List Mgmt. Contract, Trade & Draftee Discussion - 2022 Off Season Edition

[Keys]

Contract status of all players now fully updated

The Contracts Thread

2024 List Changes : Out: Retired- Gaff Delisted - Jones, Trew(R), Baker(R), Witherden, Burgiel, Culley(R), Rotham, L Edwards Traded - Darling (NM) Barrass (Hawthorn) In: Trade/FA acquisitions - Graham (Richmond) Baker (Richmond) Owies (Carlton) Draft - Allan (Pick 16) Shanahan (Pick 30) Gross...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Bestbird]

Trading down from 2 to 8+12 was to get us two picks in a range the club saw as relatively even. O’Brien said as much

I’m not an avid draft watcher but this draft does seem unusual in that there’s a group of roughly 10 players that are a) very even and b) not significantly behind the top 4/5 of the draft.

From our perspective its also an issue that the top end of the draft are all Victorian and aside from Cadman have a flight risk factor

In any other year I think it would be unlikely we’d do the trade. This year I can see why the club did it

Agree

Even before trading down there was little consensus about who to select, Cadman, not a position of need, Wardlaw hammies, Sheezel, go home factor, more of a forward, Tsatis, too outside

 

[bzparkes]

Should get him in as a punching bag!

 

[Ishmael_]

One overlooked part of drafting a disproportionate amount of West Australians is salary cap management.

I have little concern we can retain Victorian kids, Perth is a lovely and increasingly vibrant city. West Coast is a massive club with high earning potential post career and proven player retention programs.

But ultimately to maintain a competitive list, some players need to be paid below market rates. A Victorian kid might love playing for WC, living in Perth etc., but when they are offered significant overs and have the family pull, it's harder to say no.

So we can end up paying extra and you can't afford to do that with too many players. With locals, the same pull isn't there.

 

[bzparkes]

One overlooked part of drafting a disproportionate amount of West Australians is salary cap management.

I have little concern we can retain Victorian kids, Perth is a lovely and increasingly vibrant city. West Coast is a massive club with high earning potential post career and proven player retention programs.

But ultimately to maintain a competitive list, some players need to be paid below market rates. A Victorian kid might love playing for WC, living in Perth etc., but when they are offered significant overs and have the family pull, it's harder to say no.

So we can end up paying extra and you can't afford to do that with too many players. With locals, the same pull isn't there.

You can say that but Griffin Logue just went to North because Freo couldn't pay what he was asking.

 

[WestCoast05]

There is only so much power and money can buy though. I blame more the players association led by Dangerfield. The power has slowly shifted too far into players favour to the point where the go home factor is getting out of control. We can look back at our history as a good retention club no doubt but that doesnt take into account the new environment by which we are operating in presently, times have changed and we may need to change with it.

Yeah so the players have the power - agreed.
Which is why I am suggesting we use our clout, size and wealth on being attractional to the players since they hold power.
If the players didn't have the power we wouldn't need to worry about such things. Clubs like Geelong seem to be on the money right now (rumoured house and land packages etc)

How many 'go homes' seem to be legitimate home sickness? If they are legitimate then there's nothing we can do anyway.
But if it's about the players holding the power and going to where it is attractional to them then let's use what we have to play the game better than anyone (or at least to the best of our ability).

Which is why minnow clubs are not having a good run of it, they don't have a lot to offer:
St Kilda had to practically do a 'Gold Coast' and pay a Kings ransom to get Bradley Hill to come join them.
North have become a meme for failing to attract 'home sick' player - there's no attraction.

Let's just get in on the game and stoke 'flight risk' aversion amongst our rivals whilst using our immense resource to be amongst the most attractional of clubs.
Not saying this hasn't been happening, it obviously has (as evidenced by McGovern's staffed position at Vicore) - but since the club appears to have taken success for granted and therefore allowed complacency to creep into multiple areas (combined with questionable decision making in certain areas) then maybe this an area where we're just not playing to our strengths the way we should be.

 

[ziad]

Yeah so the players have the power - agreed.
Which is why I am suggesting we use our clout, size and wealth on being attractional to the players since they hold power.
If the players didn't have the power we wouldn't need to worry about such things. Clubs like Geelong seem to be on the money right now (rumoured house and land packages etc)

How many 'go homes' seem to be legitimate home sickness? If they are legitimate then there's nothing we can do anyway.
But if it's about the players holding the power and going to where it is attractional to them then let's use what we have to play the game better than anyone (or at least to the best of our ability).

Which is why minnow clubs are not having a good run of it, they don't have a lot to offer:
St Kilda had to practically do a 'Gold Coast' and pay a Kings ransom to get Bradley Hill to come join them.
North have become a meme for failing to attract 'home sick' player - there's no attraction.

Let's just get in on the game and stoke 'flight risk' aversion amongst our rivals whilst using our immense resource to be amongst the most attractional of clubs.
Not saying this hasn't been happening, it obviously has (as evidenced by McGovern's staffed position at Vicore) - but since the club appears to have taken success for granted and therefore allowed complacency to creep into multiple areas (combined with questionable decision making in certain areas) then maybe this an area where we're just not playing to our strengths the way we should be.

