Luke Ball "Officially" Walks..

[SirJimi05]

but we are close to a flag and need an inside mid to top out the list and reduce the reliance on run-of-the-mill senior players like Johnson O'Bree and Lockyer.

Lockyer is run of the mill but you want to draft Luke Ball?

Lockyer >>> Ball

And i doubt Lockyer is on 500k per year.

I was sort of warming to us taking him with pick #26 (even though he is an average footballer) just because he would help out Jobe but paying a player of his calibre 500K per season is simply absurd.

Collingwood can have him.

 

[Invigoration]

Brilliant wit, I've never heard that one before.

Ball is worth $350K/3-4 years.

If North paid more than that, I'd be fuming.

If Collingwood paid more than that, they are flat out desperate, and publicly admitting that their drafting has been massively overrated.

Front ended contract? I'm sure there would be some sort of agreement that the third and fourth years of his contract would be on significantly less coin, an agreement other clubs might not have the luxury of.

You honestly think Ball has any chance of making it to Collingwood with 250-350k a year on his head?

We have copious amounts of money anyway, we might as well use it

 

[clobba]

Why is it that everyone has to find a party to blame in this situation?

Ball wanted out, Collingwood offered St. Kilda something they weren't willing to accept at the time and Ball goes into the draft.

It's just the way the world works kids.

Come on dont be talking sense we obviously disrepected Collingwood...I mean Ball

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Now, explain something to me. How do you play ABOVE your ability? Honestly, that line is stupid on a laughable level. Are you trying to say there's a level above your maximum ability?

You can do it occasionally - play at a level that is so good its not physically possible to sustain for very long. But its impossible to play above your ability for four years running.

 

[Wally Carter]

Yeh, it's a funny theory I keep hearing. Collingwood aren't any good....but you guys keep winning games and making the top 4....I don't knowz how youz does it Collingwood!

I'm just calling it how I see it mate.

Now, explain something to me. How do you play ABOVE your ability? Honestly, that line is stupid on a laughable level. Are you trying to say there's a level above your maximum ability?

In modern football, you take a player list with a natural rating of 6 out of 10 and give them a brilliant coach and an optimal development department and they will play above a list with a rating of 8 out of 10 and none of the other advantages. I hope that helps to explain what I mean.

 

[Invigoration]

Lockyer is run of the mill but you want to draft Luke Ball?

Lockyer >>> Ball

And i doubt Lockyer is on 500k per year.

I was sort of warming to us taking him with pick #26 (even though he is an average footballer) just because he would help out Jobe but paying a player of his calibre 500K per season is simply absurd.

Collingwood can have him.

I would take Ball over Lockyer without a doubt right now. Lockyer will be phased out this year anyway.

Hopefully the clubs in front of us have the same mentality as you, that 500k a year is too much, we'll be cruising if they do.

 

[SirJimi05]

I really don't see how the anaolgy works given the parameters around which the cap operates.

If Essendon have plenty of cap space available this year and next then it really places little pressure on them at all.

How much a team pays for a player and whether they are under/over paying is only really based on their overall cap position. If Essendon take him they might not be under any more pressure than they are today.

It's actually why I think player salaries should be public because it's in players best interests in realising their true worth (but that's another story).

Essendon can easily afford Ball if they want him. But who would pay 500K per season for a plodder that can't kick over 40m?

 

[Invigoration]

Come on dont be talking sense we obviously disrepected Collingwood...I mean Ball

Don't be stupid, obviously Collingwood are just notorious hard arses that didn't meet Lyon's request for pick 30 + Goldsack... bastards

 

[Wally Carter]

You honestly think Ball has any chance of making it to Collingwood with 250-350k a year on his head?

Nope.

$ 500K mightn't get him to Collingwood either.

 

[The Panther]

Nope.

$ 500K mightn't get him to Collingwood either.

$800 K for his first year will.

 

[Wally Carter]

$800 K for his first year will.

$800K for a bloke with 3-4 years left that has major injury issues?

Are you serious?

 

[Timmy from Thomastown]

Lockyer is run of the mill but you want to draft Luke Ball?

Lockyer >>> Ball

And i doubt Lockyer is on 500k per year.

I was sort of warming to us taking him with pick #26 (even though he is an average footballer) just because he would help out Jobe but paying a player of his calibre 500K per season is simply absurd.

Collingwood can have him.

Hot potato hot potato.

