Matthew Clarke

[benrick]

Hey guys, interested to know how you all think Clarke will play this year, I am currently whether deciding to get him in a fantasy competition.

Will he be number 1 ruck the whole year and do u think he will be injury-free for the whole season. Interested to hear your comments.... thanks

 

[Stiffy_18]

I think over the years Clarke hasn't had too many injuries. Even if he cop an injury it probably wouldn't be of long term.

If you are after the hitouts then Clarke is your man as he is the best tap ruckman in the comp. If you are after marks and possesions then don't pick him.

I think Clarke and Biglands will continue to be used in the same fashion as they have been in the last couple of years. Each will get a half or so each week and each will get a lot of hitouts.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
If you are after the hitouts then Clarke is your man as he is the best tap ruckman in the comp. If you are after marks and possesions then don't pick him.

Hit the nail on the head Stiffy - it comes down to how points are awarded for taps v possessions as to whether he is value for money!

 

[benrick]

thanks guys, i appreciate the comments

 

[Damp Squarie]

Clark averaged less than 1 mark per game last year.
Ive read somewhere hes keen to lift his quota this year so its a fair bet he'll double last years effort but that aint enough Doc!!

 

[maccas_no1]

Ok alot of people beleive he will retire after this season, why is this????He generally isnt injury prone and as Stiffy has already said generally gets over injuries fairly quickly, he is a fantastic tap ruckman and is keen to take more marks around the ground this year, if he has a good season this year why would he retire????????

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by maccas_no1
Ok alot of people beleive he will retire after this season, why is this????He generally isnt injury prone and as Stiffy has already said generally gets over injuries fairly quickly, he is a fantastic tap ruckman and is keen to take more marks around the ground this year, if he has a good season this year why would he retire????????

Because he is choosing to do so of his own accord. Think he is planning to go back to Brissie to work as a vet.

 

[maccas_no1]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
Because he is choosing to do so of his own accord. Think he is planning to go back to Brissie to work as a vet.

Mmmmmmm that is a real pity if it happens feel he would be cutting his footy career a lil short if he did, but I guess if he doesnt have the desire to play any longer it's best we give someone else a go

 

[Stiffy_18]

Personally, I reckon Clarke has at least another year left at the end of this season but I guess that will be up to him and the club. He is still the best tap ruckman in the competition by a fair margin too.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Personally, I reckon Clarke has at least another year left at the end of this season but I guess that will be up to him and the club. He is still the best tap ruckman in the competition by a fair margin too.

I doubt fitness will be an issue for Clarke, due to his durability. Just a question whether the fire is still in the belly after this year.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Personally, I reckon Clarke has at least another year left at the end of this season but I guess that will be up to him and the club. He is still the best tap ruckman in the competition by a fair margin too.

When's he out of contract?
May be establishing his position for end of year discussions.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
When's he out of contract?

At the end of the season.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
At the end of the season.

Why doesn't that surprise me.
I'll predict he plays on, if the price is right

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
Why doesn't that surprise me.
I'll predict he plays on, if the price is right

Well we have a few players coming out of contracts at the end of the year. While the big guns are secured (Roo, McLeod, Hart, Goody and I think Edwards is also signed up for a couple of years) the following are coming out of contract at the end of the year:

Carey, Clarke, Burns, Smart, Bode (not 100% sure), Doughty (not 100% sure), Shirley, M. Stevens, Stenglein (not 100% sure but I think he signed a 2 year dela in 2002) and a couple of other fringe players.

Obviously Stenglein is the one we will be looking to sign up ASAP.

 

[Crow-mosone]

in Blights infamous 'pathetic pittman' speech, he did hit upon one thing I have always remembered:

that as a player, you don't get it back. once it's gone, there is no more, so if you don't give it your all while you can...
you're a long time retired.

Maybe this will play on Clarkes mind.

 

[Damp Squarie]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
Why doesn't that surprise me.
I'll predict he plays on, if the price is right

The price wont be right coz he wouldve won a flag

 

[maccas_no1]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18


Obviously Stenglein is the one we will be looking to sign up ASAP.

Hey Stiffy you wouldnt try and use Stenglein as part of a trade deal with Freo to get Pavlich

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by Wayne's-World
When's he out of contract?
May be establishing his position for end of year discussions.

I don't reckon money is a major issue for Clarke, but more a lifestyle thing as to him establishing his professional career after footy back in Queensland.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Well we have a few players coming out of contracts at the end of the year. While the big guns are secured (Roo, McLeod, Hart, Goody and I think Edwards is also signed up for a couple of years) the following are coming out of contract at the end of the year:

Carey, Clarke, Burns, Smart, Bode (not 100% sure), Doughty (not 100% sure), Shirley, M. Stevens, Stenglein (not 100% sure but I think he signed a 2 year dela in 2002) and a couple of other fringe players.

Obviously Stenglein is the one we will be looking to sign up ASAP.

We would have less contracts to sort out this year than most clubs. We should be in a good position considering a lot of hard work was done in 2003 to negotiate new longer deals with our gun players in light of the new EBA rising as quickly as in the past.

With probably Smart, Carey, M Stevens, Clarke & Burns retiring at the end of the year, & Hart & I think Roo moving to the veterans, we should have some decent room in our cap for 2005. This should give us a few options. eg. Sign up a youngster(s) for a few years, where their value may dramatically rise in 2004 due to improved performances (eg. Stiffy, Hentschel, etc). If our youngsters don't come through as hoped, then we may want to make a play for an out of contract gun player. Otherwise we will probably look at rebuilding a list & could then look at font-loading contracts during the rebuilding phase (which will make it easier to keep gun players in the future).

