Remove this Banner Ad

2026 Trade / FA Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Harry O
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

That's strange they offered 2 years if he is looking for longer, he will leave
I’m basing this offer on this scenario:

King has received a long term offer that GC simply cannot match. Short term, they can shift salaries and make it work though.
By offering him 2 years, it allows them to develop their other talls, and hopefully find some success which incentivises him to stay longer. They’d also be hoping that the lure of extra $$ from Tasmania might see him want to hold off on free agency until they enter the comp. They’ll get the compo that they would get this year anyway regardless, plus another 2 years of having arguably the premier key forward in the comp on their list.

Flaws in the logic being that King is already on enough $$ that he’d likely be more inclined to move for success/family reasons, and that if he moves to a club like Collingwood he’ll likely earn more money long term than Tassie could offer him up front.
 
It makes me more confident he will be a Pie.
actually makes me less confident, I think King will take that GC deal, gives him a shot at success for GC in 2026, 27 and 28, without locking himself away on the GC for the next 5/6/7/8 years.

Also means at the end of 2028, he will be an unrestricted FA meaning he can go to any club of his choosing, likely get a 5 year deal without GC being able to match.
 
actually makes me less confident, I think King will take that GC deal, gives him a shot at success for GC in 2026, 27 and 28, without locking himself away on the GC for the next 5/6/7/8 years.

Also means at the end of 2028, he will be an unrestricted FA meaning he can go to any club of his choosing, likely get a 5 year deal without GC being able to match.
I’m the opposite, I think that this is a last ditch effort from GC who are resigned to the fact he will leave now.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Not sure if it's been mentioned, but I'm very, very glad we didn't do what Brisbane did - signing Oscar Allen to a six year contract on nearly a million a year.

Really good player but his body isn't up to it.
 
I’m the opposite, I think that this is a last ditch effort from GC who are resigned to the fact he will leave now.
I think GC just want to recontract him as insurance incase Jamara,Walter, Read don't come.

Then in an ideal world for them, they trade him under contract in 12 months, when they already have competant replacements for him.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

I don't know why Leppa doesn't just convince Joey Daniher to make a comeback on minimum wage and then add Butters and Bailey. Seems really obvious to me.
Why don’t all of our players band together to play for minimum wage for a year for a guaranteed flag? We can frontload the shit out of every free agent on the market and bring them all in.
 
I’m the opposite, I think that this is a last ditch effort from GC who are resigned to the fact he will leave now.
As a further to this, it’s exactly the same type of offer that Port Adelaide unsuccessfully made to Butters in order to try to tempt him to stay a little longer. A desperate play to delay the inevitable.
 
I think GC just want to recontract him as insurance incase Jamara,Walter, Read don't come.

Then in an ideal world for them, they trade him under contract in 12 months, when they already have competant replacements for him.
That would never happen, you’re fantasising.
 
I think GC just want to recontract him as insurance incase Jamara,Walter, Read don't come.

Then in an ideal world for them, they trade him under contract in 12 months, when they already have competant replacements for him.
Why would a contending team trade their best key forward if he’s contracted?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

I’m basing this offer on this scenario:

King has received a long term offer that GC simply cannot match. Short term, they can shift salaries and make it work though.
By offering him 2 years, it allows them to develop their other talls, and hopefully find some success which incentivises him to stay longer. They’d also be hoping that the lure of extra $$ from Tasmania might see him want to hold off on free agency until they enter the comp. They’ll get the compo that they would get this year anyway regardless, plus another 2 years of having arguably the premier key forward in the comp on their list.

Flaws in the logic being that King is already on enough $$ that he’d likely be more inclined to move for success/family reasons, and that if he moves to a club like Collingwood he’ll likely earn more money long term than Tassie could offer him up front.

Plus they don't really want King heading to a rival club, they don't mind if Tassie picks him up and pays top dollar because the Devils won't be finals bound for a while yet. Dimma's no mug.
 
I’m basing this offer on this scenario:

King has received a long term offer that GC simply cannot match. Short term, they can shift salaries and make it work though.
By offering him 2 years, it allows them to develop their other talls, and hopefully find some success which incentivises him to stay longer. They’d also be hoping that the lure of extra $$ from Tasmania might see him want to hold off on free agency until they enter the comp. They’ll get the compo that they would get this year anyway regardless, plus another 2 years of having arguably the premier key forward in the comp on their list.

Flaws in the logic being that King is already on enough $$ that he’d likely be more inclined to move for success/family reasons, and that if he moves to a club like Collingwood he’ll likely earn more money long term than Tassie could offer him up front.
I think it's more likely the Rowell situation. Player wants to come home but also is happy so hoping they can get another 2 years and then hopefully more after that. Player not willing to commit to longer.
 
I think it's more likely the Rowell situation. Player wants to come home but also is happy so hoping they can get another 2 years and then hopefully more after that. Player not willing to commit to longer.
I think if it was the Rowell situation we’d be hearing “Ben King has signed on for 2 years”, not “Ben King has been offered a contract”.
 
I think if it was the Rowell situation we’d be hearing “Ben King has signed on for 2 years”, not “Ben King has been offered a contract”.
Rowell had to be offered a 2 year contract before you sign one. Not saying either way regarding what he does. But if you're offering a bloke like either of them a 2 year contract, it's most likely because they're not going to sign a longer one.
 
When we picked BBB I liked the selection. The surprise was the three year commitment to a player moving to their third club. Premiership player and best 23. He definitely ain’t bottom 6. SFA into a very good player, with decreasing moments, well done pies. I did not intend to pick your wording and appreciate your post. I am ain’t the Kane spud stupidity.
Billy had a 4 year contract.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom