2015 Contracts Thread

[Samael 560]

A hawthorn player did the "tunnel ball" last night.

And did not get pinged.

[Redleg 41,484]

And did not get pinged.

I think you will find that players in top sides get a lot longer to dispose of the ball than players in lower sides. Watching games besides Dees' ones, will prove that. In the lower sides, if a player with the ball is grabbed, he is often free kicked for holding the ball after a micro second, even often if he has disposed of it correctly. In the the top sides a player can be spun around 3 times as I saw yesterday and still allowed time to get rid of it. In the top sides it is play on or ball up and the in lower sides holding the ball. Really poor umpiring.

Edited August 16, 2015 by Redleg

[rpfc 28,779]

2019

Jones 27,

2018

Brayshaw 19, Petracca 19, Gawn 23,

2017

Dunn 27, Hogan 20, Viney 20, Lumumba 28, Kennedy-Harris20, Salem 19, Vandenberg 23,

2016

Trengove 22, Dawes 26, Grimes 25 (RFA), Watts 24 (RFA), Vince 29, Tyson* 21, Kent 21, M Jones 27, Spencer 25 (UFA), T McDonald 22, Terlich 25, Jetta 25, Garlett 25, Stretch 18, Frost 21, Newton 22, Neal-Bullen 19, O McDonald 19

2015

Jamar 31 (UFA), Garland 26 (RFA), McKenzie 24, Howe 24, Fitzpatrick 23, Toumpas 21, Pedersen 28, Hunt 19, Cross 32, Bail 26, Riley 23, Michie 23, Harmes ® 19, King ® 19, White ® 18

Really thought we were past these days, but no...

I want to get ND5, 25, 45, 65, 85 Upgrade Vanders, and Upgrade Harmes. That is 6 players to delist. If we trade then we will use a pick or get a player so we will still need to remove 6 from the PL.

Jamar, McKenzie, Hunt, Bail, Riley, Michie, and Fitzpatrick are the 7 in the frame as they are all OOC. If you want to remove all of them - that will open ND85. If you wish to save one or two then Terlich and Matt Jones should be paid out of their final year. Terlich should be paid out - he has not been near selection for a bloke halfway through his career. It's logical list management.

If it were up to rpfc:

IN: ND5, 25, 45, 65, 85, Upgrade Vanders, Upgrade Harmes

OUT: Jamar, McKenzie, Hunt, Bail, Fitzpatrick, Terlich, M Jones

TRADE: Howe (Player or 'ND20 or better'), Grimes (Player or 'ND40 or better')

RE-SIGN (1yr): Cross, Michie, Garland, Pedersen, Riley

RE-SIGN (2yrs): Toumpas

None of those re-signings are 'musts' but I don't want to be taking the chaff in the ND - we will back here in two years time if we do that as all 'first draftees' get an automatic 2-yr deal.

[FireOath 290]

Really thought we were past these days, but no...

I want to get ND5, 25, 45, 65, 85 Upgrade Vanders, and Upgrade Harmes. That is 6 players to delist. If we trade then we will use a pick or get a player so we will still need to remove 6 from the PL.

Jamar, McKenzie, Hunt, Bail, Riley, Michie, and Fitzpatrick are the 7 in the frame as they are all OOC. If you want to remove all of them - that will open ND85. If you wish to save one or two then Terlich and Matt Jones should be paid out of their final year. Terlich should be paid out - he has not been near selection for a bloke halfway through his career. It's logical list management.

If it were up to rpfc:

IN: ND5, 25, 45, 65, 85, Upgrade Vanders, Upgrade Harmes

OUT: Jamar, McKenzie, Hunt, Bail, Fitzpatrick, Terlich, M Jones

TRADE: Howe (Player or 'ND20 or better'), Grimes (Player or 'ND40 or better')

RE-SIGN (1yr): Cross, Michie, Garland, Pedersen, Riley

RE-SIGN (2yrs): Toumpas

None of those re-signings are 'musts' but I don't want to be taking the chaff in the ND - we will back here in two years time if we do that as all 'first draftees' get an automatic 2-yr deal.

I'd be happy with that except switch Toumpas for Grimes as trade bait and give Fitz the contract and send Riley out the door.

[Dr. Mubutu 866]

Agree with most except I honestly cannot see the club wanting both Garland and Howe to stay.

