List Mgmt. 2014 Draft Trade FA Megathread

[God Save Max King]

$1.1m a year for 6 years? If anyone I would be offering that money to Jeremy Cameron, not Tom Boyd, I'm happy to pay him $4m over 5, but $6.6m over 6 will set us back 5 years if it fails.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

So, it seems like all the dominoes will fall into place once someone blinks. So my question is- who should I be blaming for all this time wasting?
Collingwood for being pig headed and wanting too much?
Brisbane for not offering enough?
Bulldogs for thinking Griffen = Boyd?
Gws for not realising griffen=Boyd?
Or Essendon for, well, just because!

a) Yes collingwood are flogs.
b) Brisbane can take Beams or leave him, its not a problem of their making.
c) Lol at Bulldogs.
d) GWS were correct in picking Boyd first, and they are correct in trying to hold on to him.
e) Essendon are funny because they want in on all the trades but no-one wants to trade with them.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

$1.1m a year for 6 years? If anyone I would be offering that money to Jeremy Cameron, not Tom Boyd, I'm happy to pay him $4m over 5, but $6.6m over 6 will set us back 5 years if it fails.

I'll enjoy watching the Dogs struggle to pay any of their young players who start looking good, and us poaching players like Bompentelli, when he gets to the stage that he should be earning at least average money.

 

[holllywood]

With the Age reporting that the Dogs offered Boyd more than $1m/pa on at least 6 years I think I'd be happy if we pass on that. That is more money than I'd be comfortable with and I don't see how it couldn't hurt our FA ambitions in 2016. I'd prefer to take the chance with McKenzie or just back our development of Lee, White and Stanley than put that much money plus whatever picks and players it would take to get the deal done.

I'm kinda hoping that our interest is just a ploy to weaken two teams we will be competing with in a few years. If the Dogs pay too much for Boyd it can put serious pressure on their list later on and GWS will be significantly weakened by losing Boyd. In the meantime we can just keep making deals on our terms for the right price and not do anything that could seriously risk derailing the whole rebuild.

I think aussierulesrules said that one of the WB board members said that the contract was front loaded, something like 3 million in the first 2 years. And they will have the space considering all of Griffen, Cooney and Higgins will be gone.

Even if it averages out to be more than 1m P/A, they have no one else to pay to fill the massive whole in the TPP due to 3 senior players on good coin leaving. Contract wise, could be a pretty smart move.

 

[DT_35]

Why not just go for Cameron instead of Boyd? 1 mil a season for a bloke that's played less than 10 games is a bit of a joke...

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I think aussierulesrules said that one of the WB board members said that the contract was front loaded, something like 3 million in the first 2 years. And they will have the space considering all of Griffen, Cooney and Higgins will be gone.

Even if it averages out to be more than 1m P/A, they have no one else to pay to fill the massive whole in the TPP due to 3 senior players on good coin leaving. Contract wise, could be a pretty smart move.

Its still a risk though. There seems to be a trend that players treat their contracts with contempt and ask for trades. So they front end the contract, then when they get to the back end, other teams start offering front ended contracts.

 

[Hayes4PM]

I would just like to see us get a deal done!!!

 

[NarklesHelmet]

The bottom line is if we can get either Boyd or Cameron, we make it happen, pretty much at any cost because of the type of player they are. The hard part will be making the trade happen/convincing them to come here. If clubs agree on a trade and the player wants to come here than we pay whatever it takes. There is no guarantee that in a year or two when we are ready, they will be available. I'm pretty sure the club thinks that way too seeing as they are showing interest in Boyd. They would simply get Boyd this year and load up on mids next year instead changing the plan around a bit. I think many on here are getting too hung up on the raodmap thinking that we have to follow it to the letter. We'd be nuts and ridiculously inflexible passing up the opportunity to get Boyd now just because it didn't fit into a plan we made. If an opportunity like this comes up, you change your plan, as simple as that.

 

[Periphery]

$1.1m a year for 6 years? If anyone I would be offering that money to Jeremy Cameron, not Tom Boyd, I'm happy to pay him $4m over 5, but $6.6m over 6 will set us back 5 years if it fails.

Yeah, it's way to much for an unproven kid no matter how much potential he has. You're essentially using cap space to buy a number 1 draft pick, but considering we'd almost certainly have to give up pick 1 to get it we end up not a hell of a lot better than when we started.

Even if in 2016 we bring in a FA on the same amount of money (say $6m over 4 years so the timeframe and total outlay is the same as it would be with Boyd) I think we are in a better position because any player we pick up then will be a sure thing compared to Boyd. Boyd would give you more total games for the same money, but only if he works out and even then he still might not reach the lofty heights we all expect. Compare that to 5-6 years of Sloane and I know which deal I prefer.

I think aussierulesrules said that one of the WB board members said that the contract was front loaded, something like 3 million in the first 2 years. And they will have the space considering all of Griffen, Cooney and Higgins will be gone.

Even if it averages out to be more than 1m P/A, they have no one else to pay to fill the massive whole in the TPP due to 3 senior players on good coin leaving. Contract wise, could be a pretty smart move.

Yeah, I can see how it would work but it's still a HUGE risk. If Boyd doesn't work out for whatever reason it will set them back for years.

We also need to keep in mind that the Dogs are at least 18 months in front of us in their rebuild so their TPP situation could be where we expect ours to be in 2016. They might have been planning on a big FA next year, but due to the loss of Griffen they could have brought it forward and it might not hurt their long term plans too much. I'm not so sure if we are as ready as we'd need to be to take on such a massive deal.

