titan_uranus

Bucs, Seahawks, Ravens

Are we sure that incentives such as the one you've described don't count towards the salary cap? If so, wouldn't clubs just structure their contracts with massive parts of them incentive-based?

I've let myself believe for a while now that we'd only have to pay something around 26, our initial pick. As of yesterday I was expecting it to be one of 26, 31 or 33. I'm certainly far less excited at the thought of us sending two of 26, 31 and 33 for him with no other pick coming back. Our talk has been about wanting to get back into the first round and these three picks are surely, given what we have now, our best/only chance of doing that. But, in saying all of that, Brown's fair market value is much more than just one of 26, 31 or 33. I feel like North shouldn't be getting that sort of value but what choice do we have? If we don't get a trade done, this won't be a Jack Martin style result for us.

There is a lot still to play out with GWS as well in terms of its draft hand. They're pushing hard for higher picks in return for Caldwell and Hateley. If they end up trading Cameron and then securing good picks for him, Caldwell and Hateley, they'll not just be cashed up but they'll have the picks to throw around for players.

Who's adding Treloar in 2022? Are you suggesting he'll stay at Collingwood for a year then walk out next year?

I think I'm right in saying we now have 26, 31, 33, 43 and 50 as our first five picks this year. How many of those get involved in a Brown trade?

Feels like a good and reasonable deal for us, Preuss and GWS. Like Hannan, best of luck to Preuss.

He couldn't hold down a spot in a side that didn't play finals. What exactly do you think he should be worth?

Fox seems to think we're going to send one of the new picks along with 26 to get him: "The Dees could now send one of their recently-acquired draft selections, as well as their current second-round selection (Pick 26), to the Kangaroos in a Brown deal"

Best of luck to him. We'll always have that goal. A third round pick feels about right.

This is one of the all time great Nudge posts. It's unlikely, but it's possible, but it depends on TMac, so it's a 15% chance.

For whom?

We're entitled to explore a paycut option, and you're right that a paycut for someone on $700k per year isn't disastrous. But his career is on track to finish at the end of this contract no matter what. He has a daughter, and to be perfectly honest he's entitled to the money we owe him on his contract. So if he doesn't take it and instead prefers to stay with us and try to break back into the best 22, that's his prerogative and we'll have to deal with it.

The major flaw in this article is the use of percentage. It doesn't tell us enough. Is the correlation with sides who score heavily? Or with sides with strong defences? It's not particularly useful to tell us that the sides who score more than their opponents overall do better than those who don't.

Is it? I would have thought small forwards were the least of their concerns. Unless they play to play Higgins up the ground, I'm not sure how this works for them. And as there's no way Richmond will accept pick 64 or worse for him, St Kilda either has to give up a first round pick (17) for him or a player of decent worth. Is he worth 17? IMO, no.

Packers, Steelers, Ravens

I'm not really a fan of digging up the past. But, in this instance, let's do it. There is not one single post criticising the contract. It's actually saddening reading that thread. It was June 2018, we'd just won six in a row. It's like a time capsule back to a much happier era. Feels like an eternity ago.

So far only 1 senior list player has been delisted (J Wagner). Hannan, OMac, Bedford and Jordon remain out of contract whilst Preuss and TMac appear odds on to leave. If they all go, that's seven players off the senior list in total. Brown takes one spot. Assume Lockhart gets an upgrade to the senior list. That leaves five spots. And that's before the AFL cuts the list size down. There's not as much room at the moment as your post suggests.

What frustrates me most about this thread is that Mahoney's core message is something we should all agree with, but most don't. That core message is "we need to drive improvement from the players who are currently on our list". For too long trade period has rolled around and we've all crossed our fingers and sweated on the club bringing in someone, or multiple players, who are going to change everything for us. Additions to the list from other clubs make a difference, but IMO they re usually closer to the icing on the cake rather than the cake itself.

Collingwood is interested in TMac despite his salary, which can only mean one of two things: either they think/know we're going to be paying a significant portion of it, or they're prepared to wear it if other cards fall their way (e.g. Treloar, Phillips and/or Cox depart). IMO the Treloar situation isn't just salary cap pressure, it's mismanagement from Collingwood that has blown up in their face (they held a possibly genuine concern about how he would perform with his partner and child in Queensland and weren't sure he could commit to staying in Melbourne. They've then poorly responded to Treloar telling them he disgreed and wants to stay).

Look, I understand @DeeSpencer's concerns, but this doesn't need another thread. This discussion has been had, at length, in the Ben Brown thread. I think it's relatively clear we're going for Brown to partner with Weid, not to replace him. If it doesn't work in 2021, DeeSpencer will have a field day reminding us all about this thread, but I'm with the vast majority who believe the Brown-Weideman forward combo can work.

There are very few, if any, people advocating for us taking Treloar at the expense of Oliver. The issue to consider is having them both in our midfield. If that's not possible then it's not possible, end of story. But, if it is, then it's worth considering.

Just to counter the recent "report" of the Buckley phone call: