List Mgmt. 2025 List Management discussion

[BrutThough]

Are we sure they would?

Again, the move here is either pay it cause hes worth that or sell him that weve got a premiership contending list and we need to balance that out.

I suppose in some ways its kicking the can down the road but either way its better than losing him now.

Unless we put a clause the proposed deal, they would try and have some expectations any future deal would be at the 2mil mark given what we'd already given him. Otherwise, it would essentially be a 700k pay drop for the next contract which would be unheard of for a 24 year old.

 

[True Believer]

Made the list uncompetitive and signed an injury prone KPF to a mega contract for years. He's on an absolute watch right now. He should be under the microscope as much as medical and training services. We need to keep improving our footy department to catch up to the competition.

Not sure that pissing off list managers and players creates an environment of buy in. He needs to sell the dream to them instead of kicking heads to save cap space.

"Selling the dream", as you put it, doesn't need to involve rolling over with your arse in the air and letting a player manager pump you........

Your "give everyone an open chequebook" approach is a sure fire way to bugger a salary cap in short order

 

[stavro#4]

So we should match for 2 years. Yes it sounds like panic but if he leaves this year we get royally reamed.
As I said we get 2 years of watching NAZ, two years to show we can contend, and if he still goes we get a shit load better trade capital.
It is worth the extra to keep him even for just two years.

Whilst nas is going on, we have Harley Reid asking for the same money you want to throw at Nas but a 10 year commitment.


A fact lost on many posters.

 

[phantom13]

Unless we put a clause the proposed deal, they would try and have some expectations any future deal would be at the 2mil mark given what we'd already given him. Otherwise, it would essentially be a 700k pay drop for the next contract which would be unheard of for a 24 year old.

Not necesarily. If were a top 4 team in 2027 (or on the cusp) were saying to him "you got $2m, we need that to move to $1.6 (or whatever) so we can keep this team together, youre still the best paid player in the team/comp but this flattening is the same as what the Port deal would have been and we can win a flag".

If he says ****s yas im walking then we do the trade deal with Tassie/Port/Adelaide working to give us something alot better than they can do now.

Again, there is no way we lose if we keep him here for 2 years.

 

[True Believer]

He's a good player IMO. He's like a not quite as elite Nas.

So maybe $1.8m a year player?

 

[thekizzler]

And if that does happen he should be walked out the door that day

Well yeah, true.

But we could talk about things that aren't going to happen all day

Like a rational post from Mowman, for example

 

[phantom13]

Whilst nas is going on, we have Harley Reid asking for the same money you want to throw at Nas but a 10 year commitment.


A fact lost on many posters.

Its not lost on anyone Stav, we just realise the motivations and outcomes are different, a fact you refuse to acknowledge.

Answer me this. We sign him for 2 years and 2m and in 2 years he walks anyway.

How is that possibly any worse than losing him now?

 

[True Believer]

It sounds nice, but I had faith in Richo, and Ratten. I had faith in Finnis and Summers.

At some point the faith needs to be repaid, or else it becomes cult like.

Just trying to help out here - but you know they were different people, yeah?

 

[stavro#4]

No, theres zero logic because the worst case scenario is we lose Nas in 2 years, when Tassie is here and teams have been able to prep for a reasnable trade package.

The only thing you seem to be fixated on is Nas giving us a longer term comittment, which also seems to be the one thing he is absolutely not flexible on.

If he wants 2 years then do 2 years on the same money and back the club to either improve, support and build around him so he stays in 2 years OR make the right decision about offloading him in 2 years for a decent compo package.

You seem to rather want to lose him now if were gonna lose him. I cant understand any part of that.

Arguably losing NAS is worse in 2 years time than it is today.

Throwing all the money at him to stay for 2 years is horrific. The increase in money should reflect each additional year he stays. Because you need to build a list and you can’t win it with just the best player in the league.

We should bloody well know. We had plugger and won nothing.


But we also had Rooey and got close as possible could be with a very good supporting band that grew together.


