Traded Tom Mitchell [traded to Hawthorn with pick 57 for pick 14 & 52]

[Roughies Boys]

We're going to be limited on the number of picks we take to the draft too, so I think deal is more appealing if we've found a way to turn 18 + 36 in to pick 9 or 10.

On the Gold Coast board they said pick 6, on-traded from Richmond, was fair. If Mitchell decides he wants to leave the Swans will shop him around for sure.

Possibly be 2017 1st Rounder.

 

[Maddo11]

Hawks salary cap won't be an issue. JOM wont be getting too much because of his run of injuries, where as they can back load Michells contract for when their current crop of mids are gone.

Getting deals done with trades will be the tricky part.

 

[TazHawk15]

It's amazing how p'ship success has suddenly given 70% of Hawks supporters a higher IQ giving them the ability to EXACTLY KNOW the ins & outs of their list management.

JOM & Tom Mitchell may very well want to play for Hawthorn next year, but now you have to not only come up with something to give Gold Coast for JOM, but find something to give the Swans for Tom Mitchell. You couldn't find anything for O'Keefe & that went well for you.

We've won a p'ship too in the last few years & that increased my IQ enough to know that the Swans won't deal with your club if the right thing doesn't come back our way! You trade players to improve your own position. You honestly think we will improve your team whilst at the same time weaken ours.

Now how in the heck are you going to find 2 high first round draft picks (let alone 3) to accommodate two players you rate so much that your club is prepared to pay them more than a group of players that are triple p'ship players? Pay cuts my arse!

Watch AFL 360 & have a listen to what Jordan Lewis said about new boys getting more money than loyal servants!

That's why we employ someone to get it done.

His name is not Graham Wrong.

 

[thePhoenix]

Sometimes the logic on Bigfoot is laughable. Mitchell wants out of swans due to a salary cap squeeze and then you have people suggesting they are going to want a gun replacement. And that top line player is going to play for peanuts.

 

[bungwahl]

Sometimes the logic on Bigfoot is laughable. Mitchell wants out of swans due to a salary cap squeeze and then you have people suggesting they are going to want a gun replacement. And that top line player is going to play for peanuts.

Mitchell's manager's most recent quotes said he's happy in Sydney and would prefer to stay, so "wants out" is wrong..

But where have you been? Most people have suggested Sydney want a decent draft pick. The idea of a player came around because Hawthorn are also going to be committed to the JOM deal which will chew up most of their trade currency. Sydney definitely won't take fringe players because they have no need for them. It'd be more likely the gun player goes to Gold Coast, freeing up trade currency to deal with Swans.

 

[Roughies Boys]

Mitchell's manager's most recent quotes said he's happy in Sydney and would prefer to stay, so "wants out" is wrong..

But where have you been? Most people have suggested Sydney want a decent draft pick. The idea of a player came around because Hawthorn are also going to be committed to the JOM deal which will chew up most of their trade currency. Sydney definitely won't take fringe players because they have no need for them. It'd be more likely the gun player goes to Gold Coast, freeing up trade currency to deal with Swans.

He's not gonna say he wants out prior to a finals campaign...

 

[bungwahl]

He's not gonna say he wants out prior to a finals campaign...

He wants to be well paid, as any footballer does. But the way some people are carrying on make it sound like he grew up a Hawks fan and has a burning desire to pull on the league's second ugliest guernsey so that he can finally live his dream.

 

[Slax]

Well Langford won't be traded for a pick so it's a pointless exercise discussing it.

Hawthorn have thrown his name about as part of a trade for Omeara, only problem is GC want Bruest if players get involved.

This deal will take time and given he is zero chance to slip through the PSD to Hawthorn they are going to have to deal.

 

[Slax]

Pretty sure the $380k rumour started on BigFooty...

Had heard rumour that it was closer to $300k and he is wanting $450-500k to stay.

Given the money spent on Buddy and Tippett, Swans have made a rod for their own back and can't use the loyalty and everyone has to take a cut for success line, because it is a lie.

He's always stated that his preference is to stay in Sydney but if the Swans can't come up with a decent offer then he'll walk, the problem for Sydney is that they can't come up with a better offer because they are already maxed out in the salary cap and looking at running close to the 105% limit next season.

 

[bombers21]

Had heard rumour that it was closer to $300k and he is wanting $450-500k to stay.

Given the money spent on Buddy and Tippett, Swans have made a rod for their own back and can't use the loyalty and everyone has to take a cut for success line, because it is a lie.

He's always stated that his preference is to stay in Sydney but if the Swans can't come up with a decent offer then he'll walk, the problem for Sydney is that they can't come up with a better offer because they are already maxed out in the salary cap and looking at running close to the 105% limit next season.

Mitchell deserves 500K minimum

 

[Furn2]

He's gone and will nominate Hawthorn as soon as the Swans are out.

There wont be any shopping around, he like every other player in the lat 12 years will go to the team of his choice for under.

 

[bungwahl]

Had heard rumour that it was closer to $300k and he is wanting $450-500k to stay.

Given the money spent on Buddy and Tippett, Swans have made a rod for their own back and can't use the loyalty and everyone has to take a cut for success line, because it is a lie.

He's always stated that his preference is to stay in Sydney but if the Swans can't come up with a decent offer then he'll walk, the problem for Sydney is that they can't come up with a better offer because they are already maxed out in the salary cap and looking at running close to the 105% limit next season.

$300k is average wage for the AFL and Mitchell is well above that. He had the Blues sniffing around before his last contract extension and the Swans were definitely paying him $400-450k. Then there was the uproar about paying a bloke $450k to dominate the NEAFL.

