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:
I agree on your first point to an extent, I think he still has a bit to offer our list, but I'd rather take the gamble on pick 14 over him for sure. Which again for me comes back to the price.

I don't however agree with your opinion on their inability to detach themselves from the situation - I do have faith that they are professionals and they at least believe they are using their inside knowledge to their advantage and for the benefit of the Eagles.

I think we can all agree that nothing has actually occurred yet, so we all need a bit more time for something to actually happen before we go making calls about these guys - not based purely of a 5 minutes press conference.

Lastly, with all due respect to Phil, this is assuming he is legit. We will never, ever know that. We can all pop up on Monday morning and talk about how we knew exactly what was going to happen on Saturday, but couldn't say anything until after the fact. Somewhat convenient in my eyes. However, he may be legit. 🤷‍♂️
I agree that Baker would walk into our B22, I don’t think anyone could or would deny that. Regarding objectivity I genuinely think if you put Baker’s value to 16 other list managers (and Bond) and took the average pick it would come back in the mid 20s at best. That Clarke values him (in his own words) as a pick in the teens is an outlier and suggests that he’s either a poor judge of value or it’s being clouded.

I’ll reserve total judgment until a trade is done but based on what I’d heard I already didn’t like the direction the Baker trade was heading in. Then Clarke after 25 years in recruiting, previously holding the title of list manager and should be a polished media performer blurted out a target’s value making it very difficult to manoeuvre from. I’m not filled with confidence but you’re right perhaps a conversation to revisit after the trade.

Not attaching too much weight to Phil’s comments but he hasn’t given me reason to think he isn’t brokering deals as we speak but he could just as easily be at an ATM in Thailand. Or possibly both.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I agree on your first point to an extent, I think he still has a bit to offer our list, but I'd rather take the gamble on pick 14 over him for sure. Which again for me comes back to the price.

I don't however agree with your opinion on their inability to detach themselves from the situation - I do have faith that they are professionals and they at least believe they are using their inside knowledge to their advantage and for the benefit of the Eagles.

I think we can all agree that nothing has actually occurred yet, so we all need a bit more time for something to actually happen before we go making calls about these guys - not based purely of a 5 minutes press conference.

Lastly, with all due respect to Phil, this is assuming he is legit. We will never, ever know that. We can all pop up on Monday morning and talk about how we knew exactly what was going to happen on Saturday, but couldn't say anything until after the fact. Somewhat convenient in my eyes. However, he may be legit. 🤷‍♂️
Never met a Phil who wasn't completely legit.
 
To say it was a Freudian slip would be very kind. He seemed too intend what he said as he was too blase about it.
I haven't revisited the interview but I thought he said "most people seen to think that yeah" he didn't actually say he thought it.
Semantics I know but. I wouldn't hang him yet.
The idea that our new employees would stiff us to the advantage of their old employers is lala land stuff. They wouldn't be employees for long doing that.
 
I agree on your first point to an extent, I think he still has a bit to offer our list, but I'd rather take the gamble on pick 14 over him for sure. Which again for me comes back to the price.

I don't however agree with your opinion on their inability to detach themselves from the situation - I do have faith that they are professionals and they at least believe they are using their inside knowledge to their advantage and for the benefit of the Eagles.

I think we can all agree that nothing has actually occurred yet, so we all need a bit more time for something to actually happen before we go making calls about these guys - not based purely of a 5 minutes press conference.

Lastly, with all due respect to Phil, this is assuming he is legit. We will never, ever know that. We can all pop up on Monday morning and talk about how we knew exactly what was going to happen on Saturday, but couldn't say anything until after the fact. Somewhat convenient in my eyes. However, he may be legit. 🤷‍♂️
I too have question marks as to whether Phil is legit.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

4way

Eagles
Out 3, F3
In Baker, 6, 51

Dockers
Out: 10,18, F2
In Bolton, 41

GCS
Out 6, 41
In Rioli, DF2, WCF3

Tigers
Out Baker, Bolton,51
In 3,18

Eagles get Baker without losing a pick in this draft. Dont think 3 gets Baker and 6 by itself but if we help CGS by moving our F3 into a pick this year it may work.
Dockers get Bolton while keeping pick 11 and another pick in this draft in a good spot for WA prospects.
GCS get Rioli and a couple of picks for next years academy bids.
Tigers get 3 for Bolton and 18 for Baker.
4 way......you're a sicko
 
The correct spelling of the expression is bear in mind, which includes the verb “bear” (meaning “endure” or “carry”). The idea is that you're holding something in your mind. “Bare in mind” is a mistake, since the verb “bare” (meaning “uncover”) doesn't make sense here
You'd be a very busy man if you were going to correct every spelling, grammar and syntax mistake on BF.
 
