Recommitted Tom Papley [wanted to return to Victoria, nominated Carlton - didn't get there]

[mpal6]

Let’s see if the Bryce Gibbs scenario plays out in this one.

Pick 8 straight out is more than fair however Sos dosent work like that.

Well this is the first time the roles are reversed and Sydney is a well run club with good player management. Will be interesting to see how this pans out.

 

[Runk]

Seems a good fit for the Blues. Hope they get him and Sydney aren't screwed over as a result.

 

[Jeremias]

Well this is the first time the roles are reversed

Not really.

We traded for McGovern last year who had a further two years to run on his contract.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

If Papley wants to move back to Victoria because his partner has moved back there, surely the Swans won't be churlish enough to deny his request ?

They have every right to play hardball, but it's not like he is moving for money, he has strong family ties to The Bloods, but it is just his girlfriend has found a good job in Melbourne.

The Swans are a decent club run by decent people, I am sure they will strike a deal with Carlton.

 

[Blue__Balls]

You keep banging on about this:

"AFL.com.au understands the Swans intend to hold Papley, who is contracted until 2023, to his existing deal in the Harbour City."

Contracted Swans forward picks Blues over Roos

Tom Papley has told Sydney he wants to be traded to Carlton despite huge interest from North Melbourne

www.afl.com.au

Sam Edmund reporting there's a little more to the Papley contract stuff. Swans' option for additional 2 years (ie. to 2021), Papley's option for the 2 after that (to 2023).

I really can't see Sydney holding him to his contract, though it sounds like Tom is the kind of bloke who would knuckle down and keep performing and then reassess the trade situation in 12 months time if required. Question for Sydney is whether doing the trade now benefits their list strategy. Might be that trading now helps more - get Daniher, or get someone like Kemp/Flanders/McCasey/Stephens and start getting some development into them.

Might be that Papley's contribution is considered "necessary" while some kids are developing. Looking at Sydney's list though, I don't think a small forward/midfielder is something they need to put their foot down on. Florent, Hayward, Menzel, Ronke, Ling, Fox, Bell. They're not yet at the level of Papley, but it seems an area that can be suitably covered. Florent and Hayward in particular are exciting young prospects, and the others offer different profiles to balance out the forward line.

End of the day, Papley is contracted and Carlton will have to give overs. I think 8/9 is overs as it stands, but wouldn't be against giving up a little more in the way of a late pick swap or steak-knives player (someone like Macreadie who has a lot of tools as a mobile tall defender, but might benefit from moving to a club with a strong history of developing late picks). Could also see a scenario in which Sydney take that Pick 8/9 and give up Papley and a little something else, depending on what happens with Daniher.

Agresta worked with Kinnear for a long time, and SOS has shown he's willing to pony up a bit to get a player he wants. I think both sides come to the table in good faith and it'll just be about hashing out a trade that assists both sides with getting their other targets, or at the very least doesn't interfere with those deals.

 

[BOMBERS 4 LIFE!!!!]

You keep banging on about this:

"AFL.com.au understands the Swans intend to hold Papley, who is contracted until 2023, to his existing deal in the Harbour City."

Contracted Swans forward picks Blues over Roos

Tom Papley has told Sydney he wants to be traded to Carlton despite huge interest from North Melbourne

www.afl.com.au

The real question is here is North still can't land quality players hahha

 

[mpal6]

Not really.

We traded for McGovern last year who had a further two years to run on his contract.

That's why I added sydney is a well-run club with good player management. I believe Papley wouldn't sneeze at going back to them and playing another season, identical to Gibbs.

 

[Donstuie]

Always cracks me up how tough everyone talks this time of year, as if it will make any difference to the result.

Reality is that a deal is more likely to get done than not that will be fair to both parties, and if it isn’t the Swans keep a player and Carlton keeps a pick for the draft and/or another target. No one wins or loses and life goes on.

Anyway, back to chest-pumping and measuring manhood sizes.

 

[mpal6]

If Papley wants to move back to Victoria because his partner has moved back there, surely the Swans won't be churlish enough to deny his request ?

They have every right to play hardball, but it's not like he is moving for money, he has strong family ties to The Bloods, but it is just his girlfriend has found a good job in Melbourne.