I understand we're in talks with Howe presently so I'm imagining Garland will be moved on.

We've heard time and time again from Roos that there are certain players who can't seem to get over 'the past', evidenced in the way that they play and carry themselves on-field.

I maintain that our hugely dramatic and still incredibly embarrassing statistics, scorelines, skill-level, effort and willingness in patches and quarters of games this year is partially to do with having blokes like these guys. Howe is coming into some good form now but some of his efforts at the beginning of the season were pretty abysmal. Same goes with Garland.

Senior figures who float in and out of games and play with such inconsistency in their best and worst absolutely contribute to our team doing the same thing during games this year.

So my point is, whilst there will be some dead-wood moved on again, I believe one of Howe or Garland will go. And it's looking like it will be Garland.

How much longer will we be 'carrying' players like this?

If we ditch Garland but keep Howe, I am fair dinkum done with this club.

(Edit: I'm fine with ditching both, to be clear.)

Edited August 17, 2015 by Dr. Mubutu

[La Dee-vina Comedia 16,909]

Really thought we were past these days, but no...

I want to get ND5, 25, 45, 65, 85 Upgrade Vanders, and Upgrade Harmes. That is 6 players to delist. If we trade then we will use a pick or get a player so we will still need to remove 6 from the PL.

Jamar, McKenzie, Hunt, Bail, Riley, Michie, and Fitzpatrick are the 7 in the frame as they are all OOC. If you want to remove all of them - that will open ND85. If you wish to save one or two then Terlich and Matt Jones should be paid out of their final year. Terlich should be paid out - he has not been near selection for a bloke halfway through his career. It's logical list management.

If it were up to rpfc:

IN: ND5, 25, 45, 65, 85, Upgrade Vanders, Upgrade Harmes

OUT: Jamar, McKenzie, Hunt, Bail, Fitzpatrick, Terlich, M Jones

TRADE: Howe (Player or 'ND20 or better'), Grimes (Player or 'ND40 or better')

RE-SIGN (1yr): Cross, Michie, Garland, Pedersen, Riley

RE-SIGN (2yrs): Toumpas

None of those re-signings are 'musts' but I don't want to be taking the chaff in the ND - we will back here in two years time if we do that as all 'first draftees' get an automatic 2-yr deal.

Interesting. I would have thought Hunt might be a better option than ND 85.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,408]

Really thought we were past these days, but no...

I want to get ND5, 25, 45, 65, 85 Upgrade Vanders, and Upgrade Harmes. That is 6 players to delist. If we trade then we will use a pick or get a player so we will still need to remove 6 from the PL.

Jamar, McKenzie, Hunt, Bail, Riley, Michie, and Fitzpatrick are the 7 in the frame as they are all OOC. If you want to remove all of them - that will open ND85. If you wish to save one or two then Terlich and Matt Jones should be paid out of their final year. Terlich should be paid out - he has not been near selection for a bloke halfway through his career. It's logical list management.

If it were up to rpfc:

IN: ND5, 25, 45, 65, 85, Upgrade Vanders, Upgrade Harmes

OUT: Jamar, McKenzie, Hunt, Bail, Fitzpatrick, Terlich, M Jones

TRADE: Howe (Player or 'ND20 or better'), Grimes (Player or 'ND40 or better')

RE-SIGN (1yr): Cross, Michie, Garland, Pedersen, Riley

RE-SIGN (2yrs): Toumpas

None of those re-signings are 'musts' but I don't want to be taking the chaff in the ND - we will back here in two years time if we do that as all 'first draftees' get an automatic 2-yr deal.

Agree with everything but the call on Toumpas.

[olisik 4,060]

hope we keep Grimes i think he has been improving and showing some fight

[rpfc 28,779]

Agree with everything but the call on Toumpas.

I did say that none of the re-signings are 'musts' - I would back McCartney and Co. to get something out of him but if we moved him on, that is fine too. But the measure has to be what we get back.

As LDVC alludes - is Hunt for ND85 a win? Borderline, but if you get it right and pick the best 22 year old playing in the second tier leagues - you might have another Vanders on your hands.

[DemonDave 1,092]

Seems odd that all this talk of 600K a year is bandied about for Howe for next year, however he hasnt been linked to a single club as

far as I've been reading. So is this purely just his manager doing his job of pumping up his price? Or is there genuinely a club interested

in him?

[Mach5 4,768]

Not enthused by picks 65 or 85.

