Heres a couple of questions to the outraged on here:

Who thinks that Taylor, Mahoney and Todd Viney haven't weighed up Hogan's market value and looked at scenarios should he want to move clubs, or for that matter if other clubs make big offers?

If you think they have, why can't it also be discussed respectfully here?

1 minute ago, Wiseblood said:

Hardly Moonie. As the above post suggests I'm not the only one who thinks debating the hypothetical value of a contracted, loyal player is a little ridiculous. 

Then don't discuss it!

Next people will be saying close demonland because we don't like what is said on it.  If we want to talk about a subject and we do so respectfully and within the sites rules who are you to rain on the parade?

2 hours ago, SFebes said:

If FREO made Jesse an offer of $1.5m x 7, what do you think he would do? From memory currently on ~$500,00 per year at Dees.

 

1 hour ago, SFebes said:

$1m is a lot IMO, I even think $800,000 is a lot if Redleg is correct. For a bloke who hasn't performed against better sides.

Why would Freo offer him 7 x $1.5mill when you think he's worth less than half that at Melbourne?

You can't pretend he's a superstar at one club and an average player at the other. 

There's 31 pages of drivel in this thread, and only a handful of posters who really understand the substantive issue, which is how - and if - we can accommodate the 3 KPFs. Trading Hogan to resolve that issue, if it is one, is a fair way down the track right now.  

At this stage, I'm with @binman and think it can work, especially on the bigger grounds. 

5 hours ago, Watson11 said:

I can't remember which thread it was on but our forward structure and entries according to the poster was based on statistics on goalkicking etc, and that the goalkicking efficiency was really good from 0-30m and central, but statistically drops off further out and on the angles.  The implication was that the players had been coached to aim to get the ball to players in a better position, hence were probably ignoring the leads that were further out so as to kick to the hot spot, not taking shots from 45-50m and trying to pass off quickly etc.  This seems to have been fixed and modified the last couple of weeks.  Kind of like basketball, it's like Goodwin etc was always trying to get the high percentage layup, whereas now we are hitting the leads and making some 3 pointers which makes the layups harder to defend as well.  I'm really confident that if we continue to play how we have the last 2 weeks with our inside 50s we will be really hard to beat. 

So onto Hogan with the more recent game style, we will be even better if we have really quick players in our forward 50 who can get 5m on a lead.  Hogan is ideally made for this style because of his speed, endurance, strength etc  I wouldn't trade him for mids, draft picks etc and am really keen to see us use him better next year.

Yes, I always wonder why players kicking the ball inside 50, apparently lowering their eyes to hit the best target do it well when Hogan isn't playing, just don,t play exactly the same when he is in the side. Just seems obvious to me.

18 minutes ago, Grapeviney said:

 

Why would Freo offer him 7 x $1.5mill when you think he's worth less than half that at Melbourne?

The suitor often needs to outbid the resident club.... thats how players get interested. But his value to Melbourne may be higher than Febes suggests... but not so much as to say Freo.  Is it impossible that WCE enter the fray...with money...wads ??

You can't pretend he's a superstar at one club and an average player at the other. 

Thats not the point...both and all clubs may value him /anyone highly....it's what youre prepared to pay to keep said player. One valuing him lower  etc need not mean they consider him average...just the other club prepared to pay overs..maybe massively if that is what it takes to shift allegiance.

There's 31 pages of drivel in this thread, and only a handful of posters who really understand the substantive issue, which is how - and if - we can accommodate the 3 KPFs. Trading Hogan to resolve that issue, if it is one, is a fair way down the track right now.

Might be the $64  question...and it might be forced as an issue immediately we finish out season if many parties require satisfying.

At this stage, I'm with @binman and think it can work, especially on the bigger grounds. 

We seem to play better with only 2 big KPF in the arc....it declutters

Edited August 30, 20186 yr by beelzebub

In my opinion 3 KPF's works when one of them is Tom McDonald who has a tank as good if not better than most. Play him as a high half forward/2nd ruck/wing option. Leaving Hogan and Weidemann to move into vacant space forward of the ball. All good KPFs know to keep out of one another's space and that will come with time.

Developing their forward "craft" together is what they should be concentrating on over summer. Move the ball quickly like we have the last 2 weeks and there is enough space for all 3 inside the 50!!

54 minutes ago, Grapeviney said:

 

Why would Freo offer him 7 x $1.5mill when you think he's worth less than half that at Melbourne?

You can't pretend he's a superstar at one club and an average player at the other. 

There's 31 pages of drivel in this thread, and only a handful of posters who really understand the substantive issue, which is how - and if - we can accommodate the 3 KPFs. Trading Hogan to resolve that issue, if it is one, is a fair way down the track right now.  

At this stage, I'm with @binman and think it can work, especially on the bigger grounds. 

Perceived value. He’s a 50 goal a season player who’s yet to hit his prime, he’s  arguably the best young forward in the comp, a contested footy beast. He’s easily worth 1-1.2 million a year. 

