List Mgmt. Morning, Joe! (was The Daniher (Probably Mega-)thread)

[Brett C]

Mitch Robbo. Hopefully sober

lol my bad for not reading the article and assuming 360 Robbo

 

[WhiteLionFeva]

I am amazed at all the conjecture about matching and a trade. It seems like the simplest of deals to me.
I'm not convinced Brisbane is all that keen on Joe to be honest (I am surprised they are). But let's assume they are.
Surely it would be looking a gift horse in the mouth for both clubs to ignore the free gift of a compensation pick, which is what makes the deal viable.
If you take away the compensation pick (by matching), it is very hard to see a trade that satisfies both clubs.
Brisbane, rightly, see a big risk, and also a huge potential reward if Daniher is right to go. Thus the incentive based contract offer.
Essendon is losing their franchise player, who they have built their list around, and who despite the last 3 yrs of bad attitude and injury, is finally right, and still, at 26yo, is capable of being the most dominant KP forward in the comp. They rightly want a return that in some way reflects his value.
Whether you think Dodoro is hard to deal with or not, a pick around 23 is just not enough.
You could take the view that if the AFL free agency compo comes up at band 2 (end of rd 1) then that is what is fair.
Except that Brisbane's fixed salary component does not reflect their assessment of his value, but is just a built in safeguard for risk. Their true value of his worth is the base plus incentives (which the AFL compo system ignores, for good reason, to prevent rorting of the system with artificial offers).
If Brisbane stick to an offer that only generates band 2 compo, Dodoro is extremely likely to match. And if he does, the only way a deal gets done is if Brisbane offer a 1st + something (Witherden, a future 2nd, whatever).
Why would Brisbane want to give up a (late) first round pick plus something, when they can get Daniher for free, simply by converting about $100k of incentive into base contract?
Sure it adds a bit of risk, but the bulk of the risk is in offering him $650 (or so) in the first place. If they want him, surely another $100k converted from incentive to base is a small price to pay, and much better than giving up draft picks or players.
The only way that this shouldn't play out that way is if Brisbane is not really that keen and doesn't mind missing out altogether (which I think is possible).

Once again, an Essendon supporter trying to characterise a failed trade as our primarily our fault. Difference between this year and last is that if the trade deal can't be done because Dodoro is being himself then Daniher goes into the draft. We might miss out on him but that will be less of an issue for us than for Essendon. There is zero chance you will redraft him.

 

[morsie]

It's interesting to look at the relatively low key reaction to the Daniher news on this board and speculate what it might have been 2 0r 3 years ago.I suspect that this thread would have been into 100p pages.Now it's well it's good news hope the deal gets done but if it doesn't we will move on.
As a Club we have grown heaps in a pretty short time.

 

[60sbomber]

Once again, an Essendon supporter trying to characterise a failed trade as our primarily our fault. Difference between this year and last is that if the trade deal can't be done because Dodoro is being himself then Daniher goes into the draft. We might miss out on him but that will be less of an issue for us than for Essendon. There is zero chance you will redraft him.

Ignoring the point scoring, you are pretty much agreeing with my last point. If the deal can't be done, both clubs miss out on him.
It might not be a big issue for Brisbane if they don't really want him that much.
But, similarly, we have had a few picks in the 20s who have been complete wipeouts (Begley, Morgan). I don't think the prospect of missing out on a compensation pick in the 20s would be a big cross to bear if Joe were to go to the PSD.

PS You didn't express a view about the thrust of my post ie that it would cost Brisbane very little to increase the base and reduce the incentive, and so get Daniher for free, trade wise.

 

[JasRulz63]

PS You didn't express a view about the thrust of my post ie that it would cost Brisbane very little to increase the base and reduce the incentive, and so get Daniher for free, trade wise.

I agree with your point. I assume Noble and co are aware of that too, and if they choose to offer only enough for band 2 I'm sure they have a good reason why.

