PDA

View Full Version : Darren Gasper


wrennyboy
27 May 2004, 10:10
Hi Guys.

Im a tiger supporter and am feeling pretty ordinary at the moment after i just read this article that i will post below. It says that we are going to record a loss, And 7 players will be asked to leave. So this means that we are gonig to be very aggressive come trade time. Darren Gasper will be heading back west.

The question is would you guys let darren play for you and if you would what would you give up do you think?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE transformation of the Richmond Football Club, which began yesterday with the sacking of club chief executive Ian Campbell, will lead to the axing of coach Danny Frawley and most of his football department at the end of the season.

Following the Tigers' 78-point thrashing by Port Adelaide last weekend, their fifth loss in the first nine rounds, director of football Greg Miller is expected to be one of the few survivors at Punt Road.

The retention of Miller could have a dual purpose should Richmond attempt to lure Carlton coach Denis Pagan away from Optus Oval, where he is in the second year of a three-year contract.

Miller was the chief executive of the Kangaroos when Pagan was coach and the pair were the major instigators of the club's 1996 and 1999 premierships.

Richmond's overhaul began yesterday with Campbell's axing after little more than 12 months in the position.

The Tigers are believed to have already earmarked Campbell's successor. President Clinton Casey will act in an interim role, as he did in 2002-03, before the new appointment is made official.

With five wins from his past 23 games, the Richmond board has lost patience with Frawley and most of his support staff.

It is believed at least seven players will be also told to leave, including high-profile full-back Darren Gaspar, who is under contract until the end of 2006.

Gaspar, who has struggled for form since a knee reconstruction last year, could be enticed back to Perth with West Coast yesterday confirming it would bid for his services at a reduced price.

For the past 16 months, at the insistence of Casey, Richmond has put most of its financial resources into a football department which has not achieved required results.

Campbell has left Punt Road after presiding over financial losses in consecutive years and a boardroom crisis this year in which three directors resigned.

"It was probably a mutual thing," Casey said yesterday. "We have got a heavy business plan moving forward which requires a special skill-set. It is an enormous task and Ian thought it best he move on, and we agreed to that."

Casey said he had canvassed sponsors and the AFL executive about a replacement. "The CEO's position is very intricate; you only have to look at the turnover to realise how tough it is," he said.

"We will find the person to fast-track us back into the black. We know the sort of person required and I don't expect it to be months before he is in place.

"In a funny way, it's a perfect time. Membership is all but done, sponsorship locked down and now we focus on next year's figures.

"When you make senior appointments, you don't like to make mistakes. It can hurt you, and this one hasn't worked out."

Richmond's most recent profit – slightly more than $300,000 – was in 2002 under chief executive Mark Brayshaw.

After an operating loss of more than $1.2 million in 2003, the Tigers are heading for a loss this year of anywhere between $1m and $2m.

Campbell informed his board before Christmas last year he expected a worst-case scenario of a break-even situation in 2004.

In March this year, Richmond's cash flow problem was so severe it sought an AFL redirection order for the first time.

The league put a $4m redirection facility in place at the ANZ Bank a month ago, allowing players to be paid on time in April.

The AFL guaranteed Richmond via its $4.08m annual dividend to all clubs.

It is understood the AFL is worried that Richmond has only enough cash to operate for another two months, before additional revenue is needed for the Tigers to trade beyond July.

Casey, who said yesterday he still had a personal guarantee of $1.6m over Richmond's debt, also said the Tigers were yet to fully activate the $4m bank redirection.

Richmond sources yesterday said Campbell's problems were his inability to generate revenue and a dismal failing to meet budget forecasts.

The Tigers' 2004 revenue is more than $1m down on budget despite a 15 per cent increase in membership from last year to 27,100 so far this season.

Richmond posted an official loss last year of $882,000, but that was flattered by a $400,000 donation from the Jack Dyer Foundation, established for capital works, but used as income for accounting purposes.

http://foxsports.news.com.au/story/0,8659,9671083-23211,00.html

Thrawn666
27 May 2004, 10:17
After watching Darren Gaspar play post knee-recon, I dont think we'd want him.

He has lost his acceleration which allowed him to keep up with opposition forwards. Although Glass and Lynch are nowhere near Gaspar at his best, the fact that they can both run a lot better would have me go for them over Gaspar at the moment.

Otherwise if we did get him, it would be as simple as Gaspar being dragged back to the goalsquare and his opponent leading for the easy avenue to goal.

bunsen burner
27 May 2004, 10:25
He's 28 and had one or two knee reco's. He's not worth too much. It would have to be a heavily discounted price and his wage bill would have to be reduced. I'm sure we'd be interested in Zantuck or Ottens though.

wrennyboy
27 May 2004, 10:48
Well zantuck is an interesting one because if he keeps up that bad attitude i think we will trade him. So if you got him and gasper what would you offer us?

bunsen burner
27 May 2004, 10:57
What's with Zantuck's attitude? I know he has a 'too cool for school' look about him, but is there more to it?

I think the Eagles will consider trading Wirrapunda, Morrison, Rowan Jones, Jeremy Humm etc.

wrennyboy
27 May 2004, 11:21
Zantuck has been given a few warnings about him out being late and doing bad things.

I think that if he does go west he will go to west coast because of family connections.

A guy on the Fremantle Board said that they would probably offer a 1st rounder and a 2nd tier player so who would that be?

ComicStoreGuy
27 May 2004, 11:23
Originally posted by wrennyboy
A guy on the Fremantle Board said that they would probably offer a 1st rounder and a 2nd tier player so who would that be?

You're joking right?

bunsen burner
27 May 2004, 11:36
Originally posted by wrennyboy

A guy on the Fremantle Board said that they would probably offer a 1st rounder and a 2nd tier player so who would that be? Zantuck is not quite worth a first round pick. early second round pick but without an extra player. He's not quite the complete KPP like a McPharlin or Polak. He'd be worth a j'Lo or Wirrapunda at best.

coasting
27 May 2004, 11:46
Zantuck is a 188cm utility. I don't think we would be knocking down the door to get this guy. I think we could take a punt on Gaspar but not more than a 2nd round pick and/or a player. He would probably only give 2-3 years service at best and we are in rebuilding mode.

Kenny_01
27 May 2004, 12:36
There's no way we'd offer a 1st rd pick for Gaspar, let alone a 1st round pick and a player.

Why on earth would we want him?

Our defence is one thing we have going for us, all of our defenders are young and attacking... why would we trade for an overpriced, old, injury prone defender that at his best is great defensively (probably safe to say he won't reach his best again either), but provides nothing going the other way?

No thanks.

At this stage of his career, he is a poor man's Darren Glass.

bunsen burner
27 May 2004, 13:20
Fremantle would be mad to even consider Gaspar. They have McPharlin, Hadrill, Polak, and Parker. Fremantle just don't need him.

bunsen burner
27 May 2004, 13:27
Originally posted by coasting
Zantuck is a 188cm utility. I don't think we would be knocking down the door to get this guy.

- 188 cm is tall enough to be a KPP
- He's 22 and has ability and potential
- Established KPPs are scare and therefore too expensive
- Some KPPs have one or two great seasons and then are crap (ie Hay)
- The trick to trading for a KPP is to find one that is a) undervalued, and b) has further potential.
- Mal Michael anyone?


I'm not saying we should go all out for this player, but the facts are that we have two players who are unknown quantities in our backline who often get beaten. To win a flag, you need at least one top rung CHB or FB. Zantuck has shown more potential than Lynch and maybe even Glass.

coasting
27 May 2004, 13:52
Originally posted by bunsen burner
- 188 cm is tall enough to be a KPP

Depends on who he lines up against. He would fill the same roll as Adam Hunter as I see it. No point having both so trade Hunter to get him.

Originally posted by bunsen burner
- He's 22 and has ability and potential

And attitude problems, why do you think they would consider trading him?

Originally posted by bunsen burner
- Established KPPs are scare and therefore too expensive

No arguments there

Originally posted by bunsen burner
- Some KPPs have one or two great seasons and then are crap (ie Hay)
- The trick to trading for a KPP is to find one that is a) undervalued, and b) has further potential.
- Mal Michael anyone?

I'm not saying we should go all out for this player, but the facts are that we have two players who are unknown quantities in our backline who often get beaten. To win a flag, you need at least one top rung CHB or FB. Zantuck has shown more potential than Lynch and maybe even Glass.

