2021 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[TheBloods]

Amen to that deja - and RWO is sane compared to some other forums, let alone the hysterical social media threads (its already been going bonkers today following the latest 'revelations' of Edmunds.

They are all flogs in the media

ive noticed they have no problem flapping their gums when they hear the slightest rumour , going on air or on Twitter or wherever else they talk their @@@@

But when they are proven wrong or their "sources" turn out to be a load of rubbish , you never hear them admit they got it wrong or take responsibility for the @@@@ they talk !

Mind numbing drudgery is all this time of year is

[dejavoodoo44]

Amen to that deja - and RWO is sane compared to some other forums, let alone the hysterical social media threads (its already been going bonkers today following the latest 'revelations' of Edmunds.

Thankfully, I missed that. Although, it is both depressing and bizarre. While I can't know for sure, I do believe that the focus of the Swans management and players, will be 99.9% on the upcoming finals. Yet many people seem to believe, that because the teams that didn't make the finals, are now starting to focus on delistings and unsigned contracts, then somehow, that must also be our priority.

[707]

My understanding is that pretty much every club, with a small number of exceptions, is in trouble due to the reduction in the size of the salary cap. And that it's iikely to be a "dull" trade period because no one can afford to bring in players from other clubs.

Which makes me think there will be quite a lot of brinkmanship, and clubs will say to players words to the effect: you aren't going to get more somewhere else. I think it's no longer a sellers market and the players and some of the agents are taking time to adjust.

Only clubs with spare cap are like the Crows who have tipped out a number of senior players, reported Matt Crouch might take the RFA route as he's being shopped by his manager to every club, Crows are awash with spare cash.

North would be cashed up, Gold Coast have cap problems, Pies LOL, Saints problems, Bombers and Freo who knows?,

Oh, and Carlton who don't seem to have a salary cap.

Best thing about this ND will be GWS using Collingwood's pick 2 to bid on Daicos, the LOLs if that happens. Someone needs to keep an eye on Ned Guy on draft night

[bloodspirit]

Yes, we'll soon be entering my least favourite time of the year on RWO. The time between when we finish playing and the start of trade period. Which is the time where too many people take as gospel, the tweets of journalists that are paid by the clicks that they're bull@@@@ generates. The time where almost every rumour, no matter how ill-sourced, is treated as an imperative that our club must act on. The time where people think that we should cull most of our VFL side, in order to get our hands on players that nobody is offering and draft picks that defy the laws of mathematics.

I agree this is one of the worst times of year. The majority of trade period itself is much the same. I hope it doesn't drag on too long. Then there is a yawning chasm before the draft that seems interminable which I don't like either. The draft is good. Getting excited about the new arrivals is and then 'meeting' them is fun. And then we get an inadequate trickle of content over pre-season. Thankfully, from next year we will have the AFLW to keep us happy. I can't wait! (I just can't get into it that much while we don't have a team.)

[KSAS]

Journo sources are most likely player agents who themselves are not privvy to full detail of clubs salary cap situations. Their focus is their client not the club, hence why they like feeding journos a bit of mayonnaise to help their client get better deal & journos loves swallowing it because they get a precious exclusive. Works both ways.

We probably do have a tight salary cap like most clubs, but quietly confident Dawson & Parker deals will at least get done as they've both DIRECTLY made positive noises in that direction. There is no good reason why Hewitt, Reid & Stephens would want to personally leave (Stephens has had his opportunities but hasn't grabbed them as yet. Covid interruptions could be playing part, but is the most vulnerable).

Club may well have had private gentleman's agreement with each to re-sign and complex matter of juggling the books (not just for this year) to make it happen. Here's hoping!

[AB Swannie]

Does Carlton have the same salary cap as us? I just read some articles on Cerra requesting a trade back to Victoria and they all agreed that Carlton was his likely destination. They've paid big money each of the passed three trade periods with McGovern (2018), Martin (2019), and Saad/Williams (2020). Add to that, they have re-signed Weitering last year and Cripps/McKay this year to long-term big contracts plus have Sam Walsh's contract expiring next year. Somehow, they can also match 3 million over 4 years for Cerra. They must have some players on only match payments to balance the books.

