Will Cale Hooker net Dons pick 2/3?

[ParapMarkets]

As several people have mentioned, he will have to be in the top 5% of money earners to be band 1 compo, that means only approx. 14 other players (not even 1 player per team) over 25 could be paid more than him for him to fetch band 1. When you look at the salary tables he would have to be on at least $800k for that to be the case.

Also, they take into account the players' age and since he is turning 28 this year that will also count against him. They also take into account the length of contract, he would need to be offered a 5 year deal (he would be 33 at the end of such a contract) As great a player that he is, teams won't be fronting with that type of contract for a key back. He will be band 2 compo (top 6-15% of players).

Using Frawley as an example is useless because they increased the requirements last year (as per Lueunberger being talked about as band 1 compo but only getting band 4).

 

[Axcellence]

I think another interesting element of the whole essendon player walking away deal is that how many compensation picks will be allowed before they are capped?

I am not saying that all 12 players will walk away from Essendon. But, let us suppose even Hurley walks away, and Fremantle get desperate enough to offer Hooker a 5 year front loaded deal (last couple years seen as a pension to sweeten the deal for ala Franklin). In that case, Essendon can end up with pick 1, 2 and 3. Pick 4 as well if Heppell walks away on a good deal(assuming he's allowed to break contract). I don't know how Carlton or other bottom 5 teams would feel about that?

 

[Linda Lovelace]

I think another interesting element of the whole essendon player walking away deal is that how many compensation picks will be allowed before they are capped?

I am not saying that all 12 players will walk away from Essendon. But, let us suppose even Hurley walks away, and Fremantle get desperate enough to offer Hooker a 5 year front loaded deal (last couple years seen as a pension to sweeten the deal for ala Franklin). In that case, Essendon can end up with pick 1, 2 and 3. Pick 4 as well if Heppell walks away on a good deal(assuming he's allowed to break contract). I don't know how Carlton or other bottom 5 teams would feel about that?

Heppell is future captain and will be offered more money than any other club could afford, he is not going anywhere. A couple more seem to be certified cult members. Another few, Watson, Stanton, Pears, and maybe Howlett/Hocking don't have any/many options. And with Carlisle gone, Goddard, Watson, Stanton and Cooney all being old and now possibly Hooker leaving, they will have truckloads of room left in the salary cap.

There is also the elephant in the room of Essendon, backed by the AFL, possibly being able to 'settle' with currently listed players (i.e unrestricted payments outside the salary cap) and using their continued employment at Essendon as leverage ('we will settle with you for $800,000 if you leave, 1.2 million if you stay'). If anyone thinks that's me being paranoid about the AFL's conduct, then they really haven't been paying attention.

 

[Axcellence]

Heppell is future captain and will be offered more money than any other club could afford, he is not going anywhere. A couple more seem to be certified cult members. Another few, Watson, Stanton, Pears, and maybe Howlett/Hocking don't have any/many options. And with Carlisle gone, Goddard, Watson, Stanton and Cooney all being old and now possibly Hooker leaving, they will have truckloads of room left in the salary cap.

There is also the elephant in the room of Essendon, backed by the AFL, possibly being able to 'settle' with currently listed players (i.e unrestricted payments outside the salary cap) and using their continued employment at Essendon as leverage ('we will settle with you for $800,000 if you leave, 1.2 million if you stay'). If anyone thinks that's me being paranoid about the AFL's conduct, then they really haven't been paying attention.

1 year is a long time. People can get spiteful. I am just raising a scenario. Who is to say Essendon does a reassessment and figures it will prefer the option of pick 1, 2 and 3 rather than get some of the 12 back.

 

[Linda Lovelace]

1 year is a long time. People can get spiteful. I am just raising a scenario. Who is to say Essendon does a reassessment and figures it will prefer the option of pick 1, 2 and 3 rather than get some of the 12 back.

Of course it's a possible scenario but I just don't see it personally. For whatever bizarre reason, some of these players seem to insist on being loyal to an entity that has shafted them, and there are the other reasons I mentioned too.

 

[Ambrosia]

The biggest worry of this is how the hell is he not in the top 25% at the club. You would be lucky to find 2 better players let alone 10!!!!

Essendon - the club that keeps on giving......

