News GWS rumours and speculation

[Bulldog Joe]

Re: GWS has Signed 3 Players Already

It's been said before, but I guess not on your radar.

With our recent retirements (Fraser, Lockyer, Obree, Medhurst, Presti, Anthony) we have freed up @1.5 million. In addition, we have Ben Johnson and Leon Davis both veteran's eligible for 2011. In 2012, Tarrant becomes eligible.

By the time Didak comes out of his current contract in 2013, his whole next contract would be veteran's eligible. Swan is veteran's eligible in 2014 - which means in a 3 year deal, his final year can be on veterans. One would suspect the Pies might heavily back-end his contract. So for 2013, the two veteran's should be Didak and Tarrant. In 2014, probably Didak and Swan.

Heath Shaw's contract finishes in 2012, as does Reid and Sidebottoms. Shaw is veteran's eligible in 2015, so expect another back-ender a la Swan. In 2015, possibly Swan and Shaw on the veteran's.

Mapping this on a timeline:

2011 - 1.5 million extra at least in salary cap from retirements and veteran's listings. This will allow us to sign players out of contract / contract extensions. Realistically, this is Pendlebury, Thomas and Swan who would be offered a sizeable portion of this freed space.
2012 - 2 retirements likely from Leon, Johnson, possibly Brown. Tarrant to be veteran's listed. Expect savings of 300-400k.
2013 - Didak's contract ends and he becomes veteran's eligible. Savings of 250k per year.
2014 - Swan becomes veteran's eligible. Swan's last year of a back-ended 3 year deal in veterans saves 350k.

We'll also be using the Additional Services Agreement to pad out wages of top players to the tune of 100-150k each per year.

The thing about our team is it's even nature, which means no other young players really stand out as players who deserve wages head and shoulders above others. As older players retire or become veteran's listees, we keep freeing up space for the developing younger players like Sidebottom, Reid, Dawes etc.

There's also the chance to be a premiership player, which besides being its own reward allows you to snaffle 1.7 million (2010 booty) if you win. That could be another 100 - 200k per annum for top five performers.

In other words, there's nothing inevitbale at all about us losing players to GWS or other outfits.

Very good theory, but ignores the player managers all looking to maximise the player earnings (and their own interests).

If Collingwood continue the success of 2010 every player coming out of contract will be getting higher offers from other clubs.

If Collingwoods have the superior players (as some posters suggest) they will be targets of every other club and I don't believe you will be able to pay 10% of your salary cap to each of 5 players such as Swan, Pendlebury, Thomas, Didak, Jolly and you only get 50% relief for 2 of them at any point as veterans.

What happens to retain parity for Shaw, O'Brien and Maxwell.

You then need to meet increasing demands from Reid, Cloke, Sidebottom, Beams etc.

Salary cap pressure will come. It happens to every team with consistent on field performance.

 

[mattys123]

Could Sam Gilbert be a Target?

Not any more.

You wouldn't want that "type of person" as one of your experienced players and a leaders in a team that will be made up predominately of players under the age of 20.

 

[Vdubs]

Re: GWS has Signed 3 Players Already

You may be right, agree with morgoth delay in re-signing will be telling.

We might hope that contemplating moving from the biggest club in the land in it's premiership window, to West Sydney in it's infancy, would be protective...but money does talk, we all know that.

I refuse to emote about this...if someone goes they go, I wish them well.

We are not a one player club plus we'd be compensated reasonably well.

Pendles is the one that would hurt most...but hopefully he won't go, he's the next captain. I don't think he'd be that short-sighted.

We have bigger fish to fry than this side issue.

The club is astute enough to learn from the Ablett fiasco

Que sera sera
Whatever will be, will be
The future's not our's to see,
Que sera sera

We are very concerned about losing our only potential gun player of the near future, DESPITE directly learning from the Ablett fiasco, and if we lose him too, I can tell you it does hurt.

 

[Vdubs]

Well said Spiceman. You'd think that barring GWS throwing Ablett level money at one of our players we're pretty safe. I guess the question is are any of Thomas, Pendles, Swan worth that much all things considered? Swans age works against him, Thomas is good but Ablett good? Pendles would be the closest to warranting that much coin.

Looking from outside, Thomas is right up there as a desirable GET. Pendlebury too. Swan, goes without saying. Also Heath Shaw. But it's those younger guns you have to MIND--Wellingham, Sidebottom, Beams, all very quick and desirable. Somehow, you seem to have the nous to keep it all together, even during adverse times re: Shaws and Didak a couple of years ago.