 

[VDS66]

Must admit that I would rather throw big dollars to a proven player. Boyd could be anything... or he could be nothing.

Last time we threw out a 5 year deal ended up a disaster (Hammil).

when we talk about paying overs, it's not just the draft pick in question. $1m per year is just crazy.

 

[holllywood]

Its still a risk though. There seems to be a trend that players treat their contracts with contempt and ask for trades. So they front end the contract, then when they get to the back end, other teams start offering front ended contracts.

100%, it is a risk but I would say a risk worth taking, as Boyd is an elite talent.

IMO, this contract is a big a statement to the GWS for poaching their captain as it is filling an on-field need.

 

[DT_35]

It's a good laugh reading the Dogs board, they think it's more than enough to give Griffen for Boyd * face palm *

 

[Munga]

I think we're only "going after" Boyd to make the Dogs pay more (throw in another pick to GWS), then we have a better chance of getting better picks to trade our pick 1 away.

 

[Curunir]

Rahul do you think its worth the risk matching the dogs offer for Boyd of 1m a season for 5 years? (roughly)

 

[holllywood]

Let's put it this way,

If we have a lot of money to meet the minimum level of TPP, would you rather;

Front end Tom Boyd contracts to get him to the club?

Or

Over pay Adam Schneider for being a good servant to the club?

 

[SK_MD_#7]

Can't wait to see Timmy do this for us.

 

[Periphery]

Let's put it this way,

If we have a lot of money to meet the minimum level of TPP, would you rather;

Front end Tom Boyd contracts to get him to the club?

Or

Over pay Adam Schneider for being a good servant to the club?

Except we wouldn't be overpaying Schneider in any situation. We'd just keep doing what we are currently doing - prepay our young kids to free up even more space in future years in preparation for a massive tilt at free agents in 2016.

 

[NarklesHelmet]

Except we wouldn't be overpaying Schneider in any situation. We'd just keep doing what we are currently doing - prepay our young kids to free up even more space in future years in preparation for a massive tilt at free agents in 2016.

But as the old saying goes, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. 2016 comes and we have money but we still have to land a player like Boyd: only then we will likely be competing with every single Melbourne club meaning our chances will be slim. We'd be nuts to not try and bring him to the club when it is only a two horse race and we have pick 1 as a bargaining chip.

 

[joydivision22]

I remember watching a TAC game with Boyd last year and thinking wow. He is big athletic, straight kicking and kicked pressure goals. Looked as sure bet for a future FF as you get. Looked like a cross between a better Hawkins and a better Tippett. Also saw heaps of him on TAC futurestars and he was always heading for pick one. I would be tempted to throw the kitchen sink at him. Otherwise Petracca and Mc Kenzie/ Kietel/Hammellmann etc. would do as a more even spread though especially if we could grab a Cockatoo or De Goey somehow.

Yeah I'd be pretty happy either way but I'd be most happy with Tom Boyd sitting pretty with big number 4 on his back! (made vacant courtesy of a fleet footed lad from south fremantle) I'm sure he'd fill that number and some..

 

[Hayes4PM]

Boyd, Petracca or a number of first round picks. It's alllllll goood.

 

[Defacto]

No way do we match that doggies offer to Boyd without massive performance clauses. Could seriously set us backwards.

Need to stick to our strategy

 

[Periphery]

But as the old saying goes, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. 2016 comes and we have money but we still have to land a player like Boyd: only then we will likely be competing with every single Melbourne club meaning our chances will be slim. We'd be nuts to not try and bring him to the club when it is only a two horse race and we have pick 1 as a bargaining chip.

Free agents wont cost us pick 1 as well as massive amounts of money.

The club clearly rates its chances of securing free agents or else it wouldn't have made it such a priority from 2016 onwards. The chance of Boyd not making it could offset the risk of not attracting big free agents. Boyd is no sure thing just yet and the only thing that would be locked in would be his massive contract.

If the club decides it's a good idea and we end up with Boyd then I'll back their call. But at the moment I'm struggling to see how it could be worth it for the deals that have been reported.

 

[SK_MD_#7]

Tom Boyd following a saints supporter on twitter just then. It is time to read into it just like we did Kristian Jaksch.

Tom Boyd is coming to the saints.

 

[Bull3tblitz]

No way do we match that doggies offer to Boyd without massive performance clauses. Could seriously set us backwards.

Need to stick to our strategy

I don't even know why the media are bringing up contracts.....they need to get him first.

Plus if he is on that sort of money we can always go after McRae and Bonts in a few years

 

[NarklesHelmet]

Free agents wont cost us pick 1 as well as massive amounts of money.

The club clearly rates its chances of securing free agents or else it wouldn't have made it such a priority from 2016 onwards. The chance of Boyd not making it could offset the risk of not attracting big free agents. Boyd is no sure thing just yet and the only thing that would be locked in would be his massive contract.

If the club decides it's a good idea and we end up with Boyd then I'll back their call. But at the moment I'm struggling to see how it could be worth it for the deals that have been reported.

Yeah fair enough, I don't disagree with you at all really. I just think that the type of player Boyd and Cameron are means that if we get a crack at them now, whenever, we have to do our utmost to get them. If it works (and of course it is a risk) our list is set up in the forward line for years and we can then recruit for need elsewhere.