List Mgmt. 2025 List Management discussion

[Captain Paddy]

St.Kilda fans 2012- July 2025:

"We really need to land a big fish midfielder... we have all the cap space in the world just pay massive overs for someone to land a big fish"

St.Kilda fans July 2025 - forever:

"Nas might be a top 5 player in the comp... but we shouldn't over pay to keep him... Other clubs are willing to pay $2m a year but we shouldn't over pay to keep star players at the club."

 

[akaifu]

It seemed pretty reasonable at the time. It definitely had some logic. I never saw Nas becoming the star that he has and I thought guys like Sinn, Chesser and Hobbs all looked like they were really high level players. Hindsight makes calls like this seem moronic but it wasn't stupid at the time. He was a known flight risk so Toce had huge nads to take him.

That's because you actually watched the kids. Gerard hadn't watched any footage. He was purely guessing at the time and having a go at the club

 

[Yawkey way]

Nas and his manager are taking a big risk imo if he signs on for 2 years. His value will never be higher but he runs the risk of serious injury or just a dip in form. We’ve all seen players have a great run of games, even a couple of years that were nether repeated. We should be doing everything we can to make sure he understands that a longer contract with an option is protecting him more than it protects us.

 

[gringo2011]

That's because you actually watched the kids. Gerard hadn't watched any footage. He was purely guessing at the time and having a go at the club

To be fair he's always paid for a membership for him and his family. On all the members jumpers and lists his name is always on them with others in his family. I reckon he might have grown up a Saint and still has an investment in us. I find him hard to listen to on radio but I'm guessing he might be more invested than he seems.

 

[stavro#4]

I reckon you need to take this place way, way less seriously.

If a joke about you and SOS riles you up THAT much, you need to re asses priorities.

Anyway, ill leave you be.

I’ve hardly taken this place seriously or gotten riled up.

That doesn’t mean I’m going to bother responding, especially when I’m writing insults about you in return.

 

[littlecreatures]

Nas and his manager are taking a big risk imo if he signs on for 2 years. His value will never be higher but he runs the risk of serious injury or just a dip in form. We’ve all seen players have a great run of games, even a couple of years that were nether repeated. We should be doing everything we can to make sure he understands that a longer contract with an option is protecting him more than it protects us.

This I agree with, which is why I think our best chance is to blow Adelaide and Port out the water with 2 year deal with triggers for 3-5 years. Hutchy’s absolutely right in his assessment I reckon.

Potentially deal could look like 1.7m (2026), 1.85 (2027), 2m (2028 - subject to trigger and player agreement), 2.15m (2029 - subject to trigger and player agreement), 2.3m (2030 - subject to trigger and player agreement) then add incentives predominantly in early years.

 

[From 45]

Building your cap up to use your 105% is to acquire new talent - which in our case means paying overs.

The purpose isn’t just to throw everything at Nas. It defeats the purpose about getting better.

It’s also used to retain your current players not just acquiring new talent.

If as you said previously that we have enough cap space to acquire 2 x players and pay NAS all in the same year, then there’s nothing to really discuss is there?

 

[stavro#4]

We are literally using that money to bring in B graders who might still have potential.

So we are using the cap space to try and get better?

 

[Gavinmitchell11]

His camp should do us all a solid and just say there will be no announcements until after the season.

 

[stavro#4]

It’s also used to retain your current players not just acquiring new talent.

If as you said previously that we have enough cap space to acquire 2 x players and pay NAS all in the same year, then there’s nothing to really discuss is there?

And in 2 years time after you have paid him $2m+ like you want and you no longer have the advantage of your 105% - how are you proposing we start making this work when Nas’s agent says he wants his client on an further increase?

 

[gringo2011]

His camp should do us all a solid and just say there will be no announcements until after the season.

I can't go on living with the stress for any longer. That would be torture.

 

[Sully111]

Its well known you have to overpay to prise players out of their clubs.
Add to that the St Kilda tax because "not destination club" etc.

BIG difference now is we have the $$$ to spend right now.
I have no doubt that Tdk ( whether the 1.7 is correct or not) would be getting it majorly front-loaded over 2/3 years when we don't have to have as much cap available, as our up and comers - Pou, Windy, Hall, Owens etc are not demanding huge contracts now.
When they are, in 3, 4, 5 years, Tdk will just be on "ordinary" dollars.

I understand what you're saying.

I think throwing that money around affects the players' thinking when signing a new contract now though.

Regardless, Nas will cost what he costs. We need to keep him. I'd much rather lose TDK.

 

[Diehard Saint]

Respectfully, ive answered this question a few times.

In any event id rather have that problem to solve than just let him walk now.

Where do we find the money to keep them too?

When did you answer this? Not being funny - I've never seen it.
You can't solve a problem of being over the salary cap unless you cheat, or you let other good players go.
You, and everyone else on here will be correctly calling for the sacking of the player management team in that event.

Of course, I want him to stay - but you have to keep an eye on a future longer than 2 years ahead.

 

[ThomasR]

I agree with this, but devils advocate...

we give him $2 mill for 2 years...and he decides to stay.
Absolutely brilliant BUT he'll want an increase (or his manager will) and what does that do for our salary cap and players like Pou, Hall, Windy, Owens etc who will be demanding more at the end of their 2027 contracts?
(OK Pou's is apparently longer, but you get my drift)

Where do we find the money to keep them too?

