List Mgmt. 2020 Trade Thread - Part I

[Premium]

Disagree mate ..think Carlton are overpaying like the Saints did 2004 - 2011 they are paying small select
group of players on a reduced salary cap. ( 60 % of their cap will be 8 players )

Mcgovern is on a stack too reported to be $700 , 000.


They don’t still have quality 1st ruck and still have large number of players at end of careers .

They are over paying for sure but they can right off McGoverns contract this year because he is now off contract.
Mitch McGovern

#11 Carlton Blues

Age: 25yr 11mth Games: 76 Born: October 11, 1994 Origin: Claremont

Height: 191cm Weight: 93kg Position: Forward

Last Drafted: Round 3, Pick #43 2014 National Draft by Adelaide Crows

Supercoach Price: $227,200 Supercoach Profile

AFL Fantasy Price: $331,000 AFL Fantasy Profile

Contract Status: Out of contract at the end of 2020

and his next contract he will be lucky to get anywhere near that.

 

[AaronSCHQ]

Both made up some serious ground last week. If we'd lost to GWS there probably would have been some gnashing of teeth about their cost. Winning is a cover for everything. Hanners made it back in time to carry us in last weeks game. He looks much better value than if he'd played 5 games a year on $800,000 pa.

While you may be correct in some ways, they were both good in the GWS game to get us in the finals and good in the final which we won. Now I am not saying we would spend millions just to win a final. But they literally helped us into finals for the first time in 9 years and to a finals win for the first time in 10 years.

No doubt Hanners' affect as a leader on the young guys is invaluable, especially with reductions in the soft cap. He's always out there barking directions, noticeable right at the end, telling Marshall where to head to. Hill's gut running is sensational and while he will still have to earn his bucks in the coming years, I am sure he will settle more and more into our line up, and be even more important if the quarter lengths go up again.

 

[Glorious One]

Pittonet looks the goods to me and de Koning a handy forward ruck for the future.

If you want to talk about Carltank, please take it elsewhere, it’s making me feel ill, this is all about St Kilda Football Club.

Anyone who thinks Hill is a bust should give the game away, whilst Hanners is just important off field as he is on. He was almost back to his best on the weekend.

 

[Stewart66]

Pittonet looks the goods to me and de Koning a handy forward ruck for the future.

Sorry mate disagree ..on Pittonet ...Dekoning still developing .

Casboult , Murphy , Jones , E Curnow , Betts .....still on list .

Love the age profile of Stkilda list it’s fantastic.

 

[Veer Right]

Pittonet looks the goods to me and de Koning a handy forward ruck for the future.

De Koning is exactly the sort of player i wish we had to learn from Ryder.

 

[Winmar2Lockett]

Wouldn't have anything to do with Ryder becoming our second best player, Howard our best defender, Butler one of the best forwards in the league and Jones becoming our second best mid behind Steele or Ratten taking the reigns over Richo.

Or the continued rise of Clark, Coff and Paton.

No not at all. It was mainly Hill and Hanners on the list. Phew! Thanks for clearing this up.

You don’t go by the name of Arthur on Twitter do you?

Same bizarre ranting on Hill & Hanners.

Same obsession with what they earn.

Same lack of footy knowledge that makes you unable (or most likely unwilling) to actually see what they both bring to the club.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Stewart66]

They are over paying for sure but they can right off McGoverns contract this year because he is now off contract.
Mitch McGovern

#11 Carlton Blues

Age: 25yr 11mth Games: 76 Born: October 11, 1994 Origin: Claremont

Height: 191cm Weight: 93kg Position: Forward

Last Drafted: Round 3, Pick #43 2014 National Draft by Adelaide Crows

Supercoach Price: $227,200 Supercoach Profile

AFL Fantasy Price: $331,000 AFL Fantasy Profile

Contract Status: Out of contract at the end of 2020

and his next contract he will be lucky to get anywhere near that.

