Cloke chasing contract extension (poll added)

[Quicky]

3 games were half his score. Take away those and suddenly the equation becomes 1.2 goals a game.

7 goals against melbourne, 5 goals against St Kilda, 5 goals against GWS is where he gets his boosted average.

Did pretty much nothing when we actually needed him against top 8 sides.

I don't think it's fair to cherry pick these stats. This wouldn't be all that different for most players.

 

[Kappa]

I don't think it's fair to cherry pick these stats. This wouldn't be all that different for most players.

kicked 17 goals from 14 games in 2015 if you exclude Melb Saint and GWS games.

Whether you think that's unfair to point that out or not, that's an extremely poor return for such a very very highly paid forward. No two ways about it.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

On that last point, I agree but don't see why it means we have to get rid of him. We just need to change the way we play. Imagine if our forward structure was better and cloke wasn't getting double teamed constantly. We have the cattle to do it this way, no need to get rid of him if he's willing to take a bit less coin

If he's willing to take A LOT less coin. Don't get me wrong, we all know that at his best, Cloke is basically the best there is, but he hasn't been anywhere near his best for the better part of 3 years or more and as he gets older, won't be getting back there again.

If we wansn't on the money he was, it wouldn't bother me as much. But the fact that he's probably Top 3 highest paid forwards in the game, it really irks me given he's not anywhere near one of the best 3 forwards in the comp.

I hope he can return to some kind of form, but I won't hold my breath.

 

[PicaBoo]

I don't think it's fair to cherry pick these stats. This wouldn't be all that different for most players.

It is fair to judge Cloke on goals scored. And he isn't scoring them, someone else should otherwise he is clearly wasted on our team. And it is not cherry picking, it a significant deviation in his KPI. In one of my earlier posts, I did a more comprehensive breakdown. Set this 7,5,5 off against 4 games where he went goalless and you can also say he is on 3 avg. Or closer to the truth that he either scores big or not all.
To make a statement he is on 2 goals a match is simply giving the wrong impression that he is a regular contributor.
And regarding similar stats?Have you seen Elliott scoring 7,5,5 in 3 matches?

 

[Quicky]

kicked 17 goals from 14 games in 2015 if you exclude Melb Saint and GWS games.

Whether you think that's unfair to point that out or not, that's an extremely poor return for such a very very highly paid forward. No two ways about it.

I don't think Cloke had a great year but it's still cherry picking. The inference is he only plays well against poor teams. You could also point out times he has stepped up when needed most, like grand finals.

 

[PicaBoo]

I don't think Cloke had a great year but it's still cherry picking. The inference is he only plays well against poor teams. You could also point out times he has stepped up when needed most, like grand finals.

My statistics show that we didn't play finals last year. Or is that cherry picking?

 

[Quicky]

It is fair to judge Cloke on goals scored. And he isn't scoring them, someone else should otherwise he is clearly wasted on our team. And it is not cherry picking, it a significant deviation in his KPI. In one of my earlier posts, I did a more comprehensive breakdown. Set this 7,5,5 off against 4 games where he went goalless and you can also say he is on 3 avg. Or closer to the truth that he either scores big or not all.
To make a statement he is on 2 goals a match is simply giving the wrong impression that he is a regular contributor.
And regarding similar stats?Have you seen Elliott scoring 7,5,5 in 3 matches?

We do need to get more out of Cloke. And I agree that a contract extension is not the way to do that. But I take exception to this inference that he only plays well against poor teams. He has shown otherwise plenty of times in his career.

 

[Quicky]

My statistics show that we didn't play finals last year. Or is that cherry picking?

It's funny I was penning a response to your post above when you wrote this. Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed? Not really sure what this comment adds to the debate.

 

[PicaBoo]

It's funny I was penning a response to your post above when you wrote this. Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed? Not really sure what this comment adds to the debate.

Lol no I got out of bed okay, too bad still my own . Apologies if I came across like that.
Only the last few years are relevant imho. Final reputation doesn't do much for me if we don't reach them.
Against the top teams, ie the big games, he should play like it is a final. And I don’t see him standing up there either.

