Restricted Free Agent Zak Butters

[Art Vandelay_]

At that money he can go to the Tigers and I doubt any of the other contenders, namely Geelong, WB or Port would mind.
That's a contract that a club with no one else to spend the cap on can offer. Not even remotely attainable for clubs looking for success in the next 2-3 years with lists ready to contend.

He's not worth that salary outlay and the future years of leaking players due to cap squeezes.

 

[juss]

We have completely lost the plot if that offer is true.

Port match and we have to trade for him and its even worse.

 

[juss]

I think if you finished last it changes the game a little bit as PSD becomes a possibility. In which case I think we’re screwed.

Bigfooty wouldn't cope with Butters picked up in the PSD, it would never come to that though.

 

[MaxiBont]

Didn't Cal Twomey report this like 2 months ago?

This was Cal Twomey in April

Richmond is understood to be willing to put forward what would be the biggest deal in football history to try and lure Butters to Punt Road, with a price tag of close to $2 million expected for at least eight years for his next contract.

So pretty much had it right. 18 for 8 works out 2.25/yr (if what Chris says is true, which is doubtful). Twomey still has the Bulldogs as favourites for him (Gettable this week)

I think ol mate in Adelaide put 1+1 to get 3 being that Richmond have the best offer for port and the biggest contract so must be front runners.

(Yes, I will be extremely salty if he doesn’t come to the Bulldogs)

 

[tiger_tough]

At that money he can go to the Tigers and I doubt any of the other contenders, namely Geelong, WB or Port would mind.
That's a contract that a club with no one else to spend the cap on can offer. Not even remotely attainable for clubs looking for success in the next 2-3 years with lists ready to contend.

He's not worth that salary outlay and the future years of leaking players due to cap squeezes.

Don't see how there'd be a future cap squeeze if the rumored front ended deal was true.

2 years x $4mill would leave another 6 @ $1.6, which would be easily manageable given the increase in salary cap. It'd make sense to front end as much as possible given we have no one to pay big coin to right now.

It's a mammoth financial offer, but if there is one thing we have right now it's cap space. I'd much rather we overpay for a star than overpay multiple average players already on the list in order to meet the cap floor.

 

[tiger_tough]

This was Cal Twomey in April

Richmond is understood to be willing to put forward what would be the biggest deal in football history to try and lure Butters to Punt Road, with a price tag of close to $2 million expected for at least eight years for his next contract.

So pretty much had it right. 18 for 8 works out 2.25/yr (if what Chris says is true, which is doubtful). Twomey still has the Bulldogs as favourites for him (Gettable this week)

I think ol mate in Adelaide put 1+1 to get 3 being that Richmond have the best offer for port and the biggest contract so must be front runners.

(Yes, I will be extremely salty if he doesn’t come to the Bulldogs)

Agree.

Got the thread moving though.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Don't see how there'd be a future cap squeeze if the rumored front ended deal was true.

2 years x $4mill would leave another 6 @ $1.6, which would be easily manageable given the increase in salary cap. It'd make sense to front end as much as possible given we have no one to pay big coin to right now.

It's a mammoth financial offer, but if there is one thing we have right now it's cap space. I'd much rather we overpay for a star than overpay multiple average players already on the list in order to meet the cap floor.

For you. Yes it makes sense. Got to pay the cap to someone.
For clubs contending with far tighter cap situations 18/8 no matter how it's divvied up is too much to spend on one player.

The amount St.K are spending on NWM, TDK is too much and they're just a middling team not even a contender.

 

[Snuffaluphagus]

For you. Yes it makes sense. Got to pay the cap to someone.
For clubs contending with far tighter cap situations 18/8 no matter how it's divvied up is too much to spend on one player.

The amount St.K are spending on NWM, TDK is too much and they're just a middling team not even a contender.

Just having a small giggle at the absurdity of NBA contracts where seeing 18/8 would mean 18m a year for 8 years. And 18m a year gets you a half decent role player these days in the NBA. Just completely absurd money

 

[KanesBurner]

Do you think Port would match an $18mill deal? Surely not.

Unless money (plus returning to Vic) is the main motivation, he'd be crazy to pick us over Dogs.

I think Port would pretty comfortably match, it was reported we offer Butters + NWM the same deals last year $1.8mil/7 years and if neither of them are at Port will have absurd salary cap space.

Think I’m in the minority that Tigers/Dees would be good spots for him.

 

[tombomb]

I have no idea what is true and what isn't, but I am sceptical of a port adelaide supporter in the media saying Butters wants to go to the one club who could offer Port a really good deal if they were to match.

