List Mgmt. 2019 Trade Thread - Part III

[sammm]

Good because he has been mismanaged under Richo since arriving at our club

And then mismanaged by Ratten
Must very something in that

 

[Indie Rock]

I’m not really interested in signing Chris Masten but I do like that if you say his name quickly it sounds like Christmas Ten.

It was probably around my tenth Christmas that I got my first games console. Brings back some nice memories.

 

[jwikked]

There is no way the club will play hardball on this - especially in light of what has happened this week.
Would be nice if the Cats had a little integrity and didn’t try to lowball us, but I’m not holding my breath, especially after hearing Chris Scott on 360 earlier this week.

We are going to have to suck it up, unfortunately.

What happened this week should have no bearing on any trade. Secondly, Jack signed that contract, he’s a contracted player. Playing football isn’t a right. If things don’t work out he could walk away and find a job outside the industry.
It’s not up to the Saints to bend over to ensure it gets done for the sake of doing it.
it’s an unfortunate situation, but why should the team take a loss against probably the most successful team of the last 10 years?

 

[Indie Rock]

There is no way the club will play hardball on this - especially in light of what has happened this week.
Would be nice if the Cats had a little integrity and didn’t try to lowball us, but I’m not holding my breath, especially after hearing Chris Scott on 360 earlier this week.

We are going to have to suck it up, unfortunately.

He wants to move closer to home to be closer to family, just like Tim Kelly did last year. Tim, who was a 4 hour flight away (not a couple of hours drive).

Geelong were really understanding and open to enabling that to happen for the players welfare (!) so surely they will see it the same here.

Also if you are Stuv, surely you respect Saints enough to not let Geelong offer stupid unders as we are under pressure to do the right thing by him.

I’m hoping that the reason our club is being so open and saying they will do what is best for Jack, because they hope he is staying.

Otherwise I would like us to be saying that we will of course look after Jack but we will
need to also ensure that we are fairly compensated for him.

 

[austinnn]

It's a shame there's only one AFL club anywhere near Lorne and a shame that Stuv had had a public battle with mental health. Now all we can really count on is the Cats being nice.

 

[sobraz]

So, we’re supposedly going to swallow our pride and do the best thing for Jack, moving on our best player, a guy that polled 18 Brownlow votes less than 12 months ago, and was hugely influential in half our wins this year, while unfit and mentally not great.
That’s fine. I can accept that.
But why is it that it’s just accepted that Geelong are all good and well to do what’s best for Geelong? Where’s their goodwill toward the club that is showing goodwill for one of their future players (and a star).
Oh it’s business? - ‘that’s what he’s worth due to his personal issues’. No deal. If that’s the case, hold him to his contract, release him to move to Lorne and play local footy. But not for the cats for a bag of chips.
Look after Jack. F the Cats.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[pebblesofsand]

It's a shame there's only one AFL club anywhere near Lorne and a shame that Stuv had had a public battle with mental health. Now all we can really count on is the Cats being nice.

No not really - either a fair deal from Geelong or we ask the AFL to allow him to play for the Lorne Dolphins for the last year of his contract.

Rather that than have a club exploit us on the basis of a players mental health issues.

Personally I think the AFL should determine trade value to ensure fairness and equity in situations like this.

 

[ScrappyDo]

.Maybe I'm a prick compared to other people, but Stuv has earned a small fortune up till now so l couldn't GAF about allowing him to continue playing at Geelong if we get screwed on trade.

The reality is StKfc has all the power in this scenario, and if a reasonable trade isn't put forth then he can continue to play for us or simply retire.
The good grace from StKfc is about being accommodating for Jack's benefit, but that does not extend to Geelong in paying unders for a quality contracted player.
WC have P22 which will find its way to Geelong, and that seems about right to me. We get to nominate the price here, not anyone else...

 

[Tommy Wigs]

It's all speculation. No one knows what will be involved yet until trade week starts and I dare say it the Kelly/Hill deals kick start a fair few.

But surely no one believes there’s nothing happening until Day 1 of the Trade period. Of course, it’s not in stone, but clubs will certainly have had the jump now rather than waiting.

 

[Drake Huggins]

If we accept a third rounder for a contracted, 4 time club champion we will be a laughing stock. Imagine if we offered Geelong that for Selwood, or Dangerfield?
We'd be told where to stick that offer, and rightly so.

The simplest solution is to have Jack appeal to the cats, in order to facilitate a fair deal. I'm coming, I want to come, but I want the club I've loved to get fair compensation.

