I love reading peanuts on Facebook and other social media saying "imagine Howe up forward taking marks and kicking goals. Being played out of position at Melbourne. Would be a star at [insert club here]". These people are the type of armchair supporters who watch the Sunday footy show for their weekly analysis of the games and see 'highlights Howe' taking a screamer. Plain and simple, he can't play forward coz he can't kick for [censored]. Has never kicked a goal when needed. Constantly lets himself down in front of the sticks.

Ummm, 1 minute to go, Round 11 2015 v St Kilda

Quote from Match Report: "It looked like it would finally be the Demons' day when Howe slotted a tough set shot late in the game, only for Melbourne hearts to be broken seconds later."

Remember that game at all???

Not saying I disagree with your premise regarding them overestimating Howe's ability....but you might want to be a bit more careful when making such finite statements when there is recent contradictory evidence available.

Howe has snagged a few good ones but anyone saying he's a good shot for goal is kidding themselves average at best especially directly in front.

I really can't see the point to trading a seasoned AFL player such as Howe for a draft pick or a flanker / utility type.

If we can't include him in a deal for a top line midfielder, I'd rather keep him. We need to improve the list now, not three years into the future.

I really can't see the point to trading a seasoned AFL player such as Howe for a draft pick or a flanker / utility type.

If we can't include him in a deal for a top line midfielder, I'd rather keep him. We need to improve the list now, not three years into the future.

I could see Howe to Collingwood, Collingwood's 2nd rounder to Essendon, Melksham to Melbourne. Net result - Melksham for Howe. Pretty even deal.

The above would be a "worst case" deal. Best case we get a first rounder for Howe, or we package him as part of a deal for a higher quality mid.

Im sorry but Jeremy Howe is not worth 450-500 a season well thats what the paper is reporting.

Im sorry but Jeremy Howe is not worth 450-500 a season well thats what the paper is reporting.

I agree, but I don't think Melksham's worth $400 for 4 years either. I worry about offering anyone but a star like Hogan 4 years.

One gets the distinct feeling that Melbourne are trying to move Howe on.

don't you get the felling that the longer term heads are being moved closer to the door? all of them, apart from those few who aren't as infected by the old culture.

Howe about Seedling?

well, we'll neeld Lovett f/s, the nursery man first. just so seedling can flourish under his nurturing.

Yep, I'd be all for getting Maynard in. Strong competitor and has a historical tie to Melbourne too.

I'd be surprised if the Pies would trade him though, has signed a contract extension through to 2018.

yep, his dad played for, & worked for Us.

Im sorry but Jeremy Howe is not worth 450-500 a season well thats what the paper is reporting.

What is he worth? What do you think the cap is at in 2016? What do you think it will be in 2017 with the new TV deal?

I agree, but I don't think Melksham's worth $400 for 4 years either. I worry about offering anyone but a star like Hogan 4 years.

Sounds like you're completely out of touch with what an average AFL player earns today.

Well the way he has been playing id say 350-400. Id rather have extra money to pay Hogan on a long term contract

Speaking of long contracts, I wonder...

If Howe stays (and similarly, Watts), it is possible a kind of statement can be made with the contracts.At the modest end of sensible salaries, but fairly long contracts - long enough to mean that they'll expect to finish up as one-club players.

For all that we moan about them, these guys are actual AFL-level players who attract criticism mainly because of the gap between best and worst traits and form, rather than because they outright suck. If this off-season and the relative lack of interest can be the cathartic wake-up call they need, then keeping them could turn out to be a winner.

Ugh, I just realised everything I just said could have been cut and paste from a Sylvia thread four years ago.

Sounds like you're completely out of touch with what an average AFL player earns today.

I'm not a fan of Melksham maybe you are. I'd reckon 400 is more than average if you did your research.

If GWS agree to trade Mcarthey they will rightly demand a first round pick and a best 22 player.

there is potential that we could get Howe involved in the trade and help get that deal done, hopefully get something decent out of it as well, maybe Adam Tommlinson or pick 16 from freo

If GWS agree to trade Mcarthey they will rightly demand a first round pick and a best 22 player.

there is potential that we could get Howe involved in the trade and help get that deal done, hopefully get something decent out of it as well, maybe Adam Tommlinson or pick 16 from freo

Would prefer pick 16, but fail to see how a trade of Howe & McCarthney to Freo works as a three way. Would think they'll be totally seperate trades. Think the best we could hope for would be Crozier and a 2nd round pick.

