List Mgmt. Re-Signing Jake Lever

[Mattrox]

You know Bicks said it? He's the one who would know.

Roo said the opposite on MMM.

On SM-G930F using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Elite Crow]

Roo said the opposite on MMM.

On SM-G930F using BigFooty.com mobile app

Yep, Roo is going to admit we lowball our players.

 

[spenze]

I don't care whether we match Levers offer but if we do and we can't afford the midfielder we need because we spent all our cash on a loose defender who gets pantsed in every one on one contest he is in, I'll be far more annoyed than I would be by a player leaving us.

 

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

There must be a fair bit of coin floating around in our reserves and outside the current 22:
- Menzel
- Gore
- Seedsman
- Otten
- Thompson
- Hampton
- Cheney

Moving on someone like Henderson, even though he is a handy AFL player, is a good thing because it's too much cap space for a player who is not an essential part of our best 15 or 16.

Perhaps we have to alter our list profile a bit. Give away some of our depth in spots 23-35 on the list and fill the gap with a few more draftees. It's a luxury to be able to bring in Otten or Seedsman if we cop an injury but if that luxury is costing us players like Lever or McGovern is it worth it?

It's a tough balance when you consider that Cheney played pretty much every game last year.

I don't think Otten and Gore would be on a huge amount of money. Thompson probably a little more, but not that much as they had told him he might play a lot of SANFL this year.

Hampton, Menzel and Seedsman will be on mid-range coin, simply because we traded for them, so you need to offer the traded player something to get them across. Hampton has been in the side this year outside of injuries (and probably would have last year as well if not for injuries). Same goes with Seedsman last year.

Menzel seems like a bit of a bust, but you can't win them all.

 

[jo172]

I don't care whether we match Levers offer but if we do and we can't afford the midfielder we need because we spent all our cash on a loose defender who gets pantsed in every one on one contest he is in, I'll be far more annoyed than I would be by a player leaving us.

This thread is about Jake Lever.

Are we looking to pick up Rance?

 

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

I agree. He has never put contract talks off which means he is giving Adelaide every chance to entice him to stay. His manager from all reports only got back this week or last week. So they have only just sat down with the club to nut out the best offers. To be honest, I think it's a win win for us whether he stays or goes. So this panic about him going, we should sack him before the GF if he hasn't signed etc is just ludicrous. I think a fair majority of the commentary is more about the panic of yet another player leaving more so than actually what Jake offers the club. Let's get something clear, he is a star player but he isn't the best player in our team nor is he the best player in our defence. We have 3 more players who can play his position crying out for game time in the SANFL. He is replaceable to the point, we probably wouldn't even notice due to the calibre of players waiting in the SANFL. So can we stop with this pathetic hysteria, the pathetic ideas about dropping him and lets pump our side up for finals!

Yep, I think the Crows are taking that measured approach too. They are willing to pay up to a certain amount to keep him, but he is not seen as irreplaceable as others on the list might be (which I agree with).

Paying overs for Lever will just cost us someone like a Sloane, Lynch, Laird, Smith or Mrouch next year due to us running out of cap space.

 

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

This must happen, but because it's not a massive issue for the Victorian teams it will never be addressed.

I think you'll find the player's association hold all the power here and it would take a massive concession on something else to entice them to give up the right for players to veto trades.

 

[Thetrader15]

Just dropping in to see if we have signed Jake yet....

Ah, nope

Ciao

 

[Thetrader15]

There must be a fair bit of coin floating around in our reserves and outside the current 22:
- Menzel
- Gore
- Seedsman
- Otten
- Thompson
- Hampton
- Cheney

Moving on someone like Henderson, even though he is a handy AFL player, is a good thing because it's too much cap space for a player who is not an essential part of our best 15 or 16.

Perhaps we have to alter our list profile a bit. Give away some of our depth in spots 23-35 on the list and fill the gap with a few more draftees. It's a luxury to be able to bring in Otten or Seedsman if we cop an injury but if that luxury is costing us players like Lever or McGovern is it worth it?

Absolutely worth it.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

AFC Pyke said ideally the Crows would re-sign Lever and McGovern before the start of the finals to avoid any distractions from achieving the ultimate goal of breaking the Club's 19-year premiership drought.

Interesting as up until now Pyke has swatted away any questions about them re-signing. Wonder what his reasoning is to suddenly start talking about it.

The longer this has dragged out, the less confident I feel about it... particularly Lever, who appears to becoming up with different reasons why he hasn't signed. Could be part of his negotiation technique, but feels more like Dangerfield not wanting to say the truth. Hopefully, I'm wrong.