Two things are overplayed on this site:

1. The go-home factor and our inability to manage it
2. Our clout and power as a club

 

[Westcoast88]

Yeah so the players have the power - agreed.
Which is why I am suggesting we use our clout, size and wealth on being attractional to the players since they hold power.
If the players didn't have the power we wouldn't need to worry about such things. Clubs like Geelong seem to be on the money right now (rumoured house and land packages etc)

How many 'go homes' seem to be legitimate home sickness? If they are legitimate then there's nothing we can do anyway.
But if it's about the players holding the power and going to where it is attractional to them then let's use what we have to play the game better than anyone (or at least to the best of our ability).

Which is why minnow clubs are not having a good run of it, they don't have a lot to offer:
St Kilda had to practically do a 'Gold Coast' and pay a Kings ransom to get Bradley Hill to come join them.
North have become a meme for failing to attract 'home sick' player - there's no attraction.

Let's just get in on the game and stoke 'flight risk' aversion amongst our rivals whilst using our immense resource to be amongst the most attractional of clubs.
Not saying this hasn't been happening, it obviously has (as evidenced by McGovern's staffed position at Vicore) - but since the club appears to have taken success for granted and therefore allowed complacency to creep into multiple areas (combined with questionable decision making in certain areas) then maybe this an area where we're just not playing to our strengths the way we should be.

I agree with what you say. You are right, we have power and we need to use it. Power matters despite what some say, just ask North Melbourne, power and money cant buy everything but it sure makes a hell of a difference.

The go home factor is bigger this year than ever before so i don't think anyone's over playing it. Its a serious problem that's been acknowledged by Jason McCartney and is being looked at the AFL as a serious problem to the point that they are considering changes to first year player contract lengths.

 

[WestCoast05]

Two things are overplayed on this site:

1. The go-home factor and our inability to manage it
2. Our clout and power as a club

If you follow the conversation you will see I agree - I started my premise by saying we SHOULD select a player (Phillipou, but can apply to anyone) with a possible 'go home' factor precisely because as a club we should back in our ability to manage it.

Whether our clout and power as a club is overplayed or not is irrelevant - the point is however little, or however much clout we do have, lets explore it and use it to the max. Other clubs sure are.

 

[WestCoast05]

I agree with what you say. You are right, we have power and we need to use it. Power matters despite what some say, just ask North Melbourne, power and money cant buy everything but it sure makes a hell of a difference.

The go home factor is bigger this year than ever before so i don't think anyone's over playing it. Its a serious problem that's been acknowledged by Jason McCartney and is being looked at the AFL as a serious problem to the point that they are considering changes to first year player contract lengths.

But do you see it as a genuine 'go home' factor or just players flexing their rights? Like we both said - aint noone rushing to join North and St Kilda.

Either way let's exploit it too.

 

[Westcoast88]

But do you see it as a genuine 'go home' factor or just players flexing their rights? Like we both said - aint noone rushing to join North and St Kilda.

Either way let's exploit it too.

I think its both go home factor and players flexing their rights. I think there can be no doubt the go home factor/player demands have grown substantially this year and anyone who claims its overplayed has not been paying attention.

Player movements, Jason McCartney, AFL considering rule changes, Geelong getting pick 7 and Bowes, Eagles trading down to pick 8 and 12 which was a crappy deal but looks like they did it because of the rumours of the top 4/5 vic metro boys not wanting to play for interstate clubs (Jason Mc Cartney said as much by trading up to get Cadman and admitting Eagles did similar to avoid players in the pick 2 draft range). Im not sure how much more evidence people want. We cant rest on our laurels and point to our retention history, because its history and this is now and the game has changed. Pieman can see it so he traded down on a sh#t deal knowing Wardlaw, Tsatas and Sheezel were all bedwetters who likely told the club they wouldnt play for us. Its very sad but it seems to be whats happening. The AFL looking to extend first year contracts says all you need to know.

 

[thebutterflyeffect]

Trading down from 2 to 8+12 was to get us two picks in a range the club saw as relatively even. O’Brien said as much

I’m not an avid draft watcher but this draft does seem unusual in that there’s a group of roughly 10 players that are a) very even and b) not significantly behind the top 4/5 of the draft.

From our perspective its also an issue that the top end of the draft are all Victorian and aside from Cadman have a flight risk factor

In any other year I think it would be unlikely we’d do the trade. This year I can see why the club did it

Yeh I think it's somewhat obvious that our recruiting team found the 7-15 pool pretty even and I'd suggest they felt that eveness extended through to the top few picks as well.

I don't buy into the flight risk too much given our retention and drafting history. We tend to select best available and I find it hard to believe this cohort in particular are full of flight risks. I feel like this is most likely being speculated as we traded back.

If it is true I'd think rather than a one off this will be a trend and I think kids will continue to demand what they want as they have the power. If the club is concerned this year unless the top range is WA talent I reckon there's no reason to think it's not going get more difficult to recruit interstate.

 

[southcoast]

Oh very legitimate like Henry homesick at Collingwood so far away from mummy at Geelong ….. FFS what a crock of s**t.

