List Mgmt. 2025 List Management Discussion - Part 3

[Hubnester]

2025 List Management Discussion - Part 3

Now that our season is over, and news is starting to break - it's time for a fresh thread.

This thread is to discuss all things list management - trades, draft, free agency, delistings and more.
As we are now officially in our off-season, we'll be wanting to keep this thread more strictly on-topic than the previous iterations.
Be respectful. You are allowed to disagree with someone - but play the ball, not the man. Repeat offenders will have their posting rights revoked.

Thanks to Lore once again for this incredibly useful spreadsheet.

2025 KEY DATES
Free Agency Period: Friday, October 3rd - Friday, October 10th
Trade Period: Monday, October 6th - Wednesday, October 15th
AFL Draft: Wednesday, November 19th - Thursday, November 20th

See Also:
2025 Year in Review Rumours & Confirmed Movements 2025 Draft Discussion
​

 

[_Maximus_12]

The offer from Bulldogs to Cal is life changing (almost double his current salary), and he and his management are trying to use it as leverage to renegotiate and extend his current contract. A little bit to play out with the contract, but not so much the chances of Cal being a Bulldog. Going nowhere but we would be hopeful one or both of Marshall/Steele's salary isn't on our books next year so we can redirect the money. If Flanders nominates us, expect at least one those two to go.

I mentioned a few pages back, but I do hate that the clubs are being held accountable for the player managers incompetence. You were happy with $800k then, don't be greedy.

 

[Dard Ball Get]

I mentioned a few pages back, but I do hate that the clubs are being held accountable for the player managers incompetence. You were happy with $800k then, don't be greedy.

Yep it is akin to selling your house and then the market moves over 2 years and you go back demanding more from your sale lol

 

[gringo2011]

I really hate that this Wilkie story still has legs. Wilkie is absolutely integral to us moving forward, will be captain next year. The fact he is still unhappy enough with the club to be considering the Dogs is really bad for us even if we flat out refuse to trade him. Need absolutely everyone to buy in from day dot next year, let alone the captain.

As I said before, someone on SEN suggested that they were in a group chat with Wilkie's missus and that she said he was going to the Dogs because the offer was too good to pass up. Hopefully it's all bullshit but the nerves are back up.

We really need to maintain all our current A graders and add to the pool, not down grade Wilkie for Jack Silvagni.

 

[stavro#4]

Contracted.

2 years.

Club won’t even talk to the Bulldogs about it.

Click bait story.

Bryce Gibbs is a nice cautionary tale about what it’s like dealing with SOS for a contracted and wanted player.

Super high cost. Don’t pony up. No deal.

Carlton football boss Andrew McKay said the Blues would have been willing to move Gibbs for the right price but weren’t satisfied with the Crows’ offer, which is believed to have included the No13 draft pick and a future third-round selection.

“We obviously value Bryce more highly than they do,” McKay told SEN radio.

 

[_Maximus_12]

Yep it is akin to selling your house and then the market moves over 2 years and you go back demanding more from your sale lol

How would it be if the club turned around to a contracted player and said 'hey, we're going to reneg on the last 3 years of your contract because you've underperformed? How does half sound?'

 

[AFaiL]

The offer from Bulldogs to Cal is life changing (almost double his current salary), and he and his management are trying to use it as leverage to renegotiate and extend his current contract. A little bit to play out with the contract, but not so much the chances of Cal being a Bulldog. Going nowhere but we would be hopeful one or both of Marshall/Steele's salary isn't on our books next year so we can redirect the money. If Flanders nominates us, expect at least one those two to go.

I mentioned a few pages back, but I do hate that the clubs are being held accountable for the player managers incompetence. You were happy with $800k then, don't be greedy.

Not sure it is greediness but it is short sightendness from the player and manager, to a degree. Some want security of long term deal, others (Nas) back themselves to improve and obtain more $. both ways carry risk

The ONYL way this trade demand/renegotiate contract stuff stops is if/when clubs start holding players to their deals full stop. Somebody has to win the staring contest, the clubs keep folding.

IMO, if Cal asked to walk, I would use him as a case to say no, and hold him to it. His value will have deminished in two years time so onlyk he will lose out. If you liked 750k for 4 years, two years ago, then that is life. Nas has taken the risk of a short term dela - Cal could have done the same.

 

[_Maximus_12]

As I said before, someone on SEN suggested that they were in a group chat with Wilkie's missus and that she said he was going to the Dogs because the offer was too good to pass up. Hopefully it's all bullshit but the nerves are back up.

We really need to maintain all our current A graders and add to the pool, not down grade Wilkie for Jack Silvagni.

It's really irrelevant whether they want to pass it up or not because he's contracted. This isn't the same situation as Merrett.