Think you’ll find he‘ll have trigger clause , hence why Adelaide said no way would they match it.

Anyway for mine they are overpaying their age demographic on games played , age said they should be
top 4 team not even close.

 

[Winmar2Lockett]

He's a better player than he was 3 years ago.

Not really, he just gets more exposure now he plays for a supposedly big club.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Veer Right]

You don’t go by the name of Arthur on Twitter do you?

Same bizarre ranting on Hill & Hanners.

Same obsession with what they earn.

Same lack of footy knowledge that makes you unable (or most likely unwilling) to actually see what they both bring to the club.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to this Arthur fellow please?

 

[AaronSCHQ]

I couldn't give two stuffs what we trade for players and what their contract is. As long as the balance is right. We overpaid for Hill in a trade (in my opinion) but got Butler cheap, Jones, Ryder and Howard for decent deals. It balanced out.

We are over paying Hanners, given his several injuries, and Hill might be getting paid a few more dollars than his output, but it got him to the club. Both experienced players for our young group, and Hill filled a desperate need. A player type we didn't have.

We are finally in finals and have one won. So as long as we continue progressing, I have zero interest in how much of the $12 million TPP each of the 44 blokes get.

It only becomes a concern when we aren't doing well or a player is really struggling. E.g. Mitch McGovern not living up his dollars (although Carlton aren't going horribly) and a player like Polec, who I assume is on a few dollars, not getting a game for the team ranked second bottom. That's when it becomes a problem. And that's just the way footy goes.

 

[Jade Buddha]

I agree with what you are saying fully however his output compared to his contract length and coin are far apart. I want class players in the team as much as the next bloke. An example is Marsh being considered by some to come in this week is not a win for us at the selection table.

So we go all out on players like H&H to push the weak links out of the starting 22 but at what cost?

Maybe i am overblowing it anyway as we are/were not in a salary cap squeeze. Maybe my frustration does't lie with the club but at these guys asking for big contracts then not holding up their end. I'd rather we pay Steele, Marshall and Ryder 850k on principle, the guys who get it done.

I look forward to the future when our list is healthier and we are not as desperate to go all out to land a big name player.

So who do you select ahead of Marsh?

 

[ScrappyDo]

I agree with what you are saying fully however his output compared to his contract length and coin are far apart. I want class players in the team as much as the next bloke. An example is Marsh being considered by some to come in this week is not a win for us at the selection table.

So we go all out on players like H&H to push the weak links out of the starting 22 but at what cost?

Maybe i am overblowing it anyway as we are/were not in a salary cap squeeze. Maybe my frustration does't lie with the club but at these guys asking for big contracts then not holding up their end. I'd rather we pay Steele, Marshall and Ryder 850k on principle, the guys who get it done.

I look forward to the future when our list is healthier and we are not as desperate to go all out to land a big name player.

I think you're getting sucked into the principles side of the coin and not considering the context.

Using Hanners as the example:
We had to spend the minimum cap anyway, and it was spent front loading that contract.

What we got from that was culture change, and on the back end of the contract we'll only be paying about what he's worth so far as output.

We're over paying Hill, Doogs and Jones probably atm, and that's fine, because our squad is young and relatively cheap.

By the time the kids are worth more, the current high contracts will expire and those individuals may then have to take a bit under.

I don't think anyone can get every contract to precisely match the realities.
But over time, a bit more here, and a bit less there, and it works out.
Players have shown they'll play for unders if they're happy.
And they all understand the realities of trade and form fluctuations.

Big $$$ deals are overrated in the public perception. Good for headlines.

There's far more to it, and you're not even talking about the SC rorting deals that go on at the big clubs.

You've just got to leave the bean counting to the bean counters. It's not worth worrying about as a supporter and you'll never get to know the truth of it anyway.

There are several bean counters that post here regularly that would say the same.
You don't want to get too involved, in case you too end up a boring boring miserable kent..

