Victorian audience.

West Coast hasn’t bowed to any such trades in this period yet, and I expect you can read more into that in terms of what West Coast think about what is being reported on our trade options to date.
Good enough to be said twice😁
 
Baker is a very good player, perfect for our midfield and a great foil for Reid but the only reason you would give up big draft currency for him is if we genuinely think we have a contending squad in the next three years (which we don't).

Otherwise the goal is pretty straight forward. Every year we are bottom four we have to give ourselves the best chance of finding future top ten players in the entire AFL. It's hard enough to do that without squandering first rounders on a 27 year old.

Same goes for pick three. I reckon Ginbey and Hewett have long careers ahead and I won't speculate on what they could be, however Sheezel is a lock down multiple AA star and Harley Reid likewise. All of our top 5 draft picks in our history have been guns. Far too valuable to split.


Not even Tiger fans think Baker is a 'very good' midfielder though. He's a flanker who can pinch hit in the guts for a limited amount of time and get by on effort, not skill and certainly not size.

OOC and not worth a first rounder or an early first round downgrade in any known world.

As you point out, we absolutely need to take the best mid we can at the pointy end of this draft.
 
Last edited:
I feel like the constant calls of trading Barrass to other suitors just isn't realistic. Despite everyone crying about it.

It's the connection with Mitchell which is the pull for him to that club. Mitchell wined and dined him, legit when the season was still going to make his pitch.

Whatever it was was clearly a strong enough message (along with the extended contract) to have him abandon his existing contract with WCE despite only just extending it long term what, a year or two ago?

Hawthorn is the club. If it's not them it's staying at WCE. He's obviously under contract so Hawthorn have no PSD threat to leverage. If they want him, and I expect they do, despite the Battle acquisition, they'll make it happen.

Hawk's can play casual all they want and have dipshits in the flog media calling them geniuses, but they're the ones who want him. Mitchell didn't come over here and hit up a contracted KPD during the season for no reason. Means nothing to us if the trade week deadline ends and it doesn't happen. There's absolutely no urgency to make it happen for WCE. Plenty of players have asked for trades previously and ended up sticking around.

Yall remember when Papley tried going to Carlton?

Baker we've got our pick 26, if that isn't enough for Richmond then oh well, they can deal with an OOC Baker either signing up with them again or walking to the PSD.

I'm just going to naively assume WCE and Clarke realise there's no rush and to just ignore the background noise. Dev for pick 63/68 is more pressing tbh, he's at least still under contract with Brisbane.
Agreed.

We’re hardly being difficult to deal with. There’s a difference between being unreasonable, and just standing your ground on fair terms, in no rush.

We don’t have to make either trade happen so I hope we don’t go down the same path we took with the pick 2 split. “We accepted it just to get a deal done that would suit all parties”.

F*ck that, when does that ever come back around the other way. You need to demand some respect, don’t be an arseh*le about it but stand your ground and whatever happens happens. Ball is in Richmond and Hawthorns court, just gotta sit on our hands till Wednesday and see what happens.
 
Carlton want pick 3 because O'Sullivan is Sam Walsh's cousin , plus looks a very good player .....but likes the option of playing at WC also.

Don't stuff it up .
 
No offence, and I remain here in peace, but regarding the bold, you don’t really follow our clubs usual media strategy, do you?

West Coast rarely comment in the media to confirm or deny what is being reported. I wouldn’t read anything into our silence either way, to be honest.

Unfortunately, your version of the AFL (Vic) media reporting 1+1 = 2 comes across to me as the media creating narratives consistently biased to getting Vic eyeballs reading their tripe, with trade period bringing out the worst in them.

Other clubs love to throw out the blow by blow negotiations going on, and usually the sources come from those West Coast are negotiating with. So, your point that they have plenty to go on is moot, because what they have to go on is likely driven by Victorians for a Victorian audience.

West Coast hasn’t bowed to any such trades in this period yet, and I expect you can read more into that in terms of what West Coast think about what is being reported on our trade options to date.
Happened all of last year too. All the “leaks” come from the Victorian side.

“North believe these picks will get close to pick 1”. When in reality we never really considered trading it at all unless 2+3 were on the table and we couldn’t turn it down.

Any time words like “believe” and “industry sources” are used, you know it’s bullshit half truths spun into a story.
 
Carlton want pick 3 because O'Sullivan is Sam Walsh's cousin , plus looks a very good player .....but likes the option of playing at WC also.

Don't stuff it up .
Yeah it’s not the same issue with the Sheezel draft, there’s very little flight risk factor among the top few picks, one even wants to come over.

If this trade happened, we’ll have been pretty much rock bottom for 3 and a half years and come away with 2 top 10 picks. 1 of them a bolter in Ginbey at 9. It’s not a serious rebuild.

Nothings happened. But I am prepping myself for an all time melt.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

List Mgmt. Contract, Trade and Draft Discussions - 2024 Post Season

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top