 

[SideysBottom]

I'm of the opinion that he needs to see out his remaining contract before we talk an extension, simply put we shouldn't be asking for more than 2 years (3 years is ludicrous) out of him. It was a big kick in the guts for him to lose his spot in the leadership group so he needs to prove to everyone he can still be a considerable player in the competition.

FWIW, imagine if we picked up a key forward in the draft, I reckon Cloke would be in a dire predicament to hold his spot in the team beyond 2017.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

I don't think Cloke had a great year but it's still cherry picking. The inference is he only plays well against poor teams. You could also point out times he has stepped up when needed most, like grand finals.

Some would argue Cloke is the reason we've been missing finals the last couple of years. I'd wager we could have added enough wins to sneak into the 8 the last 2 years if Cloke did more than his current output.

In the end, he is our number one forward and one of the highest paid forward in the game. It is literally his job to kick goals and if you feel 30-40 goals a year is good enough for a key forward on 800K per year, then I feel you may need to raise your expectations somewhat.

 

[tehnoodnub]

Some would argue Cloke is the reason we've been missing finals the last couple of years. I'd wager we could have added enough wins to sneak into the 8 the last 2 years if Cloke did more than his current output.

In the end, he is our number one forward and one of the highest paid forward in the game. It is literally his job to kick goals and if you feel 30-40 goals a year is good enough for a key forward on 800K per year, then I feel you may need to raise your expectations somewhat.

I don't think he's THE reason but I agree with the sentiment nonetheless. Had his output been better then we likely would have played finals in both years. Based on his wage and importance, I'd like to see a minimum of 60 goals from him this year.

 

[MagpieJoel]

There is no reason why he should receive a contract extension this early. And his salary should be halved, his recent performance does not warrant his current pay.

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

I don't think he's THE reason but I agree with the sentiment nonetheless. Had his output been better then we likely would have played finals in both years. Based on his wage and importance, I'd like to see a minimum of 60 goals from him this year.

This is my point. It's not his poor form per se that bothers me. It's his poor form despite his very high pay. Not to mention the process by which he acquired such a lucrative contract. He and his father dragged the contract talks out and ensured it was all over the media and effectively tried to strong arm us and bend us over a barrel to get a huge pay day.

Anyone who argues he's justified his contract is in dream land.

There's currently no known dimension or parallel universe where Travis Cloke deserves a contract extension, let alone one that's worth more than 200K per year.

 

[Quicky]

Some would argue Cloke is the reason we've been missing finals the last couple of years. I'd wager we could have added enough wins to sneak into the 8 the last 2 years if Cloke did more than his current output.

In the end, he is our number one forward and one of the highest paid forward in the game. It is literally his job to kick goals and if you feel 30-40 goals a year is good enough for a key forward on 800K per year, then I feel you may need to raise your expectations somewhat.

My points so far in this thread are 1. I don't like people cherry picking stats 2. I don't like this inference Cloke only plays good against poor teams. This isn't true across his career 3. I think that Cloke needs to lift his game and that extending his contract won't motivate him to do that.

Considering the above, where on earth do you pull that last paragraph from? That's putting words in my mouth I never said. Stretching out my statements to something they're not. I'm not happy with Clokes performance, it needs to improve.

I hate the extremes of these arguments and the way people try to paint you as pro or con. People talk too much in absolutes. It's not all black and white

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

My points so far in this thread are 1. I don't like people cherry picking stats 2. I don't like this inference Cloke only plays good against poor teams. This isn't true across his career 3. I think that Cloke needs to lift his game and that extending his contract won't motivate him to do that.

Considering the above, where on earth do you pull that last paragraph from? That's putting words in my mouth I never said. Stretching out my statements to something they're not. I'm not happy with Clokes performance, it needs to improve.

I hate the extremes of these arguments and the way people try to paint you as pro or con. People talk too much in absolutes. It's not all black and white

My apologies. I didn't read the whole convo and responded to that post in isolation. Having said that, those rules probably apply to the last 2 years anyway don't they? In the last 2 seasons, Cloke has pretty much only had big games against poor teams?