It's only for the year 2016 so it is possible we front loaded his contract like Frawley at the Dees plus there's a good chance Hooksy signed for unders. I don't see how this reflects poorly on Essendon at all.

 

[Ambrosia]

I think another interesting element of the whole essendon player walking away deal is that how many compensation picks will be allowed before they are capped?

I am not saying that all 12 players will walk away from Essendon. But, let us suppose even Hurley walks away, and Fremantle get desperate enough to offer Hooker a 5 year front loaded deal (last couple years seen as a pension to sweeten the deal for ala Franklin). In that case, Essendon can end up with pick 1, 2 and 3. Pick 4 as well if Heppell walks away on a good deal(assuming he's allowed to break contract). I don't know how Carlton or other bottom 5 teams would feel about that?

We aren't eligible for compensation picks on all the 12 banned players. If we lose a player as DFA then there would be no compensation. If the Essendon players hadn't been banned we still could lose Hooker as an UFA.

 

[HR Roughnstuf]

Has this actually been confirmed anywhere officially?

AFLPA informed the players and player managers after the CAS ruling.

This was reported a couple of days after.

 

[HR Roughnstuf]

This is the part I find amusing. For all the banging on about how the players knew what they were doing was wrong yada yada yada, everyone is real quick to turn around and say the innocent players were mislead by nasty Essendon when it comes around to leaving the club. So either the players knew what they were doing when they agreed to it and it wasn't a breach of contract, or they didn't know what they were doing and they were wrongfully banned. But I'll leave the forum to sort through their own cognitive dissonance.

Yep.

So why are the player being paid this year? It is ridiculous.

 

[ManWithNoName]

AFLPA informed the players and player managers after the CAS ruling.

This was reported a couple of days after.

So where has it been confirmed officially?

 

[HR Roughnstuf]

So where has it been confirmed officially?

I know its not Slobbo but:

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/afl/a/30566332/banned-bombers-can-walk-out-on-club/

 

[ManWithNoName]

I know its not Slobbo but:

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/afl/a/30566332/banned-bombers-can-walk-out-on-club/

I said officially. Not "The West Australian understands".

 

[citizen-erased]

I think another interesting element of the whole essendon player walking away deal is that how many compensation picks will be allowed before they are capped?

I am not saying that all 12 players will walk away from Essendon. But, let us suppose even Hurley walks away, and Fremantle get desperate enough to offer Hooker a 5 year front loaded deal (last couple years seen as a pension to sweeten the deal for ala Franklin). In that case, Essendon can end up with pick 1, 2 and 3. Pick 4 as well if Heppell walks away on a good deal(assuming he's allowed to break contract). I don't know how Carlton or other bottom 5 teams would feel about that?

Carlton should be fine as i still think they will finish below us this year

Should we lose 12 of our core players, if we don't get the picks in 1 draft this year, we are likely to get them in years to come from finishing in the bottom 2 for a decade while the list rebuilds.
If the AFL is true to the no further sanctions, we'll get compensation picks for those that leave as UFA's.
The ones that fall in the DFA category are harder to pick. Technically, we'd get nothing for them, but this isn't your normal DFA situation.

I think what would happen is we'd get comp picks for those who leave as UFA, and we'd trade for the ones who want to leave but still have a contract.

That said, i think most of the 12 come back.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/dockers-pursue-banned-bomber-hooker-20160229-gn6rkt.html

"Essendon's suspended players, as opposed to those at other clubs, are still being paid the terms of their contracts and so Hooker's status in the top 25 per cent of money-earners for this year will still most likely ensure he is regarded as a restricted free agent at the end of the year by the AFL's Ken Wood.

If Hooker were deemed a restricted free agent, Essendon would have the right to match any contract offer and so any movement would only occur with a trade not as a free agent.

If Hooker were to leave on a five-year deal – and consequently on a very large contract – he would be expected to draw a compensatory first-round draft pick – as Jake Carlisle did last year when he left for St Kilda."

Nothing about DFA's in there. Must be true.

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/afl/a/30566332/banned-bombers-can-walk-out-on-club/#pause

So all the player agents have been informed that any of their clients can leave as a DFA if they want to and there is no statement anywhere from anyone that's it's not correct.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

I said officially. Not "The West Australian understands".

