List Mgmt. Fyfe - Signed until 2023!!

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Gibbs wants to leave Carlton for a chance at success. Obviously Carlton are years off. Fyfe if he goes won't be going for dollars. Freo have a truckload of that. If he wants success he has more of a chance at Freo than Carlton plus the added incentive of being captain of Freo's first premiership. Carlton being a destination club for Fyfe makes no sense.

At the moment obviously it's all speculation and I don't pretend to know what any possible reasons could be SHOULD Fyfe end up wanting out. Players can leave for all kinds of reasons. Change of scenery. New challenge. Perhaps he doesn't like the path that he sees Freo taking. Maybe he doesn't get along with Ross, or like his game plan. Opportunities outside of footy? The possibilities are endless. It's not always about more money or more success.
Having said that, I'm fairly confident that Gibbs isn't leaving for success. He has a young family and no support in VIC from extended family. It seems to be driven more by his partner and his family pressuring him to move back home.

 

[DaveLister]

Is there some way to hide a thread?

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

There's a reason clubs wait till the superstars come out of contract before trying to bring them across. Its too expensive to get a club to give up a marquee player when in contract. Despite contracts having less value, you still have to pay premium (unless your Hawthorn) to get contracted players (see Gibbs). Premium for Fyfe is at minimum two top 5 picks and a player. Other posters will say no way, thats crazy and they would be right, that's why the deal will never be done

 

[poshman]

Just because you don't agree with it, doesn't mean it wasn't serious.
It's not Gibbs for Fyfe, but from OUR perspective, it's effectively that. I said 2 x 1st rounders. That's pretty much the going rate for top players. I also said that we have our own picks this year and next that could come into play to make a combination of 2 x 1st rounders, and that maybe a sweetener of another 2nd or 3rd, or a young fringe player like Boekhorst, who is a WA boy and has shown some positive signs, but was hampered by a broken hand this year.
It's all hypothetical, but it's based on the assumption that he wants to leave and wants to come to Carlton. He might not be from VIC, but if he wanted to leave and wanted to come to Carlton, that's effectively the same thing.

Judd was a 1st, a 2nd and a good young player. If you want to count Kennedy as a 1st, that's 2 x 1sts and a 2nd. He was also the best player in the league and a premiership captain and a year younger.

Treloar went for 2 x 1sts and #62 and they also got #28 back from GWS.

Dangerfield was a 1st and 2nd and a player (Gore).

Beams was a 1st, a 2nd and a player (Crisp).

Ablett was 2 x 1sts.

Tom Mitchell was one 1st and a swap of later picks.

2 x 1sts, or 2 x 1sts and a player/pick is well and truly a serious proposition.

Yet you mentioned two picks in the teens and at best a player who could be traded for pick 35+

Again the judd trade is the model as he is a 'restricted' free agent and we aren't forced to sell him.

You mention we want overs however there is no one on big footy who would think Freo did well out of the trade you proposed. That would suggest that perhaps you aren't seeking a fair trade and is why your idea was rubbished.

A fair trade in this instance is based around the fact he is a restricted free agent and we have the money to match offers.

Fyfe is the dominant midfielder in the game as well as the most dominant contested player both on the ground and marking in the league. Prior to injury this year he was swinging forward more often and in a poor team was starting to produce high possession high goals games.

Based on that (which is why everyone wants him) and his restricted status. I don't hunk your offer of two picks in the teens and an average player is even close.

 

[serial_thrilla]

Is there some way to hide a thread?

The Mods might as well just pin it; it'll end up being 200+ pages by the time Fyfe signs his next contract.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Fyfe trade doesn't get done this season and if he makes it known he wants to move next year, we'll match and he'll go to the highest bidder. If he asked to move this year, I reckon we could get two/three picks in the top ten this year from GC.

If the reports are true that the Blues are only dealing with Gibbs' manager in relation to a suitable trade and giving the Crows the silent treatment, well done. 100% leave it up to the only parties that want this trade to happen to come up with a suitable offer; FWIW based on the current circumstances, I don't think #13 & McGovern or Cameron is unreasonable.

I like that most of these posts are becoming more reasonable and actual conversation can take place. That was my only intention with my first post. The picks I used in my first post were obviously too low, but it was my starting point for opening a potential scenario.
I like your optimism, but no player has ever been traded for 3 x 1st rounders. Could always be a first time though. If GC were willing and able to do that, then good luck to you guys. There's no way we could/would match that trade offer, but to suggest that he would then go to the highest bidder, is a bit wrong. The only way that happens is if Fyfe says he is happy to go ANYWHERE, but he won't. He will choose 1-2 clubs as his preferred destination and if GC isn't one of those, their offer of 3 x 1sts is off the table and no measure of what his chosen clubs would offer.

