Opinion Six $1m players in the AFL in 2019 - GWS with potentially 3 for 2020

[KermitJagger]

Six million-dollar men as player salaries go up again

The League has released the player payment data for 2018 and there are some familiar names at the top

www.afl.com.au

This article lists the 6 million dollar men for 2019, one of those being GWS forward Jeremy Cameron.

With the announcement of Lachie Whitfield signing a long term 7 year deal, turning down what would have been many big money offers from other clubs, GWS add another player with million dollar potential locked away.

Lach him in: Another star Giant signs mega-deal

Lachie Whitfield has signed a whopping seven-year contract extension with Greater Western Sydney, following in the footsteps of skipper Stephen Coniglio

www.afl.com.au

GWS already have Cameron believed to be on $1m. Josh Kelly signed a not inconsiderable deal, rejecting overtures from North Melbourne. Toby Greene is known to have signed a hefty deal as well.

This year, Lachie Whitfield joins Stephen Coniglio as the newest highly paid, long tenured players on the list.

With the contracts of Cameron, Greene, Kelly, Whitfield and Coniglio, it would not be a stretch to assume that at least 2 and potentially 3 of those players are pulling in 7 figures.

This begs the question - is this suspicious considering the quality of players and the huge amount of money involved? Is there any way to alleviate the concerns of the multitude of other clubs, save for making player payments public?

 

[Sirlemsip]

I was thinking the same thing.

It is possible (and likely) that the Coniglio and Whitfield deals are both heavily back-ended.
But it is difficult to see how all of these stars will be paid within the Cap without something big happening (e.g. J.Cameron leaving in 2021).

 

[BF Tiger]

Making player payments public would only happen through the AFL and the not the clubs. I'd suggest if the Giants are over the cap then the AFL already knows about it. Therefore if the AFL released player payments they could just doctor the figures themselves before release.

 

[KermitJagger]

I was thinking the same thing.

It is possible (and likely) that the Coniglio and Whitfield deals are both heavily back-ended.
But it is difficult to see how all of these stars will be paid within the Cap without something big happening (e.g. J.Cameron leaving in 2021).

Signing multiple players to 7 year deals makes salary cap management arguably even more difficult, it gives far less flexibility. Considering the quality of the kids they've picked up recently it seems odd that they would be comfortable with 7 year deals for Whitfield and Coniglio that may make it more difficult to keep a player like Taranto.

 

[Pykie]

With Whitfield re-signing being great news for the club on another reported 'mega deal' of 7 years and Cameron reportedly close on a similar deal it would leave the following deals in the last few years.

The questions have to be asked, how much 'ambassadorial' money is flowing into these contracts?

Toby Green - reported 6 years @ $1m a season
Josh Kelly - reported 10 years @ $1m+ a season
Stephen Coniglio - reported 7 years @ $1m a season
Lachie Whitield - reported 7 years @ $1m a season

Tim Taranto - Extended for 2 years in 2019 in a year he went on to win the B&F? $600-$800k estimate.
Jeremy Cameron - Circa $1m deal incoming...

Then there's Hopper, Davis, Shaw, Williams, Himmelberg


The above 6 consume around 50% of the salary cap, with around $170k on average remaining to pay the remainder of the 80% of the playing list.


They've certainly lost a few players along the way, but I don't think there's been a club with more $1m+ deals fit under a single cap than this current Giant's side....

 

[Sirlemsip]

Signing multiple players to 7 year deals makes salary cap management arguably even more difficult, it gives far less flexibility. Considering the quality of the kids they've picked up recently it seems odd that they would be comfortable with 7 year deals for Whitfield and Coniglio that may make it more difficult to keep a player like Taranto.

If one of Taranto, Hopper, Caldwell or Hately get squeezed out, I would be happy to take any of them.

 

[RUNVS]

Probably true, but every year GWS have a regular turnover of some big named well paid players leaving. Scully and Patton in the last 20 months would have both been on some very good coin.