 

[spotthedog1]

I am amazed at all the conjecture about matching and a trade. It seems like the simplest of deals to me.
I'm not convinced Brisbane is all that keen on Joe to be honest (I am surprised they are). But let's assume they are.
Surely it would be looking a gift horse in the mouth for both clubs to ignore the free gift of a compensation pick, which is what makes the deal viable.
If you take away the compensation pick (by matching), it is very hard to see a trade that satisfies both clubs.
Brisbane, rightly, see a big risk, and also a huge potential reward if Daniher is right to go. Thus the incentive based contract offer.
Essendon is losing their franchise player, who they have built their list around, and who despite the last 3 yrs of bad attitude and injury, is finally right, and still, at 26yo, is capable of being the most dominant KP forward in the comp. They rightly want a return that in some way reflects his value.
Whether you think Dodoro is hard to deal with or not, a pick around 23 is just not enough.
You could take the view that if the AFL free agency compo comes up at band 2 (end of rd 1) then that is what is fair.
Except that Brisbane's fixed salary component does not reflect their assessment of his value, but is just a built in safeguard for risk. Their true value of his worth is the base plus incentives (which the AFL compo system ignores, for good reason, to prevent rorting of the system with artificial offers).
If Brisbane stick to an offer that only generates band 2 compo, Dodoro is extremely likely to match. And if he does, the only way a deal gets done is if Brisbane offer a 1st + something (Witherden, a future 2nd, whatever).
Why would Brisbane want to give up a (late) first round pick plus something, when they can get Daniher for free, simply by converting about $100k of incentive into base contract?
Sure it adds a bit of risk, but the bulk of the risk is in offering him $650 (or so) in the first place. If they want him, surely another $100k converted from incentive to base is a small price to pay, and much better than giving up draft picks or players.
The only way that this shouldn't play out that way is if Brisbane is not really that keen and doesn't mind missing out altogether (which I think is possible).

Big issue I have with that is your suggestion that it'd just be "another $100k converted from incentive to base", and then that that's a "small price to pay".

1. Salary cap for us may not be tight yet, but we're planning on it being tight soon. Locking in $100k for a player many have said is cooked is a concern.
2. The financial impact of the incentives wouldn't be great, but the biggest issue is the number of years. If we're offering 5y @ $650k, I'd be amazed. I think it'd be 3y @ $650k with triggers for games in order to get to years 4 or 5. And with a player with questionable body and questionable attitude, 3 years is enough of a risk. I wouldn't be locking in years 4 or 5 just to get someone else better compo. That's not really how our club has operated.
3. "The only way a deal gets done is if Brisbane offer a 1st + something". That's called an assumption, not a fact. If we gave up a first plus Witho, I would think we'd gone overs. The risks on this one are huge... I obviously don't speak for the club, but picking up Daniher has more of a Fevola feel than a Neale feel. Would hope we've learned from that mistake and not pay overs again for a high-risk player.

 

[Gadzorks]

*wonders how much Hipwood would enjoy playing on the second defender rather than the first*

When he’s got his cranky pants face on I don’t think anything bothers him. He hunts the ball and passes on to advantage if another player is available, whether it is Daniher or anyone else wouldn’t bother him.

I’m in the Daniher in, step out camp. Mightn’t be next season but it’s very close. If Steph does another year, it might be mcstay that misses for a bit.

Lester’s interview yesterday was interesting. He said he has had to learn to be a bit more selfish and it’s improved his game. I think mcstay is in that boat. Doesn’t yet have the confidence to dominate even though he has formidable ‘weapons’. Fagan will keep at him and he’ll be our next Lester.

 

[60sbomber]

Big issue I have with that is your suggestion that it'd just be "another $100k converted from incentive to base", and then that that's a "small price to pay".

1. Salary cap for us may not be tight yet, but we're planning on it being tight soon. Locking in $100k for a player many have said is cooked is a concern.
2. The financial impact of the incentives wouldn't be great, but the biggest issue is the number of years. If we're offering 5y @ $650k, I'd be amazed. I think it'd be 3y @ $650k with triggers for games in order to get to years 4 or 5. And with a player with questionable body and questionable attitude, 3 years is enough of a risk. I wouldn't be locking in years 4 or 5 just to get someone else better compo. That's not really how our club has operated.
3. "The only way a deal gets done is if Brisbane offer a 1st + something". That's called an assumption, not a fact. If we gave up a first plus Witho, I would think we'd gone overs. The risks on this one are huge... I obviously don't speak for the club, but picking up Daniher has more of a Fevola feel than a Neale feel. Would hope we've learned from that mistake and not pay overs again for a high-risk player.