Whoever takes him is taking a big risk. And frankly whether you're paying him 350 or 500, the risk is the same. Will he perform or wont he? But for Collingwood, being a lot closer to a premiership than Essendon, the risk is arguably worth taking.

Not so sure about Essendon. They probably still have the stench of the Misiti/Mercuri contracts still hovering over their heads - it set them back 10 years and sent them into their darkest era in 30 years - and they might not want to go back down that path. If they see a flag in four years, Ball might be retired by then.

It will be interesting to see what happens.

 

[smiddaz123]

I'm just calling it how I see it mate.

So we've somehow managed to make the top 4 consistently over many years by somehow winning games we shouldn't so often?

In modern football, you take a player list with a natural rating of 6 out of 10 and give them a brilliant coach and an optimal development department and they will play above a list with a rating of 8 out of 10 and none of the other advantages.

Right, so in that case, playing to 8/10 is in their ability....coz yanno....they did it.

Tell me, which players do you think have been playing above their ability in your eyes, and then which do you believe have been playing below their potential ability.

 

[Invigoration]

Nope.

$ 500K mightn't get him to Collingwood either.

It might not, you are right, but I'd say the odds are far improved.
500k is just speculating anyway, where is the limit? Maybe Collingwood can afford 600, maybe even 700k, will he get to the Pies then?

The main point is that he will obviously have an agreement to plateau the amount out come years 3 and 4, so the initial figure is irrelevant. If he had a realistic amount on his head, there would be no mention of Collingwood in any article pertaining to Luke Ball.

 

[smiddaz123]

You can do it occasionally - play at a level that is so good its not physically possible to sustain for very long. But its impossible to play above your ability for four years running.

Maybe I just took the term ability too literally then. If you do something successfully, then surely you have the ability to do it.

Anyway, like you said, we've done it for 4 years straight basically....it's amusing to see people still so convinced we've played above our 'ability' for almost half a decade.

 

[SirJimi05]

I would take Ball over Lockyer without a doubt right now. Lockyer will be phased out this year anyway.

Hopefully the clubs in front of us have the same mentality as you, that 500k a year is too much, we'll be cruising if they do.

I must have been watching different players this season.

Ball is still good when the ball is in a pack but once it come out he is totally useless. Almost a liability.

Lockyer has effective disposal and is far far more damaging than Ball. He is also a goal kicker and is one of the best kicks for goal going around.

Why will he be phased out? He is still comnfortably in your best 22.

Is it the old "he has hit 30 so he must be shit" mentality?

I hope Essendon has the same mentaility as me also. I'd be pretty pissed off if we payed luke Ball 500K per season.

 

[mdc]

Apples and oranges.

Yes, Lockyer is a very effective kick and a smart footballer, but he's even slower than Ball, is an awful, awful contested ball player, and can't help us at all in the centre square.

Ball obviously has his own flaws too, so I think it would come down to team needs really. But in our case, he would (in theory) be replacing O'Bree, who has all of the same flaws and almost none of the strengths.

As for Essendon; can you really see Watson and Ball in the same midfield? At least with us Pendlebury can shift away from being that extractor/handballer and do more of the link stuff, whereas Watson's very much a 1-position player (albeit a very good one).

I must have been watching different players this season.

Ball is still good when the ball is in a pack but once it come out he is totally useless. Almost a liability.

Lockyer has effective disposal and is far far more damaging than Ball. He is also a goal kicker and is one of the best kicks for goal going around.

Why will he be phased out? He is still comnfortably in your best 22.

Is it the old "he has hit 30 so he must be shit" mentality?

I hope Essendon has the same mentaility as me also. I'd be pretty pissed off if we payed luke Ball 500K per season.

 

[clobba]

Don't be stupid, obviously Collingwood are just notorious hard arses that didn't meet Lyon's request for pick 30 + Goldsack... bastards

LOL I could maybe go with that also

Seriously I am just astounded that this is still going so long with so much rancour, I wish him all the best and would have liked him to stay but hes got to look after his future.
Surely its only the off season that is letting go on and on and on...just bring on the draft and let him find a home the sanctimonious prattling is both pointless and ****ing annoying.

 

[Invigoration]

I must have been watching different players this season.

Ball is still good when the ball is in a pack but once it come out he is totally useless. Almost a liability.

Lockyer has effective disposal and is far far more damaging than Ball. He is also a goal kicker and is one of the best kicks for goal going around.

Why will he be phased out? He is still comnfortably in your best 22.

Is it the old "he has hit 30 so he must be shit" mentality?

