Recommitted Sam Walsh [Re-signed to 2034]

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

Not could be … IS*

* max king a close second

So just to get this straight…

Max King was drafted in the same year as Sam Walsh. He’s played roughly 50 fewer games (that’s basically two full seasons) and he’s on $1.5 million a year for six years and is currently injured again.

And you’re saying that’s the safer or better contract than Sam Walsh’s?

Please, let me know when you’re selling your house - I’d love to negotiate with you.

 

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

My thing with the contract isn't worrying if he plays or not, its what % he plays at. The deal looks like it is based off the player he was in 21 and 22, which he has not played like in the last couple seasons really (admittedly don't watch him every minute of every game so very generalised observation).

You'd think you put a guy on this type of deal if you're getting 100% of his talent every week of every season. That being said you also see a guy like Young on this type of deal and it just ends up being that its the new norm.

You're paying for their best but its how often you get their absolute best out of them, not necessarily how often they're playing full stop.

I sort of get what you’re saying about % output versus just games played, but I think that framing slightly oversimplifies how these deals are assessed.

You’re not actually paying for a bloke to realistically reproduce his absolute peak 2021–22 form every single week. No player sustains that. Even the elite tier fluctuate across seasons depending on role, system, injury management and team performance.

Contracts like this are priced on three things:

1. Ceiling: Can he be a genuine match-winner/difference maker when it matters?
2. Floor: Even when not at his best, does he still impact games and raise the standard of your 22?
3. Market reality: What are others offering and what would it cost to replace him like for like externally?

The cap is rising, long-term deals are the new norm, and if you let top-end talent walk because you’re worried they might only give you 85-90% some weeks, you end up paying overs trying to replace them anyway.

Otherwise, list manager positions would need to come with their own crystal ball.

 

[KanesBurner]

I sort of get what you’re saying about % output versus just games played, but I think that framing slightly oversimplifies how these deals are assessed.

You’re not actually paying for a bloke to realistically reproduce his absolute peak 2021–22 form every single week. No player sustains that. Even the elite tier fluctuate across seasons depending on role, system, injury management and team performance.

Contracts like this are priced on three things:

1. Ceiling: Can he be a genuine match-winner/difference maker when it matters?
2. Floor: Even when not at his best, does he still impact games and raise the standard of your 22?
3. Market reality: What are others offering and what would it cost to replace him like for like externally?

The cap is rising, long-term deals are the new norm, and if you let top-end talent walk because you’re worried they might only give you 85-90% some weeks, you end up paying overs trying to replace them anyway.

Otherwise, list manager positions would need to come with their own crystal ball.

I think the problem is AFL fans aren’t prepared for the way list management will change to align with say the NFL. The top 4-5 players on a list are going to take up a huge chunk of salary cap.

Same with paying players early. Take Serong, he was extended even further out with years left (not sure of the cost) but for arguments sack let’s say $1.5 million per year…..you’re not getting him at that price in 3-4 years time. Paying early and long term saves huge money long term.

Mahomes in the NFL is the poster child for this. Signed for 10 years at $45mil per year that was seen as a crazy contract…within a few years it was one of the leagues best contracts. Things move fast with the constant cap changes.

 

[C4[2]Yo`DooR]

I think the problem is AFL fans aren’t prepared for the way list management will change to align with say the NFL. The top 4-5 players on a list are going to take up a huge chunk of salary cap.

Same with paying players early. Take Serong, he was extended even further out with years left (not sure of the cost) but for arguments sack let’s say $1.5 million per year…..you’re not getting him at that price in 3-4 years time. Paying early and long term saves huge money long term.

Mahomes in the NFL is the poster child for this. Signed for 10 years at $45mil per year that was seen as a crazy contract…within a few years it was one of the leagues best contracts. Things move fast with the constant cap changes.

Absolutely agree.

 

[WilloTree]

Did anyone think that? A healthy Walsh is a fair step above Cerra

Unfortunatly this is true now. People forget how good Cerra was as a 20/21 year old though. Consecutive top 4 finished in the BnF and was in the 22under22 three consectutive years. You would have bet your house he'd be as good as Brayshaw.

Bloody shame we'll never see him as the player we all thought he'd be. So silky to watch.

Of all the players Freo lost during the rebuild, Cerra was the one that pissed me off the most.

 

[briztoon]

Unfortunatly this is true now. People forget how good he was as a 20/21 year old though. Consecutive top 4 finished in the BnF and was in the 22under22 three consectutive years. You would have bet your house he'd be as good as Brayshaw.

Bloody shame we'll never see him as the player we all thought he'd be. So silky to watch.

Silky isn’t a word I associated with peak Walsh.

Very, very good runner, suspect ball use half the time.

Of all the players Freo lost during the rebuild, Cerra was the one that pissed me off the most.

 

[Not since 1910]

Silky isn’t a word I associated with peak Walsh.

Very, very good runner, suspect ball use half the time.

Peak Walsh was a fantastic user of the footy, he was never NWM or Daicos in terms of absolutely elite kicking but he was nowhere near the ball butcher he's been at times since his back issues.

 

[briztoon]

Peak Walsh was a fantastic user of the footy, he was never NWM or Daicos in terms of absolutely elite kicking but he was nowhere near the ball butcher he's been at times since his back issues.

For me, Walsh and WAshcroft are very, very similar players, and I don't think of WAshcroft as silky.

NWM is definitely the silky type. Walsh and WAshcroft are pretty different to Daicos.

 

[KanesBurner]

For me, Walsh and WAshcroft are very, very similar players, and I don't think of WAshcroft as silky.

NWM is definitely the silky type. Walsh and WAshcroft are pretty different to Daicos.

I’ll need to see more of WAshcroft but Walsh to me feels like a Boak/Selwood type. I put Andy Brayshaw in that category too.

They have skill without being known as skillful, they are elite athletes without being explosive. But they are insanely professional and ooze leadership as standard setters at their clubs.

 

[WilloTree]

Silky isn’t a word I associated with peak Walsh.

Very, very good runner, suspect ball use half the time.

Was talking about Cerra

 

[schmuttt]

It doesnt seem like we've really seen a club actually be bit on the arse for them yet, they seem easy enough to get off when you need.

 

[briztoon]

Was talking about Cerra

Cerra had all the attributes to be silky, he just couldn’t put them all together, and get a healthy run it.

Potential to be silky, never was though.

 

[Faz 2000]

I’m just so conditioned to things going badly for Carlton I have no way of objectively judging this situation.

The good version of Sam Walsh

18

Sam Walsh

Age

25

Ht

184cm

Wt

84kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

25.1

5star

K

13.5

5star

HB

11.6

5star

M

5.1

5star

T

3.2

5star

CL

3.4

5star

No current season stats available

D

26.2

5star

K

15.4

5star

HB

10.8

5star

M

6.0

5star

T

3.2

5star

CL

4.8

5star

(and there were signs last week!) is a pretty bloody good player any club would be happy to have, comfortably in the top 50 in the AFL.

The broken back crab one is… oooof. Not so flash.