Hey, thanks for the reply. Always interesting to get the other club's supporters' viewpoint.

Re your pt 1 - You would be adding another $100k risk to whatever the currently offered base is (reported $650k). Marginal really. Only an issue in the unlikely event he falls over (if it was likely, you shouldn't be offering $650k). Doesn't really affect salary cap - same outcome whether $100k is paid as base or incentive.

Re 2. The no. of years is irrelevant to the compo. Whether you offer 5 or 3, the base salary is averaged and then ranked in with all AFL players over 25. If it falls within the top 5%, band 1 compensation applies (a further factor built into the rankings is player age)

Re 3. You can't expect to get a deal done with only one of your first rounders. Given you're finishing top 4, that is hardly better than the (unsatisfactory) end of rd 1 band 2 compo. So no chance Dodoro matches because of unsatisfactory band 2 compo, then accepts Brisbane 1st rd pick in a trade.

 

[M Malice]

Article on afl.com saying that Jesse Hogan is on the outer at the Dockers, would we be better off going for him instead of Joe?

 

[HirdsTheWord]

the posts from BrunoV are a bit concerning to me. He "rushed back and looked fit" for a few weeks and then broke down quickly... makes you wonder how committed he is to doing the 1%'s with his own body to get it right... Seems like he personally (as much as Essendon pushing him) was trying to do a 3 week pre-season the last 3 years and it hasn't worked out.

Regardless at his best he's a class above our forwards, even accounting for further growth from Hipwood and its great he's committed to us and being in the premiership window to add a potential AA forward to our list even given the risks is worth it IMO. Fingers crossed he is committed in his own work ethic to turn his situation around.

I've been surprised to see on twitter the amount of discussion about the impact this will have on Hipwood and McStay in particular and the potential for Mcstay in particular to want to leave.

We play with 3 tall forwards, Martin is close to retirement and Big O has shown this year he is ready to play first ruck. That means Daniher/Hipwood/McStay could be the 3 tall forwards. Probably McStay would do back up ruck (to protect Daniher physically) but Daniher could do bits of it.

If that doesn't work out then McStay would probably be our first choice 3rd tall defender ahead of Lester and Adams... Adams injuries haven't gone away (note of caution re: Daniher) and he is 27 so you'd have to think will struggle to make it back as more than backup now.

Teams in premiership contention don't let someone like McStay leave who is almost certainly best 22 or at worst is "23rd man" playing lots of games covering injuries/rests/suspensions. I feel the same about Witherden although I think Witherden may be more inclined to leave given he has been on the outer most of this year.

In terms of trade scenarios IF Dodoro matches. Why give up much more than one of our two first round picks. eg. maybe Pick 19 and 38. or maybe Witherden (if he wanted to leave) and pick 38.

Daniher was mentally checked out with us. I am sure that with a new club he will be invigorated with a change of scenery.

As long as the Lions can keep his root issue healthy then I think he will apply himself much better then he did with us, both on the field and in training.

 

[PattyKwasagun]

Article on afl.com saying that Jesse Hogan is on the outer at the Dockers, would we be better off going for him instead of Joe?

Not keen on Hogan personally. He feels so far away from what everyone once thought he could be to my eyes. Can't really see him realising the hopes that many held for him now, whereas I think Daniher has proven that he can get back to his best in that match against Hawthorn. I can't remember seeing Hogan dominate a game like Joe did that day for a number of years now.

 

[WhiteLionFeva]

Article on afl.com saying that Jesse Hogan is on the outer at the Dockers, would we be better off going for him instead of Joe?

No.

 

[jackess]

Article on afl.com saying that Jesse Hogan is on the outer at the Dockers, would we be better off going for him instead of Joe?

That can be part of our negotiations for Joe. Heaps of key forwards on the market.

 

[BuntonRules]

Not a fan of a big base salary. Lower contract, plus incentives to reflect the risk for me.