Three tall forwards isn’t sustainable IMO.

1 hour ago, Grapeviney said:

 

Why would Freo offer him 7 x $1.5mill when you think he's worth less than half that at Melbourne?

You can't pretend he's a superstar at one club and an average player at the other. 

There's 31 pages of drivel in this thread, and only a handful of posters who really understand the substantive issue, which is how - and if - we can accommodate the 3 KPFs. Trading Hogan to resolve that issue, if it is one, is a fair way down the track right now.  

At this stage, I'm with @binman and think it can work, especially on the bigger grounds. 

Eg, Eg, Eg

Clubs get desperate......

Lever: Adelaide $300,000......Melb $800,000

Polec: Port $400,000 ...... North $750,000

Scully? Melb $300,000...... GWS $1m

Tom Boyd: GWS $300,000 ........ Bulldogs $1m

Etc Etc

Edited August 30, 20186 yr by SFebes

1 hour ago, ProDee said:

I'm interested in "highest and best use"", not watering down a player's best position to squeeze in someone else.

Salem wasn't great in the midfield, but is great down back.  Brayshaw wasn't great as a high half forward or on a back flank, but is great on ball.  

Yes, players can be juggled, but invariably water finds its own level and the course you're advocating rarely is sustainable.

not talking about watering down anything

plenty of examples of good players changing positions and excelling. i'm sure you can think of plenty of examples yourself

you'll never know if you don't try. tmac and hoges have already demonstrated their versatility 

2 hours ago, Bombay Airconditioning said:

The amount of money will be the end of the story IMO.

The club will decide all of the digits, and who they go to. 

1 hour ago, Axis of Bob said:

This is possibly the biggest load of rubbish I have read on Demonland. Not so much the message (which is near on indecipherable) but the actual collection of words in the screen.

I assume you are attempting to say that because Jesse hasn't been traded to WA yet it means that he can still get traded WA, and the way to fix that is to trade him to WA.

It's like the People's Front of Judea, if they were all high.

Dave's not here man.

24 minutes ago, SFebes said:

Eg, Eg, Eg

Clubs get desperate......

Lever: Adelaide $300,000......Melb $800,000

Polec: Port $400,000 ...... North $750,000

Scully? Melb $300,000...... GWS $1m

Tom Boyd: GWS $300,000 ........ Bulldogs $1m

Etc Etc

exactly...as mentioned above  The suitor often needs to outbid the resident club.... thats how players get interested.

It might also be said it is sometimes when clubs get interested. Im sure right at the moment things are relatively normal...and then the circus comes to town.

Two things........Freo needs an experienced Full Forward who WILL kick goals day.1

                            Melbourne cannot (i think) afford THREE star forwards and that does not count Track who could be anything.

and that's just a start..........

Edited August 30, 20186 yr by willmoy
spelling

Trying to make sense out of all this discussion, I only see a couple of reasonable scenarios:

1. If another club offers big money to Jesse: 

If so, and he wants to leave, then we get as much as we can for him.  

If he wants to stay, we negotiate a new contract for him now.

2. If no offer forthcoming, we keep him - no way we sell him IMO. We certainly don't go pawning him off.

Everything else at this stage is just wild speculation.

Let it play out.

4 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

Everything else at this stage is just wild speculation.

 

Wild speculation and footy forums go hand in hand Neil!

8 minutes ago, Neil Crompton said:

Trying to make sense out of all this discussion, I only see a couple of reasonable scenarios:

1. If another club offers big money to Jesse: 

If so, and he wants to leave, then we get as much as we can for him.  

If he wants to stay, we negotiate a new contract for him now.

2. If no offer forthcoming, we keep him - no way we sell him IMO. We certainly don't go pawning him off.

Everything else at this stage is just wild speculation.

Let it play out.

That seems reasonable. I dont think anyone is suggesting ad hoc pawning of the lad. Of course it all falls under 'what if "

that said point one :1. If another club  WILL offers big money to Jesse:  

point 2 is the default. Again I cant see the club initiating anything....why would it...it can only unsettle things and cost a lot of money...BUT.... things  CAN change, and then one thing acts as a catalyst.

But essentially  NC...youre just describing the generic basis of trade week....Sometimes things happen ...or not.

Yes its speculation . Wild ?? I dont see it as terribly far fetched .

Have we traded him yet? 

1 hour ago, daisycutter said:

not talking about watering down anything

plenty of examples of good players changing positions and excelling. i'm sure you can think of plenty of examples yourself

you'll never know if you don't try. tmac and hoges have already demonstrated their versatility 

Yeah nah.

2 hours ago, HBDee said:

In my opinion 3 KPF's works when one of them is Tom McDonald who has a tank as good if not better than most. Play him as a high half forward/2nd ruck/wing option. Leaving Hogan and Weidemann to move into vacant space forward of the ball. All good KPFs know to keep out of one another's space and that will come with time.

Developing their forward "craft" together is what they should be concentrating on over summer. Move the ball quickly like we have the last 2 weeks and there is enough space for all 3 inside the 50!!

Sorry but I disagree, Tmac is best just kicking at the sticks, anything else makes me nervous as he kicks floaters more often than not. Yes he has the tank, and can/could mind a running gorilla, but those kicks are best suited for goal kicking - keep him 45m from goal at all times I reckon.

We are not going to make Hogan a defender to fit Weideman in the forward line. That’s honestly crazy talk. Versatile players usually end up that way because they’re forced to fill a hole, not because they’ve been squeezed out of their best role.

We find a way to make three talls work. It’s the only way we don’t eventually lose one.

Maybe we should rename this the Trade WEIDEMAN thread.

Rumours circulating that Melbourne and Casey are planning to tank their way out of finals in order to shop hogan around sooner. 

2 hours ago, Moonshadow said:

Heres a couple of questions to the outraged on here:

Who thinks that Taylor, Mahoney and Todd Viney haven't weighed up Hogan's market value and looked at scenarios should he want to move clubs, or for that matter if other clubs make big offers?

If you think they have, why can't it also be discussed respectfully here?

I don't think they have at all.  

I mean, why would they?  They have a happy, contracted and loyal player at their club - why would they feel the need to weigh up his market value?  It seems counter productive to me.  Their job is to find talent and keep talent on the list, not weigh up their market value in case someone decides to leave.

That would come when he does indicate that he wants to leave.  If that ever were to happen then that is the time when they look at his market value.  Why bother doing it before hand?  Market value changes constantly, from player injuries/performance to what other clubs have done on the market themselves.  It's the same in any sport.

At the end of the day, none of us actually know what is happening behind closed doors, and it isn't just with the trade period.  That goes for team changes, training, discussions etc, something you and I have agreed upon many times.  This is no different.  But, to me, it makes far more sense that they wouldn't bother looking at the market value of their own players until they absolutely had to, either because a player wants out or because they want to move somebody on.  Until then they would be concentrating on their development as a person and as a Melbourne player.

I disagree Wise. IMO all list managers would be negligent to not be aware of the market value of their players. How else do they renegotiate new contracts or do trades? Jesse's contract ends in 14 months. They would assess the risk of player departing and do a cost/benefit. No one wants to be caught with their pants down. There are no serious indicators of Hogan leaving, so this is purely hypothetical. But this is a footy forum where people are permitted (by the grace of mods, of course) respectful discussion of 'what if's'. You can hold your breath til you are blue,  but we will still be here!

Edited August 30, 20186 yr by Moonshadow

2 hours ago, SFebes said:

Eg, Eg, Eg

Clubs get desperate......

Lever: Adelaide $300,000......Melb $800,000

Polec: Port $400,000 ...... North $750,000

Scully? Melb $300,000...... GWS $1m

Tom Boyd: GWS $300,000 ........ Bulldogs $1m

Etc Etc

Of course clubs pay overs. Get desperate if that is the word you want to use.

But in each of the above scenarios the player chose to leave so they could get more coin. It appears you are making the assumption that if a club makes a huge offer the player will naturally choose to accept it. But there are plenty of examples of plaers knocking back bigger offers. 

Kelly resigning with GWS is just one example . I'm sure Jessie himself knocked back a much bigger pay check from freo before resigning with the dees as did TMac no doubt. 

Riddle me this. Why would players knock back much bigger offers? Two reasons come to mind - loyalty and chance of winning a flag.

Every example you listed above the clubs involved were  an even money chance of winning a flag or better, but certainly no worse. Why on earth would Jessie leave a club that is a very good chance of winning a flag in the next 5 years and go to one that has zero chance of winning a flag in that same period. Players want success. They want to win flags.

And even if they are motivated by money success brings coin. Being in losing team in the west for the next 10 years might earn Jessie a good salary in that time but that's it. Winning flags for a  Melbourne club will provide opportunities to earn income for the rest of his life. 

1 minute ago, Moonshadow said:

I disagree Wise. IMO all list managers would be negligent to not be aware of the market value of their players. How else do they renegotiate new contracts or do trades? They would assess the risk of player departing and do a cost/benefit. No one wants to be caught with their pamts down. There are no serious indicators of Hogan leaving, so this is purely hypothetical. But this is a footy forum where people are permitted (by the grace of mods, of course) respectful discussion of 'what if's'. You can hold your breath til you are blue,  but we will still be here!

Totally agree Moonie .It's the job of list managers to be vigilant. They work ( hopefully ) year round , compiling scouting reports, keeping an ear to the wall of the world of movement etc. It's the job of list managers to live among scenarios and what-ifs.  We're fortunate to have a good crew in that department now. Id be aghast if they were not working the abacus and ouija board of possibilities.

In Taylor and Co I trust