List Mgmt. Trade and F/A - Part 3

[nahnah]

No idea why we didn't sign Galucci or Jetta

Gallucci ruptured his Achilles in June, it's a 12month injury so we'd be recruiting him for 2022. With smaller lists can't see many teams being willing to do that

 

[KnowsBeers]

Gallucci ruptured his Achilles in June, it's a 12month injury so we'd be recruiting him for 2022. With smaller lists can't see many teams being willing to do that

Ahhh I see, had no idea he did that

 

[No SPIN]

This.

So many are all too willing to believe any rumour and innuendo about him that's negative, because it's easier to move forward from that.

But the absolutely obvious reason we traded him, that our cap was f'd and he was an easy pick to justify to the playing group because he wasn't widely popular...? No. He was a disruption. He pissed in someone's cup. We would have traded him (for nothing) anyway. Please.

Was he a saint? Probably not.

But would we have kept him, or held onto him with a view to trading him later from a position of strength, if our cap wasn't f'd? Of course we would have.

Even if he pissed in a bloke's cup, which I doubt, we still wouldn't have done what we did if we hadn't backed ourselves into a corner. That's a disgusting act, sure, but he was a 19 year old kid. 19 year olds often do stupid things. Strong clubs back in their systems to turn things around. Hell, so did we when we were a stronger club - keeping players who have beaten blokes senseless, recruiting blokes fresh out of jail, backing in players far less talented than JS who failed drug tests and then holding them on the list through their multi year drug bans, keeping blokes "asleep in the back seat" while bikies are shooting.... the list goes on.

Hawthorn wouldn't have traded him.

It's not enough to look at this simply from the perspective of why he was the one we chose to trade when we had to trade someone, without factoring in the far more important issue which is that we were forced to trade players (ultimately one was him) at all due to nothing but gross mismanagement.

If we isn’t a “problem child”, why didn’t any other club chase him?

We persisted with JDG and Sier despite their transgressions, so I think Stevo was obviously unreformable.
Our Cap was not so tight that he needed to be traded.
As other posters have suggested, a replacement would cost $200 K so a $300k saving was not going to make much difference to keep a potential gun.

 

[sr36]

I do think though that we need to change our pay structure. We seemed to have a focus on trying to keep the group together to the enth degree whereas Richmond are fine with letting their role players go.

For instance if we’d lost the likes of JT, Phillips and Cox across 17-19 then I’m certain Stephenson is the only “loss” in the recent trade period and we may even have been able to acquire someone. Honestly there’s about 10-15 mistakes we’ve made in this area so it’s hard to pick apart entirely other than to say they at least finally got to the right solution.

I would have been disappointed at the time if we lost Langers and Elliott, but in retrospect we probably shouldn't have been haggling with them either. Offer a pay packet and if they want more - trade them.

 

[jackcass]

How the fu** is that being negative? Can you explain that?

Also it's obvious a 1st year draftee isn't going to play 25 games for us next year and we'll know that, and I don't know why you brought up 2nd year draftees who are irrelevant to the discussion.

If we didn't re-sign Lynch then we would've just picked up another draftee to replace him?

What do you not understand about Stevo being on half a million per year and our salary cap being completely f’ed?

Do you even read what you write before you hit the “post reply” button?

 

[Kappa]

Do you even read what you write before you hit the “post reply” button?

Explain how that concept is objectively negative you Muppet.

Once again, do you understand Stephenson was on around 500k and our salary cap was way over? Yes or no?

 

[jackcass]

Explain how that concept is objectively negative you Muppet.

Once again, do you understand Stephenson was on around 500k and our salary cap was way over? Yes or no?

We’ve lost Stevo, Treloar, Phillips, Scharenberg, Varcoe, Reid, Appleby, Wills, Broomhead, Beams (although his payout will be paid in 2021), Langdon (who knows what his payout deal is), Dunn, and Bosenavulagi. All to be replaced by draftees. Only a muppet would presume we hadn’t already cleared enough cap space with those outs to enable us to retain any 1 of Phillips, Treloar, or Stevo if we wanted to. They were very specifically targeted exits.

