Toast Ameet Bains

[StCicatriz]

Pierce (2019) This is a shocker I am afraid
Hickey (2019) A worry
Armitage (2019) A worry
McKenzie (2019) A real worry
White (2019) Why 2019 and not 2018?
Long (2019) See White
Dunstan (2019) 2018 would have been fine also
Nate Wright (2018)
Minch (2018)

is that ameet or the coaching staff stating theyre happy with them and seeing them improve?

you have to factor in what each player is being paid as well. for example if long isnt on much, it makes sense to lock him in cheap if you think he will improve

worth remembering this draft is shallow as and the rookie list can play when ever

 

[Wright 1]

I think some of you have short memories. The majority of this board thought Lewis Pierce was the next Dean Cox.
Nathan Wright was progressing well at that stage and I don't remember too many complaints when contract extensions were announced.
Of course you all think he is a fool now FFS.
He was a friggin God when he did the Hawthorn deal. I can't believe the BS that is spouted out on here sometimes.

 

[StCicatriz]

I'm not quite sure about the turn this thread has taken. How can we debate contracts without knowing the $ value of _all_ contracts? Is this information available somewhere?

THIS!!!!! well said

 

[gringo2011]

Right behind the Papers Stamped files, and above the Game Plan folder...

Remember Ross Lyon had his computers with the game plan stolen in 2010 . Collingwood had Max and Ballbag selling trade secrets and the campaigners probably burged Moorabbin too.

 

[gringo2011]

I think some of you have short memories. The majority of this board thought Lewis Pierce was the next Dean Cox.
Nathan Wright was progressing well at that stage and I don't remember too many complaints when contract extensions were announced.
Of course you all think he is a fool now FFS.
He was a friggin God when he did the Hawthorn deal. I can't believe the BS that is spouted out on here sometimes.

Well who listens to us- we thought Tommygun was the next Carey, we are sadly deluded, they should know better.

 

[sonnywalters]

I think some of you have short memories. The majority of this board thought Lewis Pierce was the next Dean Cox.
Nathan Wright was progressing well at that stage and I don't remember too many complaints when contract extensions were announced.
Of course you all think he is a fool now FFS.
He was a friggin God when he did the Hawthorn deal. I can't believe the BS that is spouted out on here sometimes.

One assy deal with Hawthorn that fell into his lap because they were hell bent on JOM.
He didnt have to do much for that.
When you analyse all the contracts he has signed then there is more misses than hits.

 

[Flandersss]

Remember Ross Lyon had his computers with the game plan stolen in 2010 . Collingwood had Max and Ballbag selling trade secrets and the campaigners probably burged Moorabbin too.

That's right.

Max & Bally bitter from the year before.

 

[VDS66]

Use of words like 'promising' and 'highly rated' render you with almost no credibility. 'Highly rated' but who? The club people giving out the long contracts? That is the whole problem. Internal ratings are often delusional. The club rates its own too highly. Name one independent person - a neutral - who rates McKenzie? You wont find one. Internal ratings are notoriously bias. Notoriously bias.

Sounds more like an apology.

Lets get realistic:
Pierce is unable to get a kick in the VFL. 2019 is insane. 2018 would have been fine. No other club would make any offer.
McKenzie can barely get a kick in the VFL. No need to sign him so long. 2018 would have been fine. No other clubs would make any offer.
Dunstan 250 games and future captain. Who for? A SANFL club? He is 22 years old and not in the top 300 players in the comp. Please give me a break. His tank is appalling and not AFL standard. Spare me the nonsense about being a future captain unless you mean at SANFL grade.
White - looks ok but 2018 would have done for now. No other club making offers.
Long - only 19. So 2018 would have done for now. See above.
Armo - should have given him a full medical before such a long contract.
Hickey - 2018 would have been just fine also.

The nonsense you need to 'lock up' players who are just at VFL level is absurd. No other clubs would have even have these guys on their radar. Just pure nonsense.

So you can state categorically that every other club has their 3rd tier players one one year deals?

You take the punt. Some work out, others don't... no guarantees. Look at Hammil as an example.

Or we can do what you say and keep them on yearly deals then when they come good we say OK, now that we want you we'll give you a longer contract even though we knocked you back previously...

As the player says **** you, I'm off to a club that believes in me.

 

[Moorabbin Ghost]

Use of words like 'promising' and 'highly rated' render you with almost no credibility. 'Highly rated' but who? The club people giving out the long contracts? That is the whole problem. Internal ratings are often delusional. The club rates its own too highly. Name one independent person - a neutral - who rates McKenzie? You wont find one. Internal ratings are notoriously bias. Notoriously bias.

Sounds more like an apology.