Every recruiter will be looking to recruit another Vandenberg and pick the eyes out the mature brigade come pick 60.

[titan_uranus 25,045]

IMO, the obvious outs are Jamar, McKenzie, Terlich (despite being contracted, there is no point whatsoever to retaining him if he hasn't been close to selection all year), Bail and Hunt.

M Jones, Fitzpatrick, Michie, Riley and Toumpas are questionable, but we won't cut everyone loose without having FA/trade players to bring in. FWIW, I'd keep Michie and Toumpas over the other three.

Pedersen will stay, I can't imagine any situation where he doesn't get at least one more year. Grimes IMO stays, I've liked his renewed efforts to improve this year.

If I had to keep one of Howe or Garland, I'd keep Howe - Howe's ceiling is higher. But if neither are here next year I'll understand.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,408]

As I mentioned in another thread. Before we sign up any more players they must fit 3 criteria or no contract.

1 - Natutal competitor, loves the physical contest

2 - elite user of the footy, mark the footy, hit targets on a consistent basis.

3 - footy smarts

If we had to apply that to our current list we would easily loose a 3rd in one go. Some big names would go. We are a mess. Hopefully the coaches can let go because some of the supporters can't.

Edited August 17, 2015 by Al's Demons

[mauriesy 7,357]

2015

Jamar 31 (UFA), Garland 26 (RFA), McKenzie 24, Howe 24, Fitzpatrick 23, Toumpas 21, Pedersen 28, Hunt 19, Cross 32, Bail 26, Riley 23, Michie 23, Harmes ® 19, King ® 19, White ® 18

This year I'd be looking to keep Harmes, King, White and Hunt somehow on the list, either as upgrades, or retained rookies. I think they all show promise, and time will make or break.

Howe can go for all I care. All I'll miss is the weekly marking highlight. If Garland gets a good RFA offer, I hope we think twice before matching it.

As for the rest, I'd not be upset if any or all of Jamar, McKenzie, Fitzpatrick, Toumpas, Cross, Pedersen, Bail, Riley and Michie retired, got traded or were delisted. Some of them just tease occasionally without ever providing anything substantial. Others are just not AFL level.

We need to replace these marginal players who have been getting games recently in the team with Petracca, Trengove, a good UFA if available and new draftees, as well as getting Salem, Frost, Kent etc. back from injury.

[Earl Hood 6,101]

As I mentioned in another thread. Before we sign up any more players they must fit 3 criteria or no contract.

1 - Natutal competitor, loves the physical contest

2 - elite user of the footy, mark the footy, hit targets on a consistent basis.

3 - footy smarts

If we had to apply that to our current list we would easily loose a 3rd in one go. Some big names would go. We are a mess. Hopefully the coaches can let go because some of the supporters can't.

Al if only we had those criteria for selection since 2007! While I think footy smarts maybe difficult to test for in all cases I would substitute leadership skills. If we had drafted those that have leadership skills, appetite for the contest and kicking skills we may have made different choices ~ the likes of Scott Selwood, Hurley, D Martin, J Darling, Stringer/Wines etc, etc might be on our list.

[Skuit 10,031]

I'm uncertain about Fitzy - he hasn't really come on at senior level. He's tall and athletic but doesn't appear to be overly endowed with footy smarts. Steph had shown a lot more when he left us.

Still, I'd give him another year of development but he would need to show some consistency at the top level. I'm thinking a defender is his go - despite the tunnel ball!

Let me tell you now

Ev'rybody's talkin' 'bout

Revolution, Evolution, Masturbation, Flagellation, Regulation,

Integrations, mediations, United Nations, congratulations

All we are saying is give Fitz a chance

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,408]

Al if only we had those criteria for selection since 2007! While I think footy smarts maybe difficult to test for in all cases I would substitute leadership skills. If we had drafted those that have leadership skills, appetite for the contest and kicking skills we may have made different choices ~ the likes of Scott Selwood, Hurley, D Martin, J Darling, Stringer/Wines etc, etc might be on our list.

We need to be careful with the leadership. I say that because if you can't play the game its difficult to lead by example. Take Jack Grimes, under 18 vic metro captain, he doesn't mind a bit of the physical stuff but his disposal and footy smarts are near non existent.

[Samael 560]

Really thought we were past these days, but no...

