Mitchell watch

[Nico]

You also don't know what 3rd party opportunities clubs will come up with. We may very well match a salary offer but if 3rd party deals are offered over and above then he will go. At Hawthorn with their old brigade supposedly taking pay cuts I can't help but think other offers are making up the difference.

[Zlatorog]

People might be forgetting that there are other Melbourne clubs in the mix as well. If Hawthorn wins another flag this year, AFL might not be very happy to see Mitchell going to them. There could be a lot of angry voices in Melbourne. I would imagine that the following clubs could be in the mix (besides Carlton and Hawthorn): Richmond, Collingwood and North Melbourne.

[Mug Punter]

People might be forgetting that there are other Melbourne clubs in the mix as well. If Hawthorn wins another flag this year, AFL might not be very happy to see Mitchell going to them. There could be a lot of angry voices in Melbourne. I would imagine that the following clubs could be in the mix (besides Carlton and Hawthorn): Richmond, Collingwood and North Melbourne.

I don't think the AFL can do a lot about where Mitchell goes and from what I can see they let them get away with whatever they want. The real issue for the Hawks is whether they are prepared to break their pay structure for Mitchell because clearly they have a deep list where they spread the cash around quite evenly at the $400-600K a year level. It helps for guys like Hodge that being in Melbourne with a successful club provides huge off field opportunities.

I could easily see the Blues being the club he goes to because they need him more as their list is wafer thin and I expect they can afford him more easily. His relative value is a lot higher there.

Sure he could go to any of the others but the rumours are usually pretty right.

[Nico]

Boy, he goes to Carlton he will be targeted every week. Will find it a lot harder there than higher clubs. As for the Tiges; they have snaffled their midfield gun in Dion Prestia.

[RogueSwan]

I was listening to the Superfooty podcast this afternoon two of the presenters, not Hudson but the other two, both agreed that Mitchell was going to be at Hawthorn next year.
God, I felt sick even typing that. In the end I can live the Mitchell leaving but to Hawthorn! That induces nausea. Also disappointing is that the Swans have turned Mitchell into a well rounded footballer and just as he has his best season he leaves and another club gets to reap the rewards.

[Mug Punter]

I was listening to the Superfooty podcast this afternoon two of the presenters, not Hudson but the other two, both agreed that Mitchell was going to be at Hawthorn next year.
God, I felt sick even typing that. In the end I can live the Mitchell leaving but to Hawthorn! That induces nausea. Also disappointing is that the Swans have turned Mitchell into a well rounded footballer and just as he has his best season he leaves and another club gets to reap the rewards.

I hope we can agree on fair compensation but I do think we should play hardball here if they try and shaft us. If push comes to shove I'd send him to the PSD.

Hopefully that won't be necessary. I'd accept their first round pick from 2017 and some form of upgrade in terms of the draft order this year with one or either of our picks this year.

Looking on the "upside" of Tom leaving it certainly doesn't, to me, feel like the world is caving in. Mills moves to the midfield and an opportunity opens for a new half back flanker (O'Riordan). We get some substantial $ in the cap to re-sign Heeney, Mills and others. We get two first round picks at the end of next year.

If only it wasn't the Hawks but even there I can see them plateauing

[Ludwig]

I hope we can agree on fair compensation but I do think we should play hardball here if they try and shaft us. If push comes to shove I'd send him to the PSD.

Hopefully that won't be necessary. I'd accept their first round pick from 2017 and some form of upgrade in terms of the draft order this year with one or either of our picks this year.

Looking on the "upside" of Tom leaving it certainly doesn't, to me, feel like the world is caving in. Mills moves to the midfield and an opportunity opens for a new half back flanker (O'Riordan). We get some substantial $ in the cap to re-sign Heeney, Mills and others. We get two first round picks at the end of next year.

If only it wasn't the Hawks but even there I can see them plateauing

+1

I'm not bothered by Tom going to Hawthorn. The Clarkson factor alone should keep them competitive, but their new crop of players is nowhere near the class of the ones departing. They are looking at pretty slow on ball group and if Hill goes, so does a lot of their outside run.

Buddy left Hawthorn and they smashed us the next year in the GF. Dangerfield leaves Adelaide and they improve dramatically. The impact of one player leaving, even the cream of the crop, often creates opportunities for others. We've got a good club that doesn't rely on stars across the board, but we happen to have pretty good personal nonetheless.

As you say, the main thing is that we get fair compensation for Tom. If he goes to Hawthorn, I would definitely want to get full fair market value for him. It will be interesting if Richmond give up pick 6 for Prestia, because it will set the benchmark for what Tom is worth. They are probably quite close in value. I think Mitchell is better.

[Mug Punter]

+1

I'm not bothered by Tom going to Hawthorn. The Clarkson factor alone should keep them competitive, but their new crop of players is nowhere near the class of the ones departing. They are looking at pretty slow on ball group and if Hill goes, so does a lot of their outside run.

Buddy left Hawthorn and they smashed us the next year in the GF. Dangerfield leaves Adelaide and they improve dramatically. The impact of one player leaving, even the cream of the crop, often creates opportunities for others. We've got a good club that doesn't rely on stars across the board, but we happen to have pretty good personal nonetheless.

As you say, the main thing is that we get fair compensation for Tom. If he goes to Hawthorn, I would definitely want to get full fair market value for him. It will be interesting if Richmond give up pick 6 for Prestia, because it will set the benchmark for what Tom is worth. They are probably quite close in value. I think Mitchell is better.

I'd agree with the relative value of Prestia and Mitchell but Richmond need him more and are also notoriously bad traders.

I think the unwritten rule, and certainly one at the Swans where we try and trade fair, is that you try and accommodate a player's wishes re a trade within reason. I would think that anything that provides a top 10 compensation would probably be acceptable.

I'm also wondering if the new points system is being adopted by clubs as a kind of defacto trade currency, it would be interesting if it was actually.

[Ludwig]

I'm also wondering if the new points system is being adopted by clubs as a kind of defacto trade currency, it would be interesting if it was actually.

I heard this is the case. It's a very convenient way of calculating the value of a trade. For example, if you think a player is worth a pick 5, you might take picks 18 and 21 which together have around the same value points. One good thing about this bidding system is that it establishes a common currency that is easy to fall back on when trades get complicated with several picks being exchanged.

[AnnieH]

Wow.
$600K a year.
Just for playing footy.
Wish I was a bloke with elite football skills.

[Legs Akimbo]

Wow.
$600K a year.
Just for playing footy.
Wish I was a bloke with elite football skills.

Emphasis on 'bloke'. Being a woman, you'd max out at $25k despite drawing the same TV audience.

[RogueSwan]

I heard this is the case. It's a very convenient way of calculating the value of a trade. For example, if you think a player is worth a pick 5, you might take picks 18 and 21 which together have around the same value points. One good thing about this bidding system is that it establishes a common currency that is easy to fall back on when trades get complicated with several picks being exchanged.

Okay when you are after points but not if you are after that elite footballer (pick five) who take grab a game and just take over, unlike two later picks (18 and 21) who can be really good but not dominate games.
I realise that pick 18 may become the dominant footballer but with the skill of recruiters these days (excepting the Tiggers) the top picks are more likely than lower picks to become that elite footballer.

[The Big Cat]

Okay when you are after points but not if you are after that elite footballer (pick five) who take grab a game and just take over, unlike two later picks (18 and 21) who can be really good but not dominate games.
I realise that pick 18 may become the dominant footballer but with the skill of recruiters these days (excepting the Tiggers) the top picks are more likely than lower picks to become that elite footballer.

Agree. 18 and 20 are about as reliable in terms of unearthing a star as are 30 or 40. Nowadays the top ten assure you of having a gun (unless you are Richmond!)

[caj23]

Emphasis on 'bloke'. Being a woman, you'd max out at $25k despite drawing the same TV audience.

Last weekend was a one off game in a footy free weekend, lets see what sort of television audience they draw when the real league is up and running.

[Ludwig]

Agree. 18 and 20 are about as reliable in terms of unearthing a star as are 30 or 40. Nowadays the top ten assure you of having a gun (unless you are Richmond!)

I agree. I suppose you're referring to Hannebery an Parker here.

Finishing consistently high on the ladder means we rarely get the opportunity to land a high draft pick like Scott Gumbleton or John Butcher. It would be great to have one of those KPFs in the side now, but when you have to rely on a pick 38, for example, you end up with an injury prone inconsistent player like Sam Reid. The only chance we've got for a top 10 pick is to trade Tom Mitchell.