- Banned
- #26
Maybe they didnt want to give him two millon dollars for his first two seasons?
Did GCS stuff up by losing Jack Martin for nothing?
- Thread starter Catters 070911
- Start date
- Tagged users None
ferrisb
Brownlow Medallist
I liked your post but thought your acronym was pretty "Silly, Haughty, Immature and Turgid"
It's easier to pull numbers out of your arse I suppose.
- May 5, 2006
- 62,726
- 70,017
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Maybe they are just sick of being soft targets for clubs to poach their players?
Jack Martin is 24 and reportedly now on a 5 year, $600k deal. What did Carlton offer in a trade? Reportedly 2020 2nd + 3rd picks.
Compare that to Tim Kelly who is 25 and reportedly now on anywhere from $600-800k over 5 or 6 years. We got that trade done early putting a heap of picks in play.
Now obviously Kelly is better, but I doubt Geelong would've taken us seriously if we had said 'OK we want 14 for the draft, and 24 for this trade, and then next year's pick we'd prefer to keep... etc'. In the end Gold Coast used 1, 2, 11, 27 at the draft. If the best Carlton were offering was future second and third round picks in the NGA draft then where is the motivation for Gold Coast to trade? Carlton had too many irons in the fire and ended up missing targets because of it. Let Carlton navigate the PSD and use $1m in 2020 and 2021 in order to get him. One less club with cap space to be a nuisance next year.
Jack Martin is 24 and reportedly now on a 5 year, $600k deal. What did Carlton offer in a trade? Reportedly 2020 2nd + 3rd picks.
Compare that to Tim Kelly who is 25 and reportedly now on anywhere from $600-800k over 5 or 6 years. We got that trade done early putting a heap of picks in play.
Now obviously Kelly is better, but I doubt Geelong would've taken us seriously if we had said 'OK we want 14 for the draft, and 24 for this trade, and then next year's pick we'd prefer to keep... etc'. In the end Gold Coast used 1, 2, 11, 27 at the draft. If the best Carlton were offering was future second and third round picks in the NGA draft then where is the motivation for Gold Coast to trade? Carlton had too many irons in the fire and ended up missing targets because of it. Let Carlton navigate the PSD and use $1m in 2020 and 2021 in order to get him. One less club with cap space to be a nuisance next year.
- Banned
- #30
as reported in the age
if i were the suns i wouldnt wanna give him "about" 2mill/24months either...
As a Suns fan, it was worth it just to watch Carlton squirm. It meant they had to wait another month to get him & commit $2 million of their Salary Cap over the next 2 years to ensure Gold Coast or Melbourne didn't draft him. As has been mentioned, the deal Carlton offered was not worth anything to us. Maybe you think that's because the AFL gave us over-the-top concessions. I don't see it that way. We're not a team that has been around for 100 years & is just going through a bad patch. We're a new club in a non-traditional AFL state. The AFL set us up. The resources allocated to our setup didn't work, so they've given us some more. To me, these are not the normal concessions for an under-performing club. They are still part of the establishment costs.
- Nov 14, 2010
- 42,177
- 46,421
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
Establishment costs should be well and truly over after year 5
You are into year 10 no more excuses
That's exactly what Carlton figured.
That's not the contract though.
Linky please. That way I know whether you're actually not misinterpreting it.
But worth losing a good player for nothing.
Terrific logic.
I hope you continue wanting to watch Carlton squirm during the next trading period.
My feeling on the whole Martin thing is that Gold Coast desperately wanted that extra 1st Rounder and they decided to play Russian Roulette in the final trade period hours that Carlton would acquiesce. They knew Papley wasn't getting done and there was heaps of public pressure on Carlton not to miss Martin too. GC fully expected Carlton to fold and do the deal that involved Pick 9.
But Carlton didn't fold. They held firm, as they knew their salary cap position and GC didn't factor it in enough.
Carlton wore some initial expected and not necessarily wanted ridicule, but were always gonna get the player. Thanks to GC's faulty gamble, they got him for nothing albeit on a larger than ideal wage.
Since the minute time ran out on the trade period and their gamble failed, Gold Coast have been eating the s**t sandwich of giving away a good player for nothing, and proving nothing. Because of the other picks they were given, the sandwich didn't taste as bad as it otherwise would have.
But Carlton didn't fold. They held firm, as they knew their salary cap position and GC didn't factor it in enough.