[Aprilbr]

They are all flogs in the media

ive noticed they have no problem flapping their gums when they hear the slightest rumour , going on air or on Twitter or wherever else they talk their @@@@

But when they are proven wrong or their "sources" turn out to be a load of rubbish , you never hear them admit they got it wrong or take responsibility for the @@@@ they talk !

Mind numbing drudgery is all this time of year is

I vividly recall when we did not do a deal for Daniher. Damian Barrett in particular was scathing of us at the time and said we had failed and worse. If you recall, Dodoro wanted us to give up the world to get Daniher. History has shown that such a deal would have proven to be disastrous for us had we accepted Dodoro's terms. It would also have exacerbated our salary cap issues. I've never heard Barrett retract his comments or accept that he might have been wrong at the time on his assertions. He just moves onto his next scandal/controversy.

[mcs]

Does Carlton have the same salary cap as us? I just read some articles on Cerra requesting a trade back to Victoria and they all agreed that Carlton was his likely destination. They've paid big money each of the passed three trade periods with McGovern (2018), Martin (2019), and Saad/Williams (2020). Add to that, they have re-signed Weitering last year and Cripps/McKay this year to long-term big contracts plus have Sam Walsh's contract expiring next year. Somehow, they can also match 3 million over 4 years for Cerra. They must have some players on only match payments to balance the books.

Carlton don't have a salary cap, they have a salary sombrero. If they were an interstate club, all eyes would be on how they can afford to hoover up players (not necessarily good ones) on massive contracts. They either have a shedload of players on massive unders (very unlikely), or a neat way to achieve the equivalent outcome to a whole bunch of brown paper bags (or perhaps its cardboard boxes in their case).

They aren't the only Victorian club where you go 'how do they manage that'..... but well that's how it has been for a while and would seem unlikely to change anytime soon.

[The Runner]

To get Daniher, we would have had to give up the pick that got McDonald.. we made the right call there. Daniher is good but not the right age profile for us

Does anyone else think $700k and 4 years is too much for Parker?

[KSAS]

To get Daniher, we would have had to give up the pick that got McDonald.. we made the right call there. Daniher is good but not the right age profile for us

Does anyone else think $700k and 4 years is too much for Parker?

I'm happy with the $700k. He's proven to be durable & highly consistent. Every chance he'll still be playing at high level as 32yo. I compare him with Mundy & Pendles in that regard, so I'm also happy with the 4 year term. Just a matter if we can accomodate it.

[TheBloods]

I vividly recall when we did not do a deal for Daniher. Damian Barrett in particular was scathing of us at the time and said we had failed and worse. If you recall, Dodoro wanted us to give up the world to get Daniher. History has shown that such a deal would have proven to be disastrous for us had we accepted Dodoro's terms. It would also have exacerbated our salary cap issues. I've never heard Barrett retract his comments or accept that he might have been wrong at the time on his assertions. He just moves onto his next scandal/controversy.

Its pathetic , one of the only jobs in the world where you get to keep it no matter how many times you do it poorly !

[liz]

To get Daniher, we would have had to give up the pick that got McDonald.. we made the right call there. Daniher is good but not the right age profile for us

Does anyone else think $700k and 4 years is too much for Parker?

Not in the least. Josh Kelly will reportedly be earning $1m a year over that same four year period (ignoring the extended length of that deal). Right now, Parker is tougher, more durable, more consistent and more "heart and soul" than Kelly. By some margin. He may not have the silkiness of Kelly but makes his contributions in similar ways.

It's possible that, in four years time, Kelly's contribution will be higher than Parker's. But just possible. 32 years isn't especially old for an AFL player.

Maybe comparing with Kelly is irrelevant, because I don't think any club in their right mind would offer that contract to Kelly in the current environment. But it's an easily accessible comparison point.

Another is the reported contract that is being offered to Cerra (though I acknowledge you can't just accept all these numbers that are thrown around). That puts him earning more over the next few years than Parker is reportedly asking for. Cerra is a promising player - more in the Kelly mold than the Parker mold, in terms of style of play - but he's nothing like as accomplished right now as Parker is.

Parker is also a captain of our club, which means he has responsibilities and obligations around the club that go beyond those of most players. More meetings. More media. More time spent with young players, mentoring and reviewing their development. That should come with more remuneration that just that for purely onfield contributions.

It's hard to know what the exact salary cap situation is, but purely on face value, $700k for four years for Parker sounds like pretty good value. If there's an issue, maybe the players earning more than him on the list need a tap on the shoulder (Buddy aside, since even he agreed to give up some of his salary, the full amount would still be counted in the cap).