 

[Boris the Contradiction]

If we isn’t a “problem child”, why didn’t any other club chase him?

We persisted with JDG and Sier despite their transgressions, so I think Stevo was obviously unreformable.
Our Cap was not so tight that he needed to be traded.
As other posters have suggested, a replacement would cost $200 K so a $300k saving was not going to make much difference to keep a potential gun.

Because of the timing (or the lack thereof).
He wasn't courted for 10 months, giving list managers time to sort things out internally to fit him into a structure.

He is a highly paid player who was flicked at the last minute, after most clubs had sorted out their salary structure.

List management requires management, and recruitment of highly paid players requires planning, particularly when you are not allowed to be far under the cap. Wriggle room is limited.

To say that if it wasn't a behavioral issue, why weren't other clubs interested, completely dismisses the reality that clubs are operating within a salary cap structure.

JDG and Sier are bad examples to hold up as well. JDG, despite his transgressions, is very well liked and is popular within the group, unlike JS. He is also a top 5 player at the club and probably our most marketable asset (and Buckley loves him). Sier wouldn't have attracted the interest necessary to get another club to take on a big contract to clear cap space. Chalk and cheese.

 

[No SPIN]

Because of the timing (or the lack thereof).
He wasn't courted for 10 months, giving list managers time to sort things out internally to fit him into a structure.

He is a highly paid player who was flicked at the last minute, after most clubs had sorted out their salary structure.

List management requires management, and recruitment of highly paid players requires planning, particularly when you are not allowed to be far under the cap. Wriggle room is limited.

To say that if it wasn't a behavioral issue, why weren't other clubs interested, completely dismisses the reality that clubs are operating within a salary cap structure.

JDG and Sier are bad examples to hold up as well. JDG, despite his transgressions, is very well liked and is popular within the group, unlike JS. He is also a top 5 player at the club and probably our most marketable asset (and Buckley loves him). Sier wouldn't have attracted the interest necessary to get another club to take on a big contract to clear cap space. Chalk and cheese.

The deal may have been done at the LAST moment, but clubs knew he was on the market well before their lists were settled.
So the lack of interest is telling.
And again I make the point that the incremental difference in Cap cost between Stevo staying and going was about $300k. Which is not substantial enough to suggest freeing up cap space was the prime motivation for trading him.

 

[soreplums]

We’ve lost Stevo, Treloar, Phillips, Scharenberg, Varcoe, Reid, Appleby, Wills, Broomhead, Beams (although his payout will be paid in 2021), Langdon (who knows what his payout deal is), Dunn, and Bosenavulagi. All to be replaced by draftees. Only a muppet would presume we hadn’t already cleared enough cap space with those outs to enable us to retain any 1 of Phillips, Treloar, or Stevo if we wanted to. They were very specifically targeted exits.

Targeted yes.
Probably didn’t want to pay Stevo and Phillips to play most of 2021 in the twos and thought that our remuneration would have been better.

Treloar I think is multifaceted:

1. Concern over living away from his family and being able to perform
2. Tempted for pick 5 and directly replace him with Holland’s or Phillips
3. Cap relief to chase FA’s next year.

 

[Boris the Contradiction]

The deal may have been done at the LAST moment, but clubs knew he was on the market well before their lists were settled.
So the lack of interest is telling.
And again I make the point that the incremental difference in Cap cost between Stevo staying and going was about $300k. Which is not substantial enough to suggest freeing up cap space was the prime motivation for trading him.

What makes you think that?

All the reporting on this has been that he was told after the trade period opened to pursue a trade. Half the reason the club was criticised is that the news was dropped on him that the club wanted rid at the last minute, and that the club, not having initiated trade talks with other clubs, asked him to sort out the trade himself through his management.

All the information available in the public domain is that even JS himself didn't know until after the trade period started that he was on the trade table.

As I said, that's way too late for most clubs to plan to have him in their structure. It's not surprising that the club that got him have been stockpiling cap space for years to land a big fish without success. They were the only club ready to pivot it seems.

 

[neilk]

Port are considering rookie listing Tyson Goldsack.

 

[Apex36]

Port are considering rookie listing Tyson Goldsack.