 

[boncer34]

Probably tells you all you need to know about the media.

 

[Forward Press]

With Whitfield re-signing being great news for the club on another reported 'mega deal' of 7 years and Cameron reportedly close on a similar deal it would leave the following deals in the last few years.

The quests have to be asked, how much 'ambassadorial' money is flowing into these contracts?

Toby Green - reported 6 years @ $1m a season
Josh Kelly - reported 10 years @ $1m+ a season
Stephen Coniglio - reported 7 years @ $1m a season
Lachie Whitield - reported 7 years @ $1m a season

Tim Taranto - Extended for 2 years in 2019 in a year he went on to win the B&F? $600-$800k estimate.
Jeremy Cameron - Circa $1m deal incoming...

Then there's Hopper, Davis, Shaw, Williams, Himmelberg


The above 6 consume around 50% of the salary cap, with around $170k on average remaining to pay the remainder of the 80% of the playing list.


They've certainly lost a few players along the way, but I don't think there's been a club with more $1m+ deals fit under a single cap than this current Giant's side....

I highlighted the words that you need to focus on.

Yes, yes, you might say that the AFL massage the books to allow GWS to go over the cap, grant tenuous ambassadorial payments, plan schemes to give a leg up to GWS etc etc so if you come up with those arguments I'm not bothering because it's impossible to fight conspiracy theories with evidence.

Scully, Patton, Wilson, Lobb, McCarthy etc have also left in the meantime, they would not have been on minimum wage.

 

[Danny88]

With Whitfield re-signing being great news for the club on another reported 'mega deal' of 7 years and Cameron reportedly close on a similar deal it would leave the following deals in the last few years.

The quests have to be asked, how much 'ambassadorial' money is flowing into these contracts?

Toby Green - reported 6 years @ $1m a season
Josh Kelly - reported 10 years @ $1m+ a season
Stephen Coniglio - reported 7 years @ $1m a season
Lachie Whitield - reported 7 years @ $1m a season

Tim Taranto - Extended for 2 years in 2019 in a year he went on to win the B&F? $600-$800k estimate.
Jeremy Cameron - Circa $1m deal incoming...

Then there's Hopper, Davis, Shaw, Williams, Himmelberg


The above 6 consume around 50% of the salary cap, with around $170k on average remaining to pay the remainder of the 80% of the playing list.


They've certainly lost a few players along the way, but I don't think there's been a club with more $1m+ deals fit under a single cap than this current Giant's side....

Where was it reported out of interest? The only one you have correct IMO is that Cameron is a million dollar player. Green, kelly cogs whit would all be under a mil a season.

What WAS reported was all those players you mention making a pact two years ago to take unders to stay together.

I agree the cap is tight.... but you can't just make up that they are all on a mill

 

[KermitJagger]

I highlighted the words that you need to focus on.

Yes, yes, you might say that the AFL massage the books to allow GWS to go over the cap, grant tenuous ambassadorial payments, plan schemes to give a leg up to GWS etc etc so if you come up with those arguments I'm not bothering because it's impossible to fight conspiracy theories with evidence.

Scully, Patton, Wilson, Lobb, McCarthy etc have also left in the meantime, they would not have been on minimum wage.

How can you fight conspiracy theories with evidence when there is no evidence?

Other players that GWS had to lose were squeezed out due to the fact that they had a higher salary cap and list allowances for their formative years. It was part of a natural equalisation of the list.

The fact that GWS were comfortable with signing off on 2 seven year deals is the suspicious part of this, because no club would reasonably do that due to the impact it could have on maintaining the list in the future.

 

[The Nostradamus]

Is the cap 12-14 mil a year? Somewhere in that bracket

If so they have 5 players taking up 5mil for the next 5-7 years
40 other blokes get the remainder for that period a lot of them would be on unders then

 

[Ok Boomer]

They have also lost a tremendous amount of A and B grade players over the years.