The Bombers match - the second of our first rounders and a player - Witho, Ely Smith etc. or GTFO.

 

[JasRulz63]

Article on afl.com saying that Jesse Hogan is on the outer at the Dockers, would we be better off going for him instead of Joe?

From my point of view, I see Hogan being a bigger risk than Daniher. It feels like there's a lot more holding him back both on and off the field, and he has a history of multiple different injuries he's had to overcome.

 

[John_Proctor]

Re 3. You can't expect to get a deal done with only one of your first rounders. Given you're finishing top 4, that is hardly better than the (unsatisfactory) end of rd 1 band 2 compo. So no chance Dodoro matches because of unsatisfactory band 2 compo, then accepts Brisbane 1st rd pick in a trade.

I agree that I don't see the bombers accepting one of our first rounders if they match. Its such a marginal improvement on the compo offer that it wouldn't make sense...

Yes making us match "weakens us" compared to getting Daniher for free and that may play well in the "politics" of matching... but it also looks a bit petty and I think a lot of Bombers fans actually have more sympathy for Daniher than the club at the moment.

As I posted before IF it comes to a match. Pick 19+38 would be very fair deal. Thats 1413 draft points which is equivalent to Pick 10. It might be enough to entice the Dogs to trade down for their Pick 13. Pick 13 for Daniher seems about right after 13 games in 3 seasons.

 

[notliondown]

OK... I'll stop thinking it and say it. I'm not sure about Joe - or about what he brings to the club. This thread and the posts from BrunoV are incredibly insightful (thank you) but I worry about what it mean for us.

The motivation for players to chose Brisbane is now, rightfully, very different to what it was 2 or 3 years ago. Now we are a team on the brink of real success. Previously we've been a team building to an unknown peak, and that changes so many things.

It's unfair probably but I look at the recruitment of Neale vs Daniher. Lachie had no guarantee our trajectory would eclipse that of Freemantle or that his chances of either personal or team success would be greater here than there. He seemingly made the decision based on more personal levels and was willing to take a chance on the culture (hate that term) of the club, work ethics, coaching group etc in the hope success would come.

We've now reached a point where it could be argued that some degree of success is assured so does that change the motivation to purely personal success? Why has Joe nominated Brisbane this year instead of Sydney again? I understand that there may be "bubble" issues and expectations of Joe that he finds uncomfortable in Melbourne. What I question is why us?

And if it us, is he the type of person willing to sacrifice personal "success" to be part of the team orientated style that we have? Can he park his number 1 forward mentality and ego and be willing to sacrifice his own game for the good of the team?

Joe has had wind blown up his backside ever since he pulled on an AFL jumper - rightly or wrongly. He may say he doesn't like that adulation but it's there and players get used to it.

He now comes (potentially) to a team who are/were largely no ones. A team who had a core of players who grew together through out the sh*t years. A team who have based their success on a lack of ego or selfishness.

I don't doubt his talent when he's up and going. And maybe he is the missing piece (if we have one).

My concern is whether or not he can park his baggage - and his ego - at the foot of the plane stairs in Melbourne. If not I wonder about the effect of recruting a "glory hunter" on the rest of the team given it inevitably pushes out someone who has busted their guts through the hard times.

 

[davemc_lions]

Lots of talk a few years ago Joe was not happy with medical department at Bombers.
If not happy then probably best for him to go. Hope he plays some games if we get him
What he worth.. on potential a lot
on the last few years less then Ben Brown which people saying a 2nd will get.

 

[Gadzorks]

OK... I'll stop thinking it and say it. I'm not sure about Joe - or about what he brings to the club. This thread and the posts from BrunoV are incredibly insightful (thank you) but I worry about what it mean for us.

The motivation for players to chose Brisbane is now, rightfully, very different to what it was 2 or 3 years ago. Now we are a team on the brink of real success. Previously we've been a team building to an unknown peak, and that changes so many things.

It's unfair probably but I look at the recruitment of Neale vs Daniher. Lachie had no guarantee our trajectory would eclipse that of Freemantle or that his chances of either personal or team success would be greater here than there. He seemingly made the decision based on more personal levels and was willing to take a chance on the culture (hate that term) of the club, work ethics, coaching group etc in the hope success would come.