 

[El Doederino]

I have no idea what is true and what isn't, but I am sceptical of a port adelaide supporter in the media saying Butters wants to go to the one club who could offer Port a really good deal if they were to match.

Spot on. The reporting sounded more like wishful thinking of a port nuffy than any real intel. Butters wants to go to a contender. They won’t have the picks to satisfy Port. That’s the dilemma. Why would Butters choose a different club for Ports benefit? Why would he go to a struggling Richmond if it costs them the very picks they will need to contend?

 

[Morro]

This was Cal Twomey in April

Richmond is understood to be willing to put forward what would be the biggest deal in football history to try and lure Butters to Punt Road, with a price tag of close to $2 million expected for at least eight years for his next contract.

So pretty much had it right. 18 for 8 works out 2.25/yr (if what Chris says is true, which is doubtful). Twomey still has the Bulldogs as favourites for him (Gettable this week)

I think ol mate in Adelaide put 1+1 to get 3 being that Richmond have the best offer for port and the biggest contract so must be front runners.

(Yes, I will be extremely salty if he doesn’t come to the Bulldogs)

Given the talent and stars on the Bulldogs list, you guys would be half of what we are offering surely?

 

[THE_GUN]

The part of the article that sounds silly is saying its a $2.25 mil deal and Richmond could pay $4mil the first couple of years which port could match.

Richmond have virtually no players left to pay in 2026
Tigers biggest contracts are Balta , Taranto , Hopper and have lost Bolton $1.2 , Lynch $1.5 , Rioli $800k , Baker $800k , Graham $600k along with Dusty , Riewoldt , Cotchin , Grimes contracts the previous years

The rest of the list is virtually Rookie contracts or average afl salary at best
The Bigger contracts on the list would have been seriously front ended and wouldnt surprise me if there is a massive 1st/2nd/4rd year payments of $4 mil per year for 3 years then comes down to $1 mil range after that

 

[ABAB]

I have no idea what is true and what isn't, but I am sceptical of a port adelaide supporter in the media saying Butters wants to go to the one club who could offer Port a really good deal if they were to match.

You only do that if you're contracted so clubs will let you go provided they get overs in a trade. Butters will be uncontracted and a FA, they aren't really that bright.

 

[MaxiBont]

Given the talent and stars on the Bulldogs list, you guys would be half of what we are offering surely?

We have a lot of cap space with Jamarra, Macrae, Daniel, Smith and a few other bigger contracts off our list.

 

[THE_GUN]

This was Cal Twomey in April

Richmond is understood to be willing to put forward what would be the biggest deal in football history to try and lure Butters to Punt Road, with a price tag of close to $2 million expected for at least eight years for his next contract.

So pretty much had it right. 18 for 8 works out 2.25/yr (if what Chris says is true, which is doubtful). Twomey still has the Bulldogs as favourites for him (Gettable this week)

I think ol mate in Adelaide put 1+1 to get 3 being that Richmond have the best offer for port and the biggest contract so must be front runners.

(Yes, I will be extremely salty if he doesn’t come to the Bulldogs)

Out of curiosity what do you think the bulldogs would be paying if he selected to come
surely it would have to be $1.6/$1.7 range so roughly $500k x 8 years difference

 

[THE_GUN]

Just having a small giggle at the absurdity of NBA contracts where seeing 18/8 would mean 18m a year for 8 years. And 18m a year gets you a half decent role player these days in the NBA. Just completely absurd money

My Turkish Soccer club is paying $20 million euro a year for a player called victor osimhen
And it would probably not be in the top 10 Soccer leagues in the world

 

[KanesBurner]

The part of the article that sounds silly is saying its a $2.25 mil deal and Richmond could pay $4mil the first couple of years which port could match.

Richmond have virtually no players left to pay in 2026
Tigers biggest contracts are Balta , Taranto , Hopper and have lost Bolton $1.2 , Lynch $1.5 , Rioli $800k , Baker $800k , Graham $600k along with Dusty , Riewoldt , Cotchin , Grimes contracts the previous years

The rest of the list is virtually Rookie contracts or average afl salary at best
The Bigger contracts on the list would have been seriously front ended and wouldnt surprise me if there is a massive 1st/2nd/4rd year payments of $4 mil per year for 3 years then comes down to $1 mil range after that

Don’t need to match the year by year breakdown. Only total contract value and years need to be matched. This is raised every year, front loading FA contracts isn’t a thing.

 

[Pencil case]

Given the talent and stars on the Bulldogs list, you guys would be half of what we are offering surely?

