Scott Lucas Contract article

[Philzsay]

Thought I would post this article from the Herald Sun for those who havn't seen it. Looks like normal negotions to me, as long as they sign him up eventually I will be happy.

http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/footy/common/story_page/0,8033,20067380%5E20322,00.html

It's not a Don deal for hold-out Lucas
09 August 2006 Herald-Sun
Mark Robinson

ESSENDON and its possible best-and-fairest winner Scott Lucas are at an impasse over a new contract.

Deadlocked: Scott Lucas and the Bombers are having trouble deciding on the terms of a new deal ... Lucas wants three years, the club is offering two.

Lucas wants a three-year deal, but the bottom-of-the-table Bombers want only a two-year commitment.

It is understood Lucas's age -- he is 29 on December 30 -- is an issue. The club does not want to risk a third year because of injury or poor form.

It's understood the financial packages range from $350,000 to $450,000 a year, with Lucas's manager Ricky Nixon closer to the top end and the Bombers closer to the bottom.

But the prospect of Lucas not playing at Essendon next year are virtually nil.

Essendon football manager Dominic Cato yesterday baulked at contract discussions with the media.

"We are in negotiations with Scott's management and, as a policy, we do not discuss contracts," Cato said.

The Bombers recently re-signed Mark McVeigh on a two-year deal and skipper Matthew Lloyd for three years.

The Bombers would argue Lloyd -- as skipper, at 28, and a better player -- deserved his three years.

Lucas has been a shining light for the Bombers this year, in particular the past three weeks, where he has kicked four, seven and six goals.

Without Lloyd for much of the season, Lucas has assumed the key forward's role, returning 50.35.

It's believed Nixon is arguing that Lucas rarely misses a game because of injury, plays well in big games and has stood up without Lloyd this year.

Lucas is a former winner of the club's Crichton Medal for being the club's best player, an award he shared with James Hird in 2003.

He is on target to make it a second this year, with his likely opponents being McVeigh and Dustin Fletcher.

Meanwhile, the Kangaroos are close to completing a contract extension for midfielder Brent Harvey.

 

[Pevers-Legend]

Lucas wants a three-year deal, but the bottom-of-the-table Bombers want only a two-year commitment.

It is understood Lucas's age -- he is 29 on December 30 -- is an issue. The club does not want to risk a third year because of injury or poor form.

It's understood the financial packages range from $350,000 to $450,000 a year, with Lucas's manager Ricky Nixon closer to the top end and the Bombers closer to the bottom.


The Bombers would argue Lloyd -- as skipper, at 28, and a better player -- deserved his three years.

It's believed Nixon is arguing that Lucas rarely misses a game because of injury, plays well in big games and has stood up without Lloyd this year.

I have pulled out what I think are the relevant bits and heres my spin on it:

- He should get three years
- He has been ultra consistent with his fitness and form. he doesn't get injuered often. Would be interesting to see (aside fomr his borken leg in 99 how many games he has missed).

- He easily deserves somewhere in the 400-450K bracket. He has been loyal and a great player. Who would deserve more - considering lloyd is supposed to be on 600K plus I would be insulted if scotty didn;t get at least 400K.

- Lucas has shown he is a better big game performer than Lloyd, and should be regarded on par with Lloyd. I agree Lloyd has more upside but I feel had scotty not had lloyd he would be a bigger star. In the past we have far too often ignored Lucas and kicked to Lloyd. Those two could easily kick 60+ goals each inthe same team if we picked the right option more often.

- And as much as I dislike Nixon, he is right with what he says.

 

[HalfMan-HalfAmazing]

On Target with Mcveigh and Fletcher??
How about Jobe?

I personaly don't think Fletcher has had a great year by his standards, and has missed a few games...but i guess that might even be enough to win it in a poor year for the Bombers!?
I still would have thought Stanton and even Welsh may get a look in before the great Dustin in this case.

 

[Jack-Packenham]

Lucas will get 3 years because if he doesn't there would be 10 sides willing to give him a 3 year deal in the pre season.

West Coast
Adelaide
Collingwood
Geelong
St Kilda
Bulldogs
Kangaroos
Melbourne
Sydney
Richmond

 

[judburyjets]

Lucas is a gun. In my opinion he is as valuable to the bombers as any other player, Lloyd and Hird included. His value to the club is often under rated, and he is overly crticised about certain aspects of his game (no right boot and sometimes selfish). For him to get criticised after the Brisbane game, in which he kicked 7 goals, is an absolute disgrace. He has been a fine servant of the club for a long time, and has lived in the shadows of Hird and Lloyd, yet has been more consistent (prob cause of injuries) than both of them over the past 5 or 6 years. It would show a lack of respect if the bombers don't give him a 3 year contract, he deserves it and has plenty of good footy left in him. He rarely gets injured and I can't see a 3 year contract being a risk, he will still be a very valuable player at the end of 2009.