The Swans are a decent club run by decent people, I am sure they will strike a deal with Carlton.

Put that in context of Sydney though. He is a premium small forward and it will leave a big hole in Sydney's developing forward line. Sydney will be worse off trading him so its perfectly reasonable for them to demand overs to facilitate this one.

 

[SSwans2011]

If Papley wants to move back to Victoria because his partner has moved back there, surely the Swans won't be churlish enough to deny his request ?

They have every right to play hardball, but it's not like he is moving for money, he has strong family ties to The Bloods, but it is just his girlfriend has found a good job in Melbourne.

The Swans are a decent club run by decent people, I am sure they will strike a deal with Carlton.

Err didn't the EXACT same thing initially happen with Gibbs?

 

[Jeremias]

That's why I added sydney is a well-run club with good player management. I believe Papley wouldn't sneeze at going back to them and playing another season, identical to Gibbs.

Yes, I agree.

Word out of the Papley camp is that if a deal can't be done he will return to the Swans, and probably try again next year, as we saw with Gibbs.

There will be robust discussion between the Swans and Blues, but both parties are professional, and the Swans are generally good to deal with, so I think ultimately a deal gets done this year.

It'll certainly help if Daniher does want to head to Sydney.

 

[teddies]

good opportunity to fleece Carlton for overs. They'll pay it if they really want him. Pick 9 and future 2nd for Papley and future 3rd.

 

[The Filth Wizard]

Gaff and Martin were the best players at their premiership winning clubs and chose to re-sign there on fairly similar coin.

This is an entirely different scenario. Even so, the figures that Browne is claiming are next-level, fantasy kind of stuff. At $900k, it would make Papley far and away the highest paid player at North. He's good and I'm sure the club rates him, but there's only so long that I can suspend my disbelief

You're trying to explain sense to somebody that subscribes to the gospel of Tom Browne.

Why man? Why?

 

[SSwans2011]

Sam Edmund reporting there's a little more to the Papley contract stuff. Swans' option for additional 2 years (ie. to 2021), Papley's option for the 2 after that (to 2023).

I really can't see Sydney holding him to his contract, though it sounds like Tom is the kind of bloke who would knuckle down and keep performing and then reassess the trade situation in 12 months time if required. Question for Sydney is whether doing the trade now benefits their list strategy. Might be that trading now helps more - get Daniher, or get someone like Kemp/Flanders/McCasey/Stephens and start getting some development into them.

Might be that Papley's contribution is considered "necessary" while some kids are developing. Looking at Sydney's list though, I don't think a small forward/midfielder is something they need to put their foot down on. Florent, Hayward, Menzel, Ronke, Ling, Fox, Bell. They're not yet at the level of Papley, but it seems an area that can be suitably covered. Florent and Hayward in particular are exciting young prospects, and the others offer different profiles to balance out the forward line.

End of the day, Papley is contracted and Carlton will have to give overs. I think 8/9 is overs as it stands, but wouldn't be against giving up a little more in the way of a late pick swap or steak-knives player (someone like Macreadie who has a lot of tools as a mobile tall defender, but might benefit from moving to a club with a strong history of developing late picks). Could also see a scenario in which Sydney take that Pick 8/9 and give up Papley and a little something else, depending on what happens with Daniher.

Agresta worked with Kinnear for a long time, and SOS has shown he's willing to pony up a bit to get a player he wants. I think both sides come to the table in good faith and it'll just be about hashing out a trade that assists both sides with getting their other targets, or at the very least doesn't interfere with those deals.

Good analysis - one of the better posts in the thread.

Although Florent and Bell are midfielders, Ling and Fox defenders, and Hayward and Menzel play more medium forward roles. Ronke is really the only replacement and his form this season wasn't great.

I think a lot will depend on how highly we rate Wicks who is next in line behind Ronke. I'm personally not confident enough yet that he'll make it. We'll see though.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

Err didn't the EXACT same thing initially happen with Gibbs?

Perhaps. Time will tell what eventuates. Although we certainly won't be giving up Weitering

 

[Blue__Balls]

Good analysis - one of the better posts in the thread.