 

[Swooop]

Re: GWS has Signed 3 Players Already

We are very concerned about losing our only potential gun player of the near future, DESPITE directly learning from the Ablett fiasco, and if we lose him too, I can tell you it does hurt.

It was not so much losing the player, it was the effect on morale (definitely) and performance (probably), that I was mainly referring to.

It's very sad, no doubt, to lose a club champion, but the process had a seemingly destructive effect on your club.

If we lose a star, so be it. Life goes on.

But I don't want it to erode/destroy the fabric of the club like it appeared to at Geelong, and if that's overstating it, then it seriously detracted from your year last year, a year when the premiership window was wide open.

Who is the other one you're worried about? Selwood I guess...

 

[Vdubs]

Varcoe--is already special, will be our MVP

 

[Kirby]

^ I agree on Varcoe.

He is on a Daisy like upward trajectory imho. A full time move into the middle will see him explode.

You certainly don't want to lose him!

 

[Ed D]

Re: GWS has Signed 3 Players Already

Salary cap pressure will come. It happens to every team with consistent on field performance.

That's true, and it will come if we keep playing well, but the point is it doesn't appear to be happening in the next couple of years which is what GWS would be playing off.

 

[Old Spice]

Re: GWS has Signed 3 Players Already

Very good theory, but ignores the player managers all looking to maximise the player earnings (and their own interests).

If Collingwood continue the success of 2010 every player coming out of contract will be getting higher offers from other clubs.

If Collingwoods have the superior players (as some posters suggest) they will be targets of every other club and I don't believe you will be able to pay 10% of your salary cap to each of 5 players such as Swan, Pendlebury, Thomas, Didak, Jolly and you only get 50% relief for 2 of them at any point as veterans.

What happens to retain parity for Shaw, O'Brien and Maxwell.

You then need to meet increasing demands from Reid, Cloke, Sidebottom, Beams etc.

Salary cap pressure will come. It happens to every team with consistent on field performance.

GC went after one high priced marquee player in Ablett, the rest were serviceable, not great. Those players were purported to be offered in the realms of 600k per year. The three GWS would be gunning for in our team - Pendlebury, Thomas and Swan - wont be far off that now, as opposed to say a Harbrow at the Dogs. That means, if you were to financially lure them, one would have to be the marquee player offered in excess of a mill total package.

I'm anticipating Murphy to be the marquee, million $ man, who will soak up a fair portion of GWS' cap. In his wake will come a bunch of 500-700k a year players. We can hold our own in that context.

 

[shawthing09]

Re: GWS has Signed 3 Players Already

GC went after one high priced marquee player in Ablett, the rest were serviceable, not great. Those players were purported to be offered in the realms of 600k per year. The three GWS would be gunning for in our team - Pendlebury, Thomas and Swan - wont be far off that now, as opposed to say a Harbrow at the Dogs. That means, if you were to financially lure them, one would have to be the marquee player offered in excess of a mill total package.

I'm anticipating Murphy to be the marquee, million $ man, who will soak up a fair portion of GWS' cap. In his wake will come a bunch of 500-700k a year players. We can hold our own in that context.

Without wanting to be all "I have a source" the way it stands right now I don't see Murphy going anywhere. Obviously there is a long way to go and things change but I certainly wouldn't be making the assumption that he is going.

 

[Old Spice]

Swan I just don't see being a lure for GWS due to them seeing their premeiership chance being a little more long-term. Too old for them.

Pendlebury is surely lining up for a go at the captaincy and will have his xmas stocking stuffed with some of our freed up largesse from recent senior departures.

Thomas might fit the bill, but I don't know that he quite demands the million $ marquee tag at this stage.

Maybe it wont be Muprhy, but can't see it being from the above menu.

 

[shawthing09]

Swan I just don't see being a lure for GWS due to them seeing their premeiership chance being a little more long-term. Too old for them.

Pendlebury is surely lining up for a go at the captaincy and will have his xmas stocking stuffed with some of our freed up largesse from recent senior departures.

Thomas might fit the bill, but I don't know that he quite demands the million $ marquee tag at this stage.

Maybe it wont be Muprhy, but can't see it being from the above menu.

I agree with the logic no doubt and I would be suprised to see any of the above go.

Just to play devils advocate I think that if the marketing guys have any say in it what so ever Thomas would demand that kind of coin. As mentioned earlier in the thread (I think maybe even by yourself) GWS may well go down the road of trying to secure 2 genuine big names rather then throwing all their coin at the one player. If that is the case they'd be restricted to players who are genuinely interested in playing for them as opposed to being able to just buy them over which should see the above three names safe.

