On 15/02/2016 at 23:17, Baghdad Bob said:

Patrick Cripps says hi.  Don't know why you have to tar Hogan with the equivalent of the mercenary tag. He's not done one thing to deserve it.

Do we know what Cripps has been offered ? Maybe all his expectations including monetary, have been met.

I hate the word mercenary but if getting the best deal for a player is mercenary then Hogan will be mercenary.

Players usually fall into two categories and that is dictated by demand and supply. The likes of Hogan and Brayshaw will be able to make demands of the club as they will be in demand. The likes of Michie and Spencer pretty much must take what the club is offering. It is then up to both club and player to decide if their stars are aligned.

Whilst I am not an advocate of trying squeeze every last cent out of a club I would suspect that very few players do not get their actual worth. 

Loved hearing Jade Rawlings speak about Jesse Hogan in Casey but also having a good chat about it. The emphasis being put on things that he has been taught and coached well to be able to implement them in his game consistently. Jade Rawlings talking about how they spent a substantial amount of time, especially early on, teaching him to use his hips more than his arms, pretty obvious progression but alot of unders key forward rely on being bigger and stronger and pushing players out of position or beating them on the lead rather than moving them out of the way in the simplest form.
He highlighted how competitive he was as a person and how frustrated he got while it was not working for him in training, obviously the effort paid off.

  On 15/02/2016 at 23:30, pineapple dee said:

They sell it alright but it's about double the cost.

100% markup seems about right. same here too. 

  On 15/02/2016 at 23:32, nutbean said:

Do we know what Cripps has been offered ? Maybe all his expectations including monetary, have been met. 

Hogan will be offered enough money, I think we can assume that.  RPFC said "money and wins".  Cripps certainly hasn't been offered wins.

Nathan Jones stayed for more than money.  I think to say a player will only stay if the team wins is presumptuous.  Some will and some will stay through loyalty, personal objectives and relationships.  We don't know what Hogan will do at this stage and to suggest he will leave only if he gets wins is insulting. 

  On 15/02/2016 at 23:42, Baghdad Bob said:

Hogan will be offered enough money, I think we can assume that.  RPFC said "money and wins".  Cripps certainly hasn't been offered wins.

Nathan Jones stayed for more than money.  I think to say a player will only stay if the team wins is presumptuous.  Some will and some will stay through loyalty, personal objectives and relationships.  We don't know what Hogan will do at this stage and to suggest he will leave only if he gets wins is insulting. 

I also think he will be financially taken care of.

I won't necessarily suggest it is about wins but certainly it is about direction. That anyone wanted to come our club after year one of Neeld still amazes me. I think we were somewhat of an unknown entity first year of Roos but I have never been more comfortable with what has been put in place both on and off field.

We have had the discussion around development in the past - but I firmly believe that we threw young raw talent into a cesspool of a club  with no real development path. That is not the case today. We are set up for success. So the last piece of puzzle is upward trajectory and that is all down to the players. They are being coached and developed well, given time where necessary - so they now they must deliver. 

I don't think that any Melbourne supporter is tipping us to go backwards - everything is pointing to improvement and the outcome of improvement is more wins. 

That improvement is what i hope will keep Jesse with us.

  On 15/02/2016 at 23:53, nutbean said:

I also think he will be financially taken care of.

I won't necessarily suggest it is about wins but certainly it is about direction. That anyone wanted to come our club after year one of Neeld still amazes me. I think we were somewhat of an unknown entity first year of Roos but I have never been more comfortable with what has been put in place both on and off field.

We have had the discussion around development in the past - but I firmly believe that we threw young raw talent into a cesspool of a club  with no real development path. That is not the case today. We are set up for success. So the last piece of puzzle is upward trajectory and that is all down to the players. They are being coached and developed well, given time where necessary - so they now they must deliver. 

I don't think that any Melbourne supporter is tipping us to go backwards - everything is pointing to improvement and the outcome of improvement is more wins. 

That improvement is what i hope will keep Jesse with us.

I agree with all you've said but it didn't address my point.  Or maybe I've missed it.

Jones stayed when the trajectory was down.  He stayed when we were a hopelessly managed basket case.  So did Watts by the way and he was subject to the worst of the "bad management".

Who says Jesse won't do the same?  Who says wins are his criteria?  They don't seem to be for Cripps who could have sort much greener pastures.  I just don't like putting a tag on Jesse who signed a contract extension well before the current improvement was evident and he doesn't deserve the tag that goes with RPFC's comments.

