Recommitted Andrew Gaff [re-signed]

[Scotland]

$750k x 4 years isn't unreasonable. I'd expect we'd be offering similar.

Won't get us band 1 FA compo, though.

 

[Snake_Baker]

$750k x 4 years isn't unreasonable. I'd expect we'd be offering similar.

Won't get us band 1 FA compo, though.

What figure do you think you would need?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

$750k x 4 years isn't unreasonable. I'd expect we'd be offering similar.

Won't get us band 1 FA compo, though.

That's why we should match any offer in that territory.

Getting the player for nothing in trade terms should be incentive enough for the poaching club to make a more lucrative offer.

WC's position must surely be Band 1 compo or a trade.

 

[Scotland]

What figure do you think you would need?

There is talk ITT of needing to be in the top 5% of FA eligible players, so $8-900k+.

 

[Scotland]

That's why we should match any offer in that territory.

Getting the player for nothing in trade terms should be incentive enough for the poaching club to make a more lucrative offer.

WC's position must surely be Band 1 compo or a trade.

There was talk last year about St Kilda being into him with pick 7 or 8. He was under contract then, but pick 19 would be a terrible return.

A top 4 side needing some more outside run could offer us a better trade deal than that, and once he's gone it is of no concern to us what his salary is.

 

[Snake_Baker]

There is talk ITT of needing to be in the top 5% of FA eligible players, so $8-900k+.

I can't see that happening, which is a shame, because I think durability should also be factored in to a players trade value.

I would rank him a round a 12-16 range pick all things considered.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

There was talk last year about St Kilda being into him with pick 7 or 8. He was under contract then, but pick 19 would be a terrible return.

Remember when we dropped the ball with Scott Selwood?

We got Band 2 compensation and then acted all surprised because we thought it would be Band 1. We better not pull that shit again.

"Sure, Gaff can go. Oh wait, pick 19? We thought it would be pick 8. No fair!"

 

[Sweet Jesus]

I can't see that happening, which is a shame, because I think durability should also be factored in to a players trade value.

Can you see a club offering $1.2 million per season for McGovern?

I think what is becoming clear is that clubs will put a little more sugar in the bowl if it means they don't have to trade.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Can you see a club offering $1.2 million per season for McGovern?

I think what is becoming clear is that clubs will put a little more sugar in the bowl if it means they don't have to trade.

Mate, I dunno.

Personally, I reckon that's silly money, but who knows how desperate some club might become if they think he is the crucial piece of the puzzle?

The Eagles are caught in a "damned if they do, damned if they don't" phase at the moment.

If NN continues to splutter, I reckon your mob would be quietly pleased if he decided to hang up the boots at the end of 2018 and free up some coin.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Mate, I dunno.

Personally, I reckon that's silly money, but who knows how desperate some club might become if they think he is the crucial piece of the puzzle?

I agree it's silly money. But clubs are willing to pay up because they get the player without trading. That's the incentive and it may mean equally that a club finds an extra 130k per year to poach Gaff without having to trade.

The Eagles are caught in a "damned if they do, damned if they don't" phase at the moment.

Not really. Retain their good players and find a top-line midfielder from somewhere. They wouldn't be damned for doing that.

If NN continues to splutter, I reckon your mob would be quietly pleased if he decided to hang up the boots at the end of 2018 and free up some coin.

Has Naitanui "spluttered" any more than any other player returning from a knee reconstruction?

He's missed a season. That means we want him to retire? I don't think so.

If we're talking about cap space, quite a few players finished at the end of 2017.

 

[Scotland]

I can't see that happening, which is a shame, because I think durability should also be factored in to a players trade value.

I would rank him a round a 12-16 range pick all things considered.

The AFL make it up as they go along so who knows. Tom Rockliff joined Port at age 27 on a 4 year deal. Gaff would be joining a new club at 26 on whatever deal is offered. The factors in play are supposedly contract value and length and the age of the player.

Let's assume 4 x $800k doesn't trigger band 1. Will 3 x $900k? 5 x $750k? 6 x $750k? Tyrone Vickery triggered band 3 and his contract was either 500-500-200 over 3 years or just 500-500 over 2. Would a team rather buy Gaff with a longer contract/shorter contract with more per season to up his FA credentials or trade for him?

 

[Snake_Baker]

I agree it's silly money. But clubs are willing to pay up because they get the player without trading. That's the incentive and it may mean equally that a club finds an extra 130k per year to poach Gaff without having to trade.

WCE can hope that this eventuates if Gaff or McGovern desire a move.

Who knows in Gaffs case? He might end up getting the required $850K x 4 and a smaller 5th year trigger clause.

I wonder how the AFL analyse these clauses when it comes to weighting compensation?

I know North would be a suitable suitor because Gaff is the type we need and looks a good investment age and durability wise, and also because I highly suspect we are going to be positively affected by the machinations of this years draft due to Thomas/Scott/Crocker being academy and F/S picks.

We again have plenty of coin, and the club CEO has already signaled that we will be going hard again.

 

[Scotland]

Assuming North are on track for another bottom 6 finish surely they would rather buy Gaff than trade for him.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

WCE can hope that this eventuates if Gaff or McGovern desire a move.

Well, from reports of the deal offered to McGovern, he'll warrant Band 1 compensation.

Should Gaff be offered something short of Band 1, WC would surely be compelled to match it. Accepting pick 19 as compensation for Gaff would be a disgrace.

I know North would be a suitable suitor because Gaff is the type we need and looks a good investment age and durability wise, and also because I highly suspect we are going to be affected by the machinations of this years draft due to Thomas/Scott/Crocker being academy and F/S picks.