Lets get realistic:
Pierce is unable to get a kick in the VFL. 2019 is insane. 2018 would have been fine. No other club would make any offer.
McKenzie can barely get a kick in the VFL. No need to sign him so long. 2018 would have been fine. No other clubs would make any offer.
Dunstan 250 games and future captain. Who for? A SANFL club? He is 22 years old and not in the top 300 players in the comp. Please give me a break. His tank is appalling and not AFL standard. Spare me the nonsense about being a future captain unless you mean at SANFL grade.
White - looks ok but 2018 would have done for now. No other club making offers.
Long - only 19. So 2018 would have done for now. See above.
Armo - should have given him a full medical before such a long contract.
Hickey - 2018 would have been just fine also.

The nonsense you need to 'lock up' players who are just at VFL level is absurd. No other clubs would have even have these guys on their radar. Just pure nonsense.

You say I have no credibility then ramble on with one of the most ridiculous posts I've ever read, fully highlighting that you do in fact have absolutely no idea how AFL list management and contracts actually work. Are you suggesting that in Armo's physical before his contract that the docs should have seen into the future and picked up a serious back issue and serious groin injuries, both of which hadn't happened yet?
Maybe you should apply to do Trout's job?

 

[bergholt]

When you declare that a player shouldn't have gotten a contract you should really consider who we could get to replace them...

No, that's not true. When Nathan Wright signs a two year contract in 2016, you don't have to think about who you'll get to replace him in 2018. If you sign him for one year and want to keep him at the end of that year, you re-sign him. He's not a superstar and was never going to be, he's not going to hold you over a barrel for his signature the next year. It's for precisely players like him that one-year contracts exist.

When you say a player should have got a contract then you need to consider whether there was any need for them to have got it. If there's not a fight for their signature and isn't going to be a year later, you give them a one year contract. It's poor management to do otherwise.

 

[bergholt]

I think some of you have short memories. The majority of this board thought Lewis Pierce was the next Dean Cox.
Nathan Wright was progressing well at that stage and I don't remember too many complaints when contract extensions were announced.

There were plenty of complaints when the Wright, Pierce, Minch deals were announced. It was obvious at the time the contracts were unnecessarily long.

 

[VDS66]

is that ameet or the coaching staff stating theyre happy with them and seeing them improve?

you have to factor in what each player is being paid as well. for example if long isnt on much, it makes sense to lock him in cheap if you think he will improve

worth remembering this draft is shallow as and the rookie list can play when ever

Lock them in cheap in case they come good.

Good point.

Also gives you certainly over future TPP payments and planning on who you can recruit and make room for.

If Brains had half a brain he would have done that already to ensure we can accommodate a Kelly or Dusty...

Oh wait.

 

[bergholt]

So you can state categorically that every other club has their 3rd tier players one one year deals?

You take the punt. Some work out, others don't... no guarantees. Look at Hammil as an example.

Or we can do what you say and keep them on yearly deals then when they come good we say OK, now that we want you we'll give you a longer contract even though we knocked you back previously...

The problem with not doing that is you back yourself into a corner. They still cost you a list spot even if they're cheap. List spots are like gold. There are only a handful of guys on our list out of contract this year, we're going to have to make tough decisions on some guys who are in the senior side, and give a free ride to guys who are in the twos, because they're contracted. Unless we pay out their contract - in which case we're pouring money down the drain - money that we shouldn't have even been liable for.

 

[StCicatriz]

I think some of you have short memories. The majority of this board thought Lewis Pierce was the next Dean Cox.
Nathan Wright was progressing well at that stage and I don't remember too many complaints when contract extensions were announced.
Of course you all think he is a fool now FFS.
He was a friggin God when he did the Hawthorn deal. I can't believe the BS that is spouted out on here sometimes.

people have to factor in the alternative here and understand that not every player on your list will be a star. if they are, guess what, you dont keep them because you cant afford to pay everyone star money!

the reality is alot of the players mentioned would be paid the best part of **** all. for example lewis pierce and jason holmes, whats the alternative there? no good ruckman is going to come to the club to be a 3rd or 4th in line ruckman, if they do, you overpay them to keep them happy. so your only option is the draft, but then what happens if longer and hickey go down (which we did see last year), you're going to throw an 18 year old bean pole up against men... right.

you also have to remember that part of list management is making sure you have 3-5 delistings each year. 3 are mandatory as per AFL rules, 2 more for trades. so you need to have an idea on who's going and who's coming. some years you might trade in less for stability.

this is a shallow draft, if we upgrade marshall, that means we only need two live selections. 2 more spots for trades. there is literally no point in turning over a large part of the list this year so that we can get at best rookie list quality talent that is inferior to any talent we already have on the list.

for example you might not rate minchington and wright but if we are delisting them, that means we need to have another 2 picks in the draft, in what already is pretty ****ing crap from pick 25 onwards. now here's the kicker, those two spuds you take at pick 50 and 70 to replace wright and minchington, they're on 2 year deals!!!! so you cant delist them until the end of 2019, where as wright and minchington can be delisted next year. the pain doesnt stop there, next year in the good draft when you do want to load up, to get those spots, you're now cutting into the decent players who are border line because you have that pick 50 and 70 spud contracted for another year

 

[bergholt]

this is a shallow draft, if we upgrade marshall, that means we only need two live selections. 2 more spots for trades. there is literally no point in turning over a large part of the list this year so that we can get at best rookie list quality talent that is inferior to any talent we already have on the list.

List spots are pretty tight. Which four are you going to delist? Are you going to pay out any contracted guys?

 

[Wright 1]

One assy deal with Hawthorn that fell into his lap because they were hell bent on JOM.
He didnt have to do much for that.
When you analyse all the contracts he has signed then there is more misses than hits.

Holy crud! You seriously think Ameet did nothing to get the Hawthorn deal done? I suppose he did nothing to get Carlisle deal done too? He wouldn't have done anything getting the picks we did for McEvoy and Stanley either right?
Your arguements against Ameet are ludicrous at best

 

[Rors]

All these contracts have been front loaded to be able to achieve 95% of the cap last year & 100% this year, meaning that every bloke mentioned (bar Armitage) would be on the absolute minimum. Personally, I think they're genius.

 

[Wright 1]

There were plenty of complaints when the Wright, Pierce, Minch deals were announced. It was obvious at the time the contracts were unnecessarily long.

All on minimum $ contracts. We got our money's worth out of Wright and Minch already and Pierce is a ruckman who are the hardest to predict in terms of them coming on.

 

[Wright 1]

All these contracts have been front loaded to be able to achieve 95% of the cap last year & 100% this year, meaning that every bloke mentioned (bar Armitage) would be on the absolute minimum. Personally, I think they're genius.

Amen! This is what I am trying to say

 

[bergholt]

All on minimum $ contracts. We got our money's worth out of Wright and Minch already and Pierce is a ruckman who are the hardest to predict in terms of them coming on.

So why not sign all of them on 1 year contracts? It still would have been minimum $, just we wouldn't have had to pay one or two of them out the extra year this year when we let them go.

 

[plugger66]

people have to factor in the alternative here and understand that not every player on your list will be a star. if they are, guess what, you dont keep them because you cant afford to pay everyone star money!

the reality is alot of the players mentioned would be paid the best part of **** all. for example lewis pierce and jason holmes, whats the alternative there? no good ruckman is going to come to the club to be a 3rd or 4th in line ruckman, if they do, you overpay them to keep them happy. so your only option is the draft, but then what happens if longer and hickey go down (which we did see last year), you're going to throw an 18 year old bean pole up against men... right.

you also have to remember that part of list management is making sure you have 3-5 delistings each year. 3 are mandatory as per AFL rules, 2 more for trades. so you need to have an idea on who's going and who's coming. some years you might trade in less for stability.

this is a shallow draft, if we upgrade marshall, that means we only need two live selections. 2 more spots for trades. there is literally no point in turning over a large part of the list this year so that we can get at best rookie list quality talent that is inferior to any talent we already have on the list.

for example you might not rate minchington and wright but if we are delisting them, that means we need to have another 2 picks in the draft, in what already is pretty ******* crap from pick 25 onwards. now here's the kicker, those two spuds you take at pick 50 and 70 to replace wright and minchington, they're on 2 year deals!!!! so you cant delist them until the end of 2019, where as wright and minchington can be delisted next year. the pain doesnt stop there, next year in the good draft when you do want to load up, to get those spots, you're now cutting into the decent players who are border line because you have that pick 50 and 70 spud contracted for another year

But you can resign them again during or after the season if you think there is nothing better.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[StCicatriz]

List spots are pretty tight. Which four are you going to delist? Are you going to pay out any contracted guys?

i would suggest there will be 1 or two players traded out, plus the retirement of 1 or 2 more

dempster : marshall
holmes : incoming trade 1
riewoldt : incoming trade 2
outgoing trade 1 : draft selection 1
outgoing trade 2 : draft selection 2

thats before you look at the following players: lonie, savage, montagna, gilbert

there's plenty of room here

 

[bergholt]

All these contracts have been front loaded to be able to achieve 95% of the cap last year & 100% this year...

If that's true, why not give them a one-year contract that's higher than it needed to be? Just as easy as giving a two year with the first year higher.

 

[Wright 1]

IF......
Dempster gone
Roo and Joey retire
Holmes sacked

Marshall upgraded.

Why is there such a need to have Wright, Pierce, Minch, to be coming out of contract this year?
You want to replace them with 4th and 5th rounders from this draft?????

 

[StCicatriz]

So why not sign all of them on 1 year contracts? It still would have been minimum $, just we wouldn't have had to pay one or two of them out the extra year this year when we let them go.

because it might be cheaper to spread it over 2 years, rather than knowing you'll just end up doing 2 x 1 year