I want to get ND5, 25, 45, 65, 85 Upgrade Vanders, and Upgrade Harmes. That is 6 players to delist. If we trade then we will use a pick or get a player so we will still need to remove 6 from the PL.

Jamar, McKenzie, Hunt, Bail, Riley, Michie, and Fitzpatrick are the 7 in the frame as they are all OOC. If you want to remove all of them - that will open ND85. If you wish to save one or two then Terlich and Matt Jones should be paid out of their final year. Terlich should be paid out - he has not been near selection for a bloke halfway through his career. It's logical list management.

If it were up to rpfc:

IN: ND5, 25, 45, 65, 85, Upgrade Vanders, Upgrade Harmes

OUT: Jamar, McKenzie, Hunt, Bail, Fitzpatrick, Terlich, M Jones

TRADE: Howe (Player or 'ND20 or better'), Grimes (Player or 'ND40 or better')

RE-SIGN (1yr): Cross, Michie, Garland, Pedersen, Riley

RE-SIGN (2yrs): Toumpas

None of those re-signings are 'musts' but I don't want to be taking the chaff in the ND - we will back here in two years time if we do that as all 'first draftees' get an automatic 2-yr deal.

From all reports the ND is pretty shallow so it may not yield much past 40. Also depends on whether the league gives "special" draft picks to the likes of Carlton and Brisbane. Might not be the year to toss players out. Also the draft has changed and I think there is opportunity to trade for future draft picks.

[mo64 5,881]

If it were up to rpfc:

IN: ND5, 25, 45, 65, 85, Upgrade Vanders, Upgrade Harmes

OUT: Jamar, McKenzie, Hunt, Bail, Fitzpatrick, Terlich, M Jones

TRADE: Howe (Player or 'ND20 or better'), Grimes (Player or 'ND40 or better')

RE-SIGN (1yr): Cross, Michie, Garland, Pedersen, Riley

RE-SIGN (2yrs): Toumpas

None of those re-signings are 'musts' but I don't want to be taking the chaff in the ND - we will back here in two years time if we do that as all 'first draftees' get an automatic 2-yr deal.

Pretty good summation. My question marks would be:

Garland - As a RFA, if there's interest from other clubs, there's no way he'd accept a 1 year deal. I hope he goes.

Riley/Michie - Both play a similar role so I'd only re-sign 1 of them, and retain M. Jones.

Hunt - Worth another year of development, and a preferable option than pick 65/85.

Our record of trading for fringe players from other clubs (Riley, Michie, Newton) hasn't borne any fruit to date, though I've still got hopes for Newton. Conversely, our rookie list selections over the past 2 years have been more promising, so we may go down this path.

[rpfc 28,779]

Pretty good summation. My question marks would be:

Garland - As a RFA, if there's interest from other clubs, there's no way he'd accept a 1 year deal. I hope he goes.

Riley/Michie - Both play a similar role so I'd only re-sign 1 of them, and retain M. Jones.

Hunt - Worth another year of development, and a preferable option than pick 65/85.

Our record of trading for fringe players from other clubs (Riley, Michie, Newton) hasn't borne any fruit to date, though I've still got hopes for Newton. Conversely, our rookie list selections over the past 2 years have been more promising, so we may go down this path.

Harmes and Vanders have been promising picks but it's a tad counterintuitive to say that ND65 or ND85 will have less worth than say Hunt, but if we picked up Harmes and Vanders as ND85 the last two years you wouldn't say that would you?

The perspective that the ND is shallow but we should keep taking Rookies don't run together well, if the draft is so shallow, those players should be taken earlier - ie. in the ND.

[mo64 5,881]

Harmes and Vanders have been promising picks but it's a tad counterintuitive to say that ND65 or ND85 will have less worth than say Hunt, but if we picked up Harmes and Vanders as ND85 the last two years you wouldn't say that would you?

The perspective that the ND is shallow but we should keep taking Rookies don't run together well, if the draft is so shallow, those players should be taken earlier - ie. in the ND.

The cost of speculating with a young draftee at picks 65 or 85 is that they are guaranteed 2 years. A speculative rookie pick only costs you 1 year. I'd prefer to go with a mature aged former AFL player or an outstanding State League player with latter picks.

[rpfc 28,779]

The cost of speculating with a young draftee at picks 65 or 85 is that they are guaranteed 2 years. A speculative rookie pick only costs you 1 year. I'd prefer to go with a mature aged former AFL player or an outstanding State League player with latter picks.

