Mitchell watch

[royboy42]

I honestly hope that Hawthorn say no, we don't want him; Carlton say no, and then see Tommy have to crawl back with his tail between his legs (AND take a pay cut).
Like ROK, he'll get a one-year deal - in the reserves.

No moral character. I thought he was better than that.

I know you feel let down Annie. But no one in their right mind telegraphs major business decisions (and that's what this is).
Had he told you he was going, the world would have known , and that would have been an insult to his team mates and the Swans (and maybe Hawthorn if he hadn't already told them).
He may well have not known last Thursday anyway.
I think you may be being a bit harsh on a very classy young man forced into a corner.

[Levii3]

Highly unlikely to happen but we should ask for Cyril in the Mitchell trade. Just to see the media lose it.. Again.

[Industrial Fan]

Maybe Tom said he signed a new 3 year deal that morning, it was just with a different club?

[Nico]

It was mentioned on here a while back when one B. Mitchell vacated a position with the Swans, that he was on the move.

[Ludwig]

On SEN they are talking about Hawthorn offering a future first round pick. Fraught with danger I think, as the hawks may finish high again next year and we get shafted

Agree with Liz that of all our A graders, Mitchell was the most expendable. We have a plethora of slow inside mids with questionable kicking skills.

I'd be asking for Isaac Smith to be put on the table. We need line-breaking dash (like Gary except having the ball a bit more). I hope we don't get fobbed off with some list clogger like Hartung or Sicily or Whitecross or Duryea or O'Rorke or Shoenmakers or Langford. If they expect to get a top ten B&F player they need to offer one up.

Isaac Smith is a very good player, but he's surely on bigger money than we were offering Mitchell. It's GC that want established players. We need low paid draftees to get us through the next 2 years until Tippett's contract expires.

I doubt that Hawthorn will finish better next year and are more likely to go down the ladder than up. In any case, you can discount a future pick by around 10%. I would take their first pick from next year and their 2nd rounder from this year, which is now down to 35 and likely to go lower.

[Mug Punter]

I know you feel let down Annie. But no one in their right mind telegraphs major business decisions (and that's what this is).
Had he told you he was going, the world would have known , and that would have been an insult to his team mates and the Swans (and maybe Hawthorn if he hadn't already told them).
He may well have not known last Thursday anyway.
I think you may be being a bit harsh on a very classy young man forced into a corner.

I'm happy to call bull@@@@ on this!

He could have easily said "I don't know, I'm meeting the club next week" and left it at that. Instead he told an outright lie, he said he had signed a new deal when he had done nothing of the type. He told an outright lie and whilst it's "only" to a club fan I think it reflects really poorly on him as a person.

[bloodspirit]

Well I think this is sad news but not necessarily a bad thing. Mitchell is an excellent player and that was evident from his debut which I saw (definitely at the SCG, I'm pretty sure against Essendon when he came on early as the sub) and he has only progressed since then. But on the other hand we have a salary cap and a list management strategy and a lot of money tied up in other contracts etc etc. It seems we just can't afford him. Losing him though creates a spot and a pathway for others (Heeney, Mills, Jones, Robbo, Foote etc) to strive to fill. Provided we get decent compensation it can be a win-win outcome. He is not the type of player we most need, however good he is. And from his point of view I can understand it too. He has a good offer from a strong club and doesn't have to look over his shoulder at burgeoning competition from within and maybe has a sense that he will be more valued there than here. Doesn't mean a few boos when we first play his new club are out of order.

Still feel sad. Not the beautiful ending we might have hoped for, him retiring after 250+ games for us and siring further generations of star Swans.

p.s. Very interesting to note that the low profile Jakey Lloyd finished one spot higher than Tommy in the B&F.

[royboy42]

[QUOTE=Mug Punter;713553]I'm happy to call bull@@@@ on this!

He could have easily said "I don't know, I'm meeting the club next week" and left it at that. Instead he told an outright lie, he said he had signed a new deal when he had done nothing of the type. He told an outright lie and whilst it's "only" to a club fan I think it reflects really poorly on him as a person.[/QUOTE

Ever heard a player tell journos (and fans, including me) that they were 'right..no worries' about playing next week after injury?

[707]

Sad news but losing your 4th best inside mid isn't the worse thing that could happen. What I do want to see however is a tough stance at the trade table because I don't know how Hawks get Mitchell and O'Meara trades done. In reality, Mitchell is worth Hawks first and next years first but I'd settle for their first two this year 14 & 34 (don't forget free agent compo keeps pushing out rounds after the first) if we can get it done quickly. If it's done quickly we have room to manoeuvre a bit more from then, even if it's bundling picks for a single higher pick.

If the 5 x $700k is true, that shows how inflationary the new CBA is and makes Buddy's look cheap!

[Plugger46]

Surprised people are saying that Hawthorn can't afford him.

Who have they picked up recently on big money? Not Fitzpatrick, that's for sure. Their stars are all aging and probably on reduced money, and I wouldn't be surprised if they front-loaded contracts when Buddy left. It's not like they're paying him $1m a year.

Agree. In a totally different position to us.

[stellation]

I can't blame Tom for leaving if there's a significant gap in the money on offer, especially on a long term contract.

We had to give Tom a fairly generous contract just to get him to come here in the first place- the GWS offer was reported as 3 years/$1 million, and from what I can gather we had to come pretty close to the dollars to get him here. If the gap is around $100k p.a. the Swans could probably argue that he already had been earning those extra bucks in those first few years at the club anyway. The Mitchell camp could probably argue "hey, we were looking for money from day one- we've stayed true to that!".

[tlock]

..

[rojo]

I've been saying all along that Tom is a good player, but we don't need him. When you look at our list as a whole I feel that Longmire really didn't want him either. We will be a better side without Tom because those who take his place provide a better mix than we had with Tom.

Without Tom and Macca we midfield of Kennedy, Parker, Hanners, Mills and Heeney, with Lloyd, Jones, Jack and Hewett in the rotation. That's a very high quality midfield.

Yes but we played a GF with all those players playing plus Mitchell and McVeigh and we couldn't win. Sure everyone is going to improve but so are all the young GWS and Bulldogs' players. We will have Reid and AA to bring improvement next year (out Laidler and Richards) but then we have Towers? Sinclair? Richards? Marsh? Robbo? Newman? BJ? Rose? Talia? to fill the spots vacated by Mitchell and Benny. Newman showed he has what it takes to perform in a big Final. Maybe Robbo or Rose can step up but I don't remember either of them standing out in the NEAFL GF. If we want to match it with GWS who seem to have us covered, we have got to get a couple more strong, skilled players!!

[ernie koala]

On the assumption that Tom's earlier statements were true & that he was happy at the Swans (so it comes down to $) no way we can afford Bruest.

I'm not so sure. I hope the Swans go after him. He's just about to turn 26, in his prime...Offer him a long, back ended, contract.

If we could persuade him to the red and white he would be a fantastic inclusion. He's durable, classy, pacy, and a proven big game player.

He averages 2 goals, 16 disposals, 4 tackles per game ...as a forward pocket.

Given it looks like Heeney will move to the midfield next year, and McGlynn is gone, he would be a perfect pick up.

[Legs Akimbo]

I can't blame Tom for leaving if there's a significant gap in the money on offer, especially on a long term contract.

We had to give Tom a fairly generous contract just to get him to come here in the first place- the GWS offer was reported as 3 years/$1 million, and from what I can gather we had to come pretty close to the dollars to get him here. If the gap is around $100k p.a. the Swans could probably argue that he already had been earning those extra bucks in those first few years at the club anyway. The Mitchell camp could probably argue "hey, we were looking for money from day one- we've stayed true to that!".

Well, I think the one thing we can be sure of is that he shops himself around and likes the coin.