He gets the job done every week and is rarely beaten, and when the team is struggling he is always giving 100%, which at time appears not to be the case for some of his team mates. Players such as Scott should be rewarded by being shown the respect they deserve.

 

[vast]

Ill just say that lucas definatley deserves three year deal as hes a champion player for our club. i was just wondering does anyone think the club is taking this tough stance on contract negotiations, especially with a player like lucas just as a warning to the playing group?

 

[DaSawx]

I think Lucas will be a damn fine contributor at 32 still. Give him 3 years but at the annual salary the Bombers want

 

[Sam the RAMA fan]

I think he would be capable of another 3 years,
injury can happen to anyone,and yes age can be a factor but I think Lucas wouldn't give up..plus I would hate to see him go to another club.

Sign him on Dons!

 

[Williams02]

- Lucas has shown he is a better big game performer than Lloyd, and should be regarded on par with Lloyd. I agree Lloyd has more upside but I feel had scotty not had lloyd he would be a bigger star. In the past we have far too often ignored Lucas and kicked to Lloyd. Those two could easily kick 60+ goals each inthe same team if we picked the right option more often.

Not sure if i agree that Lucas is a better big game performer than lloyd, I feel u might be forgetting the Lloyd brilliance because u havent seen him for 15 weeks... Saying that Lucas is on par with Lloyd is IMO incorrect. Watch a replay of Round 1 this year and you will know wat i mean.

This is not to say he should not get a 3 year contract tho. I believe he is worthy of 3 years due to his consistency and great record with us...

 

[Crave]

Id defintely like to see him signed on for a further 3 years. Until we can sure up our spine, he remains just as important as Lloyd, Hird and Fletcher and to be honest...he would be incredibly hard to match up on if he played on an opposing side against us.
I dont think much of Nixon however....he's a money hungry pig or for use of a better term...'a homewrecker'

 

[go_the_bombers]

He deserves 3 years

 

[Merv]

This is all part of normal contact tooing and froing.
The unusual thing is usually Essendons contract discussions arent very public.

I would assume in the end both parties will come to an agreement that both parties will be happy with.

 

[mcphee_is_a_gun]

Lucas will get 3 years because if he doesn't there would be 10 sides willing to give him a 3 year deal in the pre season.

West Coast
Adelaide
Collingwood
Geelong
St Kilda
Bulldogs
Kangaroos
Melbourne
Sydney
Richmond

Theres no way he'd reach the pre-season. At worst we'd get a good trade for him.

 

[Philzsay]

I think he is worthy of getting a 3 year contract. However I can understand the Club wanting to give him only 2 years. After all at the time I thought signing Mercuri up for 5 years was a good deal...you never know what can happen.

 

[iDon]

I think he is worthy of getting a 3 year contract. However I can understand the Club wanting to give him only 2 years. After all at the time I thought signing Mercuri up for 5 years was a good deal...you never know what can happen.

Fair point and you have to be a little cautious but 3 years isnt like a massive 5 year contract. But isnt every contract have some sort of risk involved?

-Mav

 

[Nuts4Bolts]

Theres no way he'd reach the pre-season. At worst we'd get a good trade for him.

We'll just draft him back if he does.

 

[thebigboy]

Deserves a three year deal as he has been brilliant, however a two year with an extra year option would be the way to go IMO

 

[windyhill]

Ahh ,the Scotty Lucas contract story, that old chestnut. All it`s missing is "collingwood are believed to be very interested" That club have been sniffing around Scotty and M.Lloyd since they appeared on the scene.

 

[Jack-Packenham]

We'll just draft him back if he does.

After he puts in his contract terms a 3 year deal, so he has got what he wants and you guys have wasted a precious pick on him.

 

[Stargazer]

I think Lucas will be a damn fine contributor at 32 still. Give him 3 years but at the annual salary the Bombers want

Agreed.

 

[Crave]

IMO, Scotty deserves around $400K over 3 years. Durability, ability and versatility are a rare commodity to have combined inthe one player and he thouroughly deserves to put his hand out for a little more than Essendon might be willing to offer him.