List Mgmt. Collingwood Trade Talk 2015

[Baird]

How much money is band 1 compensation. 600k?

 

[Madagascar]

How much money is band 1 compensation. 600k?

I'd like to know that, but I think the AFL keep it secret and make the rules up as they go along.

 

[doodles98]

Because the rule is the next pick after the pick in the band that is determined for the players contract.

It isnt Buddy vs Kruz. It is Buddy was Band 1, so Hawks go the first pick after their first round pick. Bad luck for them, it happened to be pick 19.

Carlton however are in a great position, because the pick after their first round pick will be... pick 2.

Kruezer won't be in the buddy contract band though would he.

 

[doodles98]

Kreuzer to Collingwood = Daisy to Carlton

If band 1 compensation is even a remote consideration that tells you all you need to know because someone is going to be overpaying by some way for that situation to occur.

We then have Kreuzer in terms of a list fit which is a poor one because we need speed, skill and KP ability. None of which is something he offers.

We need to stay well clear of that mess!

But he gives us an immediate upgrade on Witts in terms of current ability and we then get a draft pick 16 to 30 for Witts. All we have to do is find the money! How is this not good for our window if it's 2017/18?

 

[morelli89]

Well Frawley got band 1 with around $550k for 4 years, so it's completely a possibility that Carltank will get band 1 for Kruezer. That shouldn't but that's how it works currently

 

[MeisterBot]

But he gives us an immediate upgrade on Witts in terms of current ability and we then get a draft pick 16 to 30 for Witts. All we have to do is find the money! How is this not good for our window if it's 2017/18?

So basically we're spending 500k+ a year on backup/competition for Grundy?

 

[doodles98]

I can see that you honestly don't know how FA works, and who exactly does. If the Hawks had pick one, and the Swans paid $10M or whatever it was, they'd have gotten band 1 and received pick 2 as compensation.

If we offer Kreuzer a $600,000 contract, it might push it to band 1, and they get pick 2 as compensation as a result. I'd like to think we could get him, and the Blues get the compensation that would be about right, which would be pick 20. I think if that is the compensation they get, they would match the offer and force us to give something to get him.

I don't think we will get Kreuzer now. I think we should keep Witts.

Yes you're right I don't really know how it works..only vaguely kinda. But even if they do get pick 2... I think we are the winners in this scenario so who cares what they get. We are supposed to be coming back into contention in the next few years so it fits our timeframe really well. Also if this is the pick Carlton get out of Kruezer then they'd want it wouldn't they? so it's realistic for us. I'm not saying Kruezer is any world beater but he is pretty decent and in his prime. He enhances our list short term and lets us trade out Witts.

 

[doodles98]

So basically we're spending 500k+ a year on backup/competition for Grundy?

I think our preference is for 2 rucks actually. It just hasn't worked out yet with Witts. We're spending 500K a year on a good player in his prime and an early second round pick. I'll repeat.. in this scenario.. our ruck immediate and short term stocks are enhanced and we get a high draft pick to trade with or draft with...With so many good players on the table this year we need to do something like this!

 

[Baird]

I don't think Kreuzer will leave Carlton, seems like a genuinely good clubman who isn't completely driven by money

 

[BEEG]

We won't get him but Yarran with his pace and kicking would be a great get its a shame because he wouldn't cost a huge amount either

24 years old could see him becoming a Burgoyne type player

 

[Madagascar]

Yes you're right I don't really know how it works..only vaguely kinda. But even if they do get pick 2... I think we are the winners in this scenario so who cares what they get. We are supposed to be coming back into contention in the next few years so it fits our timeframe really well. Also if this is the pick Carlton get out of Kruezer then they'd want it wouldn't they? so it's realistic for us. I'm not saying Kruezer is any world beater but he is pretty decent and in his prime. He enhances our list short term and lets us trade out Witts.

The other problem I have is that, if we can gauge bigfooty posters value of Witts, he's now worth pick in the twenties or thirties. If these guys are right, which I don't think they are, then we should keep Witts, who we would be grossly undervaluing. And lets not forget, two rucks will come into fashion when the sub rule is gone next year too.

 

[TradeDraft]

I don't think Kreuzer will leave Carlton, seems like a genuinely good clubman who isn't completely driven by money

Agree but Word is that Blues don’t have much money left

 

[BEEG]

Agree but Word is that Blues don’t have much money left

Lol how who are the paying where did you hear this?