The Cats love manipulating the system:

Mental health issues.
Sick kids.
Melbourne Metro - Geelong homesickness.
Indoctrinating the young Geelong Falcons to become Geelong Homing Pigeons.

And they will continue to do so and get away with it, until the soft ***** at vAFL
house stop allowing them to do as they please.

What a shitshow the AFL is on all things equalisation.

But don’t let the player movement go the other way.

Tim Kelly says G’day.


On iPad using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[ziad]

If you follow the conversation you will see I agree - I started my premise by saying we SHOULD select a player (Phillipou, but can apply to anyone) with a possible 'go home' factor precisely because as a club we should back in our ability to manage it.

Whether our clout and power as a club is overplayed or not is irrelevant - the point is however little, or however much clout we do have, lets explore it and use it to the max. Other clubs sure are.

just a simple statement re the site not an individual poster.

 

[FKASC]

You can say that but Griffin Logue just went to North because Freo couldn't pay what he was asking.

That’s because the club didn’t rate him.

 

[Altum Volantes]

There is a cost to trading down

They weren’t taking Ginbey at 3.

If GC take him at 5….fair enough.

There isn’t another club I’d rather have drafted him if we really want him.

 

[Kegs15]

They weren’t taking Ginbey at 3.

If GC take him at 5….fair enough.

There isn’t another club I’d rather have drafted him if we really want him.

Genuinely hope GC take him so they can pay us pick 7 to take him back in 4 years

 

[Get_The_Gaff]

You can say that but Griffin Logue just went to North because Freo couldn't pay what he was asking.

He isn't worth what norf are paying .

Its like our gaff contract of sorts . Pay overs to keep him or move on .

Freo moved on and we are stuck with gaffs inflated contract

 

[bzparkes]

He isn't worth what norf are paying .

Its like our gaff contract of sorts . Pay overs to keep him or move on .

Freo moved on and we are stuck with gaffs inflated contract

1 - It wasn't inflated at the time.
2 - It's irrelevant right now anyway, as we're entering a rebuild and nobody else on the list currently is worth an increase that his contract would restrict them from getting.
3 - The last thing we need is big-dollar free agents/trade requests, as again, we're entering a rebuild, so Gaff's contract is irrelevant.

 

[plays tall 1]

Oh very legitimate like Henry homesick at Collingwood so far away from mummy at Geelong ….. FFS what a crock of s**t.

The Cats love manipulating the system:

Mental health issues.
Sick kids.
Melbourne Metro - Geelong homesickness.
Indoctrinating the young Geelong Falcons to become Geelong Homing Pigeons.

And they will continue to do so and get away with it, until the soft ***** at vAFL
house stop allowing them to do as they please.

What a shitshow the AFL is on all things equalisation.

McLachlan has been so weak on this stuff.

 

[Jed Clampet]

Ginbey at 8, has a lot of upside. So he averaged 21 disposals at u18 champ, who cares, he still managed to make the U18 All Australian Team as a starting mid. Don't mind Hewitt at 12 if there.

Whoever asked about Baxter Philip apparently Sydney and Essendon have had a look at him. Rookie pick at best I'd think, very athletic.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

So he averaged 21 disposals at u18 champ, who cares, he still managed to make the U18 All Australian Team as a starting mid.

So did Ainsworth

 

[RanaNaved]

So did Ainsworth

Similar kicking technique too.....

 

[Jed Clampet]

So did Ainsworth

Haha, good point.
Think Ginbey will be better then him though.

 

[eaglesnutcase]

Geez have any of you blokes ever moved a long way from home as a youngster? It take three months of new mates,new girls new everything and your settled.Good clubs make young players very welcome and we are as good as any.People on here are stating as fact that we traded down coz of the go home factor. Bullshit! That’s kids stuff folks!! It’s the quality available and the evenness of that quality nothing else. We will take the best player available doesn’t matter where he comes from. Now stop the squealing!!

 

[AsterixTheGaul]

Agree

Even before trading down there was little consensus about who to select, Cadman, not a position of need, Wardlaw hammies, Sheezel, go home factor, more of a forward, Tsatis, too outside

To me, Cadman was a position of need. You cannot expect a KPF to start in year 1. We had 2 other good picks prior to splitting that could have got us decent mids. More the Hotton, Burgiel and D’Aloia level but still decent.

Maybe that is me getting accustomed to the Lord of the Pies going tall early.

The biggest aspect as to why I liked this move was that the options as both 8 and 12 show how even the prospects are from 1 - 15.

Now Busslinger is not a position of need and hence I do not want him unless he is there at 20 (ie no chance)

We have the chance to get 2 top end mids at 8/12 and can afford to mix and match them. The prospect of Phillipou is enticing as he has a higher ceiling and a different skill set. Hewett likewise has some interesting attributes.

So we have Culley and Hough, hopefully Chesser, but yet to be seen, plus a possibility of Hewett and Phillipou to be our starting midfield.

I was keen on my Claremont lad in Allen - pity he is gaining so much attraction. I had hoped we go for him at 26 but might need to go early at 20.

Still great options at 26.