I hope Essendon has the same mentaility as me also. I'd be pretty pissed off if we payed luke Ball 500K per season.

Macaffer is virtually a straight swap and improvement on Lockyer. Lockyer is hardly damaging, he is a loose, uncontested ball winner who has below average speed. His goal kicking is a decent upside, something he benefits from being able to play so loose, but again, Macaffer would be a better shot for goal and has significantly better hands.
He has been a good servant to the club, but you are overrating his worth, he'll be phased out because players underneath him are overtaking him... simple.

Lockyer is easily replaced in a role we have an excess amount of guys to play in, we obviously lack a decent inside mid.

You'd be hard pressed to find a Collingwood supporter that would think we need Lockyer more than Ball.

 

[OniAu]

I'm just calling it how I see it mate.



In modern football, you take a player list with a natural rating of 6 out of 10 and give them a brilliant coach and an optimal development department and they will play above a list with a rating of 8 out of 10 and none of the other advantages. I hope that helps to explain what I mean.

too much championship manager for you. you cant play above your so called natural ability for four years and make the finals and have a dud list when its the pies yougsters who have been the ones leading the way, if anything there is only room for improvement. such a rubbish theory you have

 

[Ron]

$800K for a bloke with 3-4 years left that has major injury issues?

Are you serious?

Why not?

If there is room in the cap then why does it matter what we give him?

If it is a one off payment of 800k, then it wont affect our cap in future seasons.

Give him a one year deal of say around 600-800k and after that a 3 year deal of 300k a year.

 

[SirJimi05]

Apples and oranges.

Yes, Lockyer is a very effective kick and a smart footballer, but he's even slower than Ball, is an awful, awful contested ball player, and can't help us at all in the centre square.

Ball obviously has his own flaws too, so I think it would come down to team needs really. But in our case, he would (in theory) be replacing O'Bree, who has all of the same flaws and almost none of the strengths.

As for Essendon; can you really see Watson and Ball in the same midfield? At least with us Pendlebury can shift away from being that extractor/handballer and do more of the link stuff, whereas Watson's very much a 1-position player (albeit a very good one).

I'm not the one that made the comparison so not sure why you quoted me. I just replied to someone who said that Ball will replace run of the mill players such as Lockyer.

And to answer your question - I'm not really keen on us getting Ball at all but there is no question that Essendon really need to aquire a second inside midfielder to help out Jobe Watson. Or we need one of our current ones to pick up some more of the slack. At the moment with Essendon it is stop Jobe getting the ball out to the carriers and you win. We need a secondary player that can win heaps of contested ball.

 

[Wally Carter]

So we've somehow managed to make the top 4 consistently over many years by somehow winning games we shouldn't so often?

Top 4 consistently?

Let's put the early 2000's aside, Collingwood have a different side now.

2005 - 15th
2006 - 3rd
2007 - 6th
2008 - 5th
2009 - 4th

That's 2 top 4 finishes in recent years. In 2006 Collingwood were thumped by the team that finished 8th and bundled straight out of the finals and in 2009 Collingwood were comfortably handled by the top tier clubs.

2007 was the standout when the Pies got over a declining Sydney, a weakened Eagles team and played valiantly against the Cats.

2007 aside, the recent years have highlighted that Collingwoods armchair H & A draw has also very much inflated their real position as a side.

Right, so in that case, playing to 8/10 is in their ability....coz yanno....they did it.

Tell me, which players do you think have been playing above their ability in your eyes, and then which do you believe have been playing below their potential ability.

The entire list. I don't think Collingwood have any real underachievers. A high achieving list in relation to it's natural ability, a brilliant coach and an armchair draw are the reason Collingwood has played finals in recent years.

This thread is about Luke Ball, let's keep it there.

 

[SirJimi05]

Why not?

If there is room in the cap then why does it matter what we give him?

If it is a one off payment of 800k, then it wont affect our cap in future seasons.

Give him a one year deal of say around 600-800k and after that a 3 year deal of 300k a year.

Because clubs need to reserve extra cap space for when the expansion clubs come in. How many players do you reckon are going to be seeking significant salary increases in the coming years. There has never been a more important time to manage cap space.

 

[Wally Carter]

Why not?

If there is room in the cap then why does it matter what we give him?

If it is a one off payment of 800k, then it wont affect our cap in future seasons.

Give him a one year deal of say around 600-800k and after that a 3 year deal of 300k a year.

It's an awfully big bloody risk mate. That is stitching up a lot of money for a bloke with real injury issues.