I think it would be a miracle if Fyfe was to move this late in the period with no official word of a move, but I enjoy discussing potential trades sometimes, even if it's based on rumour and innuendo.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

There's a reason clubs wait till the superstars come out of contract before trying to bring them across. Its too expensive to get a club to give up a marquee player when in contract. Despite contracts having less value, you still have to pay premium (unless your Hawthorn) to get contracted players (see Gibbs). Premium for Fyfe is at minimum two top 5 picks and a player. Other posters will say no way, thats crazy and they would be right, that's why the deal will never be done

I wouldn't say that's completely unreasonable. Where the uncertainty comes from with Fyfe is if he potentially went to the club and said "I'm thinking I might move on next year when my contract is up". Do they wait for that moment to come and decide whether to match any offers and force a trade, knowing that he will be out of contract and another year older in terms of value, not to mention the unknown factor of how he comes back from injury and the potential for him to get injured again? Or do they bite the bullet and deal him now and try to get the max for him.
It's all guess work, but a couple of high picks in a draft like this that's stacked with even midfield talent, could ease the pain of losing him.

 

[JustaBattler]

Fyfe trade doesn't get done this season and if he makes it known he wants to move next year, we'll match and he'll go to the highest bidder. If he asked to move this year, I reckon we could get two/three picks in the top ten this year from GC.

If the reports are true that the Blues are only dealing with Gibbs' manager in relation to a suitable trade and giving the Crows the silent treatment, well done. 100% leave it up to the only parties that want this trade to happen to come up with a suitable offer; FWIW based on the current circumstances, I don't think #13 & McGovern or Cameron is unreasonable.

Yep players are worth different things to different clubs and clubs are able to pay different things at different times according to circumstances.

I think there is zero chance of a move this year ( FWIW) - however, I think that Fyfe will seriously consider making a move next year and the cheque books will be out - as mentioned previously, players usually choose i-2 Clubs they are prepared to deal with - Fremantle wont get that choice. As for other Melbourne Clubs - well good luck to them trying to match a carlton offer. We usually get who want and are prepared to pay.

 

[Wally Walpamur]

I like that most of these posts are becoming more reasonable and actual conversation can take place. That was my only intention with my first post. The picks I used in my first post were obviously too low, but it was my starting point for opening a potential scenario.
I like your optimism, but no player has ever been traded for 3 x 1st rounders. Could always be a first time though. If GC were willing and able to do that, then good luck to you guys. There's no way we could/would match that trade offer, but to suggest that he would then go to the highest bidder, is a bit wrong. The only way that happens is if Fyfe says he is happy to go ANYWHERE, but he won't. He will choose 1-2 clubs as his preferred destination and if GC isn't one of those, their offer of 3 x 1sts is off the table and no measure of what his chosen clubs would offer.

I think it would be a miracle if Fyfe was to move this late in the period with no official word of a move, but I enjoy discussing potential trades sometimes, even if it's based on rumour and innuendo.

Who would have thought a player could've earned $1M per season or that they could sign 9 year contracts? With the amount of money in AFL now, much like the EPL and American sports, players are going to see a lot more of the pie (they see something like 70%+ of the broadcast revenue as compared to <30% in AFL) and contracts are only going to go up. I also reckon players have too much power now in relation to moving clubs (contracted or not) and in the very near future, as with American sports, clubs are going to have the power to transfer contracts without the consent of the player.

 

[JohnW]

There's a reason clubs wait till the superstars come out of contract before trying to bring them across. Its too expensive to get a club to give up a marquee player when in contract. Despite contracts having less value, you still have to pay premium (unless your Hawthorn) to get contracted players (see Gibbs). Premium for Fyfe is at minimum two top 5 picks and a player. Other posters will say no way, thats crazy and they would be right, that's why the deal will never be done

Free agency changed the landscape. It is moving more and more towards a NBA type system where teams are looking to trade players before going into their last year of contract. To avoid getting the rock bottom price an out of contract player brings.

See Hogan this year.

 

[JustaBattler]

Yep - players are almost forcing the AFL into allowing Clubs to trade players to whoever they wish - whenever they wish. Supporters barrack for their Clubs - not players - something too many players forget.

 

[wayToGo_]

As for other Melbourne Clubs - well good luck to them trying to match a carlton offer. We usually get who want and are prepared to pay.

