Recommitted Hamish Hartlett [staying at Port Adelaide]

[longdonkey]

FWIW I don't think there is salary cap pressure, I think Port has just evaluated its list and realised it's not going to get them to the promised land, and that perhaps 2014 was the anomaly, not 2015. It would not surprise me if more players were available, it's just Hartlett is the obvious name as his output doesn't match his talent, but he still has the aura as someone who could be elite in the right system.

We apparently offered two first rounders last year, and Port said no presumably as they thought they had the list to get back to deep finals.

I don't believe that North offered 2 first rounders maybe the pick you used on Anderson, what you are saying is hovering around the truth but not quite there. It has been reported that there are 13 players on the table if the right offer materialised. There are a few issues that conspire to make this the time to restructure our personel a bit.

 

[Sanguinarius]

Hamish has all the power and will only go if he receives the offer he wants from the club he wants. Hence no Gold Coast, no Crows. If he doesn't get the right offer he stays. The relationship between club and player is not broken.

So he's probably going interstate then? How does that play out exactly?

Will it be a financial incentive - on top of his already handsome earnings - to entice him? There would have to be some extra stipend, otherwise why both with the cost and hassle of uprooting your whole life?

Which Vic club is going to offer that, 650-700k, on top of a top ten pick?

 

[King Elvis]

"Late in the day" would be when he's coming out of contract. He's got another 5 years to run on his contract. Unless you went chasing Buddy Franklin or Tom Boyd, you couldn't be any further from "late in the day" if you tried.

Late in the day, in this case, is alleged salary cap pressure, and potential personnel issues.

 

[LukeHodge15]

Late in the day, in this case, is alleged salary cap pressure, and potential personnel issues.

Spot on without the alleged bit

 

[stewie griffen]

70 pages of this?

 

[marty36]

Hamish has all the power and will only go if he receives the offer he wants from the club he wants. Hence no Gold Coast, no Crows. If he doesn't get the right offer he stays. The relationship between club and player is not broken.

There want be any offer, this is the problem any club taking HH will need to honor the ridiculous agreement he presently have. To think a club will up it even further is insane

He was reported to be offered 700k by the roos if that's the case you can't see port getting away with anything less than 600k unless HH and his manager are financial dummies.

$600k would equate to about 6 to 7 % of a clubs salary cap so it is a huge chunk of their cap room, if he is not putting it on the park it will cost any team dearly in their list management

 

[Schulzenfest]

Spot on without the alleged bit

Lol. Are you Port Adelaide's football manager? Because if you're not, you're not qualified to make that statement.

 

[Elite Crow]

Lol. Are you Port Adelaide's football manager? Because if you're not, you're not qualified to make that statement.

Neither are you but you seem pretty sure of yourself

 

[bigblackboz]

Are you serious? Taylor, Enright, Mackie, Lonergan are all getting on. Defence is a pressing need for you.

Also it doesn't seem Nakia is giving you much in the short term, will he in the long term?

You answered your own question. Short term Geelong is fine. Exactly what I said. Lever doesn't make Geelong much if any better at the moment.

 

[Elite Crow]

You answered your own question. Short term Geelong is fine. Exactly what I said. Lever doesn't make Geelong much if any better at the moment.

Is Enright playing on?

And when drafting do you draft for the short term or long term?

So how is Nakia going?

 

[bigblackboz]

Is Enright playing on?

And when drafting do you draft for the short term or long term?

So how is Nakia going?

I don't think long term Lever is even a pressing need for Geelong. You seem to think he is.

Nakia is fine. He had no 2014 and is still learning. Needs to build frame and will be fine. Very happy with his progress. Shows flashes of brilliance at times but needs to build consistency. I assume you don't know anything about him but is certainly improving rapidly.

Certainly not unhappy with him.

 

[Elite Crow]

I don't think long term Lever is even a pressing need for Geelong. You seem to think he is.

Nakia is fine. He had no 2014 and is still learning. Needs to build frame and will be fine. Very happy with his progress. Shows flashes of brilliance at times but needs to build consistency. I assume you don't know anything about him but is certainly improving rapidly.

Certainly not unhappy with him.

I know lots about Nakia and seems a let down.

As for Lever, who are your tall backs when those boys all go in the next couple of years?

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

Ryder and Monfries rulings have not been made yet so you can't presume to bank that.

You can't bank Lobbes salary yet because you don't know if he'll be traded.

Carlisle had a year of his contract to go, how do you know he isn't receiving some of it?

You have re-signed a number of players lately and you've also brought in a number of high priced recruits over the last few years.

It's more than conceivable you have salary cap issues.

Links to articles have been posted (pages 59-62) showing that afl have agreed to give us money.

Carlile (450k confirmed), retired. If I retire from my job that I have a contract on do I get my next years wage as well? No. If my company sacks me I do.

Again we have 1.104 million free right now in the cap, I have ready gone through evidence proving this

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

Lets go through the facts about ports salary cap

Starting with the Veterans list, to be on the veterans list a player must have "10 completed years or more" (as reported here http://www.afl.com.au/afl-hq/the-afl-explained/veteran-players)

This means port only had one player on the veterans list (VL) in 2016 (as reported here http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-03-08/new-veterans-rule-put-all-clubs-on-a-level-playing-field), being Carlile.

