Remove this Banner Ad

Strategy Aggressive reset

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Not that it matters anyway but StDwarfians and Bluws supporters must of cried that Dusty tr-signed.

Cashed Up Disruption Time again in full effect baby
 
czero said:
Seriously - Are you his dad or something. Benny is great, but no one re-negotiates an existing contract. We should extend his contract and give him a better deal, but just because we need to fill cap space does not mean we renegotiate 1 player who is already committed on our list.

This is just stupendously silly, removes options for the club on possible list improvement.
Click to expand...
What the hell are you on about - 'no one renegotiates an existing contract'?

Contracts are always renegotiated/extended/conditions changed to reflect new circumstances.

Would we rather contract some new average players from other clubs just to spend the salary cap minimum or would rather lock in the one player that we can build a forward line around who will be out of contract in 12 months?

BBB's salary next year (say $350k) gets built into the new contract - say 5 years at $4m. Rather than wait till next year which allows other clubs to start approaching his management the contract is renegotiated at 6 years at $4.350m now. This then allows us to heavily front load to meet cap minimums.

Talk about posters on other boards having no clue about commercial and business reality - we have enough of these posters on our own board!
 
Devington said:
Youth. If we got martin I would have been all for keeping Waite, Gibson, Goldstein, and Scooter and seeing just what we could achieve when we bring in TWO players that are better than our best.

But, we didn't get Martin, so that's that.

Next years draft for us is huge. The only remaining free agents this year are fairly meh. I would rather we move on a few older blokes, grab some young guns in the making if we can get them for cheap trades (think Ahern), and other than that look to increase our picks in next years draft.

Some more short term pain, continue changing our age profile, and getting games into our kids. Preferably with Preuss as our main ruck.
Click to expand...

+ 1
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Arthur Cloke said:
Exactly. Reminds me of when I visited The Pleasure Chest in Koh Samui when I was a grasshopper. I usually pay up front so that refusal is not an option, but the fine young lass behind the counter (God bless her sole), asks me, "Did you want to include ball-tracker for an extra $29?" She could see I was agog, and explained that they strap electrodes to your appendix so that your "ball-movement" can be tracked!!!! How could I say no? I couldn't. I didn't.
I gave her the $29 in cash and whinced in pain as I slammed it on the counter. She soon got it.
Click to expand...


giphy.gif
 
Snake_Baker said:
Pardon my french but when are people going to get it through their ******* heads that these blokes are contracted?

Do you want to pay out and ditch club stalwarts so we can speculate on pick ******* 76 and 94 in a pox draft?

It's stupid and its crass.
Click to expand...
I agree with you that neither of these guys should be given away, and also think they both have good footy left in them. However given their age profile and their position on the fringes of the 22, if an option came up where we could potentially upgrade our picks then I wouldn't be against trading either of them. For example if we could trade Spitta to Gold Coast- who desperately need a player of his calibre both on and off field- and in the process our pick 4 moves to pick 2, that would be a clear win win. Same goes for Goldy, of course we don't just give him away, but if we could upgrade our 2nd to a mid 1st pick and thus have access to the likes of Lochie O'Brien who perfectly fits our needs, then given Preuss' emergence id be strongly in favour of doing the deal. I love and appreciate all that those players have done for the club, but at the same time if a trade could help us get in more elite talent then I don't think any of these guys are untouchable.
 
There's two ways of achieving an "aggressive reset". There is the Clarkson model where he traded away players with currency, and retired veterans. Then went to the draft with their own picks, plus the ones from trades.

The other way is the Carlton way, chasing a superstar like Judd, but giving away draft picks and cap space for the player.

Whilst we have seen the end of Harvey, Petrie, Firrito, Dal Santo, Wells and now Hansen, we have a call to make on Thompson, Gibson and the contracted pair of Swallow and Thomas. Do we have any players with currency that we can trade for picks inside the top 20? Maybe Goldie, but he is contracted and someone needs to take over his salary. Thomas and Swallow aren't going to attract a decent draft selection.

Our picks are 4, 21, 44, 62, 76... Can we package 44 and a player for another pick in the top 20? Should we just rebuild the traditional way via the draft?
 
remfan101 said:
I agree with you that neither of these guys should be given away, and also think they both have good footy left in them. However given their age profile and their position on the fringes of the 22, if an option came up where we could potentially upgrade our picks then I wouldn't be against trading either of them. For example if we could trade Spitta to Gold Coast- who desperately need a player of his calibre both on and off field- and in the process our pick 4 moves to pick 2, that would be a clear win win. Same goes for Goldy, of course we don't just give him away, but if we could upgrade our 2nd to a mid 1st pick and thus have access to the likes of Lochie O'Brien who perfectly fits our needs, then given Preuss' emergence id be strongly in favour of doing the deal. I love and appreciate all that those players have done for the club, but at the same time if a trade could help us get in more elite talent then I don't think any of these guys are untouchable.
Click to expand...
Wonder what Collingwood did with that sub-100 pick we gave for Marley?
 
Firestarter said:
Wonder what Collingwood did with that sub-100 pick we gave for Marley?
Click to expand...

I have always held a belief that Marleys release was tied in to the Wells trade.

The Pies had a heap of young defenders they obviously deemed better and wanted to debut.

Their loss is our gain.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

This is part of the reason I am annoyed we re-signed Brad, he had a year on his contract we should have used that to assess whether an extension was deserved, I am not saying he should/should not be coach, I am saying we have dudded ourselves out of flexibility as we all know he wont get paid out. Facts are for a myriad of reasons our last year and a half has been very poor, hardly cause for re-signing.

I don't think having him on the last year on the contract shows instability, so to re sign him on the off chance it nets us a signing was foolish. If we end up with no-one it was a stupid unnecessary risk.

In terms of players it is imperative we inject some young quality. The fact that we have such a hole in our cap is partly good management but also an indicator of us having no premium quality.

Shopping list for me (2 maybe three of)

Kelly
Smith
Hopper
Whitfield
Lever
Rockliff


Stay away from
Motlop
Ablett
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Strategy Aggressive reset

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top