Yes but we don't have some dodgy agreement with Carlton like GWS Given St Kilda and Hawthorn are the other two clubs talked about, I'd hate to break it to you but I think the Hawks may have a slightly better record of getting who they want in recent times.

BTW most of us on here think there is close to zero chance Fyfe will leave. This thread is just so we can enjoy other club supporters getting their hopes up only to be destroyed when he resigns with us early to mid next year.

 

[Taylor]

Yep - players are almost forcing the AFL into allowing Clubs to trade players to whoever they wish - whenever they wish. Supporters barrack for their Clubs - not players - something too many players forget.

The clubs are nothing without the players.

The clubs build their success on the broken bodies of young men, many of whom will spend the rest of their lives broken - but as long as the idea that they are living their dream and not just plying their trade for work is spread around it makes that alright.

Only those players good enough get to choose where they want to work too, the rest get spat out.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Yet you mentioned two picks in the teens and at best a player who could be traded for pick 35+

Again the judd trade is the model as he is a 'restricted' free agent and we aren't forced to sell him.

You mention we want overs however there is no one on big footy who would think Freo did well out of the trade you proposed. That would suggest that perhaps you aren't seeking a fair trade and is why your idea was rubbished.

A fair trade in this instance is based around the fact he is a restricted free agent and we have the money to match offers.

Fyfe is the dominant midfielder in the game as well as the most dominant contested player both on the ground and marking in the league. Prior to injury this year he was swinging forward more often and in a poor team was starting to produce high possession high goals games.

Based on that (which is why everyone wants him) and his restricted status. I don't hunk your offer of two picks in the teens and an average player is even close.

All fair points, but you always start low. Eventually we would end up at 2016 pick #5 and our 2017 1st, which will likely be no higher than say #7, so it would be #5 and <#7, but the player would be the stumbling block. Kennedy was a high pick, but he was also unproven at the time and struggling to get games in a forward line that was actually functioning quite well and had Fevola anchoring. Without the benefit of hindsight, we thought we could afford to part with him at the time, even though WC wanted Fev in the deal.
I struggle to see anyone on our list at the moment that we would be willing to part with and you would be willing to accept. Boekhorst might be scoffed at, but I actually like him and he's the only player I can see that I would be happy to keep, but also happy to move on in the right deal.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Who would have thought a player could've earned $1M per season or that they could sign 9 year contracts? With the amount of money in AFL now, much like the EPL and American sports, players are going to see a lot more of the pie (they see something like 70%+ of the broadcast revenue as compared to <30% in AFL) and contracts are only going to go up. I also reckon players have too much power now in relation to moving clubs (contracted or not) and in the very near future, as with American sports, clubs are going to have the power to transfer contracts without the consent of the player.

Agreed, but at the moment the players choose. If the rules changed at the end of next year, you would be in the box seat should he want to move.

 

[Wally Walpamur]

All fair points, but you always start low. Eventually we would end up at 2016 pick #5 and our 2017 1st, which will likely be no higher than say #7, so it would be #5 and <#7, but the player would be the stumbling block. Kennedy was a high pick, but he was also unproven at the time and struggling to get games in a forward line that was actually functioning quite well and had Fevola anchoring. Without the benefit of hindsight, we thought we could afford to part with him at the time, even though WC wanted Fev in the deal.
I struggle to see anyone on our list at the moment that we would be willing to part with and you would be willing to accept. Boekhorst might be scoffed at, but I actually like him and he's the only player I can see that I would be happy to keep, but also happy to move on in the right deal.

And that's the stumbling block. You could trade Boekhorst to get say a second rounder to throw in with the two firsts to make it worth our while or look hard at your list and ask yourself is Fyfe worth giving up said players.

 

[mightymouse75]

Ken

All fair points, but you always start low. Eventually we would end up at 2016 pick #5 and our 2017 1st, which will likely be no higher than say #7, so it would be #5 and <#7, but the player would be the stumbling block. Kennedy was a high pick, but he was also unproven at the time and struggling to get games in a forward line that was actually functioning quite well and had Fevola anchoring. Without the benefit of hindsight, we thought we could afford to part with him at the time, even though WC wanted Fev in the deal.
I struggle to see anyone on our list at the moment that we would be willing to part with and you would be willing to accept. Boekhorst might be scoffed at, but I actually like him and he's the only player I can see that I would be happy to keep, but also happy to move on in the right deal.