We've now reached a point where it could be argued that some degree of success is assured so does that change the motivation to purely personal success? Why has Joe nominated Brisbane this year instead of Sydney again? I understand that there may be "bubble" issues and expectations of Joe that he finds uncomfortable in Melbourne. What I question is why us?

And if it us, is he the type of person willing to sacrifice personal "success" to be part of the team orientated style that we have? Can he park his number 1 forward mentality and ego and be willing to sacrifice his own game for the good of the team?

Joe has had wind blown up his backside ever since he pulled on an AFL jumper - rightly or wrongly. He may say he doesn't like that adulation but it's there and players get used to it.

He now comes (potentially) to a team who are/were largely no ones. A team who had a core of players who grew together through out the sh*t years. A team who have based their success on a lack of ego or selfishness.

I don't doubt his talent when he's up and going. And maybe he is the missing piece (if we have one).

My concern is whether or not he can park his baggage - and his ego - at the foot of the plane stairs in Melbourne. If not I wonder about the effect of recruting a "glory hunter" on the rest of the team given it inevitably pushes out someone who has busted their guts through the hard times.

No doubt the Brisbane current success is a carrot.

Other consideration that I think is really important is that Daniher had his best season when the head of medical peter blanch was Essendon head of medical. I put a lot of weight on him just wanting to play before his personal window closes and that means the best medical team with a proven track record. Three years with essentially no games must be incredibly awful

 

[M Malice]

OK... I'll stop thinking it and say it. I'm not sure about Joe - or about what he brings to the club. This thread and the posts from BrunoV are incredibly insightful (thank you) but I worry about what it mean for us.

The motivation for players to chose Brisbane is now, rightfully, very different to what it was 2 or 3 years ago. Now we are a team on the brink of real success. Previously we've been a team building to an unknown peak, and that changes so many things.

It's unfair probably but I look at the recruitment of Neale vs Daniher. Lachie had no guarantee our trajectory would eclipse that of Freemantle or that his chances of either personal or team success would be greater here than there. He seemingly made the decision based on more personal levels and was willing to take a chance on the culture (hate that term) of the club, work ethics, coaching group etc in the hope success would come.

We've now reached a point where it could be argued that some degree of success is assured so does that change the motivation to purely personal success? Why has Joe nominated Brisbane this year instead of Sydney again? I understand that there may be "bubble" issues and expectations of Joe that he finds uncomfortable in Melbourne. What I question is why us?

And if it us, is he the type of person willing to sacrifice personal "success" to be part of the team orientated style that we have? Can he park his number 1 forward mentality and ego and be willing to sacrifice his own game for the good of the team?

Joe has had wind blown up his backside ever since he pulled on an AFL jumper - rightly or wrongly. He may say he doesn't like that adulation but it's there and players get used to it.

He now comes (potentially) to a team who are/were largely no ones. A team who had a core of players who grew together through out the sh*t years. A team who have based their success on a lack of ego or selfishness.

I don't doubt his talent when he's up and going. And maybe he is the missing piece (if we have one).

My concern is whether or not he can park his baggage - and his ego - at the foot of the plane stairs in Melbourne. If not I wonder about the effect of recruting a "glory hunter" on the rest of the team given it inevitably pushes out someone who has busted their guts through the hard times.

Understand your reservations, but Noble and co would have done their due diligence, ie. medical tests and they would have sat down and gone through an extensive interview process(probably skyped) with him to see if he is the type of personality that fits into our club ethos.

Seeing Daniher has said publicly that he wants to get to the Lions I assume that process as been done in large part.

 

[dlanod]

OK... I'll stop thinking it and say it. I'm not sure about Joe - or about what he brings to the club. This thread and the posts from BrunoV are incredibly insightful (thank you) but I worry about what it mean for us.

The motivation for players to chose Brisbane is now, rightfully, very different to what it was 2 or 3 years ago. Now we are a team on the brink of real success. Previously we've been a team building to an unknown peak, and that changes so many things.

