2021 trading, drafting and list management: players and personnel

[KSAS]

Tom Morris regurgitated the same re Swans salary cap squeeze on Foxtel "AFL Tonight" but specifically highlighting there is a large gap with Luke Parker's contract asking and what the club is offering. Tom is of the opinion if it doesn't get it resolved within the next month, clubs will come hard at Luke & the other OOC players.

He believes our Cap Squeeze has came about with so many young exciting talent emerging on our list & has not ruled out Buddy playing beyond 2022.

Tom's said his sources are speaking with List & Player Managers (but not directory from the club). He also pointed out other clubs are also in Cap Squeeze, namely Pies, Cats, Lions, Eagles, Dogs, Tigers & Port. Crows, Norf & Bombers with the most Cap space to make splash. However there is a thought to keep war chest for 2022 when there is more attractive FA offerings than 2021.

After all that, i still of the opinion no one really knows as the club do play contract negotiations close to their chests (rightly so).

[Roadrunner]

For the record I don’t want to see Dawson, Parker, Hewitt or Stephens leave. Unfortunately salary caps force most clubs hands. There are choices to made due to financial constraints. We are simply debating these choices.

I also feel there is a moral obligation from all players in the AFL to each get the best financial deal they can.

I wonder why fans are so selfish to expect players to take financial deals that are far less than what they are worth on the open market so they can maintain a position at the fans club. Fans don’t do the hard training, fans don’t do the hours of physio, fans don’t face the scrutiny and the fans are not walking with pain when they are retired. Players have limited years to earn on field money from playing football. These years need to be maximised. They have children and partners to support. These players are also years behind in their career progression compared to their mates at school. Many players have to start a new career from scratch while their mates from school have already had 8-10 years in the system to advance their careers.

Fans should be happy for players to move on if the result of them moving on is better future prospects and prosperity.

Bangalore, I don’t see where morality comes into it. In every team there is a high degree of club loyalty as players go to battle with close mates and this creates a special bond. However it is easier these days to change clubs as you can see at the end of a game opposition players are in very friendly discussions with each other, unlike in past eras, and I for one think this is a beautiful thing!

My thinking is that the reason for the majority of players changing clubs is due to better opportunities, like Toby Nankervis. We have some leaving for more money like Tom Mitchell, some leaving for a combination like AA who didn’t want to play in the ruck and Gazza and Hanners for salary cap plus other factors. Of course finances play a role but I suggest not the major one. We lost players like Diesel in the past who wanted to play in a team vying for a premiership. It is sad for us as fans when we lose a top player to an opposition club and even if though we can understand their reasons for leaving, it still hurts like hell!

[Faunac8]

According to the AFL site the only injured player not available for selection that we have currently is Sam Naismith.
Now I’m not 100% sure how accurate that is but I don’t think I can ever remember us only ever having one player listed as injured in fact I don’t think I’ve ever seen any club have such a slim injury list. Is this simply good luck or have we made improvements in our rehab support and medical teams?
The stars are certainly aligning for us this year and to echo another poster on here
I Believe

[Mark26]

[QUOTE=TheBloods;826248]You love Chad , Stephens , Rowbottom etc so much , who do you think is the one taking them under his wing , mentoring them and showing them how its done week in week out ? PARKER

im ttelling you it doesnt matter how talented Chad is , he will not be the player he could be if he loses a shield and a LEADER like Parker so early in his career . They need guidance around them until they are ready to take over for themselves . Losing Parker and Kennedy in back to back years will be trouble for them . I dont want that , surely you dont want that . Its not gonna happen

- - - Updated - - -

I agree about Parker's importance for our young mids. Joey is there leading by example too. If I recall correctly, Parker had to spend some time early in his career as the sub. He had to bide his time and do an apprenticeship. Let's hope some of our young guns have the patience to emulate him.

[Ludwig]

All the trade discussion recently has been about four players (Stephens, Hewitt, Parker and Dawson.