Maybe we have and there isn’t any equally or better qualified person who wants to come to Perth/ WC. Woosha has the perfect resume for the role and has spent plenty of time away from the club and football to broaden his experience. Not sure what there is not to like.

We aren’t fishing in the same pond as east coast teams in terms of support staff and players. It’s just the way it is. But he is fully qualified.
Fully agree

I think as long as he doesn't have a tactical role (i.e. not in coaches box - which he won't be), he's perfectly suited.
 
So can someone who understands trade/draft/contract things better than me help me understand a correct perspective when it comes to this:

When it comes to the Graham contract we seem to the the only club around not willing to play silly buggers with the compensation picks.

We've been told that a current strength of ours is that we have cap space - we even just moved a Darling off our books and received back pretty much nothing - and we are literally in the process of negotiating with Richmond for a player we want and currently jostling over which picks to give up.... so why the @#$& can't we do what every other club does and use the free agency compo to our benefit in this situation?

Can anyone help set my mind at ease that we're not just inept and out of touch with where current successful clubs are at?


EDIT: apologies if this convo has already been raged out somewhere, I had a look but didn't see it and am genuinely curious to see what the possible answer may be.

Your belief that clubs routinely play silly buggers in relation to compensation picks is fundamentally false

It doesn’t happen, certainly not when it would benefit another club

Firstly, it’s fairly unique that a club targeting a FA is also in trade negotiations with that players club for a separate player like we are with Graham and Baker.

So in most instances there’s no benefit for a club to overpay to generate a better compensation pick for the free agents former club. Hawthorn with Battle, Collingwood with Perryman and Adelaide with Cumming couldn’t give a shit what compo GWS and St Kilda received - their priority was getting the player without paying any more than necessary to get their signature

In our situation, it’s a long bow to draw to suggest that paying extra for Graham would result in a lesser pick being required for Baker. First up we likely wouldn’t know how much extra to pay to increase the compensation - would an extra $50k per year make a difference? If it doesn’t we just blew $200k for no benefit

Then you’ve also got the issue where you paying someone more than their worth which can have a ripple effect through your playing list when it comes to contract negotiations

The one time there is shenanigans is where it’s a restricted free agent so a club pays extra to avoid a matching situation that forces a trade. Like what Essendon did last year with McKay. They’d paid overs so North would get band 1 compo and therefore not match meaning Essendon avoided having to trade for McKay

We would’ve been stupid to pay extra for Graham
 
Trade values according to the media are all over the place and the variances defy rational explanation

Bailey Smith (7/12/00 - Uncontracted) - pick 17 because Dogs have no leverage and he’s coming off an ACL and not trading him would be a human rights violation
• James Peatling (21/8/00 - Uncontracted) - a F2 pick is considered about right
Jack Lukosius (9/8/00) - hard to get a read on his value as media seem not to give a **** about his trade
Shai Bolton (8/12/98 - Contracted) - whilst some are saying picks 10 and 11, most are saying 10 or 11 plus 18
Liam Baker (27/1/98 - Uncontracted) - pick 14 is the general consensus
Dan Houston (12/5/97 - Contracted) - despite Port saying they want 2x R1 picks most reports are focused on a club getting pick 13 off Gold Coast to do the deal with maybe something extra that isn’t another R1
• Dan Rioli (16/4/97 - Contracted) - pick 6 considered the minimum with suggestions that pick 23, or even 13, might need to be added
John Noble (25/3/97 - Contracted) - Collingwood reportedly offering Noble and a F2 for 13 and 23
Alex Neal-Bullen (9/1/96 - Contracted) - traded for pick 28. Considered slight chance unders but reasonable due to his circumstances in seeking a return to SA
Tom Barrass (8/10/95 - Contracted) - pick 14 plus a usually undefined sweetener but needs to be done to ensure Baker trade is also done
• Jack Macrae (3/8/94 - Contracted) - Saints have picks 27 (too much) and 47 (not enough)