Why on earth would they list a 34 year old utility who hasn’t played at the level for 2 years?

 

[HFF]

What is going on with Goldsack?
Has to be an off fields role involved with this i would have thought as much as "on field"

 

[neilk]

Why on earth would they list a 34 year old utility who hasn’t played at the level for 2 years?

Agree, they may as well have kept The Hoff on the list.

 

[Shade]

Port are considering rookie listing Tyson Goldsack.

Very very bizarre

 

[johncitizen]

Very very bizarre

Embarrassing on Tyson to even consider this. If true

 

[Kappa]

Other than the ridiculously low prices we got in trade, I don't have an issue with the decision to trade. Everyone wants us to load up when we're in the window. We all thought we were in the window, so they loaded up. Time to pay off the credit card. I still think we're in a good position in terms of players.

We paid ridiculous overs to get them in, then sold them for ridiculous unders. We will be paying off the credit card for a LONG time, both in terms of paying opposition salary caps, and in terms of the 7 first round draft picks we've spent for close to zero return. That is going to be felt big time in the next few years because our kids are a mile behind other teams.

 

[sr36]

We paid ridiculous overs to get them in, then sold them for ridiculous unders. We will be paying off the credit card for a LONG time, both in terms of paying opposition salary caps, and in terms of the 7 first round draft picks we've spent for close to zero return. That is going to be felt big time in the next few years because our kids are a mile behind other teams.

So dramatic. We may have paid slight overs for Treloar. I personally think that he was worth the price, we didn't fully develop him, but still would have ended up justifying the price with his career at the Pies if we had have kept him. We didn't pay overs for Stepho. We certainly didn't pay overs for Phillips..

 

[Kappa]

So dramatic. We may have paid slight overs for Treloar. I personally think that he was worth the price, we didn't fully develop him, but still would have ended up justifying the price with his career at the Pies if we had have kept him. We didn't pay overs for Stepho. We certainly didn't pay overs for Phillips..

I'm talking about the players we traded in, in terms of the price we paid and contracts.

If you think Treloar was worth 2 first rounders you must not watch him often.

And the less said about the Beams trade the better, will go down as one of the worst trades in AFL history. 4 year deal and 2 first rounders for a 30 year old ticking time bomb. Brilliant.

 

[Scodog10]

I would have been disappointed at the time if we lost Langers and Elliott, but in retrospect we probably shouldn't have been haggling with them either. Offer a pay packet and if they want more - trade them.

Heart before head it’s understandable, but you can’t keep them all and not expect the outcome we had. Although the one I was always keen on prioritising was Elliott because he was always going to come good once he got pre-seasons under his belt and the compensation would have been poor.

 

[mike123]

Why on earth would they list a 34 year old utility who hasn’t played at the level for 2 years?

Does he have an off field role with them? Maybe it’s to dodge the soft cap

 

[Apex36]

Heart before head it’s understandable, but you can’t keep them all and not expect the outcome we had. Although the one I was always keen on prioritising was Elliott because he was always going to come good once he got pre-seasons under his belt and the compensation would have been poor.

From what’s been reported, Elliott ended up stating for quite a bit less than what Brisbane were offering too, which was circa $550k. If he’s on $400-450k then it’s not an unreasonable contract anyway for what he’s capable of when utilised correctly (ie. not in the midfield )

 

[Kappa]

From what’s been reported, Elliott ended up stating for quite a bit less than what Brisbane were offering too, which was circa $550k. If he’s on $400-450k then it’s not an unreasonable contract anyway for what he’s capable of when utilised correctly (ie. not in the midfield )

With all due respect to Elliot, even 550k is ridiculous overs for the player he will be over the next few years, he's slowing down quickly and his dodgy back/hamstrings probably won't hold up well past 30.

 

[Apex36]

With all due respect to Elliot, even 550k is ridiculous overs for the player he will be over the next few years, he's slowing down quickly and his dodgy back/hamstrings probably won't hold up well past 30.

Didn’t see anything wrong with his speed this year and he had no injuries despite the heavy schedule. $550k is overs though, so I guess it’s lucky we’re not paying him that.