 

[KingsRansom]

Link to this Arthur fellow please?

 

[Dr Spaceman]

Dodo always keeps it entertaining.

 

[AaronSCHQ]

De Koning is exactly the sort of player i wish we had to learn from Ryder.

We have an untried Jack Bell. No idea what he's like, and De Konig looks a handy player (much better than Bell at this stage obviously)... but I assume Ryder is working closely with him. Won't know for a few years whether it will pay off.

 

[Diehard Saint]

While you may be correct in some ways, they were both good in the GWS game to get us in the finals and good in the final which we won. Now I am not saying we would spend millions just to win a final. But they literally helped us into finals for the first time in 9 years and to a finals win for the first time in 10 years.

No doubt Hanners' affect as a leader on the young guys is invaluable, especially with reductions in the soft cap. He's always out there barking directions, noticeable right at the end, telling Marshall where to head to. Hill's gut running is sensational and while he will still have to earn his bucks in the coming years, I am sure he will settle more and more into our line up, and be even more important if the quarter lengths go up again.

To all the above about spending big (but not blowing the budget) to make finals add the ripple affect of becoming a real destination club, increasing membership, growing sponsorship and becoming a respected club.
It’s always been said that the off-field is just as important as what’s happening onfield.

 

[Joffaboy]

You don’t go by the name of Arthur on Twitter do you?

Same bizarre ranting on Hill & Hanners.

Same obsession with what they earn.

Same lack of footy knowledge that makes you unable (or most likely unwilling) to actually see what they both bring to the club.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Both are busts. Seriously[emoji6][emoji6]

 

[Premium]

So who do you select ahead of Marsh?

is is the only big guy with matches under his belt and surely he is above Roberton , Clavarino , Joyce and Austin - this just shows the hole that we have to fill when Carlisle not playing.
Another trade we need to do , find a ready to good key defender, hopefully they can pluck something out of nowhere.

 

[Winmar2Lockett]

Link to this Arthur fellow please?

Twitter.com/imadipshitnamedarthur


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gringo2011]

While you may be correct in some ways, they were both good in the GWS game to get us in the finals and good in the final which we won. Now I am not saying we would spend millions just to win a final. But they literally helped us into finals for the first time in 9 years and to a finals win for the first time in 10 years.

No doubt Hanners' affect as a leader on the young guys is invaluable, especially with reductions in the soft cap. He's always out there barking directions, noticeable right at the end, telling Marshall where to head to. Hill's gut running is sensational and while he will still have to earn his bucks in the coming years, I am sure he will settle more and more into our line up, and be even more important if the quarter lengths go up again.

That's pretty much what I just said. He was rushed back and we rolled the dice which worked. If we'd lost another game at some point he would have been held back and been criticised for his wage to games played. It's a fine line between stupidity and genius sometimes. Hill was rightly critiqued for his underperforming throughout the season. His last couple of weeks have been very good though. Even if we'd lost to the Dogs I think there would have been critics coming for both. If we get annihilated and they break down or play poorly the sights will take aim again next week. Footy is pretty unfair sometimes.

You really are only as good as your recent form, people forget the bad when you do good and they forget the good when you do badly.

 

[Sarcoidevo]

I look forward to the future when our list is healthier and we are not as desperate to go all out to land a big name player.

At some stage many if not all teams will find themselves in that position

Securing Hanners a few years back in many ways kicked started our rise to finals ...... we needed a big name and the push on effect has enabled us to attract more decent names.

Add the big signing of Hill to that last year and now we find even more in-contract and out of contract opposition team players are now starting to look in our direction.

Of course add even further to that some good drafting and we are starting to look very good again.

Don't underestimate Hanners & Hills positive mental influence on the playing group and their leadership abilities either ...... the club looks absolutely tight knit at the moment

https://www.saints.com.au/video/822...dal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1601868634001

 

[BrutThough]

I think you're getting sucked into the principles side of the coin and not considering the context.