In a revelation that threatens to further gut a shattered Essendon list, the AFL Players’ Association confirmed at a closed meeting yesterday that each of the dozen Bombers suspended by the Court of Arbitration for Sport was free to quit Essendon of their own will

 

[rusman]

https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/sport/afl/a/30566332/banned-bombers-can-walk-out-on-club/#pause

So all the player agents have been informed that any of their clients can leave as a DFA if they want to and there is no statement anywhere from anyone that's it's not correct.

You cannot say something is true because no one has made a statement negating every issue the media drums up..........
I am a 300 kg rock lobster. Do you believe me? ......There is no statement that it's not correct from anyone?

 

[rusman]

Fwiw players will be able to leave if they want, I just didn't like the comment.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

You cannot say something is true because no one has made a statement negating every issue the media drums up..........
I am a 300 kg rock lobster. Do you believe me? ......There is no statement that it's not correct from anyone?

You just blew a hole in your fellow Essendon fans argument. Sweet, thanks.

Did you read the bit where it stated that all the player agents involved have been informed that any of the Essendon 12 can leave as a dfa if they want to?

 

[Marc_Remillard]

Fwiw players will be able to leave if they want, I just didn't like the comment.

Read the post of was replying to, but your comment is nonsensical. There is no way that Essendon would allow this to be reported if it wasn't true. This is a major issue for Essendon, this isn't just yet another minor issue the media is running with. The player agents have been informed of the ruling.

 

[ManWithNoName]

In a revelation that threatens to further gut a shattered Essendon list, the AFL Players’ Association confirmed at a closed meeting yesterday that each of the dozen Bombers suspended by the Court of Arbitration for Sport was free to quit Essendon of their own will

Yes keep reading. There's no official statement. Just "The West Australian understands".

It could be true. Who knows. But my simple question was has it been officially confirmed yet? It appears no.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

Yes keep reading. There's no official statement. Just "The West Australian understands".

It could be true. Who knows. But my simple question was has it been officially confirmed yet? It appears no.

No, you didn't read it properly. The article stated that the player agents have been officially notified, you can't get any clearer than that.

Player agents were advised of the option by the AFLPA via teleconference yesterday.

There is no 'the West Australians understands...' or anything wishy washy about that line, it simply stated a fact that all of the player agents have been informed of the situation that they can leave as a dfa if they wish to.

However, imho unless there is a major communication breakdown between the players and Essendon and the club makes it difficult for anyone to leave then none of them will enforce it. I can't see this current Essendon leadership group to allow it to get to that point.

So my guess is that it won't happen anyway

 

[ManWithNoName]

No, you didn't read it properly. The article stated that the player agents have been officially notified, you can't get any clearer than that.

Player agents were advised of the option by the AFLPA via teleconference yesterday.

There is no 'the West Australians understands...' or anything wishy washy about that line, it simply stated a fact that all of the player agents have been informed of the situation that they can leave as a dfa if they wish to.

However, imho unless there is a major communication breakdown between the players and Essendon and the club makes it difficult for anyone to leave then none of them will enforce it. I can't see this current Essendon leadership group to allow it to get to that point.

So my guess is that it won't happen anyway

So why hasn't anyone reported it since that article? Why is that one article the only mention of it? If it was officially confirmed it'd be reported everywhere. And yet, it's not.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

So why hasn't anyone reported it since that article? Why is that one article the only mention of it? If it was officially confirmed it'd be reported everywhere. And yet, it's not.

I'm just guessing but probably because it's pretty much understood by everyone that none of the players are interested in taking the option up. I did find an article earlier that confirmed it. I'll see if I can find it again and link it.


Edit: Sorry, the article was from 2013 so not relevant

 

[ManWithNoName]

I'm just guessing but probably because it's pretty much understood by everyone that none of the players are interested in taking the option up. I did find an article earlier that confirmed it. I'll see if I can find it again and link it.


Edit: Sorry, the article was from 2013 so not relevant

If it was official and confirmed there's no way the Herald Sun wouldn't be pumping it up and mentioning it every chance they get.

 

[Marc_Remillard]

If it was official and confirmed there's no way the Herald Sun wouldn't be pumping it up and mentioning it every chance they get.

Perhaps, I do understand your point though.

Regardless, either way I don't think a player will take the option up