I think the middle ground here is to offer Nas a $1.5m contract for 8 years, but structure it as a 2-year deal with a 6-year option that has a $1m bonus if exercised

numbers are obviously very rough and simplified but something of that nature

if (and only if) he decides to stay, then he gets his $4m over 2

if he decides to leave, he will still have been paid above what the SA clubs are offering (on average)

hopefully this would provide him enough financial incentive to stay for 2 years, and a carrot to extend further, without stuffing our cap by paying him $4m over 2 and having him leave

a lot of senior players will be coming off the books after 2027 so we should be able to make it work

 

[jwikked]

His camp should do us all a solid and just say there will be no announcements until after the season.

That’ll just make things worse lmao

 

[Diehard Saint]

I think the middle ground here is to offer Nas a $1.5m contract for 8 years, but structure it as a 2-year deal with a 6-year option that has a $1m bonus if exercised

numbers are obviously very rough and simplified but something of that nature

if (and only if) he decides to stay, then he gets his $4m over 2

if he decides to leave, he will still have been paid above what the SA clubs are offering (on average)

hopefully this would provide him enough financial incentive to stay for 2 years, and a carrot to extend further, without stuffing our cap by paying him $4m over 2 and having him leave

a lot of senior players will be coming off the books after 2027 so we should be able to make it work

From what has been mentioned before, the club have offered him many different deals - 2, 4, 6 years whatever and also structured with options for extension etc etc.

I have no doubt they are trying everything they can.
And hopefully, he and his manager come to the party.

And HOPEFULLY they do it bloody soon because this board is a tinder box.

 

[CaptainRisky]

Thats all reasonable, but the optics of paying TDK 1.7m are what make us look foolish. I understand you have to pay out of contract players more, but $600k+ more? For somebody not that good, who also doesn't fill a huge need.

It's stupid. Now everybody wants to stick there hand out and get overs, because we are putting forth a deal that is 60% above market rate.

I will wait until I see where the chips fall before I go full melt. Maybe the club has it all under control. Mabye....

See unlike a lot on here , I'm not melting either way as i see no point ,

I can't go on living with the stress for any longer. That would be torture.

The only way you wouldn't post

 

[phantom13]

Where do we find the money to keep them too?

When did you answer this? Not being funny - I've never seen it.
You can't solve a problem of being over the salary cap unless you cheat, or you let other good players go.
You, and everyone else on here will be correctly calling for the sacking of the player management team in that event.

Of course, I want him to stay - but you have to keep an eye on a future longer than 2 years ahead.

We dont know what the cap situation would be to be fair so its pure speculation. TDK might be more balanced, others might be on longer deals with less money etc etc.

My answer was as follows.

If were contending at that point and hes happy youd be asking him to take a longer deal on less money per year (which is really what were doing now). Hes 2 years older and understands the system more, hes happier at the club and in Melbourne, you have more avenues to sell him on staying that just money.

If were still shit then he likely wants to leave and honestly we should be doing a full gut and rebuild and let him go, knowing the trade options will be much better and the current "rebuild" has failed.

We would need to assess where we are at by then and make a decision about what we can afford to pay him but if were contending and we cant afford him we can likely at least try to stay in contention by asking for ready made players who fill a need, if were not then load up on picks.

Either way its better than losing him now.

 

[Obss]

Hearing if Butters is out then Hawthorn is in the box seat. Not an offical ITK so take it as a grain of salt. Wish we would scoop in and take him and keep Nas

 

[Diehard Saint]

We dont know what the cap situation would be to be fair so its pure speculation. TDK might be more balanced, others might be on longer deals with less money etc etc.

My answer was as follows.

If were contending at that point and hes happy youd be asking him to take a longer deal on less money per year (which is really what were doing now). Hes 2 years older and understands the system more, hes happier at the club and in Melbourne, you have more avenues to sell him on staying that just money.

If were still shit then he likely wants to leave and honestly we should be doing a full gut and rebuild and let him go, knowing the trade options will be much better and the current "rebuild" has failed.

We would need to assess where we are at by then and make a decision about what we can afford to pay him but if were contending and we cant afford him we can likely at least try to stay in contention by asking for ready made players who fill a need, if were not then load up on picks.

Either way its better than losing him now.

Your last line absolutely. Definitely have him for 2 with the hope we can convince him to stay than give him up right now.

The bold - just not sure when a player has ever taken a pay cut - and especially not one with a manager with the initial BW.
Its a very romantic idea that'd he'd do it out of love for club etc.

Either way, I'm just about done with all this. Just wish he'd decide and put us out of our misery.

 

[moirae42]

Cant wait till he signs on for 6 years at a little over 11 mil for the duration.

"Was never going anywhere.."

Bongo Thursday.

 

[beside the seaside]

It's gonna be a long August

 

[saintbill]

Hearing if Butters is out then Hawthorn is in the box seat. Not an offical ITK so take it as a grain of salt. Wish we would scoop in and take him and keep Nas

That is interesting. Hawks have Blues first rounder so could pay 2 firsts this year, future 1st next year for Butters.

Port on trade those 3 picks to us for NAS.

Still not ideal but we don't get completely reamed.

Port lose Butters, gain NAS
Hawks lose 3 first rounders
Saints gain 3 first rounders

 

[Winmar2Lockett]

We are in a good position if we are looking down the barrel of good young talent at our club.

But club needs to stagger players coming out of contract, an issue is that they all come out of contract at the same time.

The King deal was a very strange one at the end of last year, but hey at least we don't have to worry about that contract lapsing ever.

Max's contract expires at the end of 2028.

If he hits a games played trigger the 2nd half of the deal kicks in (unlikely at this stage).

A key point willfully ignored by many who want to keep the bad St Kilda narrative going.

 

[Yawkey way]

So we are using the cap space to try and get better?

I hope like hell we have a plan B and we’re quietly chatting to some quality players. If Nas doesn’t want it someone else will, just need to make sure we can get the assets for Nas if he leaves to get it done.