Strategy GWS must keep Tom Scully

[Paunchos Pizza]

Did they agree? His manager said no comment when asked. The club has been upfront with the other players but silent on this one.

I think there's a chance he'll go. The difficulty is getting your head around the difference between he's going, and he's looking around. Ie the outcome is currently uncertain.

Do you really think we would trade him for a pick in the 5O's and pay any part of his contract ongoing? Even serious Hawks supporters are struggling with that.

So I will wait until the dust settles and not join in the hysteria.

That's an interesting point about the club staying mum. I haven't followed the ins and outs of who's saying what during the off season, but any idea on who is driving the deal news flow in this case? Coming out from the hawks to put pressure on us?

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

That's an interesting point about the club staying mum. I haven't followed the ins and outs of who's saying what during the off season, but any idea on who is driving the deal news flow in this case? Coming out from the hawks to put pressure on us?

Not sure, given we do have players leaving the press piling on seems natural to me. Creating a crisis gets clicks.

A sensible Hawks poster suggested the real story is the Hawks made an offer to us if a low puck thus year, and a future second round pick. That is credible since he did a medical. I dont think it's near enough though.

He might go but I think wait and see is sensible.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

The clubs like a waiting room, get drafted and then leave to a proper Melbourne based club.

Mindless Mutts trolling doesn't add anything on our board.

 

[LittleG]

I wrote this on the Bulldogs board about what GWS were doing the last three years:

GWS list manager was the master of deferring salaries into future years and then off-loading the contract prior to the final year. The reason was this:
Player X got $250k, $250k, $850k.
You kept the player for the first two years and then traded them out to someone. This player could be Shiel or Lobb but there were a few before him.
It is a fantastic way of keeping the list as strong as possible for a few extra years. During that time you aim to win the premiership and get the players to agree to take less to stay together. It's a great strategy.

Unfortunately, the player managers are not playing ball any more. So, there is a cap squeeze for this year and without shedding some of the underperforming/older players, you will be unable to sign up your stars like Kelly, Haynes & Coniglio next year.

Personally I would keep Scully, a super hard trainer and leader. Not sure why the List manager doesn't look for others to offload before him. Perhaps the injury is just too bad....


Note: happy for mods to delete IF they think inappropriate.

 

[Colonial]

I wrote this on the Bulldogs board about what GWS were doing the last three years:

GWS list manager was the master of deferring salaries into future years and then off-loading the contract prior to the final year. The reason was this:
Player X got $250k, $250k, $850k.
You kept the player for the first two years and then traded them out to someone. This player could be Shiel or Lobb but there were a few before him.
It is a fantastic way of keeping the list as strong as possible for a few extra years. During that time you aim to win the premiership and get the players to agree to take less to stay together. It's a great strategy.

Unfortunately, the player managers are not playing ball any more. So, there is a cap squeeze for this year and without shedding some of the underperforming/older players, you will be unable to sign up your stars like Kelly, Haynes & Coniglio next year.

Personally I would keep Scully, a super hard trainer and leader. Not sure why the List manager doesn't look for others to offload before him. Perhaps the injury is just too bad....


Note: happy for mods to delete IF they think inappropriate.

LittleG if you posted more often like this you would always be welcome here.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

I wrote this on the Bulldogs board about what GWS were doing the last three years:

GWS list manager was the master of deferring salaries into future years and then off-loading the contract prior to the final year. The reason was this:
Player X got $250k, $250k, $850k.
You kept the player for the first two years and then traded them out to someone. This player could be Shiel or Lobb but there were a few before him.
It is a fantastic way of keeping the list as strong as possible for a few extra years. During that time you aim to win the premiership and get the players to agree to take less to stay together. It's a great strategy.

Unfortunately, the player managers are not playing ball any more. So, there is a cap squeeze for this year and without shedding some of the underperforming/older players, you will be unable to sign up your stars like Kelly, Haynes & Coniglio next year.

Personally I would keep Scully, a super hard trainer and leader. Not sure why the List manager doesn't look for others to offload before him. Perhaps the injury is just too bad....