  On 15/02/2016 at 23:32, nutbean said:

Do we know what Cripps has been offered ? Maybe all his expectations including monetary, have been met.

I hate the word mercenary but if getting the best deal for a player is mercenary then Hogan will be mercenary.

Players usually fall into two categories and that is dictated by demand and supply. The likes of Hogan and Brayshaw will be able to make demands of the club as they will be in demand. The likes of Michie and Spencer pretty much must take what the club is offering. It is then up to both club and player to decide if their stars are aligned.

Whilst I am not an advocate of trying squeeze every last cent out of a club I would suspect that very few players do not get their actual worth. 

agreed. Chris Judd put the first nail in the coffin of what is now well and truly buried - the notion  of showing loyalty to your club ahead of squeezing every last drop you can out of whoever will give it to you. It is simply not expected that anyone sticks around if there is a better offer elsewhere and it is very sad IMO.

If Hogan requests a trade to Freo, I'd be expecting Nat Fyfe or something of the equivalent value in return.

We're talking about a once in a generation  key forward that's already kicked 42 goals and top 5 in contested marks in his first year.

Sounds like the next 12 months are going to be critical with regards to Hogans future. I reckon we're in trouble if he hadn't re-signed by round 1 next year.

  On 16/02/2016 at 02:00, Baghdad Bob said:

I agree with all you've said but it didn't address my point.  Or maybe I've missed it.

Jones stayed when the trajectory was down.  He stayed when we were a hopelessly managed basket case.  So did Watts by the way and he was subject to the worst of the "bad management".

Who says Jesse won't do the same?  Who says wins are his criteria?  They don't seem to be for Cripps who could have sort much greener pastures.  I just don't like putting a tag on Jesse who signed a contract extension well before the current improvement was evident and he doesn't deserve the tag that goes with RPFC's comments.

I do agree that we can never be sure what makes individual's tick. I do believe that players will rarely stay on offers for massive unders ( I do stress "massive" as a lot of clubs will offer more to get a player out of their existing club and players may stay stay for somewhat less due to friendships/relationships. Certainly premiership or near premiership teams have kept lists together for less money because of the nearness of the goal).

Jones stayed two contracts ago when he played hardball with us against an offer from Essendon. There was some angst on these very boards as he kept negotiations going longer than many on here liked. I think Watts is quite interesting as I think he is highly intelligent and I believe he is acutely aware that hasn't delivered to what he this his potential is at the club and wants to. But yes some have stayed with little fanfare during our down times.

I think the landscape has changed remarkably in the last couple of seasons in that players are much more willing to pull up stumps for either money or perceived success and most clubs now negotiate the players release (Cam McCarthy being the obvious exception).

When palyers can move so easily, I believe that the lure of success is becoming more important which is why the Hawks have been so successful luring players to them.

But you are right - we don't know what motivates each individual.  

 

   

  On 16/02/2016 at 02:22, Curry & Beer said:

agreed. Chris Judd put the first nail in the coffin of what is now well and truly buried - the notion  of showing loyalty to your club ahead of squeezing every last drop you can out of whoever will give it to you. It is simply not expected that anyone sticks around if there is a better offer elsewhere and it is very sad IMO.

Hence my new found fickleness - I love every player knowing they could be gone next season and my love for them with it !

  On 14/02/2016 at 03:08, McQueen said:

Which I find a little amusing to be honest.

When did he leave Perth? He was a 17 year old and has spent the last 3 to 4 years in Melbourne.

Sure he's had opportunities to experience Perth as an adult but not in the same way as Melbourne.

Perth has heaps to do and a much nicer climate to do it in.

I grew up in Perth and moved to Melbourne three years ago.

I personally hate going back there (have to see family) as I find the place boring and backwards.

I could understand why he would much prefer Melbourne as I believe as an 18-30 year old it is now easily the best place to live in Australia. Sydney lost that mantle with their ridiculous prices and new lock-out laws.

  On 16/02/2016 at 02:29, Bring-Back-Powell said:

If Hogan requests a trade to Freo, I'd be expecting Nat Fyfe or something of the equivalent value in return.

 

So what your saying is the trade would never happen. Trading Fyfe out ? Freo would never do it.

Interestingly Freo offered a first rounder this year and next year for McCarthy  - although the first round pick was pick 22. Hogan is worth way more than McCarthy in my biased opinion - so it begs the question - what would it take ? I honestly don't think that a deal could be done. 

 

  On 15/02/2016 at 22:27, rpfc said:

So Hogan will stick around because he likes coffee?

I get the 'travel with a bad back' reason but the things that will keep him around are money and winning.