 

[Old Spice]

From a marketing perspective, Daisy would have been a better fit at GC, but still highly marketable in GWS with his locks, among potential youth market who, let's face it, would be the demographic to tap in Sydney.

If they did go at two biggish players, say Daisy and A. Swallow, they couldn't be paying too much - 1 mill each tops (incl outside payments). Leaves 7 mill for the rest of the list, including another 6 or so players on @ 450-600k each.

I reckon they'd be better placed chasing a Bartel who has a bigger body to support a young team. Daisy's marketability is high, but his body is not sufficient to protect young bodies.

 

[shawthing09]

From a marketing perspective, Daisy would have been a better fit at GC, but still highly marketable in GWS with his locks, among potential youth market who, let's face it, would be the demographic to tap in Sydney.

If they did go at two biggish players, say Daisy and A. Swallow, they couldn't be paying too much - 1 mill each tops (incl outside payments). Leaves 7 mill for the rest of the list, including another 6 or so players on @ 450-600k each.

I reckon they'd be better placed chasing a Bartel who has a bigger body to support a young team. Daisy's marketability is high, but his body is not sufficient to protect young bodies.

If I was involved in the marketing of GWS the appeal of Thomas would be his scope to capture the imagination. If you where trying to sell AFL to someone who is neutral on the idea things like Big speccies, dashing runs and check side goals would be the real winners of our game and he offers all of that as well as that cheeky likeable character and the ability to win the hearts of the young lady fans.

That said as mentioned above if they try to go for two high profile guys the appeal of going to GWS drops because the amount of cash thrown around will be halved making it harder to make an offer he can't refuse.

A lot depends on what the priorities of GWS are and who is interested to go to them to begin with. Ablett contacted GC to begin with and hence they did all their list structuring around the fact they thought they would get Ablett. There maybe a similar case this time where someone is actually excited about being the marque man for GWS. There is so much water to go under the bridge at this stage I find it hard to even speculate as too how it will all pan out.

 

[Ed D]

Just throwing this out there but would anybody be surprised if Sheedy didn't select any big name players and chose a bunch of B-D graders, moreso young players who haven't peaked yet? I wouldn't be. Even looking at the way he selected the international squad to play Ireland a few years ago he slected guys that people weren't expecting.

 

[Hva sher a]

If I was involved in the marketing of GWS the appeal of Thomas would be his scope to capture the imagination. If you where trying to sell AFL to someone who is neutral on the idea things like Big speccies, dashing runs and check side goals would be the real winners of our game and he offers all of that as well as that cheeky likeable character and the ability to win the hearts of the young lady fans.

That said as mentioned above if they try to go for two high profile guys the appeal of going to GWS drops because the amount of cash thrown around will be halved making it harder to make an offer he can't refuse.

A lot depends on what the priorities of GWS are and who is interested to go to them to begin with. Ablett contacted GC to begin with and hence they did all their list structuring around the fact they thought they would get Ablett. There maybe a similar case this time where someone is actually excited about being the marque man for GWS. There is so much water to go under the bridge at this stage I find it hard to even speculate as too how it will all pan out.

disagree - Daisy is good and was great in the GFs but he's not elite. Love the Dais but you can find blonde locks and speccies easily enough in the draft. What GWS need is a number of the the semi-elite...players like Pendles, Varcoe, Cyril, Kurt Tippett (not necessarily these but you get the drift). But they need at least 3 so they aren't totally banking on one Ablett-type. They've already got their media star in Folau.
All they need is a collection of really good types to carry the team

 

[Optimax]

Thomas is as good as varicoe, Cyril as stand alone players. Either ever gotten 30 touches in a game before?

Or dominated entire games including grand finals for more then patches.

In short Cyril varcoe are elite Thomas is far far past it

 

[Ed D]

It's a bit hard to judge Cyril on finals performances when he's only played 1 final (in which he got injured) since his debut year. In saying that he helped turn the 2008 GF on it's head. Varcoe is starting to peak and is a year younger than Thomas (Rioli is 2 years younger). If you compare Varcoe's 2010 with Dale's 2009 they're pretty even IMO, although Dale had been more consistant up to that point. Dale had a ripper 2010, Varcoe and Rioli are potential at this stage (could easily do it, but haven't).