Note: happy for mods to delete IF they think inappropriate.

Fairyland.

Who have we traded out in the third year of a contract , it would have to be the 5th year for draftees. The first two are fixed for them. Disturbingly wierd that you dont even mention anyone in that situation. Sufficient to seriously doubt your intentions in fact.

 

[Giant Pete]

The big question now is who will take out our time trials? Will anyone beat Tommo? Will Taranto or Shipley sneak into the top 3? Now our flag window is shut we can get interested in the real stuff!

 

[LittleG]

Fairyland.

Who have we traded out in the third year of a contract , it would have to be the 5th year for draftees. The first two are fixed for them. Disturbingly wierd that you dont even mention anyone in that situation. Sufficient to seriously doubt your intentions in fact.

My example was for 3 years but Lobb was a 2 year and Shiel was too. They both will earn less than 1/3 of their two year deals. Yes, less than 1/3. There are others and my example was from a player manager who has more than 1 client effected.

Setterfield is no longer at GWS, I think you will find me less nasty in future. Really wish he came to the Dogs, family friend.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

My example was for 3 years but Lobb was a 2 year and Shiel was too. They both will earn less than 1/3 of their two year deals. Yes, less than 1/3. There are others and my example was from a player manager who has more than 1 client effected.

Setterfield is no longer at GWS, I think you will find me less nasty in future. Really wish he came to the Dogs, family friend.

It still makes no sense though. Shiel has been on rolling two year contracts for ever' as have most of our mids. Lobb signed on a three year deal in 2016 in fact.
They may well have been backended but you just cant trade players with a balloon payment pending. They dont have to accept a trade, and I'd expect self interest would motivate them, and rightly so. Unless the new club honours the contract, which must affect the trade price.

It would also damage the relationship between the club and the players, and that could be the most significant impact long term. Maybe some clubs would risk that, but it's all part of the culture thing.

 

[Cmarsh]

This makes a lot of sense. The club should articulate this to supporters, impossible to do completely but it’s important to get on the front foot otherwise it looks like the sky is falling.

McCartney is known as being a hard ass so I doubt he will give away anything. He did a good job with the Setterfield compensation extracting as much as he could.

We are a much more rounded club these days.

We no longer have the Carlton man doing our recuiting, we have a gun in Caruso who has a terrific background with analytics and understanding numbers and Quayle who has been in the space for years and known to have a good eye.

We have replaced that moron Craig Cameron who left the racing industry in disgrace following the BC3 debacle and showed his true colours jumping for money just before the draft.

In Matthews we have a very strong CEO, perhaps a touch arrogant but this is required to stand up against the very strong VFL clubs led by Eddie who want us to be a development project and TV Rights cash cow and nothing more.

In Leon Cameron we have a smart coach with tremendous relationship management and empathy and a sound tactical brain. He needs more mature support around him which he gets next year with Nicks.

We need to tidy up our game plan a little, develop strong systems in defence and have our players learning the balance of combining talent with defensive accountability and team oriented play. This is a work in progress.

The other area needing improvement is the Athletic Performance Unit. Joyce has been a dismal failure, the players put too much loading early in the season leading to a string of injuries. We need to source a gun in this area as you don’t assemble a fleet of Ferrari’s and get Mr Magoo to drive them.

Would love the club to poach a good analytics guy for Opp analysis, this has become a big part of coaching.
Clearly the AFL is reluctant to spend in certain areas given the club is fully subsidised but we clearly are disadvantaged in some key areas of support.

Anyways as Raymann says the list is still very good, yes we have missed a flag opportunity or two when we had the ridiculous depth but perhaps moving some of the egos out and balancing it out with more team oriented guys will ultimately blend better with the blue chip talent we have.

I’m still optimistic but if we lose one of Kelly, Whitfield or Cogs that would change. They are the key to this clubs future.

The problem is the going home thing is so in vogue that it only takes one of Kelly, Cogs or Whitfield to say this and that core is shattered.