I'd perhaps add 'playing alongside his closest mates' as another reason. Money and winning flags with your mates is what they all want.

  On 16/02/2016 at 03:59, Moonshadow said:

I'd perhaps add 'playing alongside his closest mates' as another reason. Money and winning flags with your mates is what they all want.

...................  but player managers are only interested in the first part of that equation, and my gut feeling is that they probably have too much influence, particularly where youngsters are concerned.

  On 16/02/2016 at 03:13, nutbean said:

So what your saying is the trade would never happen. Trading Fyfe out ? Freo would never do it.

Interestingly Freo offered a first rounder this year and next year for McCarthy  - although the first round pick was pick 22. Hogan is worth way more than McCarthy in my biased opinion - so it begs the question - what would it take ? I honestly don't think that a deal could be done. 

 

No you're right, freo would never trade Fyfe but I reckon the future value of Hogan = current value of Fyfe.

Therefore melb should be compensated with the equivalent value of Fyfe, eg - top 6 freo player and a first rd draft pick

  On 16/02/2016 at 06:39, Bring-Back-Powell said:

No you're right, freo would never trade Fyfe but I reckon the future value of Hogan = current value of Fyfe.

Therefore melb should be compensated with the equivalent value of Fyfe, eg - top 6 freo player and a first rd draft pick

well i can't see freo having enough valuable draft picks to offer, so it would have to be players(s)

If Hogan requested a trade at the end of this year to Freo I'd want Neale, Tabener and their first round pick for the next two years minimum.

  On 16/02/2016 at 06:03, Deeoldfart said:

...................  but player managers are only interested in the first part of that equation, and my gut feeling is that they probably have too much influence, particularly where youngsters are concerned.

Good point Farty. They are the leeches of the AFL.

  On 16/02/2016 at 07:01, DemonAndrew said:

If Hogan requested a trade at the end of this year to Freo I'd want Neale, Tabener and their first round pick for the next two years minimum.

and what if Freo told us to cram it, and made a lower counter-offer but Jesse was still intent on leaving? We'd have to just cop it on the chin and take whatever Freo feels like giving us is what. If they want to orchestrate some salary cap workaround the tricks are there for anyone to use. Then we just get the standard 'family reasons' excuse. Yeah right, family reasons, but also millions of dollars. Just look out for number 1. That's how it works now. Not only do players not care about staying with their club, they also don't care if the club gets shafted by them leaving and that's what is likely to happen if he decides to go, because as we've all just spoken about, the true compensation for this player is gigantic and we simply won't get it..

  On 16/02/2016 at 07:01, DemonAndrew said:

If Hogan requested a trade at the end of this year to Freo I'd want Neale, Tabener and their first round pick for the next two years minimum.

Why on earth people worry about this when he's contracted for the next 2 years is beyond me. 

  On 16/02/2016 at 09:39, ProDee said:

Why on earth people worry about this when he's contracted for the next 2 years is beyond me. 

what difference does it make if it is 2 years or tomorrow?

Edited February 16, 20169 yr by Curry & Beer

  On 16/02/2016 at 09:41, Curry & Beer said:

what difference does it make if it is 2 years or tomorrow?

And this needs answering  ?

  On 16/02/2016 at 09:44, ProDee said:

And this needs answering  ?

it is a gigantic issue for this club and I don't know why it needs to be a certain distance of time away for you to be comfortable with other people discussing it

what date are we allowed to discuss it, let me know and I will put it in my calendar

  On 16/02/2016 at 09:50, Curry & Beer said:

it is a gigantic issue for this club and I don't know why it needs to be a certain distance of time away for you to be comfortable with other people discussing it

what date are we allowed to discuss it, let me know and I will put it in my calendar

By your logic it would be worth discussing if he had 5 years to go. 

Players rarely want to leave a club they're happy at and I see zero evidence to suggest Hogan isn't happy. 

Perhaps have a modicum of faith in the character in question, especially when they've already signed an extension.  It's called  judging things on face value.  

That said, who am I to deter precious souls. 

  On 16/02/2016 at 11:22, ProDee said:

By your logic it would be worth discussing if he had 5 years to go. 

Players rarely want to leave a club they're happy at and I see zero evidence to suggest Hogan isn't happy. 

Perhaps have a modicum of faith in the character in question, especially when they've already signed an extension.  It's called  judging things on face value.  

That said, who am I to deter precious souls. 

yes if t was 5 years i might still discuss it, would you still whinge about it being discussed?

unless you believe in santa, the precedent is set, regardless of how much 'faith in the character' you have for a bloke you've never met