He hasn't shown more than Glass. He has shown more than Lynch but is a small upgrade worth the risk? I think Lynch can make it. I also wouldn't call Hay crap, I would take him over Zantuck anyday and there are whispers that he may be available at the end of the year.

bunsen burner
27 May 2004, 14:16
Originally posted by coasting
Depends on who he lines up against. He would fill the same roll as Adam Hunter as I see it. No point having both so trade Hunter to get him.No point in even mentioning Hunter. Richmond wouldn't be able to control their laughter.


And attitude problems,This would have to be investigated


why do you think they would consider trading him?Everyone has a price.


He hasn't shown more than Glass. I didn't necessarily say he did. But Glass gets the towel on a regular basis.

btw I rate Glass's potential


He has shown more than Lynch but is a small upgrade worth the risk? You're not getting my point.

You have to trade for a KPP that you speculate will be a top rung defender within a few years. Polak etc is too obvious and herefore too expensive. Of course we don't know, but I rate Zantuck much more likely to be an elite defender than Lynch or Hunter.

I also wouldn't call Hay crap, I would take him over Zantuck anyday and there are whispers that he may be available at the end of the year.
- How many good seasons has Hay had?
- When was the last time he had a good season?
- How many major injuries has he had?

He'd have to come quite cheap for the risk to be worth it.

Mr Q
27 May 2004, 14:47
I doubt that Gaspar's market value would be too high. I'd be interesting in taking a punt if what Richmond asked in trade was low and we didn't have to pay an exorbitant amount to get him on board (ie Richmond pay a substantial part of his salary).

sabre_ac
27 May 2004, 15:14
Freo have Coughlan squarely in their sights.
Gasper is not required.

Mark Viduka
27 May 2004, 15:55
Originally posted by wrennyboy
A guy on the Fremantle Board said that they would probably offer a 1st rounder and a 2nd tier player so who would that be?

HAHA Wasn't Gerard Neesham was it? :D

Mark Viduka
27 May 2004, 15:56
Originally posted by sabre_ac
Freo have Coughlan squarely in their sights.
Gasper is not required.

What are they going to pay him with? bottletops? or have they forgotten about the salary cap over Freo way.... especially when Pavlich and Haselby are being given 1.2mill contracts.

coasting
27 May 2004, 16:25
I doubt Coughlin is going anywhere. Even if he did want to come back home I doubt Richmond would trade him.

Mr Q
27 May 2004, 17:50
Originally posted by sabre_ac
Freo have Coughlan squarely in their sights.
Gasper is not required.

Yes, yes, yes. Somehow I doubt that you've got even a remote chance of getting Coughlan out of Richmond short of offering someone like Schammer or Haddrill with picks. You know, the sort of player you're not going to offer.

Richmond might be trying to do a clean out perhaps, but they won't be getting rid of someone like Coughlan who's one of their few shining lights.

wrennyboy
27 May 2004, 17:53
I rate haddrill i would love him at richmond but dun wanan give up cogs.

Mead
27 May 2004, 18:07
I'd certainly look at Gaspar- he's worth a punt, but not much- might have some good seasons in him and take a bit of the pressure of Glass for now- the only way you'll ever get a quality FB for a reasonable price is by going after them before they've done anything, or by picking a decent one up when he's in poor form and coming off a knee injury.

Chad Morrison for Gaspar straight swap, and if Richmond don't bite, well no great loss.

tiger of old
27 May 2004, 21:23
Originally posted by Mead

Chad Morrison for Gaspar straight swap, and if Richmond don't bite, well no great loss. funny you should say that mead.im a bit of a fan of morrison,s and his knee problems of the past has ruined what could have been a very promising career into one of uncertainty for him.
he has the build that we need just not sure if we can afford to take the risk or not with him.
a bit like you guys with gasper i guess.

good luck on sat.by the way.

cheers!

andrew_embley
27 May 2004, 21:30
Gaspar HAS to be worth the punt. Obviously not for a big valued priced but certainly for something we have. The defence is young and what do ppl say about what Daniel Chick offers. Experience to a young side!!! (among various other things, although we are yet to see most of these!)