 

[Cmarsh]

How on earth did the club get so far over the cap that now there is a virtual fire sale of all these players? Seems ridiculous.

 

[Andre the Giant]

How on earth did the club get so far over the cap that now there is a virtual fire sale of all these players? Seems ridiculous.

Combination of initial list build, inflation of wages due to free agency and godfather style offers, living away from home retention premiums paid and the quest to win a flag.

We didn’t quite get that flag or it might have been justified.

Now we pay the price. Without AFL assistance we become GC mark 2. Cola needs to come back.

 

[Cmarsh]

Combination of initial list build, inflation of wages due to free agency and godfather style offers, living away from home retention premiums paid and the quest to win a flag.

We didn’t quite get that flag or it might have been justified.

Now we pay the price. Without AFL assistance we become GC mark 2. Cola needs to come back.

Your last point is very sobering indeed.

 

[LittleG]

Now we pay the price. Without AFL assistance we become GC mark 2. Cola needs to come back.

This is the near future.

The AFL will wait a few years and realise both you and GC need COLA. Not sure that COLA works as well as it should.

A better idea would be to remove players being able to nominate specific clubs. IF they player wants out, club can then trade them anywhere. This will stop you being Forced to trade a player to a specific club and be able to trade them to the highest bidder (better draft picks).

What does it do for GWS?
Player wants out, trade them to Saints/Carlton/GC/North/Dogs/Freo. You get better picks, player is more likely to want to stay, rather than go to Carlton/Saints/GC/North/Dogs/Freo. It will help with retention of players. IF a player really wants to go somewhere, then the 'destination club' has to pay a premium price. GWS currently has many premium players, so this system makes you more likely to retain OR get adequate compensation.

 

[Teeso]

Perhaps if players want to nominate a club in the middle of a contract, make it that they can nominate the state but not the club. The kids can all still return home but the club gets to benefit trading them to the team with the most currency.

Geelong took the chance with Tim Kelly and now he wants out 1 year after joining. Chooses the premiership team in the WCE and refuses to go to Fremantle even if it means he can go back to his home state to play footy. Puts Geelong in a predicament knowing they either trade to WCE for unders or they have to keep a player who doesnt want to be at their club. Contracts and loyalty mean nothing in the modern day.

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Perhaps if players want to nominate a club in the middle of a contract, make it that they can nominate the state but not the club. The kids can all still return home but the club gets to benefit trading them to the team with the most currency.

Geelong took the chance with Tim Kelly and now he wants out 1 year after joining. Chooses the premiership team in the WCE and refuses to go to Fremantle even if it means he can go back to his home state to play footy. Puts Geelong in a predicament knowing they either trade to WCE for unders or they have to keep a player who doesnt want to be at their club. Contracts and loyalty mean nothing in the modern day.

Players can't actually nominate a club in contract though. They can ask to be traded, and I dont think you can stop them asking.

I get your point about Kelly and I think his manager was treading on dangerous ground stating he will only go to WC. Trying to corner the Cats like that risks a repeat if the McCarthy saga. It's not in either parties interests, the Cats or Kelly, to reach an impasse.

It's meant to be a balance of power between the player and the club and works in most cases. The impression it doesn't is caused by a lot of requests only becoming public when it goes wrong I think, or it is approved. I'm sure clubs regularly decline requests with no drama, as Leon did Tommo's last year.

It's difficult to imagine the AFLPA agreeing to players being traded against their will, in contract or not. That's the change that would change the balance.

 

[HODGEYROAD]

This is the near future.

The AFL will wait a few years and realise both you and GC need COLA. Not sure that COLA works as well as it should.

A better idea would be to remove players being able to nominate specific clubs. IF they player wants out, club can then trade them anywhere. This will stop you being Forced to trade a player to a specific club and be able to trade them to the highest bidder (better draft picks).

What does it do for GWS?
Player wants out, trade them to Saints/Carlton/GC/North/Dogs/Freo. You get better picks, player is more likely to want to stay, rather than go to Carlton/Saints/GC/North/Dogs/Freo. It will help with retention of players. IF a player really wants to go somewhere, then the 'destination club' has to pay a premium price. GWS currently has many premium players, so this system makes you more likely to retain OR get adequate compensation.