Although Florent and Bell are midfielders, Ling and Fox defenders, and Hayward and Menzel play more medium forward roles. Ronke is really the only replacement and his form this season wasn't great.

I think a lot will depend on how highly we rate Wicks who is next in line behind Ronke. I'm personally not confident enough yet that he'll make it. We'll see though.

Seemed to me Papley was spending more time up the ground for the Swans this year, so I could certainly see a young outside mid or HBF being transitioned into his role, especially if those kids are struggling to crack the side in their "preferred" position.

There's also potential for someone like Parker to increase his time in the forward line if Heeney, Mills and Melican can start to shoulder more of the midfield load.

Thinking about it - even Blakey would be more than capable of playing Papley's role. He's bloody quick for his size, has good disposal and is cool under pressure. Won't have any problems applying pressure, and getting goalside of his opponent to get on the end of a fast break.

Long story short, plenty of options at the Swans, who have, to me, epitomised the "champion team > team of champions" approach. If the Blues are prepared to pay a fair price for Papley then someone else will be waiting to step up and do the job.

I think the "overs" goalposts get moved, which causes a lot of the disconnect between fans discussing trade cost. Papley is worth a pick in the teens. Papley with a contract (2 years, 4 years, makes little difference) is worth more than that. That's the "overs" component. Pick 8 or 9 is significant overs for a good forward pocket who can push up into the midfield. What happens though, is people start to agree that pick 8 or 9 would be necessary, and then others start to try and apply the "overs" argument again.

Mid teens - nope, needs to be overs.
Pick 8/9 - yep, that's fair.
Wait - fair isn't good enough, needs to be overs.

The pick we got from Adelaide will be 90% of the deal. Whether the other 10% favours Sydney or Carlton or neither may come down to what other deals both parties want to do, and what picks are required for them.

 

[Blues_Man]

Well this is the first time the roles are reversed and Sydney is a well run club with good player management. Will be interesting to see how this pans out.

When it pans out you will be keeping well away from this thread ..bookmark it

 

[SickQwon]

Lose Papley
Gain Daniher

That is a big win for the Swans you’d think

 

[SSwans2011]

Seemed to me Papley was spending more time up the ground for the Swans this year, so I could certainly see a young outside mid or HBF being transitioned into his role, especially if those kids are struggling to crack the side in their "preferred" position.

There's also potential for someone like Parker to increase his time in the forward line if Heeney, Mills and Melican can start to shoulder more of the midfield load.

Thinking about it - even Blakey would be more than capable of playing Papley's role. He's bloody quick for his size, has good disposal and is cool under pressure. Won't have any problems applying pressure, and getting goalside of his opponent to get on the end of a fast break.

Long story short, plenty of options at the Swans, who have, to me, epitomised the "champion team > team of champions" approach. If the Blues are prepared to pay a fair price for Papley then someone else will be waiting to step up and do the job.

I think the "overs" goalposts get moved, which causes a lot of the disconnect between fans discussing trade cost. Papley is worth a pick in the teens. Papley with a contract (2 years, 4 years, makes little difference) is worth more than that. That's the "overs" component. Pick 8 or 9 is significant overs for a good forward pocket who can push up into the midfield. What happens though, is people start to agree that pick 8 or 9 would be necessary, and then others start to try and apply the "overs" argument again.

Mid teens - nope, needs to be overs.
Pick 8/9 - yep, that's fair.
Wait - fair isn't good enough, needs to be overs.

The pick we got from Adelaide will be 90% of the deal. Whether the other 10% favours Sydney or Carlton or neither may come down to what other deals both parties want to do, and what picks are required for them.

Papley spent about 90% of his time forward with very small midfield bursts. Blakey is too tall for that role and will transition to a role where he spends more time in the midfield.

Parker isn't a small forward. He's way too slow to be. Melican is a KPD and will probably play in the NEAFL next year. Most definitely not a midfielder.

Ronke and Wicks are our only realistic Papley replacements.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Seemed to me Papley was spending more time up the ground for the Swans this year, so I could certainly see a young outside mid or HBF being transitioned into his role, especially if those kids are struggling to crack the side in their "preferred" position.

There's also potential for someone like Parker to increase his time in the forward line if Heeney, Mills and Melican can start to shoulder more of the midfield load.