All you want to do is kick the can down the road 2 years and hope for the best. Reality in your version of events says we start our negotiations at $2m a season for 24 year old Nas and that’s not even an increase. That’s par and nobody is signing that deal.

 

[Dard Ball Get]

Josh Jenkins

Next, let’s ask Zak Jokes how he plaits his hair.

 

[dudeintheswamp]

Hutchy's take makes good sense in my biased Saints fan opinion. Take the big deal now Nas, cover your ass, and then if you really want to go home in two years, do so under contract. This way just about everyone wins.

 

[BrutThough]

Not necesarily. If were a top 4 team in 2027 (or on the cusp) were saying to him "you got $2m, we need that to move to $1.6 (or whatever) so we can keep this team together, youre still the best paid player in the team/comp but this flattening is the same as what the Port deal would have been and we can win a flag".

If he says ****s yas im walking then we do the trade deal with Tassie/Port/Adelaide working to give us something alot better than they can do now.

Again, there is no way we lose if we keep him here for 2 years.

As I said, if we did that, we'd need to put some sort of clause into the current contract about future negotiations recognising that an offer over 2mil is more of a 'staying bonus' due to where our cap currently is because we couldn't rely on that type of good faith negotiation with the manager in the future.

 

[stavro#4]

Its not lost on anyone Stav, we just realise the motivations and outcomes are different, a fact you refuse to acknowledge.

Answer me this. We sign him for 2 years and 2m and in 2 years he walks anyway.

How is that possibly any worse than losing him now?

Because in 2 years time we should hopefully be at the point of competing.

So you have this list ready to go and you have no Nas. It’s going nowhere. It’s smack back in the Tassie drafts and it leaves us sunk.

If he pisses off tomorrow, we are still in this rebuild, we haven’t lost 2 years and whoever we get back has 2 years to develop and maybe we still do something at this 2027 goal (I don’t want this. I’m pointing out the difference.)

 

[Holy Hunter Clark]

Josh Jenkins

Next, let’s ask Zak Jokes how he plaits his hair.

Probably the same way as you and me

 

[MightySaint]

Arguably losing NAS is worse in 2 years time than it is today.

That is an objectively insane statement

 

[phantom13]

Arguably losing NAS is worse in 2 years time than it is today.

Throwing all the money at him to stay for 2 years is horrific. The increase in money should reflect each additional year he stays. Because you need to build a list and you can’t win it with just the best player in the league.

We should bloody well know. We had plugger and won nothing.


But we also had Rooey and got close as possible could be with a very good supporting band that grew together.


All you want to do is kick the can down the road 2 years and hope for the best. Reality in your version of events says we start our negotiations at $2m a season for 24 year old Nas and that’s not even an increase. That’s par and nobody is signing that deal.

How? When we all acknowledge no one has anything even remotely close to fair value for him?

Except its not at all. If were still shit in 2 years we probably should trade him cause theres no point paying anyone that money if were 14th. If were actually playing good footy we have a sell beyond the financial (which we dont have now).

Your blind faith in the club here is failing a broader a vision. Youre just prepping for whatever outcome happens to claim they were right again.

 

[Joffaboy]

Players are worth whatever the competition offers them. His recent form would suggest that he is worth big dollars. Not sure how many would actually put that up but obviously someone thinks it's his value.

JJ was suggesting we should offer $2.25 million for two years and hope we can keep him because we should try to build a list around him. Said that that much cap space is just going to be spread out and it's the only advantage we have right now.

Nearly every commentator is suggesting that losing Nas and then paying huge dollars for a very underwhelming TDK seems to be absolute stupidity.

WTF are you arguing here? It is certainly not the original post I put up.
It had nothing to do with TDK, nothing to do with market value, it was statements from rival clubs that he is worth 2 mill a year every single year for the sole purpose of driving up his price to one of the three clubs he land at. 15 clubs are not in the running so they say '2 million a year'
It seems you can't grasp this basic concept.
I would match or go above the 2 mill if he wants it and deal with the consequences later.
If he takes 2.1 a year for the 2 years his manager has asked us to prepare, what will he be willing to take in 2 years.

