- Aug 24, 2009
- 1,907
- 6,652
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Well put.Carlton has matched contract duration and payments to player age and quality since Cook (and Voss) arrived.
Petracca's mooted money at Melbourne is way way over anything that Carlton is paying anyone based on the formula above.
So Petracca switching Clubs on same money terms as he is currently ( talked about earning) is the first consideration - and only a consideration based on the first assumption below which is an open question :
Will Petracca be able to play at the same standard he hs demonstrated previously at his best at Carlton for the duration of his contract - which in my opinion is a big ask of any player
The second consideration is does Petracca playing at his best and on significantly more money than ( eg Cripps or Curnow or McKay or in due course TDK or Walsh or Weitering) replace and significantly improve the team if one of the above quality players is traded out - because THAT is what the team portfolio question is
The third consideration is - would the team be more improved IF the hypothetical money spent on Petracca was spent in other areas?
The fourth consideration is if the cost of Petracca was not only money but also 'a' Harry McKay and also picks - would the cost to the team portfolio in terms of investment in the draft/trade be warranted?
Now put your feet in Melbourne's shoes
They have one of the best players in the competition who has been granted a very generous long term contract around which they thought they could build their between the arcs and forward fifty team. He is very unhappy. He is also coming back from what has been reported as being life threatening surgery. He will need time to get healthier and fitter and who knows how long that will take and he wants out and has stated it ( apparently) in front of all the player group and has made it clear he wont go anywhere except to a bigger Melbourne Club.
That reduces the options that Melbourne have as far as deal-making goes. That means for all their chest puffery - they wont want a player who doesn't want to be there ( aka Joe Daniher at Essendon) not being 100% committed and causing internal problems because of pay etc etc etc
The two obvious candidates for Petracca are Collingwood ( who dont have player or pick capital to throw around ) Carlton who have a theoretical player in McKay who has unequivocally stated GAGF about moving and Carlton having stated the same - and you have (potentially) Essendon - who will have picks and salary cap space and play in front of big crowds - but dont have a player that Melbourne want.
Melbourne are in a bad position - there is no need for Carlton to make its position as a team and Club worse by helping Melbourne where others ( Collingwood and Essendon) cant.
and I dont think Carlton can afford to throw money around as they did with Williams and McGovern.
Neither of whom would be of any interest to Melbourne.
Fascinating situation - Petracca might have to accept less if he wants out- a lot less and Melbourne will definitely have to accept less than their chest puffer media commentators are suggesting.
I'd like to see Petraca at Carlton as much as anyone else - but I also wouldn't give Melbourne anything except draft picks and players we dont want.
As for those who think giving up Harry for petracca and picks and whatever else Melbourne want and whatever Petracca wants - yeah naaa.
Trac is one of my fave non Blues players. But not for McKay (or other spine star players) and not for a salary well above our highest paid players. And not at the expense of jeopardizing our list plan and needs going forward (KPD, speedy mid, freaky forward
). If this happens, and I hope it can ‘cause he’d be amazing for us, has to happen on terms that fit our long term plan.And if not, we comfortably move on.