 

[Hodgy]

Pay him more and we will be having the same discussion regarding Sloane, M Crouch etc next year

Hawthorn could have paid Buddy, who is the best player of the last 10 years, more and kept him. Sticking to their plans and values is what makes them strong.
Teams with strong cultures like us simply can't let individual players set their own value. It has a knock on effect to all facets of list management and whilst it might have a short term gain, will never pay off in the long run.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Clubs must be able to trade players without the player vetoing it. Players have waaaay too much power.

Agree, but with some caveats.

E.g. Can't trade only 1 year into a contract 3 or more years.

Perhaps, can only do in the back half of their contract.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Please, please, please let us get Devon Smith. The guys a genius with the footy. Stevie J on steroids.

If CC leaves, would be a decent option as a clever forward who can play on ball.

 

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

They did. Another Dangerfield in the making was the claim.

It was TAFKATMS , so I'd give the rumour some weight. He didn't say Sloane was definitely gone, just that he'd heard that Belinda was supposedly keen to return home to Vic. That news, combined with no announcement on a contract extension he was meant to be signing mean a bit of a red flag.

 

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

This thread is about Jake Lever.

Are we looking to pick up Rance?

Did you see Lever against Charlie Curnow and Joe Daniher? He is not great one on one.

 

[icrow32]

I don't know, I reckon he might just do it so they can move on to more important things.

That was the excuse for our day 1 rollover on the Dangerfield trade

 

[Red mist]

Key ones:

Brodie Smith
Charlie Cameron
David Mackay
Matt Crouch
Richard Douglas
Rory Atkins
Rory Laird
Rory Sloane
Tom Lynch

Draftees/Edge players:

Harry Dear
Jordan Gallucci
Myles Poholke
Elliot Himmelberg
Matthew Signorello
Ben Davis

You would think that they would all hang around, except for maybe Charlie with all these Brisbane rumors.

See bolded. you just can't have this mentality of wanting to keep them all. You have to make some hard calls esp if unpredicted cap space for Lever and Gov needs to be found. Because there's not nearly as much space coming out of this yrs delistings. Several of those players will have to be gone.

 

[Cromulent]

See, you just can't have this mentality of wanting to keep them all. You have to make some hard calls esp if unpredicted cap space for Lever and Gov needs to be found. Because there's not nearly as much space coming out of this yrs delistings. Several of those players will have to be gone.

That's not what I said..

You would think that they would all hang around

These players will want to hang around. Whether we keep them all or not is another story..

 

[Red mist]

That's not what I said..

These players will want to hang around. Whether we keep them all or not is another story..

Ok misunderstood.

 

[Shaz2012]

It's a tough balance when you consider that Cheney played pretty much every game last year.

I don't think Otten and Gore would be on a huge amount of money. Thompson probably a little more, but not that much as they had told him he might play a lot of SANFL this year.

Hampton, Menzel and Seedsman will be on mid-range coin, simply because we traded for them, so you need to offer the traded player something to get them across. Hampton has been in the side this year outside of injuries (and probably would have last year as well if not for injuries). Same goes with Seedsman last year.

Menzel seems like a bit of a bust, but you can't win them all.

So why wouldn't we trade out these guys? Mid-range coin guys are going to affect our ability to re-sign our top 12 players. They provide very good depth, but if we can't hold on to the guys in the top 12 then depth is meaningless. I think Cheney is gone now that Doedee and Kelly have re-signed. The only scenario where you would keep him is if Lever was gone and our plan A was to play Doedee in his role. That seems a bit of a stretch for a zero gamer, but I can see that as being an option.

Menzel - I still think will offer us a lot, but if we hang on to Gov, then I dont see why we would bother with mid-coin depth here if it exposes us to losing top players.

Seeds - I have not been impressed really with what he has brought. There were a few games where our game plan (and the way opposition teams played us) allowed us to have outside 50 shots at goal and Tex, Smith and Seeds looked like a massive weapon for us. That type of game seems to be in the past now. He is a good depth player, and I am surprised that Mackay has kept Seeds out. But we can't afford to have mid-coin guys like Mackay and Seeds in the team. Seeds would have some trade value, so I would like to see us proactively trade him out with time on his contract and then use the freed up salary to help nail down Matt Crouch or Sloane at the end of this year.

Hampton - I would keep. I think we go very short on depth if we lose him. Its such a key area and really he is next man up, or possibly finds himself in the 22 if everyone is fit. Really I see Hampton, Douglas and Greenwood fighting for 2 spots in our best 22. That seems to be ok. But if we do get an A-grade mid in like Rockliff, then I think it would be smart to think about whether we have one too many mid-range coin players there out of Hampton and Douglas. Douglas the better player (on last few months form), but Hampton with age on his side. Really, the right list management choice would be to keep both and then make a hard decision on Douglas who would be 32 in 2019. Hopefully Dougie would understand that he can only be offered a minimum AFL wage contract and stays as depth.