You carry on about not overpaying players and maxing out the SC but don't think of the consequences in two years if we are finals bound and he wants to stay. Will it be another 2 mill a year and destroy our cap?
You really struggle with basic financial concepts.

 

[Saint Shags]

Whilst nas is going on, we have Harley Reid asking for the same money you want to throw at Nas but a 10 year commitment.


A fact lost on many posters.

Do you know why he is doing that?

If he came back to Vic do you think he would be asking that much?

And more importantly, is he worth it right now based on performance.

 

[phantom13]

Because in 2 years time we should hopefully be at the point of competing.

So you have this list ready to go and you have no Nas. It’s going nowhere. It’s smack back in the Tassie drafts and it leaves us sunk.

If he pisses off tomorrow, we are still in this rebuild, we haven’t lost 2 years and whoever we get back has 2 years to develop and maybe we still do something at this 2027 goal (I don’t want this. I’m pointing out the difference.)

If in 2 years were competing then Nas is more likely to stay but even if he goes we can demand players rather than picks to stay up.

Look, weve done this to death, your logic (which there is **** all of here) is so flawed its not even worth having a discussion with you about it.

The deal in 2 years will be better than any deal we get now, you know this, youve argued the point in the Nas thread, the backflip to knob shine the club is so transparent it may as well be ****ing cellophane.

 

[Sully111]

He's the perfect FA, his monetary value is way below his output. $300k a year less than Josh Battle for a pretty similar player. JSos probably the better one on one defender.

I don't understand why we're not into him tbh.

 

[Saintos The ITK]

What does Terry do at Port?

Looks after the towelling.

 

[stavro#4]

How? When we all acknowledge no one has anything even remotely close to fair value for him?

Except its not at all. If were still shit in 2 years we probably should trade him cause theres no point paying anyone that money if were 14th. If were actually playing good footy we have a sell beyond the financial (which we dont have now).

Your blind faith in the club here is failing a broader a vision. Youre just prepping for whatever outcome happens to claim they were right again.

What outcome are you on about!?

I’m openly saying I don’t want to lose him. But gearing your entire rebuild around a bloke who buggers off in 2 years is a significantly bigger problem than it is today.

That’s nothing but fact. The crows and power likely have the same assets on offer in 2 years than they do today.

They won’t magically have a top 5 pick in 2027. They have Tasmania right there.

Take off the Nas coloured glasses and be completely objective about this.

Whatever we are building by the end of 2027 is geared around Nas as the superstar. It falls apart if he goes.

It might be recoverable today from a list build point of view.

 

[D2D3]

Because in 2 years time we should hopefully be at the point of competing.

So you have this list ready to go and you have no Nas. It’s going nowhere. It’s smack back in the Tassie drafts and it leaves us sunk.

If he pisses off tomorrow, we are still in this rebuild, we haven’t lost 2 years and whoever we get back has 2 years to develop and maybe we still do something at this 2027 goal (I don’t want this. I’m pointing out the difference.)

2 years is a long time. Longer hes here the longer we have to try to convince/accommodate him to stay, and the longer we have to grow as team to the point the loss won’t hurt as much.

 

[stavro#4]

Do you know why he is doing that?

If he came back to Vic do you think he would be asking that much?

And more importantly, is he worth it right now based on performance.

It’s been reported this week that if west coast don’t accept the deal he will ask for a trade this off season to get said deal in vic.

 

[Ricmel]

JJ was suggesting we should offer $2.25 million for two years and hope we can keep him because we should try to build a list around him. Said that that much cap space is just going to be spread out and it's the only advantage we have right now.

Nearly every commentator is suggesting that losing Nas and then paying huge dollars for a very underwhelming TDK seems to be absolute stupidity.

From what we hear, NAS loves St Kilda, he has great mates amongst the players, he feels he owes the club, he is open to a 2 year deal at Saints.

On that basis, it would seem if Saints match PA's first 2 years, you'd think odds are in our favor. If you accept that - then just match PA. Really doesn't matter what PAs long term offer is. NAS and management would know it is still going to be there when he turns 24.