 

[soreplums]

Ok. Extremely rarely do I bother checking out other clubs' boards, but I was interested in what the Blues thouhghts of Murph being chased by GWS and I pissed myself laughing at this comment:

"I think the strongest thing that someone can say to Smurph is 'How would you feel about leaving Carlton for a big wad of money and in 2012 we win the premiership?"

Talk about delusional!

 

[mwalker]

Re: GWS after Pendles and Daisy

Thomas is just a flashy outside runner who shirks hard contests. He'd be no loss. If any club wants to pay $1,000,000 for him then good luck to them.

Swan gets a heap of the ball, but doesn't hurt teams, doesn't do enough defensively or in attack given the amount of ball he gets, again he'd be no loss given his age and the amount we'd have to give up to keep him. McCarthy could come in a do his role easily provided he was never tagged like Swan - except that McCarthy would probably be slightly neater by foot.

Pendlebury would be the greatest loss, but again, nothing irreplaceable - his major asset is evasiveness and decision making, and is nothing more than a good kick of the footy. He really needs to push forward more and hurt teams offensively before he could be considered in the same mold as Marc Murphy, Ryan Griffan or Justin Sherman. I wouldn't be too sad to see him go, and we have a heap of players who would fill his void straight away in 2012: Fasolo, Young, Wellingham, Sidebottom, Beams, Thomas etc

.
.
/quote]


That was a funny read. However I think if you posted that in the main board everyone would agree with you which is outrageous.

 

[mwalker]

Re: GWS has Signed 3 Players Already

You may be right, agree with morgoth delay in re-signing will be telling.

We might hope that contemplating moving from the biggest club in the land in it's premiership window, to West Sydney in it's infancy, would be protective...but money does talk, we all know that.

I refuse to emote about this...if someone goes they go, I wish them well.

We are not a one player club plus we'd be compensated reasonably well.

Pendles is the one that would hurt most...but hopefully he won't go, he's the next captain. I don't think he'd be that short-sighted.

We have bigger fish to fry than this side issue.

The club is astute enough to learn from the Ablett fiasco

Que sera sera
Whatever will be, will be
The future's not our's to see,
Que sera sera

That is what I think too. Will we lose anyone? Hope not but we must accept the possiblity it will prob happen. Without a premiership I think we might have escaped as everyone considered our list average and playing above their weight for a long time. Different story now though.

However he have built a team around good-very good players with a couple of exceptions. Rather than rely on superstars to get you over the line. Thus the loss of one very good to great player is not a significant as say a Buddy/Fev/St Nick/ etc.


God I would love to see us lose no-one and go b2b. That would send BF it a frenzy. The B2B is no problem though....

 

[TradeDraft]

Official GWS Rumour Thread

The Giants are also eyeing Collingwood trio Dale Thomas, Scott Pendlebury and Dane Swan and Cat Jimmy Bartel.

GWS has an extra $1 million in its salary cap to lure a maximum of one uncontracted player from each club over the next two seasons.

I guess these Rumours won't go away until they sign. Get use to people on the Footy Shows to Harp on this until is sorted

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...-man-beau-waters/story-e6frf9jf-1225995654834

 

[soho]

Re: Official GWS Rumour Thread

there was no bigger country boy, face of the club, loved by his town, family dynasty, home grown boy than garry ablett...

if he can leave for money, anyone can... that includes dale thomas, scott pendelbury and the rest of our list...

if i was head of collingwood, id tell all the players that no one is bigger than any club, especially collingwood, that your name will be forgotten the second you leave town, and that if they're not signed up by june 1st, there is no spot in the team for you...

 

[soho]

Re: Official GWS Rumour Thread

just read the above posted article: "GWS has an extra $1 million in its salary cap to lure a maximum of one uncontracted player from each club over the next two seasons."

so does this mean GC17 also have an extra million this year, and are still allowed to negotiate and sign uncontracted players?

so essentially, 2 players from each club may take the cash...?

hmmm...

wouldnt be surprised if a few more of the geelong players abandon ship, seeing as the rest already have...
daniel rich may get out as well, seeing as the lions are royally ****ed...
waters likewise...

in the end, we'll probably see the stars of the weaker clubs and/or from smaller states leave... im confident players wont leave a good wicket down at collingwood, but can never be sure... if the difference is getting paid $350k a year to getting $750k a year, who knows... i dont even know what id do...

 

[shawthing09]

I am not 100% on the details but I think the main difference between GWS and GC is that GC only had one year to sign uncontracted players (being 2010) because so many clubs signed up their players on new contracts to cover them from being avalible for GC the AFL have given GWS 2 years to sign uncontracted players so that they have a wider group of players coming out of contract.