 

[AFaiL]

How would it be if the club turned around to a contracted player and said 'hey, we're going to reneg on the last 3 years of your contract because you've underperformed? How does half sound?'

Such an apt point!

Players want it all their way, Clubs need to start being firm.

Don't sign a long term deal if you aren't willing to stick by it.

Bombers, for eg, would be a much stronger club if they sat merrett instead of trading him. No player would EVER **** with them again, ever.

 

[thekizzler]

As I said before, someone on SEN suggested that they were in a group chat with Wilkie's missus and that she said he was going to the Dogs because the offer was too good to pass up. Hopefully it's all bullshit but the nerves are back up.

We really need to maintain all our current A graders and add to the pool, not down grade Wilkie for Jack Silvagni.

It's okay Gringo.

My grandma says Wilkie is going to stay so you can relax again.

 

[SaintsofSteel]

The offer from Bulldogs to Cal is life changing (almost double his current salary), and he and his management are trying to use it as leverage to renegotiate and extend his current contract. A little bit to play out with the contract, but not so much the chances of Cal being a Bulldog. Going nowhere but we would be hopeful one or both of Marshall/Steele's salary isn't on our books next year so we can redirect the money. If Flanders nominates us, expect at least one those two to go.

I mentioned a few pages back, but I do hate that the clubs are being held accountable for the player managers incompetence. You were happy with $800k then, don't be greedy.

Player managers are just doing whats best for their clients, contracts mean zip when it suits clubs and players are just following suit.

I dont blame Wilk's one bit, behind Nas he has been our best and most reliable player for years. He is 29yo if he wants to go for money because other GOP's are getting paid way more than him, then more fool the Saints it was bound to happen! The club cant expect to pay other players ridiculous dollars and not expect other clubs to want to pick off our under paid soldiers.

Many have said it but there is a pretty good chance the clubs salary cap management is going to come back to bite them big time....if they start losing players like Wilkie.

 

[_Maximus_12]

IMO, if Cal asked to walk, I would use him as a case to say no, and hold him to it. His value will have deminished in two years time so onlyk he will lose out. If you liked 750k for 4 years, two years ago, then that is life. Nas has taken the risk of a short term dela - Cal could have done the same.

It is greed, because he was happy with the deal when he signed it that provided him long term security. Now he wants a bigger slice of the pie before he's due.

That said, Wilkie isn't really in a position of power. He is 30 next year, if he wants to sit out the remaining two years of his contract he will be 32 and his career will almost be over.

 

[BucketsandBanger]

Just calm down, chief.

Basing anything off the words of a random Big Footy poster makes you look pretty stupid.

What you are actually saying is probably right in essence, but it's a huge leap to make based on what we actually know.

Haven't we learned anything from recent sagas?

Maybe but unless Edmund is straight up lying then I'd say your second best and probably most important player and leader taking a call from a call from an opposition coach cause he is thinking about a move is a really bad thing. I'ts not cause I think the outcome is gonna be different in the end but the fact this hasn't been shut down from Wilkie and not the club is the issue.

Do you see players as important as Wilkie doing this at Geelong, Collingwood Hawthorn etc? You don't, cause their all on the same page buying into success as a group. It is not a good look.

 

[St Neil]

It wont make any difference in the end. The Tas premier has come out and said, in nice politics speak, "thanks for that and the final decision is not up to you. It's up to us in the parliament and we're all for it. Bye."

It’s all going to come down to the vote of 3 independents in the Upper House.

What a joke.

If the Tasmanian Upper House knocks it over then I suspect the AFL will move quickly and put the Tasmanian licence to a final vote to the 18 clubs.

Without a stadium with a roof it will be a unanimous NO.

That will be the end of the Tassie Devils because none of the clubs wants it to go ahead.

The politicians in Tasmania have a binary choice now. Who knows which way it will go but the concerning thing for the Devils is that most of these clowns think that they can force the AFL to bend and abandon the demand for the roof on a new stadium.

That won’t happen.

It’s not a decision for the AFL Commission to make. It is for the 18 clubs to decide. And they will knock it over if given half a chance out of self interest.

 

[Diehard Saint]

Of course he’d talk to Bevo.
Manager and media on the case.
Will push his contact with us up nicely.
101% certain he’ll be going nowhere.
Certainly club will have the last word if it even comes to that.

 

[stavro#4]

“He is still unlikely to leave Moorabbin - I will frame it” - Sam Edmund

 

[AFaiL]

It is greed, because he was happy with the deal when he signed it that provided him long term security. Now he wants a bigger slice of the pie before he's due.

That said, Wilkie isn't really in a position of power. He is 30 next year, if he wants to sit out the remaining two years of his contract he will be 32 and his career will almost be over.