We again have plenty of coin, and the club CEO has already signaled that we will be going hard again.

Well, there you go.

If North identified Gaff as a target, would they rustle up some extra cash to poach him without trading? Or would they offer roughly the same as WC, making it more likely their offer is matched, and then have to negotiate a trade?

Surely every club considers this calculus and finds the extra cash to avoid trading.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Assuming North are on track for another bottom 6 finish surely they would rather buy Gaff than trade for him.

That goes without saying. I just put forward the scenario that puts us squarely in the market.

Your coach is a North man and North and WCE have a good history of cordial relations between the club, so who knows what might happen?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Your coach is a North man and North and WCE have a good history of cordial relations between the club, so who knows what might happen?

Band 1 or GTFO. How's that for cordial?

If Simpson loves his old club so much that WC gets shafted, he can piss off back to Arden St. I couldn't give two shits about being BFFs with a rival club.

 

[Snake_Baker]

If North identified Gaff as a target, would they rustle up some extra cash to poach him without trading? Or would they offer roughly the same as WC, making it more likely their offer is matched, and then have to negotiate a trade?

That would be the absolute least likely scenario that I can see unfolding. If it came to that I highly suspect we would walk away.

I don't give much credence to this forced salary/forced trade thinking. I doubt two clubs rarely if ever engage in it.

Band 1 or GTFO. How's that for cordial?

If Simpson loves his old club so much that WC gets shafted, he can piss off back to Arden St. I couldn't give two shits about being BFFs with a rival club.

I doubt either footy club will negotiate according to your emotional state.

If WCE demand a round 1 pick from North (likely 1 to 4), then I suspect North would split their sides laughing and Gaff will continue on at WCE with a bigger contract.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

That would be the absolute least likely scenario that I can see unfolding. If it came to that I highly suspect we would walk away.

I don't give much credence to this forced salary/forced trade thinking. I doubt two clubs rarely if ever engage in it.

Sure, more likely, North would anticipate in advance that a lower offer would be matched, and therefore find the extra cash to ensure Band 1 compensation. If they want the player, that is.

 

[Snake_Baker]

Sure, more likely, North would anticipate in advance that a lower offer would be matched, and therefore find the extra cash to ensure Band 1 compensation. If they want the player, that is.

There'll be no bidding war mate.

He's not good enough for that.

North will (possibly) offer and WCE will match or decline and that will be the end of it.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

There'll be no bidding war mate.

He's not good enough for that.

North will (possibly) offer and WCE will match or decline and that will be the end of it.

I didn't say anything about a bidding war.

I said that if North (or any other club) wants a player, they likely find the extra cash to avoid trading.

If a club is offering roughly the same amount as WC would, short of Band 1 compensation, then matching becomes a no-brainer.

 

[Snake_Baker]

I didn't say anything about a bidding war.

I said that if North (or any other club) wants a player, they likely find the extra cash to avoid trading.

Trading's not going to come in to it mate.

If we weren't prepared to dangle pick four for Dustin Martin, then I can't see how in any universe we are going to do it in a superdraft year with Andrew Gaff . It's an hilarious proposition. In the event he was traded you would probably get pick 19-21 as compensation, which will be around the ball park of our 2nd round pick anyway. A trade with us makes absolutely no sense at all. It won't happen unless a club in the 10-15 range gets involved, and then WCE could deal with them.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Trading's not going to come in to it mate.

That depends on which club is involved and how much they're willing offer in salary terms. I assume more clubs than North Melbourne would be interested.

Is Gaff going to leave WC to join NM for a very marginal pay rise?

If we weren't prepared to dangle pick four for Dustin Martin, then I can't see how in any universe we are going to do it in a superdraft year with Andrew Gaff . It's an hilarious proposition.

See above.

Let's say WC has already offered a new contract of 750k per season over four seasons. And another club tries to poach Gaff as a free agent by offering 800k per season over four seasons, triggering Band 2 compensation. You don't reckon WC match that? Of course they do. That would be a no-brainer if it's a choice between finding an extra 50k per season or taking a shit sandwich in FA compensation.

In the event he was traded you would probably get pick 19-21 as compensation

No, I don't think so.

A trade with us makes absolutely no sense at all. It won't happen unless a club in the 10-15 range gets involved.

How can you say in March which clubs will have which picks in October?

 

[Snake_Baker]

Let's say WC has offered a new contract of 750k per season over four seasons. And another club tries to poach Gaff as a free agent by offering 800k per season over four seasons, triggering Band 2 compensation. You don't reckon WC match that? Of course they do. That would be a no-brainer.

They probably will, unless WCE end up pulling off a big trade themselves, and we will politely hang up the phone and look up Laird, Sloane, Guthrie and Dalhaus's numbers. Gaff isn't the only decent running player coming out of contract this season..

How can you say in March which clubs will have which picks in October?

I'm pretty sure we will be in the top 4 picks.

It's just my opinion mate. I'm not as invested in this as you appear to be.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

They probably will, unless WCE end up pulling off a big trade themselves, and we will politely hang up the phone and look up Laird, Sloane, Guthrie and Dalhaus's numbers. Gaff isn't the only decent running player coming out of contract this season.

Do you understand how free agency works?

You can go sniffing around those free agents as much as you like, but you'll still have to make an offer above and beyond what their current clubs have tabled. And clubs will likely pay the extra cash to get a free agent without trading for them. This is a basic point.

It's just my opinion mate. I'm not as invested in this as you appear to be.

That's great.

 

[Snake_Baker]

You can go sniffing around those free agents as much as you like, but you'll still have to make an offer above and beyond what their current clubs have tabled.

No kidding. You're a pretty smart bloke. I hope WCE are on to this.