If due to salary cap reasons, I have to keep only two of the four this whom this is my thinking:

Keep - Dawson, Stephen’s

Let go - Parker and Hewitt

I sort of agree that if our backs are up against the wall and we are truly stuck with an immovable salary cap limitation, then Hewett and Parker are the ones we would have to lose.

I can't see Parker leaving unless our offer is really way under what he deserves, which would be an indication of some salary mismanagement by our administration.

Parker would be a huge loss, but clubs find a way to cover these losses. Other players step up and step in, and we would do the same. We are fortunate to have a good young midfield group that can cover the loss of a big part of our on ball brigade and reemerge even stronger.

We should get a 1st round and 2nd round draft picks for Parker and Hewett, so we should get a couple of good players for the future to make up for the loss.

I'm prepared to lose Hewett. I wouldn't want to lose Parker, but if it helps relieve our salary cap problems, and we can keep both Dawson and Stephens, I believe we will come out of this okay.

[AB Swannie]

This is probably going to sound harsher than its intention but I would think that Sam Reid would be the player who would most likely be "sacrificed" if our backs were against the wall. From memory, it was reported that he was on significant money when he signed his deal 5 years ago and so a decent saving could be made there.

I've been on record within these posts that I think we should attempt to keep Hewett but I also don't think he is irreplaceable.

[KTigers]

The thing is of course if losing Parker now is salary cap mismanagement, then so was signing him and Heeney etc to above market
deals years ago. If we didn't have half a dozen or more guys being so well paid now there'd be more in the kitty to keep the likes of
Dawson (and Parker) now and all the rest that need to be resigned next year. It always comes back to the same old chestnut, "You
can't have everything".

[Ludwig]

The thing is of course if losing Parker now is salary cap mismanagement, then so was signing him and Heeney etc to above market
deals years ago. .

That's what I was referring to. It's not this year, but the planning that went before it that has taken us the state of play this year. In truth, the problem goes back to 2012-13 with the signing of Tippett and Franklin, then losing the COLA. We've never quite emerged from that. In more recent times, it was the 3 year Naismith contract that was a big mistake, given he was unfit to play with an ACL reco at the time. What were they thinking?

[707]

Something on the AFL website about the Pies being interested in Stephens

[erica]

I doubt Parker will leave Sydney. He and his fiancee have just committed to their next home building project (for profit) in Sydney.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[bloodspirit]

The media commentators are all mostly speculating. I think the evidence for us having a salary cap squeeze is:

a) we have numerous unsigned players, including big names, and that suggests we are struggling to make suitable offers to them

b) possible leaks from player agents who are seeking to boost their players' contracts.

These are useful bases for speculation but it is not more than that.

Also, the comment about a better pool of free agents next year seems dumb to me - surely that's just because they haven't been re-signed yet? By this time next year the pool will likely have shrunk to a similar size.

I am firmly in the retain Parker camp. If we had to lose him we would manage but we shouldn't lose him and I don't think we will. It's very much in both ours and his interests that he be extended and I think ultimately that's what will happen. The club are probably saying something like this is the most we can offer you now but we will look at it further once we know the TPP figures for next year. It's only if we insult him by not even making a respectable effort to get close to his market worth that he will look at leaving.

Incidentally, I wouldn't be confident of Parker getting a first round FA compo pick despite his worth. The age of the traded player is one of the factors weighed by the AFL when determining compo and Parker will be 29 in October.

[stevoswan]

if we lose Parker or Dawson you have to wonder wtf the people in charge of our list management are doing

It's not going to happen TB.....it just isn't.

[rb4x]

Something on the AFL website about the Pies being interested in Stephens

Swap for Lynch?

[giant]

Losing Parker or Dawson would make losing Allir look bearable. Staggering we could get to this situation.

[ugg]

The news reported about Dawson has been that the Crows have been chasing him hard but I wouldn't be surprised if Port have the wherewithal to offer him a sizable deal too. They were chasing Zach Merrett until he re-signed with Essendon on a massive contract and so they must have the money in stock.