Thinking about it - even Blakey would be more than capable of playing Papley's role. He's bloody quick for his size, has good disposal and is cool under pressure. Won't have any problems applying pressure, and getting goalside of his opponent to get on the end of a fast break.

Long story short, plenty of options at the Swans, who have, to me, epitomised the "champion team > team of champions" approach. If the Blues are prepared to pay a fair price for Papley then someone else will be waiting to step up and do the job.

I think the "overs" goalposts get moved, which causes a lot of the disconnect between fans discussing trade cost. Papley is worth a pick in the teens. Papley with a contract (2 years, 4 years, makes little difference) is worth more than that. That's the "overs" component. Pick 8 or 9 is significant overs for a good forward pocket who can push up into the midfield. What happens though, is people start to agree that pick 8 or 9 would be necessary, and then others start to try and apply the "overs" argument again.

Mid teens - nope, needs to be overs.
Pick 8/9 - yep, that's fair.
Wait - fair isn't good enough, needs to be overs.

The pick we got from Adelaide will be 90% of the deal. Whether the other 10% favours Sydney or Carlton or neither may come down to what other deals both parties want to do, and what picks are required for them.

He's probably worth just the one 1st rounder. Certainly worth that but not much more I wouldn't have thought.

Where we non-Carlton people laugh is when blokes like the one above start talking about not being churlish after the Bryce Gibbs episode.

 

[SSwans2011]

He's probably worth just the one 1st rounder. Certainly worth that but not much more I wouldn't have thought.

Where we non-Carlton people laugh is when blokes like the one above start talking about not being churlish after the Bryce Gibbs episode.

Exactly. Not to mention holding a bloke to a 4 year contract isn't being churlish.

Expecting another club to roll over and give up a bloke on a 4 year contract on the other hand...

 

[Mr_Plow]

Sydney doesn't need to let Blues win. They can look after their own interests and ask for a ransom in my view. As the link provided earlier shows its contracted up to 2023, so if Blues want him that badly they can pay up.

I believe the 2023 option is based on Papley agreeing to it. It is essentially an optional trigger.

He is thus contracted until 2021.

 

[Juddernaut08]

When it pans out you will be keeping well away from this thread ..bookmark it

lol

 

[Blue__Balls]

He's probably worth just the one 1st rounder. Certainly worth that but not much more I wouldn't have thought.

Where we non-Carlton people laugh is when blokes like the one above start talking about not being churlish after the Bryce Gibbs episode.

Haven't followed the conversation closely enough to know what this is in reference to.

For what it's worth, I think the Gibbs situation was a little different. We got ourselves in a position where we were very light on for senior bodies and mature leaders - Gibbs value to us that first year was greater than his on-field stats and as such we demanded a premium price. His contribution to the club couldn't be replaced with a draftee or 2nd/3rd year player "stepping up", and our profile in the trading market made replacing him via trade nigh impossible as nobody of that caliber wanted to jump on board.

Papley is part of the Swans leadership group, too, but I don't believe he's as critical to the club's fortunes as Gibbs was to us. That's down to the strength of Sydney's culture and their current place in the life-cycle of a club. You've got leaders, you've got talented kids, you've got a strong development program, and your list management has been well-organised for a long while. You're in a position where trading out one young leader won't rock the boat too much.

Different situations and circumstances.

Also. Adelaide. Arrogant without reason, they deserved to have terms dictated to them.

As I said though, I think both clubs come to the table this year looking to make a favourable deal. And that doesn't have to be one in which one side wins and the other loses, I think both clubs stand to benefit out of a Papley-centric trade.

What do you guys see as Sydney's biggest area of need as it stands?

 

[Monkey King]

Err didn't the EXACT same thing initially happen with Gibbs?

Similar, not exact. Gibbs’ wife hadn’t moved anywhere. He was one of a handful of senior players Carlton had planned their rebuild around and signed a straight up long term contract, no clauses, which had already been front loaded before he requested the trade. He also informed the club quite late, whereas this move seems to have been on the boil for a while now.

Carlton have done really well to attract a quality player in an direct area of need, now they’ll have to pay up. Hopefully a deal is done that satisfies everyone.