Dogs have a lot of cap space. To make room for Butters, over the past few years we’ve lost Macrae, Daniel, Juh, Smith, (Treloar and Libba also possibly retire).

Sounds like we’re also offering Butts a sizeable financial sum for 4 years.

In terms of picks, that’s irrelevant. Once Butters nominates a club, he’ll get there.

 

[#Port Patriot#]

Can you pull out once you've officially lodged an offer?

Not strapped, but a spare $18mill? Would be very few clubs that could match that.

You don't HAVE to trade if they match at all. Morally you probably should, but you don't have to. If port matched and we walked away, Port would then have to trade with another team, lose him to the draft for nothing, or re-sign him.

FWIW I don't think we are a chance at all, just speculating.

If offer is matched by Port, Richmond have to trade. Port can decline any trade if it isn't good enough for them which means either Butters stays at Port on that matched contract offer OR Port have a 3 day window (from memory) to modify and offer different contract, or Butters can decide to enter to draft whether National or PSD. Which he won't and will guaranteed stay at Port 100% in that situation. Butters is very evidently not the character type to screw over Port and leave in the draft where they receive nothing. Won't happen.

Richmond can decide against the trade if matched as well, if Port don't accept their trade offer and "pull out" which would look extremely bad on them considering they basically won in getting Butters to choose them and now they can't satisfy a proper trade deal.

No other club can come in to try and get Butters, only the one club in this situation. If that fails, that's it. So if Richmond can't get it done, Dogs for example can't be chosen as option 2 to then try. Not allowed.

Port can indeed match that offer apparently being rumoured. Comfortably. Doesn't have to be the same either. Only the length and total amount. So if Tigers decide to state 18m over 8 seasons but first 2 years heavily front ended at 4m per year for example to try and prevent matching, it doesn't matter because all Port have to do is prove they can match paying 18m over 8 years regardless of how much is paid per year, front ended or back ended or just an even amount.

Tigers rumour is a load of garbage as well. Never going to happen and literally opposite of him choosing a club that will contend fast and try and win a flag as soon as possible.

 

[Morro]

Dogs have a lot of cap space. To make room for Butters, over the past few years we’ve lost Macrae, Daniel, Juh, Smith, (Treloar and Libba also possibly retire).

Sounds like we’re also offering Butts a sizeable financial sum for 4 years.

In terms of picks, that’s irrelevant. Once Butters nominates a club, he’ll get there.

If you guys have to trade, how would you get it done in your opinion?

 

[SSSSSS]

Just having a small giggle at the absurdity of NBA contracts where seeing 18/8 would mean 18m a year for 8 years. And 18m a year gets you a half decent role player these days in the NBA. Just completely absurd money

Bobby Bonilla is still getting paid 1.2 million a year from the Mets.

It's been 25 years since he last played professionally and they'll still have to pay him $1.2 million a year in deferred payments until 2035.

We're just small fish here in Oz.

 

[tombomb]

Don’t need to match the year by year breakdown. Only total contract value and years need to be matched. This is raised every year, front loading FA contracts isn’t a thing.

Where is this written?

Everything available online, including the AFL's own rules, says a club has to match the exact terms.

 

[Tonythetiger]

Could look at it one way with Tigers offering such a large deal, Lalor could be on the move to Tassie based on the rumours of them targeting him and we aren't factoring in a large salary jump for him. But for sure, Tigers warchest must be massive, we are a team full of kids and a bunch of guys on one year deals at minimum amount like Tresize, Sonsie, Smith etc. I don't love committing so much to one player but could absolutely understand if it's been planned this way and the fact that we don't have anyone else to pay, so you just have to go out and get the best player available that year.

I wonder if we do some dodgy deal whereby Port don't match but then we do some deal like Fawcett plus a future first with a second round pick coming back? I vaguely recall this being not allowed with each trade having to sort of be independently valid and this would amount to a manipulation.

Surely there's a way where if we finish bottom, then Port get a draft pick after their pick for losing Butters, then we bid on Walker, Port get an extra end of first round pick, then we trade with Port so they can get a pick in before Cochrane, and maybe they trade out that next pick for our first next year, but then Port match with their remaining pick.

Tigers get Butters, Ports first rounder this year.
Port get Pick 1 this year, Cochrane via the draft, Richmond future first.

I don't even need to work out the imbalance of this trade because I'm sure someone will immediately tell me how unrealistic this is and why...

Chuck in Fawcett and Smith too.

 

[RanaNaved]

We are not ruthless enough to threaten PSD IMO

Tbf most teams don't do it