 

[Underarm]

The fact that GWS were comfortable with signing off on 2 seven year deals is the suspicious part of this, because no club would reasonably do that due to the impact it could have on maintaining the list in the future.

Say what? Clubs do this all the time. Long term deals give the player insurance (which reduces the price), allows you to schedule higher wages when it's best for the club, and is the most flexible if you need to rearrange the finances later.

So long as the players dont have a major falling out and need to leave, there's nothing wrong with the contract length.

 

[boncer34]

Feels like North and Hawks posters gonna feature heavily in this thread.

 

[KermitJagger]

Say what? Clubs do this all the time. Long term deals give the player insurance (which reduces the price), allows you to schedule higher wages when it's best for the club, and is the most flexible if you need to rearrange the finances later.

So long as the players dont have a major falling out and need to leave, there's nothing wrong with the contract length.

It worked so well for Port Adelaide after 2014 right? Exactly why Collingwood jumped at the opportunity to sign Grundy for 7 too right?

It's not something a club does all the time. They might do it with one player, but it's not smart list management gambling on a bunch of guys that are playing well now on the assumption that they'll stay good on a longer contract with less incentive.

 

[Gralin]

I highlighted the words that you need to focus on.

Yes, yes, you might say that the AFL massage the books to allow GWS to go over the cap, grant tenuous ambassadorial payments, plan schemes to give a leg up to GWS etc etc so if you come up with those arguments I'm not bothering because it's impossible to fight conspiracy theories with evidence.

Scully, Patton, Wilson, Lobb, McCarthy etc have also left in the meantime, they would not have been on minimum wage.

Are you saying there is no chance the playing field for player retention is compromised?

 

[Gralin]

Feels like North and Hawks posters gonna feature heavily in this thread.

Funny how you were already in here though

 

[boncer34]

Funny how you were already in here though

Yes.

Excellent point, well done. You have noticed I am here making predictions. Here, have a star.

 

[KermitJagger]

Scully, Patton, Wilson, Lobb, McCarthy etc have also left in the meantime, they would not have been on minimum wage.

Also - that would be fine, but it also discounts the fact that Wilson, Hopper, Himmelberg, Taranto and Haynes have all gotten better and signed new deals in the meanwhile.

 

[Gralin]

Yes.

Excellent point, well done. You have noticed I am here making predictions. Here, have a star.

Making a prediction..... baiting the hook so you can derail the thread later more like it.

 

[Forward Press]

How can you fight conspiracy theories with evidence when there is no evidence?

Other players that GWS had to lose were squeezed out due to the fact that they had a higher salary cap and list allowances for their formative years. It was part of a natural equalisation of the list.

The fact that GWS were comfortable with signing off on 2 seven year deals is the suspicious part of this, because no club would reasonably do that due to the impact it could have on maintaining the list in the future.

The evidence is that GWS haven't been busted for rorting the salary cap.

And then you will inevitably say 'well that's because GWS are an AFL lovechild and it's being covered up with shady deals'.

 

[Orange Agent]

Nobody knows the figures, the media guess.
Its weird that supporters of clubs that proudly celebrate the cultures their clubs have built over the past few years are the same ones in here launching conspiracy theories against the actual same thing.
Players want to be in Sydney for the lifestyle benefits and will take unders to keep it.
Contracted players with back ended deals can be traded out.

 

[boncer34]

Making a prediction..... baiting the hook so you can derail the thread later more like it.

Nah that was going to be my only contribution to the topic. The paranoia over the Giants is a long term boring topic on here for me. I'm only replying to you out of the genuine respect I have for you.

But since you believe I'm derailing instead.

Ciao, I'll leave.

 

[Forward Press]

Are you saying there is no chance the playing field for player retention is compromised?

Maybe GWS are paying half their players in ambassadorial payments or VISY deals or maybe they are just flouting the salary cap at will with the AFL's blessing.

However that's all just conjecture. No point arguing that because nothing I could say would make people change their minds on a conspiracy.