Using Hanners as the example:
We had to spend the minimum cap anyway, and it was spent front loading that contract.

What we got from that was culture change, and on the back end of the contract we'll only be paying about what he's worth so far as output.

We're over paying Hill, Doogs and Jones probably atm, and that's fine, because our squad is young and relatively cheap.

By the time the kids are worth more, the current high contracts will expire and those individuals may then have to take a bit under.

I don't think anyone can get every contract to precisely match the realities.
But over time, a bit more here, and a bit less there, and it works out.
Players have shown they'll play for unders if they're happy.
And they all understand the realities of trade and form fluctuations.

Big $$$ deals are overrated in the public perception. Good for headlines.

There's far more to it, and you're not even talking about the SC rorting deals that go on at the big clubs.

You've just got to leave the bean counting to the bean counters. It's not worth worrying about as a supporter and you'll never get to know the truth of it anyway.

There are several bean counters that post here regularly that would say the same.
You don't want to get too involved, in case you too end up a boring boring miserable kent..

Thats the really big part with Hannebery. We had the money that was going to disappear if we didnt spent it for starters.

And getting in Hannebery changed the narrative around us. If someone of Hanners quality was willing to vouch for us publicly, then we must not be that bad.

And to get someone with that reputation and those accolades into a bottom club, then you need to pay.

 

[Roddy Grant]

I agree with what you are saying fully however his output compared to his contract length and coin are far apart. I want class players in the team as much as the next bloke. An example is Marsh being considered by some to come in this week is not a win for us at the selection table.

So we go all out on players like H&H to push the weak links out of the starting 22 but at what cost?

Maybe i am overblowing it anyway as we are/were not in a salary cap squeeze. Maybe my frustration does't lie with the club but at these guys asking for big contracts then not holding up their end. I'd rather we pay Steele, Marshall and Ryder 850k on principle, the guys who get it done.

I look forward to the future when our list is healthier and we are not as desperate to go all out to land a big name player.

Hannebery came over at a time where we had a load of cap space and nobody to blow it on. His leadership off field and standards knowing what it takes to get to the top would be worth a significant portion of that (although I still think Lethers and Hanners dad are drinking some seriously old scotch from some of the proceeds ).

Hannebery never shuts up in training, I’ve watched couple of sessions and even from the sides he is driving standards.

There were definitely some question marks about his ability to get his body right but also I think just getting someone like him raised our profile.

Hill, well to shake a player like that loose you have to sometimes pay overs. He is prob worth his contract at his best and has been better as the year has wore on. After finishes of 16th and then 14th and not finals since 2011 we couldn’t realistically have relied on our premiership chances as a carrot (I’m not underestimating the vision that Ratten, Lethlean and co have sold though).

Agree 100% that we need to pay our up and coming players what they are worth but we are fortunate that so much development has come from within and Clark, Coffield, Paton, King etc...are ahead of expectations - this has bridged the quality gap massively along with last years recruits. If our young guns keep on the current trajectory and we can add 1-2 more top quality players we should be right up there competing for a flag.

We should be in a position now where we don’t need to pay overs to get players to come to a bottom club any more.

Great coach who the players love, respectable administration and a young talented team who just won a final.

 

[gringo2011]

De Koning is exactly the sort of player i wish we had to learn from Ryder.

I like him heaps more since I heard him interviewed and said he's a massive Saints fan and grew up idolising Rooey even though his dad played at the Dogs, one of 12 kids too. Interesting background. Played pretty well late season too. Geelong got his little brother last year too.

 

[ScrappyDo]

is is the only big guy with matches under his belt and surely he is above Roberton , Clavarino , Joyce and Austin - this just shows the hole that we have to fill when Carlisle not playing.
Another trade we need to do , find a ready to good key defender, hopefully they can pluck something out of nowhere.

If that guy were to be named Oscar Claverino, I'd be a very happy Scrappy.