So basically 330k (reduced $450k salary of Carlile due to VL) + 400k (Schulz, confirmed)

This also means that in 2017 we will have Boak, Gray and Westhoff on our VL. $127k is granted per veterans (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-03-08/new-veterans-rule-put-all-clubs-on-a-level-playing-field).. So this means that 381k will be free

So right now we know for a fact that we have 1.104 million free in the cap.

This also does not include Colquhoun (probs 130k?) and Kane Mitchell (probs 70k?) were all just delisted

Salary cap.

 

[Elite Crow]

Links to articles have been posted (pages 59-62) showing that afl have agreed to give us money.

Carlile (450k confirmed), retired. If I retire from my job that I have a contract on do I get my next years wage as well? No. If my company sacks me I do.

Again we have 1.12 million free right now in the cap, I have ready gone through evidence proving this

Not this again. I showed you a later article where a decision on Monfries and Ryder hasn't been made, why have you ignored that to repeat the same misinformation?

As for Carlisle, you honestly don't think they've come to some mutual decision?

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

Not this again. I showed you a later article where a decision on Monfries and Ryder hasn't been made, why have you ignored that to repeat the same misinformation?

As for Carlisle, you honestly don't think they've come to some mutual decision?

I think carlile retired? That's a fact... doesn't matter if port pressure him or not... difference between me and you is you have assumptions, I have facts

 

[Elite Crow]

I think carlile retired? That's a fact... doesn't matter if port pressure him or not... difference between me and you is you have assumptions, I have facts

You don't. You've continued to lie about Monfries and Ryder salary cap relief.

Yeah he retired, do you know on what terms? Of course you don't, so again you are claiming your assumption as fact.

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

You don't. You've continued to lie about Monfries and Ryder salary cap relief.

Yeah he retired, do you know on what terms? Of course you don't, so again you are claiming your assumption as fact.

Stop trolling mate, I have gave you a link from a credible source (not rucci) confirming that the afl has agreed. That's not lying.

No when someone retires they don't get salary from that company the following year. That's a fact, the one making assumptions here is you, you're assuming that it was under terms, and assuming that a deal was made. I work with facts mate, an injury prone, old, good servant of the footy club retired.

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

This is grasping at straws at its finest.

 

[Elite Crow]

Stop trolling mate, I have gave you a link from a credible source (not rucci) confirming that the afl has agreed. That's not lying.

No when someone retires they don't get salary from that company the following year. That's a fact, the one making assumptions here is you, you're assuming that it was under terms, and assuming that a deal was made. I work with facts mate, an injury prone, old, good servant of the footy club retired.

And I gave you a link which was dated after yours from the same source that said no decision had been made.

Football clubs work a little bit different from your normal workplace. Are you that naive to think Carlisle would have foregone hundreds of thousands of dollars because he's a nice bloke?

And in your theories you've made plenty of assumptions and passed them off as facts. Repeating them doesn't make them facts, it makes them repeated assumptions.

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

And I gave you a link which was dated after yours from the same source that said no decision had been made.

Football clubs work a little bit different from your normal workplace. Are you that naive to think Carlisle would have foregone hundreds of thousands of dollars because he's a nice bloke?

And in your theories you've made plenty of assumptions and passed them off as facts. Repeating them doesn't make them facts, it makes them repeated assumptions.

Again mate, you can assume all you want, I will be over here dealing with facts.

Everything i said in that salary cap post was facts and backed up by articles.

 

[Elite Crow]

Again mate, you can assume all you want, I will be over here dealing with facts.

Everything i said in that salary cap post was facts and backed up by articles.

So you have your fingers in your ears?

Why are you claiming salary cap relief for Monfries and Ryder as fact and ignoring a later article by the same source as saying a decision hasn't been reached?

You are making assumptions on player salaries, can you post the articles listing their exact salaries?

 

[Elite Crow]

Then there is this article:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...p-help-on-banned-bombers-20160309-gnepms.html

Which was written after the one you quoted as fact.

Also Keith Thomas was on 5AA the other day and asked about it and he dodged and weaved.

port_adelaide_1870 here is the post you are conveniently ignoring

 

[port_adelaide_1870]

So you have your fingers in your ears?

Why are you claiming salary cap relief for Monfries and Ryder as fact and ignoring a later article by the same source as saying a decision hasn't been reached?

You are making assumptions on player salaries, can you post the articles listing their exact salaries?

I never said we are getting salary cap relief? All I told you was that there were articles on pages 59-62 saying we 100% did. All I told you was there are articles there, not my opinion... again with making assumptions I see.

I have listed articles showing carlile and Schulz salary, obviously it is a general number in the article as they can't give sum to the exact dollar but that's still better then anything you have provided trying to prove me wrong.

 

[Elite Crow]

I never said we are getting salary cap relief? All I told you was that there were articles on pages 59-62 saying we 100% did. All I told you was there are articles there, not my opinion... again with making assumptions I see.

I have listed articles showing carlile and Schulz salary, obviously it is a general number in the article as they can't give sum to the exact dollar but that's still better then anything you have provided trying to prove me wrong.

Are you a politician?

You've banked the salary cap relief as fact and you've relied on outdated articles to do it and ignored subsequent articles.

There is no way you can try and worm your way out of that now. Unless you are trolling this thread.