Otten - great depth player, but not worth paying mid-wage coin. If he can get another club to offer him that we should let him go. But if he can't then he would be a welcome depth player on a minimum AFL wage contract.

 

[Cromulent]

Ok misunderstood.

All good. I should have been a bit clearer..

 

[jackster83]

How many of these players who have switched clubs for big money have actually tasted premiership success?

Judd - no. Not even close.
Ablett - no. Not even close. Missed out on a flag by leaving.
Bock - no. Not even close.
Scully - no. Probably will soon though.
Ward - see above. Missed out on a flag by leaving.
Davis - see above
Mitch Clark - no.
Tippett - no, but got close.
Franklin - no, but got close. Missed out on a flag by leaving.
Goddard - no. Not even close.
Betts - no, but closer at his new club. Not sure he's in the same ballpark for $$$ as others on this list.
Tom Boyd - yes.
Treloar - no. Not even close.
Dixon - no, but closer at his new club.

 

[Shaz2012]

How many of these players who have switched clubs for big money have actually tasted premiership success?

Judd - no. Not even close.
Ablett - no. Not even close. Missed out on a flag by leaving.
Bock - no. Not even close.
Scully - no. Probably will soon though.
Ward - see above. Missed out on a flag by leaving.
Davis - see above
Mitch Clark - no.
Tippett - no, but got close.
Franklin - no, but got close. Missed out on a flag by leaving.
Goddard - no. Not even close.
Betts - no, but closer at his new club. Not sure he's in the same ballpark for $$$ as others on this list.
Tom Boyd - yes.
Treloar - no. Not even close.
Dixon - no, but closer at his new club.

So your not going to give Franklin any credit for the fact that the umpires robbed the shit out of Sydney and handed the Bulldogs the flag?

 

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

So why wouldn't we trade out these guys? Mid-range coin guys are going to affect our ability to re-sign our top 12 players. They provide very good depth, but if we can't hold on to the guys in the top 12 then depth is meaningless. I think Cheney is gone now that Doedee and Kelly have re-signed. The only scenario where you would keep him is if Lever was gone and our plan A was to play Doedee in his role. That seems a bit of a stretch for a zero gamer, but I can see that as being an option.

Menzel - I still think will offer us a lot, but if we hang on to Gov, then I dont see why we would bother with mid-coin depth here if it exposes us to losing top players.

Seeds - I have not been impressed really with what he has brought. There were a few games where our game plan (and the way opposition teams played us) allowed us to have outside 50 shots at goal and Tex, Smith and Seeds looked like a massive weapon for us. That type of game seems to be in the past now. He is a good depth player, and I am surprised that Mackay has kept Seeds out. But we can't afford to have mid-coin guys like Mackay and Seeds in the team. Seeds would have some trade value, so I would like to see us proactively trade him out with time on his contract and then use the freed up salary to help nail down Matt Crouch or Sloane at the end of this year.

Hampton - I would keep. I think we go very short on depth if we lose him. Its such a key area and really he is next man up, or possibly finds himself in the 22 if everyone is fit. Really I see Hampton, Douglas and Greenwood fighting for 2 spots in our best 22. That seems to be ok. But if we do get an A-grade mid in like Rockliff, then I think it would be smart to think about whether we have one too many mid-range coin players there out of Hampton and Douglas. Douglas the better player (on last few months form), but Hampton with age on his side. Really, the right list management choice would be to keep both and then make a hard decision on Douglas who would be 32 in 2019. Hopefully Dougie would understand that he can only be offered a minimum AFL wage contract and stays as depth.

Otten - great depth player, but not worth paying mid-wage coin. If he can get another club to offer him that we should let him go. But if he can't then he would be a welcome depth player on a minimum AFL wage contract.

The simple answer is you need some depth in case of injury.

Look at it this way. If we traded out Kelly last year because Cheney was locked in that spot who would have played that role at the start of the year when Doedee and Cheney were both injured? Would they have done anywhere near as well as Kelly?

 

[Shaz2012]

The simple answer is you need some depth in case of injury.

Look at it this way. If we traded out Kelly last year because Cheney was locked in that spot who would have played that role at the start of the year when Doedee and Cheney were both injured? Would they have done anywhere near as well as Kelly?

Difference is Kelly wasn't on mid-range coin.