Kennedy was a jag for west coast

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

All fair points, but you always start low. Eventually we would end up at 2016 pick #5 and our 2017 1st, which will likely be no higher than say #7, so it would be #5 and <#7, but the player would be the stumbling block. Kennedy was a high pick, but he was also unproven at the time and struggling to get games in a forward line that was actually functioning quite well and had Fevola anchoring. Without the benefit of hindsight, we thought we could afford to part with him at the time, even though WC wanted Fev in the deal.
I struggle to see anyone on our list at the moment that we would be willing to part with and you would be willing to accept. Boekhorst might be scoffed at, but I actually like him and he's the only player I can see that I would be happy to keep, but also happy to move on in the right deal.

Haha, I didnt think we were actually negotiating here. For the record, if you walked in with that offer I cant tell you what would happen:

 

[Taylor]

The risk a team takes to trade in the likes of Fyfe or Hogan are that there is a big chance you cripple the club in what it takes to get them so the net gain is wiped out.

That being said, I wouldn't want any future picks in the deal for Fyfe because he will lift any club - and that isn't good for the pick in trade.

 

[Crippa]

AFL site reporting that Hawthorn moving on Mitchell/Lewis isn't about making room for this years trades and is instead to create a war chest to lure Fyfe/Martin next year.

Hey Braddles can't blame you for not realising but Ashley Browne who wrote that article is a fanatical Hawks supporter who wouldn't know what journalistic integrity was if it hit him in the face. Will write whatever made up crap it takes to seduce the unsuspecting into believing that this diabolical embarrassment of a trade period was a stroke of genius.

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

To add more fuel to the fire, we have just had this posted recently by one of our most reliable posters. I won't directly link to the quote here, as I'm not sure if he'd appreciate that, but this is what it says:

"As mentioned a few weeks ago, Fyfe is the big fish we are after. We are waiting on Freo to respond & the door has not been closed shut on it just yet. We were hoping we could get him next year via FA, but Freo would likely match any offer. Now we have 2 first rounders, Freo are just considering if that satisfies or not. My gut feel is that it won't happen, but it's also a real possibility."

Having said that, we had another poster say that we would be happy with our final movements in the period and it involves keeping pick 5. Based on that, I would say that Fyfe is off the table, because I honestly can't see it getting done without #5 being involved somewhere, but one post doesn't necessarily cancel out the other.
(sounds like a Gibbs deal is effectively done if 'we have 2 first rounders' - don't know if that means we got 2 for Gibbs, or if that means #5 and #13)

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Hey Braddles can't blame you for not realising but Ashley Browne who wrote that article is a fanatical Hawks supporter who wouldn't know what journalistic integrity was if it hit him in the face. Will write whatever made up crap it takes to seduce the unsuspecting into believing that this diabolical embarrassment of a trade period was a stroke of genius.

Problem with that is that Mitchell and Lewis are creating space for JOM and Mitchell. I doubt they can make room for JOM, Mitchell AND Fyfe. I also believe they were only contracted for next year, so they could've played next year and retired to make room.

 

[Moist Biscuit]

To add more fuel to the fire, we have just had this posted recently by one of our most reliable posters. I won't directly link to the quote here, as I'm not sure if he'd appreciate that, but this is what it says:

"As mentioned a few weeks ago, Fyfe is the big fish we are after. We are waiting on Freo to respond & the door has not been closed shut on it just yet. We were hoping we could get him next year via FA, but Freo would likely match any offer. Now we have 2 first rounders, Freo are just considering if that satisfies or not. My gut feel is that it won't happen, but it's also a real possibility."

Having said that, we had another poster say that we would be happy with our final movements in the period and it involves keeping pick 5. Based on that, I would say that Fyfe is off the table, because I honestly can't see it getting done without #5 being involved somewhere, but one post doesn't necessarily cancel out the other.
(sounds like a Gibbs deal is effectively done if 'we have 2 first rounders' - don't know if that means we got 2 for Gibbs, or if that means #5 and #13)

Mate we don't care about posters on your board and how good their Intel is, it won't happen. He has said success is the most important thing, he's better off staying at Freo as we are in a better spot imo.

 

[Crippa]

Problem with that is that Mitchell and Lewis are creating space for JOM and Mitchell. I doubt they can make room for JOM, Mitchell AND Fyfe. I also believe they were only contracted for next year, so they could've played next year and retired to make room.

In other words Ashley Browne is full of s**t. I agree

 

[Cripps 'n' Blue Bloods]

Mate we don't care about posters on your board and how good their Intel is, it won't happen. He has said success is the most important thing, he's better off staying at Freo as we are in a better spot imo.

Chill mate. Just passing on some info that's related to the rumour and the thread. You have as much knowledge as I do.