The automatic 2 year deal is for 'First Time' draft eligible players. That means for those straight out of the TAC Cup or kids applying to be drafted for the first time.

So we can take the Vanders equivalent on a 1 year deal in the ND. I would never take a speculative teenager straight out of the TAC Cup with a pick lower than 50 but for mature age players, I would use the ND picks where you would have a better chance to get those players than waiting for the Rookie Draft.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,408]

2019Jones 27,

2018

Brayshaw 19, Petracca 19, Gawn 23,

2017Dunn 27, Hogan 20, Viney 20, Lumumba 28, Kennedy-Harris20, Salem 19, Vandenberg 23,

2016Trengove 22, Dawes 26, Grimes 25 (RFA), Watts 24 (RFA), Vince 29, Tyson* 21, Kent 21, M Jones 27, Spencer 25 (UFA), T McDonald 22, Terlich 25, Jetta 25, Garlett 25, Stretch 18, Frost 21, Newton 22, Neal-Bullen 19, O McDonald 19

2015

Jamar 31 (UFA), Garland 26 (RFA), McKenzie 24, Howe 24, Fitzpatrick 23, Toumpas 21, Pedersen 28, Hunt 19, Cross 32, Bail 26, Riley 23, Michie 23, Harmes ® 19, King ® 19, White ® 18

* = Require confirmation...

Those underlined are player I think are the top 11 paid players; RFA is determined by players being among these 11 (obviously this will be wrong but hopefully indicative).

Ages are from the 1st April 2015 - an arbitrary date fit for a fool...

After yesterday we need to let go of a few

1 - Jamar. Retirement

2 - McKenzie. Not AFL standard

3 - Howe. Trade

4 - Garland. Trade for whatever you can get

5 - Toumpas. Trade for whatever you can get

6 - Bail. Delist, hasn't worked out.

7 - Riley. Delist, hasn't worked out.

8 - Grimes. Trade for pick 87 as long as they pick up his salary

9 - Dawes. Trade for pick 88 as long as they pick up his salary

10 - Terlich. Pay out.

11 - Undecided at this stage.

These decisions are not based on 1 or 2 games. These are based on years of performances. We need to let go, the sooner the better, they've had plenty of chances. The club and player need some fresh air.

Grimes - 7th season. We have 1st year players showing more. Whether you buy into the whole "captaincy ruined his career" or not he is one of the mentally scarred and needs to go. Lost his place across halfback to Salem, in and out of the team, with Petracca, Trengove(??), draft picks, trades to come in next year is there any point of keeping him?

Dawes - I'm not joking when I say pick 88. It hasn't worked, I would give him away as long as someone picked up his salary.

On a side note I want more from Viney and Tyson next year. They need to take the next step.

I'm sick of hearing Jones cops a tag, doesn't everyone have an opponent? Hogan gets double teamed at times.

If we were to secure Lynch from the Crows I'd play him with Watts and Hogan rotating through the goal square/half fwd and pushing up the ground. Let's mix it up. Three agile fwds, no more plodders.

[Bombay Airconditioning 6,408]

I would add that Grimes and Dawes are not the only thing wrong but they're on good money and there not part of the solution.

H is another who's done close to bugger all but we're stuck with him for now.

It's sad when your kids are leading the way.

Edited August 24, 2015 by Al's Demons

[dee-luded 2,959]

I cannot understand all those clambering to delist Fitzy! A 200cm KPP who has developed this year at both ends and who also is capable of being a back--up ruck. I can see him becoming another Stef Martin the moment he transfers to another Club. To me there are others on our list (e.g. McKenzie, Bail) who offer far less upside. We would be silly to discard a developing tall who is insurance, for the same reason that those same Demonlanders feel we should retain Pederson on our list (and they are right)!

If we don't give Pedo at least a one year extension then we're nuts. His form pre-injury vastly outweighed Dawes' contributions.

we need to hang onto both Pedo & Fitzy... one does his job now, the other is still progressing, more progres in the last 2 seasons then all his early years... he is just starting to coma along.

... the one I'm more concerned about is Dawesy... ok, he is a senior player now, but imo, not for too long. I prefer to have Pedo on the list, & develop Frost & any other tall who comes in...

Fitzy has special weapons, so I want him to be persevered with, & further developed.