Wouldn't surprise me that the Swans would be unlikely to increase his salary too much, but there's no way they've offered him $100-150k pay cut.

 

[DapperJong]

I think he will stay.

 

[Steven Tyler]

He wants to be well paid, as any footballer does. But the way some people are carrying on make it sound like he grew up a Hawks fan and has a burning desire to pull on the league's second ugliest guernsey so that he can finally live his dream.

Who has the ugliest?

 

[HairyO]

Hawks salary cap won't be an issue. JOM wont be getting too much because of his run of injuries, where as they can back load Michells contract for when their current crop of mids are gone.

Getting deals done with trades will be the tricky part.

Yep, anyone coming in would be on okay money for 2017, then get a nice bump in 2018 when at least a couple of Hodge, Gibbo, Burgoyne and Mitchell have retired.

Mitchell deserves 500K minimum

I suspect he would get a little over that in future years.

I cant imagine O'Meara getting close to the $750k that is being talked about. That would make him the highest paid player at Hawthorn and he hasnt played a game in 2 years.

 

[citizen-erased]

Hawthorn have thrown his name about as part of a trade for Omeara, only problem is GC want Bruest if players get involved.

This deal will take time and given he is zero chance to slip through the PSD to Hawthorn they are going to have to deal.

I am looking forward to seeing how the Hawks play the Jaeger & Mitchell trades.

If last year is anything to go by, it might be in GCS' best interest to move early.
Cats traded their 2017 1st to Carlton for Henderson early on. Had they not, i have no doubt it would have been part of the Dangerfield deal.
Clubs can only give up what they have (see Ryder to Port) and if the player is that headstrong on getting there, it can end up costing you the best deal

Flipside is GCS could follow through on the threat of sending him to the PSD if they don't like the deal.

 

[bungwahl]

Who has the ugliest?

That's a good idea for a new thread...

 

[cdcanman]

He wants to be well paid, as any footballer does. But the way some people are carrying on make it sound like he grew up a Hawks fan and has a burning desire to pull on the league's second ugliest guernsey so that he can finally live his dream.

2nd? I'm pretty sure Hawthorn are the perennial champs of the Ugly Jumper Cup.

The trophy sits proudly in our trophy cabinet out at Waverley, has done since Fremantle retired their dashing purple, green and red number.
Do tell who has an uglier jumper than Hawthorn?

 

[Slax]

$300k is average wage for the AFL and Mitchell is well above that. He had the Blues sniffing around before his last contract extension and the Swans were definitely paying him $400-450k. Then there was the uproar about paying a bloke $450k to dominate the NEAFL.

Wouldn't surprise me that the Swans would be unlikely to increase his salary too much, but there's no way they've offered him $100-150k pay cut.

The new contract offer is definitely below $400k and is a reduction on his last one which is why he has taken the stance he has.

It is looking more and more likely he will leave, just where remains to be seen. Carlton are definitely still interested.

 

[bradburygold]

380k was reported to be swans max offer back page of herald sun, for people wondering where the "rumour" came from.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bungwahl]

The new contract offer is definitely below $400k and is a reduction on his last one which is why he has taken the stance he has.

It is looking more and more likely he will leave, just where remains to be seen. Carlton are definitely still interested.

380k was reported to be swans max offer back page of herald sun, for people wondering where the "rumour" came from.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do either of you have a reference? All I can find is random numbers all originating on BigFooty, or the "$380k" rumour which started on SEN.

 

[Slax]

I am looking forward to seeing how the Hawks play the Jaeger & Mitchell trades.

If last year is anything to go by, it might be in GCS' best interest to move early.
Cats traded their 2017 1st to Carlton for Henderson early on. Had they not, i have no doubt it would have been part of the Dangerfield deal.
Clubs can only give up what they have (see Ryder to Port) and if the player is that headstrong on getting there, it can end up costing you the best deal

Flipside is GCS could follow through on the threat of sending him to the PSD if they don't like the deal.

They will say that they will send him to the PSD publicly now, but come trade time a deal will be done, it just might take longer to get it done.

What it also means is that Hawthorn won't be able to move on Mitchell until they sort that out, which could mean they miss out on Mitchell completely

 

[citizen-erased]

They will say that they will send him to the PSD publicly now, but come trade time a deal will be done, it just might take longer to get it done.

What it also means is that Hawthorn won't be able to move on Mitchell until they sort that out, which could mean they miss out on Mitchell completely

or deal on Mitchell early. I don't know much about the Mitchell situation, and i doubt anyone will until after the finals.
But if he wants out and the hawks are offering him the contract he wants, the hawks could just put their offers on the table and let Sydney and GCS fight it out over who gets what

Striking me as very much like the Cats last year.
Selwood was an RFA, Vickery is an RFA
Danger & Henderson were the high rated players worth 1st round picks.
Cats dealt one to Carlton. Crows lost Danger for unders.

 

[butlers hawks]

Do either of you have a reference? All I can find is random numbers all originating on BigFooty, or the "$380k" rumour which started on SEN.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...d/news-story/9cdf5319bdad21924f2ea49b72097419

"Sydney has offered Mitchell a deal of only $380,000 a season — a pay cut on his current wage — which is likely to force him out of the club."

 

[bungwahl]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/a...d/news-story/9cdf5319bdad21924f2ea49b72097419

"Sydney has offered Mitchell a deal of only $380,000 a season — a pay cut on his current wage — which is likely to force him out of the club."

Ah, behind a pay wall so I can't view it.