I'm sure a deal could be easily done. We have a lot of Victorians on our list and I'm sure Richmond wouldn't mind someone we have!

After getting Rid of Holland last year they have shown they are not afraid to trade name players!

Mead
27 May 2004, 21:32
Originally posted by tiger of old
funny you should say that mead.im a bit of a fan of morrison,s and his knee problems of the past has ruined what could have been a very promising career into one of uncertainty for him.
he has the build that we need just not sure if we can afford to take the risk or not with him.
a bit like you guys with gasper i guess.

good luck on sat.by the way.

cheers!

Exactly- two guys who have struggled after recos, both would be a bit of a gamble but a decent fit if they came good- makes sense to send them home.

Really looking forward to this weekend, to see Gaspar pushing around Gaspar :)

wrennyboy
27 May 2004, 22:43
Chad Morrison for Gaspar straight swap, and if Richmond don't bite, well no great loss.

Na i think gasper offers a bit more i wouldnt accept that and we have plenty of midfielders already. But i would take chick

daddy_4_eyes
27 May 2004, 23:23
Originally posted by sabre_ac
Freo have Coughlan squarely in their sights.
Gasper is not required.

Coughlan has just signed a new contract with Richmond. According to AFL rules introduced last year, he can't be traded for the first 12 months of a new contract (unless I've got my wires crossed, but I'm quite sure on that).


At the moment, I think the eagles are more desperate for tall forwards rather than tall defenders, so I dunno how eager the eagles would be to get Gasper. Ottens would be an incredible pick up, though I doubt he'd be up for trade or that he'd want to come over West.

Gasper would be nice though, on a small salary and at a cheap trade price only though.

coasting
27 May 2004, 23:31
Originally posted by sabre_ac
Freo have Coughlan squarely in their sights.

Another sabre_ac gem.

zero
28 May 2004, 02:25
Originally posted by Mark Viduka
What are they going to pay him with? bottletops? or have they forgotten about the salary cap over Freo way.... especially when Pavlich and Haselby are being given 1.2mill contracts.
salary cap is at freo is fine, that overpaid hack croad is gone and farmer has resigned on a much cheaper salary. freo are looking to trade this year, and they are looking for a top line player.

the eagles are in the same boat, they still have peter materas salary and now jakovichs to throw around too.

zero
28 May 2004, 02:29
Originally posted by coasting
Another sabre_ac gem.
hey dont think the eagles werent eyeing up coughlan before his resigning. he would have looked great in blue and gold

jod23
28 May 2004, 04:11
Im not sure Gaspar would be worth the trouble. He is 28 now and has dodgy knees. Sure we lack KPP's but IMO if he was in the side he would only be played as a third tall with Glass getting the job at FB and Lynch at CHB.

Although he would give us something as a third tall. So I wouldnt be too annoyed if we did go after him, but it would have to be at a very reduced price. He simply isnt worth what he once was.

Hodge_is_God
28 May 2004, 11:41
Originally posted by zero
salary cap is at freo is fine, that overpaid hack croad is gone and farmer has resigned on a much cheaper salary. freo are looking to trade this year, and they are looking for a top line player.

Uh...you do realise that you're still paying 200k of Croad 350k contract this year and next? :o



Originally posted by bunsen burner

- How many good seasons has Hay had?
- When was the last time he had a good season?
- How many major injuries has he had?

He'd have to come quite cheap for the risk to be worth it.

Hay's last decent season? That would be last year... Actually, aside from 2002 (no pre-season) and his knee this year he has been injury free and one of the top four or five performed full backs of the comp.

Hay for cheap? Please...AA Full backs in the prime of their careers don't grow on trees and you're hardly at an oversupply at the moment.


As for Zantuck being KP, what drugs are you on?

bunsen burner
28 May 2004, 11:53
Originally posted by Hodge_is_God

Hay's last decent season? That would be last year... Actually, aside from 2002 (no pre-season) and his knee this year he has been injury free and one of the top four or five performed full backs of the comp.

Hay for cheap? Please...AA Full backs in the prime of their careers don't grow on trees and you're hardly at an oversupply at the moment.
Err, what drugs are you on?

Hodge_is_God
28 May 2004, 13:13
Originally posted by bunsen burner
Err, what drugs are you on?

Brilliant retort...