Exactly - and the dogs need for him would be gone in 2yrs time.

Again, hes never said he wants to go and playing the game for more $ is part of the system, but i would be holding him (and Ro, FWIW - both 2 years left and worthless when the time comes to re-sign). Unless there is a Godfather offer like Ed Richards, obviously (which wont happen).

 

[pebblesofsand]

It’s all going to come down to the vote of 3 independents in the Upper House.

What a joke.

If the Tasmanian Upper House knocks it over then I suspect the AFL will move quickly and put the Tasmanian licence to a final vote to the 18 clubs.

Without a stadium with a roof it will be a unanimous NO.

That will be the end of the Tassie Devils because none of the clubs wants it to go ahead.

The politicians in Tasmania have a binary choice now. Who knows which way it will go but the concerning thing for the Devils is that most of these clowns think that they can force the AFL to bend and abandon the demand for the roof on a new stadium.

That won’t happen.

It’s not a decision for the AFL Commission to make. It is for the 18 clubs to decide. And they will knock it over if given half a chance out of self interest.

Makes you wonder how the AFL has managed to play proper mid season games in Tasmania for the last 25 years.

Must be to do with the rainfall - nope!!

Brisbane 1200mm (no roof)

Sydney 1150 mm. (No roof)

Melb 650mm. (No roof MCG)

Hobart 610mm ??????

Adelaide 525 mm (No roof)

 

[stavro#4]

Dunkley was one of the big names up for a move during the trade period, publicly requesting a trade to the Bombers, but his incumbent club held firm, rejecting an Essendon offer of pick 8 and a future second-rounder.

Just a nice reminder when the pugs try and get under anyone’s skin.

 

[Diehard Saint]

Yep it is akin to selling your house and then the market moves over 2 years and you go back demanding more from your sale lol

One day, hopefully soon, it’ll all spontaneously combust.
It just cannot continue this way.

Two choices:
1.Take your chances on a 2 year deal and an increase more regularly if good enough/remain fit.

2. Take a long term deal for security, then live with it, no matter who comes in for more etc. Especially if you’ve been front ended and now want two bites of the cherry.

 

[St Neil]

It is greed, because he was happy with the deal when he signed it that provided him long term security. Now he wants a bigger slice of the pie before he's due.

That said, Wilkie isn't really in a position of power. He is 30 next year, if he wants to sit out the remaining two years of his contract he will be 32 and his career will almost be over.

IF Wilkie is genuinely agitating for more money and stirring the pot while contracted (who knows if this is true) then I wouldn’t give him the Captaincy.

Stuff that.

Give it to Nasiah. Move on to the next generation.

A contract is a legal agreement. Signed willingly by two parties. Greed is no justification to break it and cause dislocation.

I’m a bit old school when it comes to honouring your word.

 

[stavro#4]

Makes you wonder how the AFL has managed to play proper mid season games in Tasmania for the last 25 years.

Must be to do with the rainfall

Brisbane 1200mm (no roof)

Sydney 1150 mm. (No roof)

Melb 650mm. (No roof MCG)

Hobart 610mm ??????

Adelaide 525 mm (No roof)

Isn’t it also to do with the fact the weather conditions (wind, freezing conditions etc) make playing football incredibly more difficult.

Hawthorn and Adelaide played there mid season. They kicked 6.11 to 5.14

 

[gringo2011]

Yep it is akin to selling your house and then the market moves over 2 years and you go back demanding more from your sale lol

We need to be able to trade out players in contract to the highest bidder if they are on more than $600k or something. Make it a sellers market as well as a players market. Player managers just take the piss with contracts at the moment.

 

[Linton Street Saint]

IF Wilkie is genuinely agitating for more money and stirring the pot while contracted (who knows if this is true) then I wouldn’t give him the Captaincy.

Stuff that.

Give it to Nasiah. Move on to the next generation.

A contract is a legal agreement. Signed willingly by two parties. Greed is no justification to break it and cause dislocation.

I’m a bit old school when it comes to honouring your word.

I too was thinking very much the same but only on the big IF.

Your captain is supposed to be the rock of the team that sells the message of personal sacrifice for success.

 

[St Neil]

“He is still unlikely to leave Moorabbin - I will frame it” - Sam Edmund

Edmund is clueless.

 

[DougalHoward]

IF Wilkie is genuinely agitating for more money and stirring the pot while contracted (who knows if this is true) then I wouldn’t give him the Captaincy.

Stuff that.

Give it to Nasiah. Move on to the next generation.

A contract is a legal agreement. Signed willingly by two parties. Greed is no justification to break it and cause dislocation.

I’m a bit old school when it comes to honouring your word.

Don't want Wilkie captain either, give it to someone in the young core IMO.