This would be like the NBA and I agree it's a fairer way to go, but the problem would still be someone like Shiel could get traded to the Saints but still be eligible to walk away in 1 season, so those clubs may be apprehensive in giving a lot up for them.

 

[LittleG]

Perhaps if players want to nominate a club in the middle of a contract, make it that they can nominate the state but not the club. The kids can all still return home but the club gets to benefit trading them to the team with the most currency.

Geelong took the chance with Tim Kelly and now he wants out 1 year after joining. Chooses the premiership team in the WCE and refuses to go to Fremantle even if it means he can go back to his home state to play footy. Puts Geelong in a predicament knowing they either trade to WCE for unders or they have to keep a player who doesnt want to be at their club. Contracts and loyalty mean nothing in the modern day.

Freo didn't show any interest in Kelly. Kelly has no choice but WC to get home.
But I blame Cats&WC for this situation. He has an autistic 3 year old and 1yo twins. To move him across the country away from all support networks, was never going to work.
WC should have taken him last year, but were too busy picking other players before him, knowing that no one else should pick him. Really WC got greedy.
They got him to nominate for the draft, telling him they would take him but then took two other players first.

Hoping WC pay pick 19+future first for T Kelly.

 

[dlanod]

Freo didn't show any interest in Kelly. Kelly has no choice but WC to get home.
But I blame Cats&WC for this situation. He has an autistic 3 year old and 1yo twins. To move him across the country away from all support networks, was never going to work.
WC should have taken him last year, but were too busy picking other players before him, knowing that no one else should pick him. Really WC got greedy.
They got him to nominate for the draft, telling him they would take him but then took two other players first.

Hoping WC pay pick 19+future first for T Kelly.

LOL.

Sorry, but welcome to the experience of the northern clubs.

I don't have as much insight inside of GWS as some of the other guys here, but I know that every single first round pick the Lions have taken in the last 10 years have had Victorian based clubs in their ear even before the draft telling them that they'd bring them back. It's funny to see the shoe on the other foot for once, and how quickly it becomes "they have to overpay for him!"

 

[Smartest Brain]

I like the moves the club is making.

Lobb is never going to hit the big time, doesn't have the right mentality imo. Freo is the perfect fit for him.
Shiel looks like he has already peaked, played this year like he was already out the door, club doesn't need players like that.
Setterfield looks like he was always going back (Blues in his ear since he was drafted, constantly injured anyhow)
Scully will likely never be the player he was and there is some sour history with us paying overs for him coming to the club.

Don't underestimate how much clearing the deck of bad attitudes and history can help a team bond.

 

[LittleG]

LOL.

Sorry, but welcome to the experience of the northern clubs.

I don't have as much insight inside of GWS as some of the other guys here, but I know that every single first round pick the Lions have taken in the last 10 years have had Victorian based clubs in their ear even before the draft telling them that they'd bring them back. It's funny to see the shoe on the other foot for once, and how quickly it becomes "they have to overpay for him!"

I like the irony that it's Geelong.... they try and play the Geelong card at all time.


Dogs have a guy called Adams, who is 1 year into a 3 year deal, who has been homesick & decided to leave. Instead of going home to Perth, he is off to Brisbane!!!!
A 'fresh start' is his only reason....
Good luck with him @dlanold
A strange solitary guy.

 

[ploppy]

surely you could get a better pick for scully than the hawks 50 something..whats with that.

 

[Socrates2]

surely you could get a better pick for scully than the hawks 50 something..whats with that.

Yes,what's going on? Why are you propping up Hawthorn, who have 4 flags since 2008?

 

[Isaac Cumming No 1]

Yes,what's going on? Why are you propping up Hawthorn, who have 4 flags since 2008?

We aren't

 

[Orange Agent]

Somehow I've been thread banned from the D&T board thread and have just read an entire page of non stop trolling.