[Ludwig]

I vividly recall when we did not do a deal for Daniher. Damian Barrett in particular was scathing of us at the time and said we had failed and worse. If you recall, Dodoro wanted us to give up the world to get Daniher. History has shown that such a deal would have proven to be disastrous for us had we accepted Dodoro's terms. It would also have exacerbated our salary cap issues. I've never heard Barrett retract his comments or accept that he might have been wrong at the time on his assertions. He just moves onto his next scandal/controversy.

You have to wonder now how that Daniher deal could ever have been possible, given the current salary cap situation. I think RWO was overwhelmingly against the deal. The deal looked so bad I suspected it was all just a show, i.e. we were just going through the motions to fulfill obligations we made to certain parties that we would try to do a deal.

The Swans usually like to see how everything looks in the end, once all the deals are done, before committing to any one piece of the total package, thus holding up any number of contracts until the puzzle is complete. So it could be something like whether we do a new contract for Sam Reid that's holding up contracts for Parker and Dawson. And it's probably a lot more complicated than that, more likely involving a half dozen players, including deals with other clubs.

We can still do some maneuvering with list size reduction and shifting between rookie and primary lists, like perhaps moving Taylor to the rookie list and bringing a lower priced rookie to the primary list. It's hard to keep up with what is currently permissible or how much slack remains in the system to pull off some magic. But in the end, I think we will make it happen and get the deals done that need to get done.

[i'm-uninformed2]

Not in the least. Josh Kelly will reportedly be earning $1m a year over that same four year period (ignoring the extended length of that deal). Right now, Parker is tougher, more durable, more consistent and more "heart and soul" than Kelly. By some margin. He may not have the silkiness of Kelly but makes his contributions in similar ways.

It's possible that, in four years time, Kelly's contribution will be higher than Parker's. But just possible. 32 years isn't especially old for an AFL player.

Maybe comparing with Kelly is irrelevant, because I don't think any club in their right mind would offer that contract to Kelly in the current environment. But it's an easily accessible comparison point.

Another is the reported contract that is being offered to Cerra (though I acknowledge you can't just accept all these numbers that are thrown around). That puts him earning more over the next few years than Parker is reportedly asking for. Cerra is a promising player - more in the Kelly mold than the Parker mold, in terms of style of play - but he's nothing like as accomplished right now as Parker is.

Parker is also a captain of our club, which means he has responsibilities and obligations around the club that go beyond those of most players. More meetings. More media. More time spent with young players, mentoring and reviewing their development. That should come with more remuneration that just that for purely onfield contributions.

It's hard to know what the exact salary cap situation is, but purely on face value, $700k for four years for Parker sounds like pretty good value. If there's an issue, maybe the players earning more than him on the list need a tap on the shoulder (Buddy aside, since even he agreed to give up some of his salary, the full amount would still be counted in the cap).

This is the correct take.

But I suspect what the Swans are going through at the moment is a recognition with the tightened cap going forward, every dollar counts - so if they can squeeze $80,000 over four years off a few contracts, for example, that adds up to an extra player kept over the medium term.

The negotiations are probably going something like:

Swans: we will give you $755,000 for three years - and either backing themselves when that expires to sign him on a reduced contract, or including a trigger for a fourth at $500K.
Parker: four years at $700,000 will do fine thanks.

I've said before, I reckon the biggest influence on our cap will be what happens with Heeney. He's currently in the vicinity of $900K. When he's up next year, even he will probably accept that was overs. But does he accept a cut to $700K, or demand something halfway in between. $100K either way each year for a few years is again, another player staying or going.

[liz]

So it could be something like whether we do a new contract for Sam Reid that's holding up contracts for Parker and Dawson. And it's probably a lot more complicated than that, more likely involving a half dozen players, including deals with other clubs.

Nothing against Reid - it's not really his fault he's been injured so much - but I'd be aghast if the question of accommodating a new contract for him got in the way of re-signing Parker or Dawson.

From a purely football perspective (putting aside the human side of things), the contributions of both Amartey and McLean this year should give the club confidence that we can cope without Reid. If we only had the one showing glimpses, it would be a greater risk. But the fact we have a pair of them showing they might be able to play the Reid role long term is comforting.