It's unfair probably but I look at the recruitment of Neale vs Daniher. Lachie had no guarantee our trajectory would eclipse that of Freemantle or that his chances of either personal or team success would be greater here than there. He seemingly made the decision based on more personal levels and was willing to take a chance on the culture (hate that term) of the club, work ethics, coaching group etc in the hope success would come.

We've now reached a point where it could be argued that some degree of success is assured so does that change the motivation to purely personal success? Why has Joe nominated Brisbane this year instead of Sydney again? I understand that there may be "bubble" issues and expectations of Joe that he finds uncomfortable in Melbourne. What I question is why us?

And if it us, is he the type of person willing to sacrifice personal "success" to be part of the team orientated style that we have? Can he park his number 1 forward mentality and ego and be willing to sacrifice his own game for the good of the team?

Joe has had wind blown up his backside ever since he pulled on an AFL jumper - rightly or wrongly. He may say he doesn't like that adulation but it's there and players get used to it.

He now comes (potentially) to a team who are/were largely no ones. A team who had a core of players who grew together through out the sh*t years. A team who have based their success on a lack of ego or selfishness.

I don't doubt his talent when he's up and going. And maybe he is the missing piece (if we have one).

My concern is whether or not he can park his baggage - and his ego - at the foot of the plane stairs in Melbourne. If not I wonder about the effect of recruting a "glory hunter" on the rest of the team given it inevitably pushes out someone who has busted their guts through the hard times.

I think you're looking at this the wrong way around. You should be asking the inverse question:

Why did we approach Daniher in the first place?

I can't imagine that an RFA (or just about anyone) would have nominated a club that haven't indicated their interest. After all, we will be putting a contract offer to him during free agency. I have to assume that we've had a chat to his manager, bandied figures around, gauged his interest, etc, and only after those discussions progressed would it have gotten to the current state. Unless, I guess, the preference is for players to reject us?

It's not impossible that Daniher's camp approached us, but even if that was the case the club would have done all the above anyway so it still ends up being a mutual decision.

 

[Slax]

The key I think in Daniher getting to Lions easily will be what the AFL secret formula comes up with. Pick 7 and reckon Essendon will take it, pick 20 and they will match and force a trade.

 

[notliondown]

I think you're looking at this the wrong way around. You should be asking the inverse question:

Why did we approach Daniher in the first place?

I can't imagine that an RFA (or just about anyone) would have nominated a club that haven't indicated their interest. After all, we will be putting a contract offer to him during free agency. I have to assume that we've had a chat to his manager, bandied figures around, gauged his interest, etc, and only after those discussions progressed would it have gotten to the current state. Unless, I guess, the preference is for players to reject us?

It's not impossible that Daniher's camp approached us, but even if that was the case the club would have done all the above anyway so it still ends up being a mutual decision.

You are right, this descision has had to be mutual or else it would end up being almost farcical. And I don't doubt that we asked the question like we most likely would have on a number of players. We obviously perceive a need and think he has the potential to answer that and were willing to offer ourselves up.

And as Jason mp mentioned I don't doubt the club through Noble etc have done their homework.

It's just our priorities have changed too. We might now be more willing to take chances where previously we might not have because we now think we have a chance of success. Not to directly compare but think Fevola.

I'm sure my concerns are overblown. If Essendon are toxic and we are not (bleh culture) I just hope he can leave it behind and be willing to fully embrace the club and not divide it.

 

[Some_guy]

I was a bit eh on Daniher to start with. But I've really come around, Assuming he can stay on the park for the most part he could really lift the team to another level. I think it could also lead to McStay developing an interesting role, I think he could be very useful as a roaming tall. It might even give him more confidence if hes further up the ground and doesnt have to worry about wayward goal kicking

 

[dlanod]

I'm sure my concerns are overblown. If Essendon are toxic and we are not (bleh culture) I just hope he can leave it behind and be willing to fully embrace the club and not divide it.

I think the amount of damage one player can do to a club is overrated, especially if the club has a robust culture already.

Fev is the classic example thrown around but the Fev issues really snowballed by us overpaying, us doubling down on him as some kind of saviour, and then basically running him out of the club instead of trying to manage some combination of alcoholism and mental health issues. So terrible management by the club as much as the player causing anything.