No point referring to past glory days when the present/recent history is all that's relevant no?

 

[spartan-magpie]

We all know cloke has been playing a virtual lone hand and 2/3 on 1 a lot of the time . Cloke in isolation isn't the problem it's our entire foward setup. Cloke is virtually the only target and doesn't get beaten often.. He causes more than enough chances for crumbers to capitalize without us haven taken advantage of it.


Jesse white, who is good as a 3rd forward isn't what cloke needs. Cloke needs a guy who can be dangerous along side him. Someone like Ben Reid.


As for contracts I can't understand why he'd want one so early out.

 

[Vicky Park]

Poll added to thread. Let's vote on it!

 

[Bard]

If he's willing to take A LOT less coin. Don't get me wrong, we all know that at his best, Cloke is basically the best there is, but he hasn't been anywhere near his best for the better part of 3 years or more and as he gets older, won't be getting back there again.

If we wansn't on the money he was, it wouldn't bother me as much. But the fact that he's probably Top 3 highest paid forwards in the game, it really irks me given he's not anywhere near one of the best 3 forwards in the comp.

I hope he can return to some kind of form, but I won't hold my breath.

His wage wouldn't scrape the boots of Buddy/Tippett/Cameron/Boyd and whatever contract Hogan gets thrown this year. I do agree though that his output needs to lift. He was largely hampered by injury last year but he needs to be able to play through that on his salary (if he can get on the field that is...) or accept something far less.

 

[Snell1234]

The reason for the push for the contract extension was the fact the Gold Coast made an irresponsible offer to him late last year. It was never entertained but of course it would get the Cloke's greedy.

 

[PicaBoo]

The reason for the push for the contract extension was the fact the Gold Coast made an irresponsible offer to him late last year. It was never entertained but of course it would get the Cloke's greedy.

direct swap for JOM and a package of chips?

 

[Maggie5]

Just looked at Footywire and compared Cloke to the two Riewoldts, Kennedy and Franklin and stats-wise, not much different, yet surprising he cops a lot of flak from supporters and not only from our club..

I think we are hard on Cloke because of his misses and tendency to get frustrated at umpiring decisions, and I think of who his manager is and the way his contract dealings were covered. However if I recall correctly he always wanted to stay and is loyal and doubt that he would not gouge the club for money.

I have no idea what salary he is on but think that sometime during this year will sign him again.

 

[Old Spice]

The main thing from the club perspective is not to mug ourselves. There is no need to rush into these negotiations and I say let's see how 2016 goes and then have a look early in 2017 at what the reasonable wage level might be. We have 112k per annum as a head start over other clubs already.

It also depends how we are sitting in 2016/2017. If we are right in the frame of top 4, we might be robbing ourselves to let him go, especially if a premiership competitor came knocking.

He's free of course to exercise his options as a Restricted Free Agent but if we are a flag contender then he might forego some money.

The market for Cloke will be what it is and linked to his form - high or low. There's no escaping that. If he looks good, we want him and are 100k in the + with the vet's allowance plus (hopefully) a club loyalty/flag discount. If his output is poor, then the wage outcome diminishes. If the latter is the case and Cloke wants 800k for 2 years, then we probably say try again.

 

[sirlothie]

As 76woodenspooners discovered, the 5th year of Cloke's contract is dependent on a range of trigger points. One can only presume that he hasn't met them therefore this would be the last year of his current contract, thus the beginning of negotiation.

I'm surprised the media haven't clarified and elaborated on this. I hope this question is posed soon (has the 5th year been triggered or not?).

 

[PicaBoo]

As 76woodenspooners discovered, the 5th year of Cloke's contract is dependent on a range of trigger points. One can only presume that he hasn't met them therefore this would be the last year of his current contract, thus the beginning of negotiation.

I'm surprised the media haven't clarified and elaborated on this. I hope this question is posed soon (has the 5th year been triggered or not?).

Where was that mentioned? I thought year 5 was primarily performance based, not triggered as a whole.