Carlton wore some initial expected and not necessarily wanted ridicule, but were always gonna get the player. Thanks to GC's faulty gamble, they got him for nothing albeit on a larger than ideal wage.
Since the minute time ran out on the trade period and their gamble failed, Gold Coast have been eating the s**t sandwich of giving away a good player for nothing, and proving nothing. Because of the other picks they were given, the sandwich didn't taste as bad as it otherwise would have.
- Mar 14, 2014
- 39,394
- 72,511
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
- Other Teams
- Las Vegas Bears
Is he a good player though? He hasnt really played a good game of football in 2 years. I said at the start of the trade period he would be lucky to be worth a 2nd round pick. Not stressed losing him at all because he has been fairly ineffectual for us over the last 2 years. Hoping you can get the best out of him
Your own club wanted pick 9 and a future 2nd rounder for him, which means internally they rated him high enough. When Carlton didn't accept that, they were blasted by the so-called scribes on this forum, yelling from the rooftops that we should've made a deal because he was apparently good enough to give up #9.
But now he's suddenly mediocre?
Laughable.
- Mar 14, 2014
- 39,394
- 72,511
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
- Other Teams
- Las Vegas Bears
This is my own opinion not the one of the clubs
That's fair enough, but apparently "those in the know" don't really see it that way. Oh, until he actually ends up at Carlton that is. Funny how mindshifts happen so conveniently!
- Banned
- #42
By Jake Niall
November 14, 2019 — 6.08pm
Jack Martin will be paid about $2 million over the first two years of his massively front-loaded five-year deal as a result of a deal struck between Martin and the exiting Gold Coast player's preferred destination club, Carlton.
Martin's terms – nominated in a bid to assure him of safe passage to Carlton in the pre-season draft – guarantee him more than a $1 million next year, and then close to that amount in year two of a five-year deal that pays him an aggregate of about $3.1 million, with incentives that could stretch that to about $3.5 million if he performs well.
The front-loading of the contract – designed to deter both his current team, Gold Coast, and Melbourne from picking him up – means that Martin will be close to Carlton's highest paid player, potentially ahead of Patrick Cripps, in those two years, although he will average a more moderate guaranteed salary of about $625,000 per season over the entire length of the contract.
The Age revealed on Monday that Martin's terms included a 2020 contract on more than $1 million to discourage the Suns and Demons from picking him, but this huge second year is a further disincentive for those clubs.
- Mar 14, 2014
- 39,394
- 72,511
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
- Other Teams
- Las Vegas Bears
Every club is going to rate every player differently, but in my opinion we arent losing a thing with Martin. He doesn't work hard enough as a mid or as a forward doesn't apply enough defensive pressure. He is a cherry on top sort of player that doesnt have to work hard just feeds off others. You might have the midfield to get the best out of him but i just don't see it in him.
- Banned
- #44
when some d grade nobody says the tigers are in love with Philp its gospel when Niall rights extensively about JMartin its widely off the mark. thatd be right
- Nov 23, 2019
- 3,349
- 3,703
- AFL Club
- Gold Coast
Carlton also rated him at a certain level to offer the contract they did.
At least the Suns' administration and their fans are on the same page - both seem equally happy to squander their footy resources.
- Banned
- #47
suns list looks pretty brilliant just quietly
Sixpence
Brownlow Medallist
To answer the OP: No. Not when you have Daddy Gil to pick you up, wipe your ass and hand you some shiny new picks instead.
Any other club and the answer would be "Absolutely, yes".
Any other club and the answer would be "Absolutely, yes".
- Sep 25, 2013
- 14,988
- 29,161
- AFL Club
- Carlton
Kelly is on unders because he wanted to move home. Probably would’ve been closer to 1m if Freo became an option.
We didn’t miss any targets due to “too many irons in the fire”. We only missed out on Papley because Sydney didn’t want to lose a goal kicker without replacing him with one. Which is fair enough. They were offering 9 in the Daniher deal which proves we came to play, and had the Daniher deal got done I suspect GC would’ve accepted a future 2nd and 3rd which is fair.
- Feb 6, 2016
- 5,066
- 9,922
- AFL Club
- Carlton
In an interview immediately after trade period closed your list manager said "we have a really strong hand in this years and next years drafts" as the reason the trade failed.
Similar threads