 

[TradeDraft]

Lol how who are the paying where did you hear this?

Heard it on EB&W

 

[Quicky]

I would be very surprised if we hadn't inquired after McCarthy. The reality of prying him from GWS is a different beast, I would be surprised if we could satisfy their needs.

It seems to be some posturing from us. We let him know we value and rate him and if circumstances change in the future that may play in our favour if we make a play for him. We have done similar with Adams in the past, and reportedly Treloar currently.

Fwiw Number10 is not a full of shit poster. So when he says there has been talk about him I believe him.

 

[ottoman]

Lol how who are the paying where did you hear this?

Every club must pay a minimum of 95% of their salary cap. So even if a club is full of spuds all the money still has to be spent

 

[BEEG]

I honestly would rather Vickery over Kruz

 

[BEEG]

Every club must pay a minimum of 95% of their salary cap. So even if a club is full of spuds all the money still has to be spent

I know this but no way they would be having cap issues

 

[ottoman]

I know this but no way they would be having cap issues

I guess that all depends on how the contracts have been structured.
Plus this is Carlton we are talking about. They have shown a very good ability to be incompetent

 

[doodles98]

The other problem I have is that, if we can gauge bigfooty posters value of Witts, he's now worth pick in the twenties or thirties. If these guys are right, which I don't think they are, then we should keep Witts, who we would be grossly undervaluing. And lets not forget, two rucks will come into fashion when the sub rule is gone next year too.

Agree that we should keep him if we get any less than say pick 23. It is only worth doing if we get Kruezer as a free agent anyway. No point in trading Witts out and then having to draft in a project ruck 5 years away or give up more picks to get some established b grader. Good point about 2 rucks being more in vogue without the sub rule too

 

[CFC2010]

We won't get him but Yarran with his pace and kicking would be a great get its a shame because he wouldn't cost a huge amount either

24 years old could see him becoming a Burgoyne type player

No ticker BEEG.......... do not want.

I agree we need a bit more pace but he is not the answer.

Please no players from the filth EVER!

 

[PicaBoo]

No ticker BEEG.......... do not want.

I agree we need a bit more pace but he is not the answer.

Please no players from the filth EVER!

Not even Cripps?

 

[MeisterBot]

I still wonder if we can pinch Mitch Harvey off Port somehow. Rendell's nephew, big frame, can ruck, leads well, beautiful set shot, right age for our list profile. Apparently he struggles for fitness and that's why he doesn't get games but he'd be great to plonk at full forward. He's behind John Butcher and Paul Stewart in the pecking order, so won't cost a whole lot. I doubt Port would be willing to let him go though.

I think our preference is for 2 rucks actually. It just hasn't worked out yet with Witts. We're spending 500K a year on a good player in his prime and an early second round pick. I'll repeat.. in this scenario.. our ruck immediate and short term stocks are enhanced and we get a high draft pick to trade with or draft with...With so many good players on the table this year we need to do something like this!

Kreuzer is no good as a forward, he's #1 ruck or nothing. Also, he's ridiculously injury prone, as bad as Reid. We'd be wasting our money with that kind of move. Giles at Essendon would provide similar output for a much lower price if we really wanted a ruck/fwd. Honestly, I think we ought to be done chopping and changing players for the moment. I don't even want to see Seedsman and/or Oxley moved to Queensland for Aish. I think Aish, while good, brings a little sameness when we have Broomhead and Sidebottom. With Keeffe, Thomas, Young and Armstrong, we already meet the requirements for list changes.

Besides that, Treloar builds up our midfield stocks, but our key need after that isn't a ruck/forward. Even if Witts doesn't work in the team, White, Moore and Cox can all play games next year. It's a strong key position forward we need to partner with Moore for the next 10 years, followed by a speed demon outside player along the lines of Stephen Hill, with our third need being a livewire crumbing small forward that can apply real pressure ala Charlie Cameron.

Kennedy might fulfill the last role, but he needs to replace Blair ASAP and stop playing inside midfield full time in the VFL.

 

[ottoman]

As soon as the final siren sounds in the GWS match tomorrow, I want Treloar to come out and make his intentions known.

Am I expecting too much?

 

[PicaBoo]

Uh oh, season might get even better... Can anyone please verify that latest post from "TheScout" on EBNW ???