If they don't up the offer, it's no deal. If Jack and his management don't want to facilitate a fair deal, then it's no deal. He leaves next year as a FA and we get compensation anyway.

I'm sick of watching our club champions finish their careers elsewhere. To have this happen again, while being shafted by a power club only rubs salt into the wounds.

It's time for the club to show some spine. Jack is one of the club's greatest assets, both on and off field. We will not give him away for nothing. You want him, you pay a fair price. We hold all the cards.

If they don't play ball, I would let Jack sit out the year. That way, he could move back to Lorne, be near his family and child and make a full recovery.

He would, of course, be in breach of his contract were he to do that, but we could always work out a deal where we pay him minimum wage, saving a packet. Next year we get compensation for him when he leaves.

The biggest bonuses are we are no longer seen as a soft touch by other clubs, nor a laughing stock. The look on Scott's face would be hilarious.

If the media and Geelong see us as campaigners, so be it. Better to be hated and respected, than being disrespected as a joke and seen as the "good guys" by Geelong while they sfellow behind our backs and have one of our champions help them win another flag.

Now that Coniglio and Higgins are out of the market, Jack becomes more valuable. Narkle or Constable, or one of Geelong's first rounders. Take it or leave it. If Geelong reject those offers, let them be the bad guys who are the ones who are really causing a champion to sit out a season.

We could also have Jack play for us pursuant to changes in his contract that would help his domestic situation and mental health. Simples!

 

[gringo2011]

What happened this week should have no bearing on any trade. Secondly, Jack signed that contract, he’s a contracted player. Playing football isn’t a right. If things don’t work out he could walk away and find a job outside the industry.
It’s not up to the Saints to bend over to ensure it gets done for the sake of doing it.
it’s an unfortunate situation, but why should the team take a loss against probably the most successful team of the last 10 years?

I get all that and it hurts that he's not going o be at the Saints any more full stop. Add the fact that he's walking away and we get very little compensation back and it feels like someone's rubbed lemon juice on our paper cuts. That's said if we started to play hard ball we'd be as popular a guy beating a box of baby kittens to death.

It's a s**t situation for us but I guess it's a shitter situation for him. He's one of my all time favourite Saints, he's a loveable guy and I can't believe he won't finish with us. He is going to break my heart when I see him run out in Geelong hoops.

 

[SaintSteele9]

I understand the nature of our position re: Jack Steven and the Cats but to some extent we won’t have anything to show for paying a “good bloke” tax in accepting relatively little to get him there. I’m fine with him going, but I’d be pretty keen on a player in return; a draft pick starting with 3 or higher would be pretty disappointing for mine.

 

[Keg on legs]

I've had an epiphany...

Let's renegotiate Bruce's contract. Back date the start to 2011. Have it end now. He then becomes an RFA

Then he goes to the bulldogs and we get pick 6 as compo





Seems legit

 

[Palantine]

The Max & Mayo Show was also on at Coburg the week before Max was hurt.

So about 60 mins actually


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MAXIMO

Like Dangerwood but better!


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[gringo2011]

I understand the nature of our position re: Jack Steven and the Cats but to some extent we won’t have anything to show for paying a “good bloke” tax in accepting relatively little to get him there. I’m fine with him going, but I’d be pretty keen on a player in return; a draft pick starting with 3 or higher would be pretty disappointing for mine.

It will certainly leave a bit of bad blood between us and them. They draft well anyway, they don't need high picks.

Hopefully the AFL sends us to mediation and we can get a fair deal done.

 

[gringo2011]

MAXIMO

Like Dangerwood but better!


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

That's good.

 

[ronnysnodgrass]

Hannebery was the same situation as we face with Steven (different reason)

Champion a year or so ago, traded when a bit broken down, could get back to his best.

Don’t get your hopes up, he’s gone for a pick in the 30’s.

We wish him the best and move on.

 

[Keg on legs]

I kinda agree with Drake Huggins

If the cats won't be reasonable and want to be hypocrites after holding Kelly against his wishes because the deal wasn't suitable then we hold him to his contract. We then renegotiate it and he sits out the year. Stuv gets back near where he needs to be, and the cats can eat a bag full

Time to make a stand.

 

[Diehard Saint]

What happened this week should have no bearing on any trade. Secondly, Jack signed that contract, he’s a contracted player. Playing football isn’t a right. If things don’t work out he could walk away and find a job outside the industry.
It’s not up to the Saints to bend over to ensure it gets done for the sake of doing it.
it’s an unfortunate situation, but why should the team take a loss against probably the most successful team of the last 10 years?