Great mark but really a 1 trick pony.. Plenty of turnovers from kicks out of the backline ... Maybe better suited as a forward only... Wouldn't be paying 500k to keep him.....

Hogan2014, on 02 Oct 2015 - 11:10 AM, said:

Great mark but really a 1 trick pony.. Plenty of turnovers from kicks out of the backline ... Maybe better suited as a forward only... Wouldn't be paying 500k to keep him.....

Geez....I get so sick of posters saying Howe is a one trick pony......Check his stats before you just join the groupthink.

The football dept must disagree, as he hasn't been dropped through form or injury for two bloody years.

Is he the greatest thing since sliced bread?.....No...... but I would back him rather than an 18 year old draftee

Geez....I get so sick of posters saying Howe is a one trick pony......Check his stats before you just join the groupthink.

The football dept must disagree, as he hasn't been dropped through form or injury for two bloody years.

Is he the greatest thing since sliced bread?.....No...... but I would back him rather than an 18 year old draftee

and some might suggest that the club doesn't value him as a two trick pony either. Club aint anteing up is it ?

I have never seen Howe put in a 4 quarter performance in 100 games of football. He goes missing far too often.

If the club really wants 22 "competitors" I doubt Howe is in their plans.

I'm not a fan of Melksham maybe you are. I'd reckon 400 is more than average if you did your research.

The average salary is skewed by rookies and 1st and 2nd year players who are on minimum contracts. What's more important is the median salary - in round terms the 22nd person on the list. A player in this position will probably be in and out of the best 22 through the year.

Now if the average is 300,000 (and I reckon that's a pretty good guess), the median will probably be 20-30k higher than that. Now if you consider were offering Melksham a 4 year deal it's pretty apparent that we expect him to be a regular 22 player, which would put him in the top third of players on the list. Therefore, $400k will be pretty much spot on for a player of that type.

To get a club-by-club distribution, just divide by 18!

under 100k = 5

100-200k = 11

200-300k = 8

300-400k = 7

400-500k = 4

>500k = 4

(figures rounded down)

I'd say we are paying '1 pay band' over for Melksham, but that's what you have to do when you are trying to assemble a team. Another way to look at it is that in one hit we have replaced the entire depth contribution from the group of NQR we've already delisted, improving on that aspect while also opening a few extra list spots for draftees. Melksham + 2 draftees is both cheaper and better than Bail + McKenzie + Riley!

To get a club-by-club distribution, just divide by 18!

under 100k = 5

100-200k = 11

200-300k = 8

300-400k = 7

400-500k = 4

>500k = 4

(figures rounded down)

I'd say we are paying '1 pay band' over for Melksham, but that's what you have to do when you are trying to assemble a team. Another way to look at it is that in one hit we have replaced the entire depth contribution from the group of NQR we've already delisted, improving on that aspect while also opening a few extra list spots for draftees. Melksham + 2 draftees is both cheaper and better than Bail + McKenzie + Riley!

good stuff goffy

so an average of 8.5 players per club earn >=400k

interesting wrt melksham

Important to note that we're using 2014 data. Salary cap in 2019 when Melksham's reported contract runs out will be much higher. Be interesting to try and identify 7 members of Hawthorn's grand final team that are on less than 300 grand.

To get a club-by-club distribution, just divide by 18!

under 100k = 5

100-200k = 11

200-300k = 8

300-400k = 7

400-500k = 4

>500k = 4

(figures rounded down)

I'd say we are paying '1 pay band' over for Melksham, but that's what you have to do when you are trying to assemble a team. Another way to look at it is that in one hit we have replaced the entire depth contribution from the group of NQR we've already delisted, improving on that aspect while also opening a few extra list spots for draftees. Melksham + 2 draftees is both cheaper and better than Bail + McKenzie + Riley!

Really good stuff that, appreciated.

I'd love to see those figures aligned to the Hawthorn list. Reckon it would be a tough task assigning equivalent values to their players.