It’s all a bit odd. Geelong are routinely a bunch of utter campaigners at trade time but never get called out in the media for it

And the cheerleading for Richmond playing draft pick Pokémon is ridiculous. The fact that probably only Bolton is close to being worth what’s being discussed is ignored when trumpeting their fantastic rebuild in one draft story

(Nevermind that in addition to the retirements of Martin, Grimes and Pickett they are set to lose Rioli, Bolton, Baker and Graham from a side that just finished 18th leaves their inexperienced list with a lot of holes)
 
Trade values according to the media are all over the place and the variances defy rational explanation

• Bailey Smith (7/12/00 - Uncontracted) - pick 17 because Dogs have no leverage and he’s coming off an ACL and not trading him would be a human rights violation
• James Peatling (21/8/00 - Uncontracted) - a F2 pick is considered about right
• Jack Lukosius (9/8/00) - hard to get a read on his value as media seem not to give a **** about his trade
• Shai Bolton (8/12/98 - Contracted) - whilst some are saying picks 10 and 11, most are saying 10 or 11 plus 18
• Liam Baker (27/1/98 - Uncontracted) - pick 14 is the general consensus
• Dan Houston (12/5/97 - Contracted) - despite Port saying they want 2x R1 picks most reports are focused on a club getting pick 13 off Gold Coast to do the deal with maybe something extra that isn’t another R1
• Dan Rioli (16/4/97 - Contracted) - pick 6 considered the minimum with suggestions that pick 23, or even 13, might need to be added
• John Noble (25/3/97 - Contracted) - Collingwood reportedly offering Noble and a F2 for 13 and 23
• Alex Neal-Bullen (9/1/96 - Contracted) - traded for pick 28. Considered slight chance unders but reasonable due to his circumstances in seeking a return to SA
• Tom Barrass (8/10/95 - Contracted) - pick 14 plus a usually undefined sweetener but needs to be done to ensure Baker trade is also done
• Jack Macrae (3/8/94 - Contracted) - Saints have picks 27 (too much) and 47 (not enough)

It’s all a bit odd. Geelong are routinely a bunch of utter campaigners at trade time but never get called out in the media for it

And the cheerleading for Richmond playing draft pick Pokémon is ridiculous. The fact that probably only Bolton is close to being worth what’s being discussed is ignored when trumpeting their fantastic rebuild in one draft story

(Nevermind that in addition to the retirements of Martin, Grimes and Pickett they are set to lose Rioli, Bolton, Baker and Graham from a side that just finished 18th leaves their inexperienced list with a lot of holes)
The biggest campaigners this trade period are Geelong, Richmond and anyone dealing with Gold Coast. Noble is not even worth pick 23 let alone trying to get 13 for him as well.
 
Yeah I would. Particularly if we have obtained Hawthorn's 1st rounder next year.
It brings our rebuild forward and allows an extra year of development in a player which is great. It also likely helps with retention of Harley due to his relationship with Tobie.
A lot of positives. I know that others might get hung up on having the ability to select a player like Sharpe but we're not likely to obtain pick 1 (due to Richmond losing all their experienced talent this trade period) so it is likely that our pick will be in the 3-6 range again. There's a chance that if we improve next year it could be 2024 pick 6 for 2025 pick 4-5 plus Baker which would be a coup.

Also kudos upon selecting almost exclusively Vic Country boys above.
Finally someone with a common sense approach. Specifically, as you say, we need to trade for the now, get as much development into the kids and not worry too much, at the top end, about who might be available next year. Putting FOS and TT around their team mate Harley should be a priority and smart business. Their will be plenty WA FS/academy kids next 2 seasons to focus on.

On Pixel 6 Pro using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

Remove this Banner Ad

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

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top