I didn’t mean the trade. I meant that if Jack needs to go we need to respect that. At the end of the day good mental health is way more important than football - a game.

I would like to be part of a club that does the right thing, even if, unfortunately, it costs us in the long run. Watching a smug Chris Scott the other night I’m not expecting a great outcome though. Cest la vie.

 

[jwikked]

Hannebery was the same situation as we face with Steven (different reason)

Champion a year or so ago, traded when a bit broken down, could get back to his best.

Don’t get your hopes up, he’s gone for a pick in the 30’s.

We wish him the best and move on.

Hannebery was also happy to stay if a deal couldn’t be done and Sydney were desperate to free up salary space. The two can’t be compared.

 

[lewdogs]

Hannebery was also happy to stay if a deal couldn’t be done and Sydney were desperate to free up salary space. The two can’t be compared.

Well Jack has barely played in a year and doesn't look fit to do so, on 600k a year, fair chance we're desperate to get that salary off our books I'd say.

 

[malevu]

If we accept a third rounder for a contracted, 4 time club champion we will be a laughing stock. Imagine if we offered Geelong that for Selwood, or Dangerfield?
We'd be told where to stick that offer, and rightly so.

The simplest solution is to have Jack appeal to the cats, in order to facilitate a fair deal. I'm coming, I want to come, but I want the club I've loved to get fair compensation.

If they don't up the offer, it's no deal. If Jack and his management don't want to facilitate a fair deal, then it's no deal. He leaves next year as a FA and we get compensation anyway.

I'm sick of watching our club champions finish their careers elsewhere. To have this happen again, while being shafted by a power club only rubs salt into the wounds.

It's time for the club to show some spine. Jack is one of the club's greatest assets, both on and off field. We will not give him away for nothing. You want him, you pay a fair price. We hold all the cards.

If they don't play ball, I would let Jack sit out the year. That way, he could move back to Lorne, be near his family and child and make a full recovery.

He would, of course, be in breach of his contract were he to do that, but we could always work out a deal where we pay him minimum wage, saving a packet. Next year we get compensation for him when he leaves.

The biggest bonuses are we are no longer seen as a soft touch by other clubs, nor a laughing stock. The look on Scott's face would be hilarious.

If the media and Geelong see us as campaigners, so be it. Better to be hated and respected, than being disrespected as a joke and seen as the "good guys" by Geelong while they sfellow behind our backs and have one of our champions help them win another flag.

Now that Coniglio and Higgins are out of the market, Jack becomes more valuable. Narkle or Constable, or one of Geelong's first rounders. Take it or leave it. If Geelong reject those offers, let them be the bad guys who are the ones who are really causing a champion to sit out a season.

We could also have Jack play for us pursuant to changes in his contract that would help his domestic situation and mental health. Simples!

I concur 100%. As you said, and those that posted before you said also, being sympathetic to Stuv's mental health is one thing. Bending over to get shafted by Geelong is another altogether. Trade fairly or play at Lorne.

 

[ScrappyDo]

Hannebery was the same situation as we face with Steven (different reason)

Champion a year or so ago, traded when a bit broken down, could get back to his best.

Don’t get your hopes up, he’s gone for a pick in the 30’s.

We wish him the best and move on.

WTF?
You know Hanners was a salary dump right?
So in fact his club actually wanted to shift him out right?..
Sooo, the opposite of Stuv's situation right?
To a club needing to fill a Tim Kelly sized hole in the last moments of their premiership window right?

 

[CanadianSaint]

RE Stuv: I think the club should wait until he announces his intensions, and then if it is to leave release a statement somewhere along the lines of:

"The St Kilda Football Club has been informed by Jack that he wishes to be traded to Geelong, and we will do everything possible to comply with his wishes.
St Kilda is committed to looking after Jacks well being, he has been a great servant of our club, a 4 time Trevor Barker medalist and much loved player and teammate. With this in mind we hope that both Geelong and the wider footballing community also have Jack's interests in mind as both he and St Kilda seek fair compensation for what will be the lost of one of the clubs most important leaders."

I would love to see a comment about Scott disparaging remarks, his petty game playing and his lack of understanding of mental heath issues, but I would leave it at that... I would of make sure Jack has been involved in the process by the club.

 

[Jade Buddha]

Perhaps if mental health and fairness are the priorities then Stuv needs to take year out.

Why would you be trying to get back into a high profile job when you have issues that will only be exacerbated by this