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by Kane McGoodwin
We would have less contracts to sort out this year than most clubs. We should be in a good position considering a lot of hard work was done in 2003 to negotiate new longer deals with our gun players in light of the new EBA rising as quickly as in the past.

With probably Smart, Carey, M Stevens, Clarke & Burns retiring at the end of the year, & Hart & I think Roo moving to the veterans, we should have some decent room in our cap for 2005. This should give us a few options. eg. Sign up a youngster(s) for a few years, where their value may dramatically rise in 2004 due to improved performances (eg. Stiffy, Hentschel, etc). If our youngsters don't come through as hoped, then we may want to make a play for an out of contract gun player. Otherwise we will probably look at rebuilding a list & could then look at font-loading contracts during the rebuilding phase (which will make it easier to keep gun players in the future).

I don't really buy into ok.crows' strategy of recruiting a gun. The bottom line is to get a gun we must give a gun or something equivelant. To think we will get a gun just because we have money is a bit far fetched. No club in their right mind would let go a good player for peanuts. Before someone points out Nick Stevens-Port Adelaide scenario, please keep in mind that Carlton had an early pick in pre-season draft.

I think overpaying player is very dangerous. To be honest I don't know if its a good thing that we have that much room in our salary cap when we don't really have a gun that we can part with. What we can afford to give is 2nd tier players and no club will give us a gun for one or 2 of those. There is a minimum limit we must pay so if we are below that limit we could be in real trouble. Think of Freo a few years back when they had an ordinary list and got over the cap.

This situation is not as simple as it seems. In fact it could turn out to be a bit of a headache.

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by maccas_no1
Hey Stiffy you wouldnt try and use Stenglein as part of a trade deal with Freo to get Pavlich

We had our chance to get Pavlich and we have screwed up. He will never be a crows player. he will finish his career with Freo.

 

[maccas_no1]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
We had our chance to get Pavlich and we have screwed up. He will never be a crows player. he will finish his career with Freo.

Isn't Pavlich out of contract at the end of this season?????Why do you say we have done our dash in getting Pavlich?????

Pavlich and Ottens I want in Crows colours

Cooney when the Bulldogs fold

 

[Stiffy_18]

Originally posted by maccas_no1
Isn't Pavlich out of contract at the end of this season?????Why do you say we have done our dash in getting Pavlich?????

Pavlich and Ottens I want in Crows colours

Cooney when the Bulldogs fold

Pavlich signed a 3 year deal so he is out of contract at the end of 2005 season. Well to cut the long story short we wanted Carey more than Pavlich. We weren't prepared to beat Freo's offer of $1.1m over 3 years when it was obvious to everyone slightly interested in football that Pavlich was about to burst and become one of the best players in the comp.

Instead we opted to spend that money on Carey and Burns. We really didn't go after Pavlich as hard as we should have and oif we put in only half the effort we put in for getting Carey Pavlich would be in tri-colors now and Wells would be a Docker instead of a roo.

Picks 2 and 18 would have been enough to satisfy Dockers for Pavlich and that would have been a fair trade.

From a very reliable source: If we offered Pavlich $1.2m over 3 year he would have signed on despite Port offering $1.5m over 3 years. I think Pavlich was a bit disheartened after that. Can't blame him really

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
I don't really buy into ok.crows' strategy of recruiting a gun. The bottom line is to get a gun we must give a gun or something equivelant. To think we will get a gun just because we have money is a bit far fetched. No club in their right mind would let go a good player for peanuts. Before someone points out Nick Stevens-Port Adelaide scenario, please keep in mind that Carlton had an early pick in pre-season draft.

I think overpaying player is very dangerous. To be honest I don't know if its a good thing that we have that much room in our salary cap when we don't really have a gun that we can part with. What we can afford to give is 2nd tier players and no club will give us a gun for one or 2 of those. There is a minimum limit we must pay so if we are below that limit we could be in real trouble. Think of Freo a few years back when they had an ordinary list and got over the cap.

This situation is not as simple as it seems. In fact it could turn out to be a bit of a headache.

Stiffy, I agree that it is unlikely that we will be able to get a gun, as one falling off a back of a truck cheaply like with N Stevens is rare (& we are not likely to finish bottom).

Assuming that we don't sign any more gun type players & we lose quite a few higher profile players that are replaced with lower paid youngsters, the question is what we do with the room we have in the cap.

I didn't suggest we should over-pay our players - far from it as that is crazy. Rather, we front load some of players on say 3 year deals, to take the pressure of for future years, when we made need extra room if the "value" of our squad increases after some rebuilding. Not using up our salary cap & say paying only 90% is stupid, when we may need extra in later years to keep a talented squad together.

 

[macca23]

Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Pavlich signed a 3 year deal so he is out of contract at the end of 2005 season. Well to cut the long story short we wanted Carey more than Pavlich. We weren't prepared to beat Freo's offer of $1.1m over 3 years when it was obvious to everyone slightly interested in football that Pavlich was about to burst and become one of the best players in the comp.

Instead we opted to spend that money on Carey and Burns. We really didn't go after Pavlich as hard as we should have and oif we put in only half the effort we put in for getting Carey Pavlich would be in tri-colors now and Wells would be a Docker instead of a roo.

Picks 2 and 18 would have been enough to satisfy Dockers for Pavlich and that would have been a fair trade.

From a very reliable source: If we offered Pavlich $1.2m over 3 year he would have signed on despite Port offering $1.5m over 3 years. I think Pavlich was a bit disheartened after that. Can't blame him really

You really know how to depress a guy Stiffy!!

While I always suspected that we hadn't chased Pavlich hard enough, I haven't heard all of what you've posted above, and if this is as it happened, then it's madness.

10 years of a rising Pavlich vs 2 years of a fading Carey only warrants a milli-second to make the choice - Pavlich by the proverbial length of the straight!!

Depressing!!