Page 13 of 27 FirstFirst ... 39101112131415161723 ... LastLast
Results 145 to 156 of 313

Thread: 2020 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

  1. #145
    Reefer Madness
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    in a yellow submarine
    Posts
    1,459
    Blog Entries
    1
    Paps is a large margin ahead of the first four mentioned there and for all their promise, the two academy kids are unproven.

    I’m so pleased we held firm on him last year and hope we do so again.

    He’s very much top half dozen on our list.

  2. #146
    Quote Originally Posted by i'm-uninformed2 View Post
    Paps is a large margin ahead of the first four mentioned there and for all their promise, the two academy kids are unproven.

    I’m so pleased we held firm on him last year and hope we do so again.

    He’s very much top half dozen on our list.
    Too true. That's why we were insisting on someone of Daniher's ilk to replace him. And I hope so too.

    However, the point I'm making is that if the radically changed financial landscape affects salary caps and requires player contracts to be renegotiated, that may give Paps the opening he's been looking for to leave the club, whether we like it or not.

  3. #147
    Paps is a machine we dont want to let go of unless we received two significant picks minimum or a traded player 2 way or 3 way that is equivalent in team value that meets our needs
    "be tough, only when it gets tough"


  4. #148
    We need to keep Paps. If contracts get re-negotiated, he would have to be upgraded, even if the new financial climate dictates most cop a pay cut.

  5. #149
    I wholeheartedly agree that Paps needs to stay. He's one of our elite players. We can't let him walk unless we get adequate return. If he nominates the Blues again, then one of their elite players should make their way north, or a set of very handy picks. The Blues would surely baulk at letting Cripps or Walsh go. We should do the same with Tom.

  6. #150
    IMO, I don't think high profile contracted players will be changing clubs this year due to the extraordinary season (if we do get to complete one) and on top of AFL not approving any new contracts for the foreseeable future.

  7. #151
    I'm not sure if you all are understanding my point or not. Currently, Paps is contracted (for this season and another two). That is why last year when he wanted to go we were able to hold him against his wishes. However, potentially, if contracts are effectively voided so that they can be downgraded to lower value amounts due to the COVID-19 induced financial crisis (can this even happen? I'm not sure - legally probably not, commercially, maybe), players would not have to accept the renegotiated level (even if we offered the same or more than he is currently getting) and he would have more choice about whether he walks. The only thing we could then do might be to refuse an inadequate trade offer and force him to choose between taking our offer and going to the open draft (possibly with a price tag on his head designed to make him hard for anyone except the club of his preference to take him).

    Who knows whether this will happen. Nobody has much of a clue at this stage. But the point of my post is to speculate about (a) whether this might happen; and (b) whether he would go against our wishes if he gets the option. Nobody, certainly not I, is questioning his worth to the club. (Although no player is priceless.)
    All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated, and well supported in logic and argument than others. -Douglas Adams, author (11 Mar 1952-2001)

  8. #152
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,481
    Quote Originally Posted by bloodspirit View Post
    I'm not sure if you all are understanding my point or not. Currently, Paps is contracted (for this season and another two). That is why last year when he wanted to go we were able to hold him against his wishes. However, potentially, if contracts are effectively voided so that they can be downgraded to lower value amounts due to the COVID-19 induced financial crisis (can this even happen? I'm not sure - legally probably not, commercially, maybe), players would not have to accept the renegotiated level (even if we offered the same or more than he is currently getting) and he would have more choice about whether he walks. The only thing we could then do might be to refuse an inadequate trade offer and force him to choose between taking our offer and going to the open draft (possibly with a price tag on his head designed to make him hard for anyone except the club of his preference to take him).

    Who knows whether this will happen. Nobody has much of a clue at this stage. But the point of my post is to speculate about (a) whether this might happen; and (b) whether he would go against our wishes if he gets the option. Nobody, certainly not I, is questioning his worth to the club. (Although no player is priceless.)
    Are you a footy journo?

  9. #153
    Quote Originally Posted by Nico View Post
    Are you a footy journo?
    Yeah. I'm just looking for some quotes from a few of you "reliable" sources. It's not that easy reporting 'news' from my lounge room you know. Help a mate out. C'mon, Nico.

  10. #154
    Quote Originally Posted by bloodspirit View Post
    I'm not sure if you all are understanding my point or not. Currently, Paps is contracted (for this season and another two). That is why last year when he wanted to go we were able to hold him against his wishes. However, potentially, if contracts are effectively voided so that they can be downgraded to lower value amounts due to the COVID-19 induced financial crisis (can this even happen? I'm not sure - legally probably not, commercially, maybe), players would not have to accept the renegotiated level (even if we offered the same or more than he is currently getting) and he would have more choice about whether he walks. The only thing we could then do might be to refuse an inadequate trade offer and force him to choose between taking our offer and going to the open draft (possibly with a price tag on his head designed to make him hard for anyone except the club of his preference to take him).

    Who knows whether this will happen. Nobody has much of a clue at this stage. But the point of my post is to speculate about (a) whether this might happen; and (b) whether he would go against our wishes if he gets the option. Nobody, certainly not I, is questioning his worth to the club. (Although no player is priceless.)
    Quote Originally Posted by bloodspirit View Post
    I'm not sure if you all are understanding my point or not. Currently, Paps is contracted (for this season and another two). That is why last year when he wanted to go we were able to hold him against his wishes. However, potentially, if contracts are effectively voided so that they can be downgraded to lower value amounts due to the COVID-19 induced financial crisis (can this even happen? I'm not sure - legally probably not, commercially, maybe), players would not have to accept the renegotiated level (even if we offered the same or more than he is currently getting) and he would have more choice about whether he walks. The only thing we could then do might be to refuse an inadequate trade offer and force him to choose between taking our offer and going to the open draft (possibly with a price tag on his head designed to make him hard for anyone except the club of his preference to take him).

    Who knows whether this will happen. Nobody has much of a clue at this stage. But the point of my post is to speculate about (a) whether this might happen; and (b) whether he would go against our wishes if he gets the option. Nobody, certainly not I, is questioning his worth to the club. (Although no player is priceless.)
    That’s a very big can of worms to open, could not see that happening, would cause even more disarray to an already wobbly competition.

    And if it did it opens up just as many opportunities for us to go cherry picking from other clubs as well...


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  11. #155
    I guess, at this point, the talk seems to be of gradually shrinking the salary cap and it's unclear whether it will be necessary to renegotiate player contracts to achieve the reductions or whether they can be achieved just on basis of unallocated money. If it's the latter, it's going to suck for all the players out of contract because there will be way less money in the pool for their contracts whereas the guys who are at the beginning of a long, lucrative contract (e.g. Coniglio) will be sitting pretty. So the gradual, phased reductions in the salary cap tend to make me think they won't seek to void and renegotiate contracts but the unfairness that will produce tends to make me think they will do it, probably in collaboration with the AFLPA to produce fairer outcomes. But I really have no idea.
    All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated, and well supported in logic and argument than others. -Douglas Adams, author (11 Mar 1952-2001)

  12. #156
    Veterans List
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,481
    Quote Originally Posted by bloodspirit View Post
    Yeah. I'm just looking for some quotes from a few of you "reliable" sources. It's not that easy reporting 'news' from my lounge room you know. Help a mate out. C'mon, Nico.
    Sorry, can't reveal my sources.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO