Past players - what are they up to?

[Blood Fever]

May not be true, but it isn't too hard to believe is it.

I think this has been one area we have been outstanding at in recent years - identifying who the mercenaries are, standing firm on what we think is a fair offer, and letting them go when it's clear they just want to go with a highest offer.

Mitchell and Jones the obvious ones - despite the supporter unrest at the time, the reality with guys like that is even if they re-sign they'll only do so for a couple of years and pull the same thing each renewal. Even guys like Nic Newman and back to Jed Lamb - you look at all the weak clubs and how often they overpay to recruit or retain and it backfires on them.

Harsh on Jones. Never really got a long run at playing midfield with us. Was offered the chance to be a midfielder leader at the Saints with a more lucrative contract. Has played very well there but similar to how he was at the Swans, is still injury prone. Gave everything while he was with us.

[Steve]

Past players - what are they up to?

Harsh on Jones. Never really got a long run at playing midfield with us. Was offered the chance to be a midfielder leader at the Saints with a more lucrative contract. Has played very well there but similar to how he was at the Swans, is still injury prone. Gave everything while he was with us.

He went down the same path before last re-signing with us, but there wasn’t a big enough offer for him to move back then.

I think he’s one Longmire was rightfully tough on, undisciplined and most of his disposals were rushed and was behind many better midfielders. I was never a Jones fan I admit - he developed a reputation for toughness but most of that was push-and-shove stuff, not a lot of hardness at the ball.

Of course you’re going to get more midfield time and money at a @@@@ team - my observation was more that we have done the right thing by letting those guys go, good luck to them if other clubs are willing to overpay them and those teams don’t go anywhere.

[bloodspirit]

AFL | Ex-Sydney Swans, Essendon and Giants player Shaun Edwards on retirement, Indigenous issues - PlayersVoice

[The Big Cat]

On a separate but similar topic. These blokes who are still in contract and get “homesick “ should have no input into which club they end up at. For example Paps was keen to return to Vic for personal reasons but wanted specifically to go to Carlton. Luckily a deal couldn’t be done and we stood strong. IMO the swans should have been able to canvass every Victorian club as to what they could offer and pick the best deal. Often the WA players want to go home but will only go to the Eagles. A player shouldn’t be able to break a contract plus dictate the terms of the break.

[Blood Fever]

He went down the same path before last re-signing with us, but there wasn’t a big enough offer for him to move back then.

I think he’s one Longmire was rightfully tough on, undisciplined and most of his disposals were rushed and was behind many better midfielders. I was never a Jones fan I admit - he developed a reputation for toughness but most of that was push-and-shove stuff, not a lot of hardness at the ball.

Of course you’re going to get more midfield time and money at a @@@@ team - my observation was more that we have done the right thing by letting those guys go, good luck to them if other clubs are willing to overpay them and those teams don’t go anywhere.

He was a bit undisciplined but I never questioned his hardness, more his turnovers. Pretty sure Longmire was a fan of his. Agree that we probably don't miss him but he played some good footy down back in his early days,including finals. He was important for the Saints last year and they did win a final.

[bloodspirit]

On a separate but similar topic. These blokes who are still in contract and get “homesick “ should have no input into which club they end up at. For example Paps was keen to return to Vic for personal reasons but wanted specifically to go to Carlton. Luckily a deal couldn’t be done and we stood strong. IMO the swans should have been able to canvass every Victorian club as to what they could offer and pick the best deal. Often the WA players want to go home but will only go to the Eagles. A player shouldn’t be able to break a contract plus dictate the terms of the break.

Well, it kind of is like that, at least from a legal point of view. Because there is a contract on foot, changes have to be agreed to by both parties. The player can say "well, I only want to go there" and we can say "tough, no bickies". Conversely the club can say we want to trade you to X club and the player can respond "get stuffed, I'm not going". Unless both sides agree, there's no deal.

The other side of the story is the non-legal side. Sure, the club can refuse to trade a contracted player, but the risk then is that you're paying good money to someone that may be disaffected and not give you good value and it's better to try and get something out of it sooner rather than later.

As the Swans have twice in recent memory shown, we are prepared to stand up to players and risk their disaffection by refusing a trade when we think it is in our best interests to do so (as in the cases of Paps and ROK).

[Matty10]

The other side of the story is the non-legal side. Sure, the club can refuse to trade a contracted player, but the risk then is that you're paying good money to someone that may be disaffected and not give you good value and it's better to try and get something out of it sooner rather than later.

As the Swans have twice in recent memory shown, we are prepared to stand up to players and risk their disaffection by refusing a trade when we think it is in our best interests to do so (as in the cases of Paps and ROK).

Yes, but as a club we were open to the idea (even if there were limitations to what we would accept). It is in the best interests of the club to keep players happy, even when they want to leave. Both Paps and ROK seemed to regain their passion for the club after their respective deals fell through.

At some point you have to back that the culture of your organisation is strong enough for players to want to stay at the club (or you need to make some big changes so that it is). If you continually hold players to ransom once they arrive no one will want to go there in the first place. It rarely works out any other way.

[rojo]

Thanks BS. What an amazing young man. Would have been good to see him at the.Swans for at least one more year before him going off to help change things for his people.

[MattW]

He went down the same path before last re-signing with us, but there wasn’t a big enough offer for him to move back then.

I think he’s one Longmire was rightfully tough on, undisciplined and most of his disposals were rushed and was behind many better midfielders. I was never a Jones fan I admit - he developed a reputation for toughness but most of that was push-and-shove stuff, not a lot of hardness at the ball.

Of course you’re going to get more midfield time and money at a @@@@ team - my observation was more that we have done the right thing by letting those guys go, good luck to them if other clubs are willing to overpay them and those teams don’t go anywhere.

Totally agree.

[Aprilbr]

Well, it kind of is like that, at least from a legal point of view. Because there is a contract on foot, changes have to be agreed to by both parties. The player can say "well, I only want to go there" and we can say "tough, no bickies". Conversely the club can say we want to trade you to X club and the player can respond "get stuffed, I'm not going". Unless both sides agree, there's no deal.

The other side of the story is the non-legal side. Sure, the club can refuse to trade a contracted player, but the risk then is that you're paying good money to someone that may be disaffected and not give you good value and it's better to try and get something out of it sooner rather than later.

As the Swans have twice in recent memory shown, we are prepared to stand up to players and risk their disaffection by refusing a trade when we think it is in our best interests to do so (as in the cases of Paps and ROK).

The key with the Paps deal was that he still had a couple of years to go on his contract. So we had an upper hand in negotiating a deal (or no deal). ROK asked to be traded in a period prior to the introduction of free agency so again we had a good negotiating position. The hard situation is when a player is coming out of contract at the end of the current season and they want out. A team's negotiating position is much weaker in these situations. There is a risk of losing him for little or nothing in return. We lost Membery to the Saints for literally nothing as he just nominated for the pre-season draft where the Saints had first pick that year. We lost Jones for a modest draft pick. Same with Nankervis. The last time we received something decent for a traded player in their final year of contract was Mitchell where we received number 14 which became Ollie. We need to watch this going forward as we have a lot of out of contract players coming up at season's end. We need to re-sign the best of those soon eg Dawson, Stephens, as history shows that we won't get much in return if we let them go!

[bloodspirit]

The key with the Paps deal was that he still had a couple of years to go on his contract. So we had an upper hand in negotiating a deal (or no deal). ROK asked to be traded in a period prior to the introduction of free agency so again we had a good negotiating position. The hard situation is when a player is coming out of contract at the end of the current season and they want out. A team's negotiating position is much weaker in these situations. There is a risk of losing him for little or nothing in return. We lost Membery to the Saints for literally nothing as he just nominated for the pre-season draft where the Saints had first pick that year. We lost Jones for a modest draft pick. Same with Nankervis. The last time we received something decent for a traded player in their final year of contract was Mitchell where we received number 14 which became Ollie. We need to watch this going forward as we have a lot of out of contract players coming up at season's end. We need to re-sign the best of those soon eg Dawson, Stephens, as history shows that we won't get much in return if we let them go!

I agree but personally I'm not too worried about losing Dawson or Stephens. I think the high probability is that either the club or the player and their agent are holding off on finalising an extension for whatever reason e.g. in Dawson's case he (or his manager) may be trying to inflate his worth by showing great form and getting other clubs to show interest in him. In Stephens case it may be more that we are prioritising the higher profile deals first. Anyway, I agree it will be great when they are signed up but, for now, I'm not sweating on it.

As for those other examples I think we also got substantial unders for Mitchell and I said so at the time. The problem was that we weren't offering him $$ commensurate with a really high draft pick (we couldn't afford to because we had him behind JPK, Parker, Hanners & Jack) and by then he wanted out so our negotiating position was weakened.

[AnnieH]

St Kilda must still be in town.
Just saw Hanners walking up Druitt Street from Darling Harbour.
He doesn't know when he'll play again.

[Blood Fever]

He went down the same path before last re-signing with us, but there wasn’t a big enough offer for him to move back then.

I think he’s one Longmire was rightfully tough on, undisciplined and most of his disposals were rushed and was behind many better midfielders. I was never a Jones fan I admit - he developed a reputation for toughness but most of that was push-and-shove stuff, not a lot of hardness at the ball.

Of course you’re going to get more midfield time and money at a @@@@ team - my observation was more that we have done the right thing by letting those guys go, good luck to them if other clubs are willing to overpay them and those teams don’t go anywhere.

Careful about labelling Saints and others as a @@@@ team. We were lucky to win last Saturday. St Kilda are ravaged by injury just like we were last year. If we had their injury list, we would be struggling..GWS are in the same boat..Apart from 3 or 4 sides, at full strength, there is not much between another 10 or so teams. It's a very fine line and things can change quickly. We have done very well so far and it's a credit to the club as a whole but it's too early to crow.

[Aprilbr]

St Kilda must still be in town.
Just saw Hanners walking up Druitt Street from Darling Harbour.
He doesn't know when he'll play again.

So sad to see Hanners struggling. He tries very hard and prepares well. His beat up body is now betraying him. He was a warrior for us for so long.

[bloodspirit]

How bargain-basement Cat Gary Rohan has become statistically 'elite'