Bulldogs poised to offer $900,000 a year for GWS gun Jonathon Patton

[LostDoggy]

The club has denied this but this article in the Australian today looks like it has more weight than just a rumor.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/afl/bulldogs-poised-to-offer-900000-a-year-for-gws-gun-jonathon-patton/story-fnca0u4y-1227023569554 (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/afl/bulldogs-poised-to-offer-900000-a-year-for-gws-gun-jonathon-patton/story-fnca0u4y-1227023569554)

Its a high risk strategy as he is probably the worst of the the big 3 - (Cameron, Boyd) but they have to roll the dice.
Given he is not a free agent, I wonder what we will have to give up to get him.

[bornadog]

The club has denied this but this article in the Australian today looks like it has more weight than just a rumor.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/afl/bulldogs-poised-to-offer-900000-a-year-for-gws-gun-jonathon-patton/story-fnca0u4y-1227023569554 (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/afl/bulldogs-poised-to-offer-900000-a-year-for-gws-gun-jonathon-patton/story-fnca0u4y-1227023569554)

Its a high risk strategy as he is probably the worst of the the big 3 - (Cameron, Boyd) but they have to roll the dice.
Given he is not a free agent, I wonder what we will have to give up to get him.

Are you able to post the full article please.

[chef]

Pick 5 and a Hrovat/Dahl/Stringer/Bonti is what he'd cost us.

Not a price I'd want to pay

[LostDoggy]

CASHED-UP rivals are coming after Greater Western Sydney’s best players, with the Western Bulldogs poised to offer as much as $900,000 a year to acquire key forward Jonathon Patton.
Patton and fellow key-position star Jeremy Cameron come out off contract at the end of next year, as does developing key-forward Tom Boyd. Cameron too has clubs keen on him returning to Victoria.
Bulldogs president Peter Gordon hinted earlier in the year that the Dogs wanted to pay the full entitlement of their salary cap from next year, which will leave them well placed in the market to secure a ready-made talent.
The Bulldogs traded in forward Stewart Crameri from Essendon last year, but are still vulnerable deep in attack and urgently need of a strong goalkicking target, something the club has not had since Barry Hall retired at the end of 2011. Hall booted 135 goals in 39 games for the Bulldogs in a two-season stint after crossing from the Swans.
Patton, the No 1 selection in the 2011 national draft, has blossomed this season after being restricted to just 10 games by knee injuries in his first two seasons. In 18 games this season he has kicked 25 goals and has earned a rising star nomination.
The 21-year-old is the Dogs’ priority target over the next 14 months as, like a number of clubs, they will be able to use new AFL equalisation measures to pay 105 per cent of the salary cap when they decide to pull the trigger.
The Bulldogs, still hurting over losing Callum Ward to the Giants for their start-up in 2012, are prepared to offer Patton a contract of at least five years.
Patton’s manager Paul Connors yesterday confirmed he had fielded serious interest in his client from two clubs, including the Bulldogs. GWS football manager Graeme Allan last week told Melbourne’s Herald Sun that Patton would never be traded, but he has been wrong before. At Brisbane, he told The Australian in 2009 the Lions would not trade in Carlton bad boy Brendan Fevola, which they did several weeks later. And last year Allan denied mid-season the Giants would recruit Sydney ruckman Shane Mumford, which they did in October.
GWS coach Leon Cameron said late last month he was “really, really confident” that Patton, Cameron and Boyd would all remain with the Giants long term.
“We’re really confident they can play for the next 10 to 12 years for this footy club,” Cameron said. “Everyone’s going to speculate … there’s no doubt the other clubs are going to be looking at our kids week in, week out.
“That’s what happens when you’ve got that exciting talent on your list. One thing’s for sure, the culture that we’re building here is one these players want to stay at.”
The problem for GWS is that their current primary list of 46 needs to be pruned to between 38 and 40 in another three years as does their salary cap, which is the largest in the competition because of their start-up conditions.
While most other clubs next year will have a cap of $10.07 million, GWS has the capacity to pay another $880,000 depending on how many players are on their list. However, by the end of 2018, the Giants’ salary cap will fall into line with the rest of the competition.
With a host of clubs circling Patton and Cameron, and Hawthorn in the market to land one of the Giants’ young midfielders after missing out on signing Fremantle’s David Mundy, rival clubs assume GWS may have no choice but to make decisions on the futures of players still under contract.
Should Patton and Cameron stay, the Giants will probably have to pay dearly for them — in the vicinity of $1m each a season — which could lead to a cull at the end of next year to remain under the cap. Overrated GWS players Phil Davis and Tom Scully have already earned more than $1m a season in front-ended deals that were used to lure them in the first place from Melbourne and Adelaide.
Free agency has left the Hawks with more than $1m to spend on players following their loss of Buddy Franklin to Sydney, and traditionally struggling clubs on the improve and on the cusp of potential finals campaigns, such as the Bulldogs, are taking advantage of the league’s new competitive balance measures. Other Giants players whose deals expire at the end of 2015 include Rhys Palmer, Nick Haynes, Dylan Shiel, Stephen Coniglio, Toby Greene, Devon Smith and Adam Treloar.
Those out this year include Kristian Jaksch, Sam Frost, Jono O’Rourke, Mark Whiley and rookie Sam Schulz.

[ledge]

Gordon denied offering 1 million a year and apparently Patton refused, so why would he take 100,000 less ?

[bornadog]

Thankyou, please add in the article links on your post just to cover woof

[LostDoggy]

I think it would prob be the pick 6 and a one of our top 10 players.
Shame Higgins and Wood are out of contract, they would have been the perfect bait.

[dadsgirl16]

"POISED" to offer... sort of means we haven't done it yet??

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Not worth pick 6 and one of our guns. I wouldnt even trade one of our guns alone for him. Pick 6 alone or Pick 6 and a fringe player or no deal. So essentially no deal. He is out of contract next year though so perhaps we can snare him then when we have more leverage.
There are rumors abound for all of Boyd, Patton and Cameron coming back to VIC. Cant see GWS giving any of them up for anything less than an established gun

[LostDoggy]

Not worth pick 6 and one of our guns. I wouldnt even trade one of our guns alone for him. Pick 6 alone or Pick 6 and a fringe player or no deal. So essentially no deal. He is out of contract next year though so perhaps we can snare him then when we have more leverage.
There are rumors abound for all of Boyd, Patton and Cameron coming back to VIC. Cant see GWS giving any of them up for anything less than an established gun


Agree with you. They will want a gun, no one will give them one so nothing will get done. You're right, the only way he will leave is when he is out of contract next year and nominates a team as his preference ala Stu Crameri.

[Scorlibo]

He's not worth any more than pick 5.

[Ozza]

He's not worth any more than pick 5.

I think he is. He's was a number 1 pick with 2 years of development in him (albeit first year was injury affected), 198cms tall and has the potential to be a player you build a forward line around, or even a club around.

Get another pre-season or two into Patton (his body shape still needs some work) and he will be an absolute weapon. He has everything that Tippett had (physically) at the same age, but more natural footy ability.

The thought of having Stringer, Macrae, Bontempelli, Libba and Patton in the same team, around the same ages....salivating.

Get the General!

[G-Mo77]

Greg Denham wrote this. Just saying.

[ReLoad]

you guys are dreaming if you say he isn't worth it. He is worth it on a lot of different levels, first we have no chance of picking a player of his size and stature up in the draft unless it is with a speculative pick, imagine the marketing, and finally we would have that exact type of player we can build around. Then there is the marketing value to a team like ours that cannot be undersold.

GWS is going to lose one of the 3, we NEED to be the team that gets one of them. They need quality small forwards, something we have a lot of, so lets do the deal.

Fortune favors the brave, we will die wondering otherwise.

[Yankee Hotel Foxtrot]

Who knows, but maybe it's part of a bigger plan. If our offer forces GWS to offer up a similar deal to retain Patton it may leave them exposed to losing Jaksch, who is out of contract come season end. In that scenario maybe we'd have more leverahe to secure him. Jaksch is also close to Macrae & Hrovat according to something I read in one of the papers this morning.

[F'scary]

Who knows, but maybe it's part of a bigger plan. If our offer forces GWS to offer up a similar deal to retain Patton it may leave them exposed to losing Jaksch, who is out of contract come season end. In that scenario maybe we'd have more leverahe to secure him. Jaksch is also close to Macrae & Hrovat according to something I read in one of the papers this morning.

I hope this what we are doing because I just can't find it within me to rate Patton that highly. Didn't Tom Young break even with him earlier in the season?

[SlimPickens]

I think he is. He's was a number 1 pick with 2 years of development in him (albeit first year was injury affected), 198cms tall and has the potential to be a player you build a forward line around, or even a club around.

Get another pre-season or two into Patton (his body shape still needs some work) and he will be an absolute weapon. He has everything that Tippett had (physically) at the same age, but more natural footy ability.

The thought of having Stringer, Macrae, Bontempelli, Libba and Patton in the same team, around the same ages....salivating.

Get the General!

I'm with you Ozza, people throw up anyone over 6"4 to come to the doggies ie read Casboult, Butcher et al, yet when a genuine high end talent comes could possibly come our way we sherk the issue in the fear of paying "overs".

Our first pick and a good young prospect (Hrovat or Macrae) might get it done and I'd probably do it. It'll sting but if we generally want a tall dominate forward this is what we need to do.

[GVGjr]

It's a doubtful move. GWS have been very clear that they won't trade Cameron, Boyd and Patton. I wouldn't hold my breath that this is accurate. We will push hard for a genuine KPP though but Im not sure how we pry Patton from GWS. What we are prepared pay Patton is somewhat irrelevant because he already has a contract

[Greystache]

Greg Denham wrote this. Just saying.

That was my first instinct too, but Patton's manager confirmed there was serious interest from us. Surely not evenDenham could be that wrong!

[jeemak]

Connors is a renowned artist of the BS though, isn't he?

[LostDoggy]

I'm not sure how anyone can say Patton isn't worth anymore than pick 5 or 6.. This year has been his first real crack at it and he is improving at a very rapid rate.

I have no doubt Patton will be the better player out of the 3 (Cameron, Boyd) no doubt at all.

In terms of the article by Denham. I stopped reading after he mentioned Callum Ward

[bornadog]

It's a doubtful move. GWS have been very clear that they won't trade Cameron, Boyd and Patton. I wouldn't hold my breath that this is accurate. We will push hard for a genuine KPP though but Im not sure how we pry Patton from GWS. What we are prepared pay Patton is somewhat irrelevant because he already has a contract

No harm in trying. I say go for it, well worth it.

[Throughandthrough]

you guys are dreaming if you say he isn't worth it. He is worth it on a lot of different levels, first we have no chance of picking a player of his size and stature up in the draft unless it is with a speculative pick, imagine the marketing, and finally we would have that exact type of player we can build around. Then there is the marketing value to a team like ours that cannot be undersold.

GWS is going to lose one of the 3, we NEED to be the team that gets one of them. They need quality small forwards, something we have a lot of, so lets do the deal.

Fortune favors the brave, we will die wondering otherwise.

great post and echoes my thoughts exactly

[1eyedog]

It's a doubtful move. GWS have been very clear that they won't trade Cameron, Boyd and Patton. I wouldn't hold my breath that this is accurate. We will push hard for a genuine KPP though but Im not sure how we pry Patton from GWS. What we are prepared pay Patton is somewhat irrelevant because he already has a contract

I'm not so sure. They obviously understand long-term that if they stitch Cameron and Patton up for 1 mill a year that will put enormous pressure on them when their cap levels out and how do they hold on to Boyd / McCarthy et. al. The only way they can possibly do this is to loose a bunch of mids when they have to trim their list which they will also be loathe to do - so they need to make some pretty important list management decisions over the next few years re. what type of player they want to spend their money on to keep them on their list. They can't have depth players for every position forever. With a host of KPP to choose from one may just squeeze out and it may be a Patton. If Boyd plays soon and shows good signs it may make the way a little less bumpy. We should be into him big time.

[bornadog]

GWS have come back with this:


GREATER Western Sydney says it will announce some key re-signings in the very near future and is confident it can keep the wolves at bay and retain the majority of its blue-chip talent.

Key forward Jon Patton is the latest Giant to face speculation over his future, with the 2011 No.1 draft pick reportedly the subject of a big-money bid from the Western Bulldogs.

Patton, Jeremy Cameron, Dylan Shiel, Adam Treloar and Stephen Coniglio and a host of the club's best youngsters are all coming off contract at the end of 2015, and the rest of the AFL is on high alert.

The prevailing sentiment from outside the club is that if one of them announces his intention to stay, it could have a flow-on effect for the rest.

GWS coach Leon Cameron seems extremely content with the situation and says the immediate priority is signing players off contract at the end of this season.

read more h (http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-08-14/giants-like-the-signs)ere

[Happy Days]

It will never happen, because we don't get nice things,

BUT

I'd do pick 5 and anyone on the list except for the four horsemen (Bont, Macrae, Stringer, Liberatore) for him.

[LostDoggy]

I think we should have a crack most definitely, but beware he does another knee and he is finished.

We should be having a crack at Devon Smith!

[Happy Days]

I think we should have a crack most definitely, but beware he does another knee and he is finished.

We should be having a crack at Devon Smith!

Small half forward, exactly what we need and don't have like 20 of already!

Smith is just said to be good because all of the other kids are so unimpressive. Dahlhaus is miles better at exactly the same thing, and he even passes the ball once in a while.

[Greystache]

I think we should have a crack most definitely, but beware he does another knee and he is finished.

We should be having a crack at Devon Smith!

Likewise I don't think we should choose any player with an early pick for fear they'll do a knee and be a bust. I think the sensible thing would be to pass on our first round pick each draft to prevent wasting it.

Perhaps there's a injury riddled dud at another club who happens to be tall we could get for a late pick. Say around pick 125, it might be worth a punt.

[Greystache]

I'm with you Ozza, people throw up anyone over 6"4 to come to the doggies ie read Casboult, Butcher et al, yet when a genuine high end talent comes could possibly come our way we sherk the issue in the fear of paying "overs".

Our first pick and a good young prospect (Hrovat or Macrae) might get it done and I'd probably do it. It'll sting but if we generally want a tall dominate forward this is what we need to do.

Exactly. If I hear "what if he gets injured" one more time (to quote @thelistmanager) I'll spew up. If I hear "what about X player who can't get a game at some club on the bottom of the ladder, he's tall, might be worth a late pick" I'll spew up twice.

You either play the game to win, or you play to not come last. I know which game we've been playing for 60 years, I'll give you a hint, we've got the least premierships and 3rd lowest wooden spoons.

[Remi Moses]

Interesting hearing Patton's presser.
Not entirely convincing

[Remi Moses]

Exactly. If I hear "what if he gets injured" one more time (to quote @thelistmanager) I'll spew up. If I hear "what about X player who can't get a game at some club on the bottom of the ladder, he's tall, might be worth a late pick" I'll spew up twice.

You either play the game to win, or you play to not come last. I know which game we've been playing for 60 years, I'll give you a hint, we've got the least premierships and 3rd lowest wooden spoons.

Couldn't agree more

[Remi Moses]

It's a doubtful move. GWS have been very clear that the won't trade Cameron, Boyd and Patton. I wouldn't hold my breath that this is accurate. We will push hard for a genuine KPP though but Im not sure how we pry Patton from GWS. What we are prepared pay Patton is somewhat irrelevant because he already has a contract

The alarm bells for me were when Patton uttered"I'll speak to my manager at seasons end". Didn't sound overly convincing on signing a contract after next season. They could lose if for nothing at the end of next season. Pretty hard to knock back that money

[Templeton31]

I'll put it like this. If Patrick Wiggins or Pat Bowden (the talls we drafted in 99 with Murphy, Gia etc) had turned out as good as I reckon patton will be then we would have made the gf or won the flag in one of 08,09 or 10. To me patton would make our chances of winning the flag with this generation that is coming much more likely. Pick 6 and a good player would be well worth it.

[Dancin' Douggy]

Pick six and Cooney? Pick six and Minson? Pick 6 and Higgins? I'd do those.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

I'm with you Ozza, people throw up anyone over 6"4 to come to the doggies ie read Casboult, Butcher et al, yet when a genuine high end talent comes could possibly come our way we sherk the issue in the fear of paying "overs".

Our first pick and a good young prospect (Hrovat or Macrae) might get it done and I'd probably do it. It'll sting but if we generally want a tall dominate forward this is what we need to do.

Would never give up Macrae

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Pick six and Cooney? Pick six and Minson? Pick 6 and Higgins? I'd do those.

I'd do these too but i dont think GWS would. Especially considering Higgins is a RFA

[Dry Rot]

It's a doubtful move. GWS have been very clear that the won't trade Cameron, Boyd and Patton. I wouldn't hold my breath that this is accurate. We will push hard for a genuine KPP though but Im not sure how we pry Patton from GWS. What we are prepared pay Patton is somewhat irrelevant because he already has a contract

This.

Offers may be being made (Blues fans swear they are hunting Boyd) but IMO GWS will hang onto them and hope that over 12 months they will convince them to stay.

[Templeton31]

First time I've bought the Australian in years.... ��

[LostDoggy]

Is it allowed to trade future picks as yet? I know they can do it in the NFL, something like Patton for pick 5 + 1st rounder in 2015. I know that we would probably have to part with a Dahl or Hrovat to get it done now, but I'd much rather lose a draft pick than lose a kid the club has already come to know and love. For GWS Patton and his massive salary for 2 reasonably early draft picks, pretty fair I would of thought!

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Exactly. If I hear "what if he gets injured" one more time (to quote @thelistmanager) I'll spew up. If I hear "what about X player who can't get a game at some club on the bottom of the ladder, he's tall, might be worth a late pick" I'll spew up twice.

You either play the game to win, or you play to not come last. I know which game we've been playing for 60 years, I'll give you a hint, we've got the least premierships and 3rd lowest wooden spoons.

Yep - we need to stop being so sentimental. Yes, it can hurt losing household names, but the goal here is to win a Premiership.

What do you think we would have to give up Grey? Obviously a lot would depend on whether we're aiming to snag him now, or at the end of next year when his contract expires. A Crameri-esque "I only want to go to the bulldogs" would help us achieve a better deal at the end of next year, but either way it's still going to cost a bit.

Pick 5 & Dahlhaus (or Minson) would be my offer.

[Remi Moses]

This.

Offers may be being made (Blues fans swear they are hunting Boyd) but IMO GWS will hang onto them and hope that over 12 months they will convince them to stay.
If they hope to sign one of them and one wants out they'll get nothing.
Logic would say it would be wise to trade one.

[bornadog]

Need to assess what GWS needs are then work on that.

[bulldogtragic]

I'd consider pretty much everything and then work backwards from "i'd never do this trade, it's impossible". To "gee it's bloody steep, but 198cm, 100kg gorilla full forward. Excitement, games, membership, attendance, winning, having Jones play no. 2, Crameri 3, Grant 4, Campbell 5 if playing while rotating Bonts, Hrovat, Dahl, Hunter, Honey (etc).

It would sting at the beginning, but he's not Jade Rawlings or Allen Jackovich. He's the real deal. We didn't bottom out low enough to get a number 1 draft pick KPF gun. So if we want that player we need to buy them and these players are valuable, so they cost. Casboult and others are cheap because they're shite list cloggers. This management team have been working are getting them off our list so why pay peanuts and undo our work? I'm glad we're aggressive with this, because if we show Patton or others a skillful and elite midfield that will make them 80-100 goal a year full forwards (which is what they've wanted to be for 20-25 years) then we might just get one. And when we go into the last 5 minutes of our net pre-lim and we have the option under pressure of kicking it long to an imposing figure. I will say then that pick 5 and XXX was dirt cheap.

[comrade]

Would Pick 5 + Clay Smith get it done or do his 2 knee injuries push it too far?

[jeemak]

Would Pick 5 + Clay Smith get it done or do his 2 knee injuries push it too far?

I wouldn't have thought so.

In a thread earlier in the year I suggested pick 5 plus Dahlhaus is probably where it needs to be. I would think GWS would ask for more, though if they were smart they'd on-trade pick five for a good mid from another team and end up with pick 2 to secure some young talent and two very good players.

A ready made quality mid, plus Dahlhaus is good compensation for Patton.

[GVGjr]

No harm in trying. I say go for it, well worth it.

But how does a financial offer of that magnitude to the player change GWS thoughts into considering a trade when they already have him contracted for next year? At the moment GWS couldn't care less what another team is willing to pay Patton, they would only be interested in what another club could offer them in terms of draft picks and players to help bolster and improve their list.

I'm sure we would love to get him and I'm sure we have had some communications in whatever form we can within the rules but the public position for GWS is that they won't trade him. It's up to Jason McCartney now to work some magic and convince GWS we can offer them something they want more than Patton.

[Greystache]

Yep - we need to stop being so sentimental. Yes, it can hurt losing household names, but the goal here is to win a Premiership.

What do you think we would have to give up Grey? Obviously a lot would depend on whether we're aiming to snag him now, or at the end of next year when his contract expires. A Crameri-esque "I only want to go to the bulldogs" would help us achieve a better deal at the end of next year, but either way it's still going to cost a bit.

Pick 5 & Dahlhaus (or Minson) would be my offer.

As others have said, really it's just a matter what we wouldn't give up. Libba and Griffen is just about it. I'd keep Macrae as next priority and maybe Bonti, but you have to sacrifice or you're not in the game. I would've said Roughead too due to our inability to draft tall but I'd even consider that now.

[BornInDroopSt'54]

If the opportunity is there to get Patton with pick 6 and a good player, do it.
No pain, no gain.

[Greystache]

But how does a financial offer of that magnitude to the player change GWS thoughts into considering a trade when they already have him contracted for next year? At the moment GWS couldn't care less what another team is willing to pay Patton, they would only be interested in what another club could offer them in terms of draft picks and players to help bolster and improve their list.

It makes them realise they can't keep him next year without squeezing 2 or 3 other players out of the club and that being the case the best strategic move is to get the maximum value for him they can while they hold the cards.

[GVGjr]

It makes them realise they can't keep him next year without squeezing 2 or 3 other players out of the club and that being the case the best strategic move is to get the maximum value for him they can while they hold the cards.

But it still comes down to picks and players more than what a club is willing to pay Patton.
To me it's way overs to be paying Patton that sort of coin.

I'd rather see what I could do with St Kilda to move up the order and then we might have something to play with.

[Remi Moses]

But it still comes down to picks and players more than what a club is willing to pay Patton.
To me it's way overs to be paying Patton that sort of coin.

I'd rather see what I could do with St Kilda to move up the order and then we might have something to play with.

It probably is, but surely it's investing on futures
The club just can't think some Fringe player from another club.( we have lived that path to often)

[bornadog]

But how does a financial offer of that magnitude to the player change GWS thoughts into considering a trade when they already have him contracted for next year? At the moment GWS couldn't care less what another team is willing to pay Patton, they would only be interested in what another club could offer them in terms of draft picks and players to help bolster and improve their list.

I'm sure we would love to get him and I'm sure we have had some communications in whatever form we can within the rules but the public position for GWS is that they won't trade him. It's up to Jason McCartney now to work some magic and convince GWS we can offer them something they want more than Patton.

You are agreeing with me, ie we have to try and come up with a deal. As I mentioned later, we need to work out what GWS requires in players ie what roles do they want and do we have the players to offer on top of a pick?

[boydogs]

To me it's way overs to be paying Patton that sort of coin.

You don't rate him? Franklin got $10m for 9 years, the last few of which he would be doubtful to still be playing for

[Greystache]

But it still comes down to picks and players more than what a club is willing to pay Patton.
To me it's way overs to be paying Patton that sort of coin.

I'd rather see what I could do with St Kilda to move up the order and then we might have something to play with.

Isn't that just the same old approach we half look into and it never goes anywhere? We make some noise, the other club throws out ridiculous terms, and we draft the best available midfielder yet again.

Is there even a key position player in the same league as Patton in this draft? The biggest wraps are on McCartin and he's looks a 3rd tall type with nothing like the exposed form of some of his predecessors.

[lemmon]

What if they ask pick 6 and Roughead? I can't see them chasing our young mids or half forwards, they have plenty.

[Topdog]

Heath shaw joining in the fun.

https://twitter.com/heathshaw23/status/499862186345263104

[Topdog]

What if they ask pick 6 and Roughead? I can't see them chasing our young mids or half forwards, they have plenty.

I'd do that without a doubt

[bulldogtragic]

Heath shaw joining in the fun.

https://twitter.com/heathshaw23/status/499862186345263104

Tweet of the century. I laughed out loud literally. Very amusing. :)

Hope it's true.

[Twodogs]

Many a true word spoken in jest.

[Dancin' Douggy]

First time I've bought the Australian in years.... ��

Did you enjoy the rest of the paper T31?

[Dancin' Douggy]

I'd consider pretty much everything and then work backwards from "i'd never do this trade, it's impossible". To "gee it's bloody steep, but 198cm, 100kg gorilla full forward. Excitement, games, membership, attendance, winning, having Jones play no. 2, Crameri 3, Grant 4, Campbell 5 if playing while rotating Bonts, Hrovat, Dahl, Hunter, Honey (etc).

It would sting at the beginning, but he's not Jade Rawlings or Allen Jackovich. He's the real deal. We didn't bottom out low enough to get a number 1 draft pick KPF gun. So if we want that player we need to buy them and these players are valuable, so they cost. Casboult and others are cheap because they're shite list cloggers. This management team have been working are getting them off our list so why pay peanuts and undo our work? I'm glad we're aggressive with this, because if we show Patton or others a skillful and elite midfield that will make them 80-100 goal a year full forwards (which is what they've wanted to be for 20-25 years) then we might just get one. And when we go into the last 5 minutes of our net pre-lim and we have the option under pressure of kicking it long to an imposing figure. I will say then that pick 5 and XXX was dirt cheap.

I honestly can't believe you didn't include Jake Stringer in our future forward line? He's the best of them all!

[bulldogtragic]

I honestly can't believe you didn't include Jake Stringer in our future forward line? He's the best of them all!

My bad!! It's a nice problem to have when you think to yourself ''name every talented kid that could play in the forward line for this post'' and you can't remember them all let alone Jake!! It makes the case for a Patton type player even more convincing, imagine he or Crameri on 3rd string defenders with Jones and Grant on 4 and 5 string defenders and small rotating. But I sincerely apologise to Jake, his family, the club and it's members and supporters for any offence.

[GVGjr]

You don't rate him? Franklin got $10m for 9 years, the last few of which he would be doubtful to still be playing for
Are we really now measuring everything by the Franklin deal?

Patton's good but he doesn't have Franklins runs on the board...not by a long shot.
900K largely based on potential is more than a bit rich I would have thought.

[Templeton31]

Did you enjoy the rest of the paper T31?

Same as last time I bought it - had to check I hadn't picked up 'The Liberal Party Gazette' by mistake.

It was only the Patton article that made me think it was The Australian.

[GVGjr]

Isn't that just the same old approach we half look into and it never goes anywhere? We make some noise, the other club throws out ridiculous terms, and we draft the best available midfielder yet again.

Is there even a key position player in the same league as Patton in this draft? The biggest wraps are on McCartin and he's looks a 3rd tall type with nothing like the exposed form of some of his predecessors.


I certainly don't see McCartin as a 3rd tall. I wouldn't draft him in the top 5 if that was the case.

We should make a serious play for any of the GWS 3 gun forwards but 900K for a largely unproven talent in Patton is a huge risk.
I want the club to be bold during the trade period but not reckless.

Didn't the speculation of this sort of deal start with a comment made by Wayne Carey?

[jeemak]

Isn't that just the same old approach we half look into and it never goes anywhere? We make some noise, the other club throws out ridiculous terms, and we draft the best available midfielder yet again.

Is there even a key position player in the same league as Patton in this draft? The biggest wraps are on McCartin and he's looks a 3rd tall type with nothing like the exposed form of some of his predecessors.

Yet MJP rates McCartin as better than each of Boyd and Patton as a true forward.

Not saying that's the be all and end all of it, though it's certainly some food for thought. I'd be happy if he slipped to us.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Pick 6 and Roughead would bloody sting, but we'd have to consider it.

[GVGjr]

I'm with you Ozza, people throw up anyone over 6"4 to come to the doggies ie read Casboult, Butcher et al, yet when a genuine high end talent comes could possibly come our way we sherk the issue in the fear of paying "overs".

Our first pick and a good young prospect (Hrovat or Macrae) might get it done and I'd probably do it. It'll sting but if we generally want a tall dominate forward this is what we need to do.

Paying 'overs' is one thing. Paying 'well overs' should be challenged and at least discussed.
Reid at 600K (for example) that might cost us pick 5 and getting something back in return is currently seen as paying overs which I understand.
Patton at 900K costing us the same pick plus a very good player as you have pointed out is seen as bold which I don't quite get.

I guess it's good for discussions but to me paying a good player and pick 5 for Patton is worth a good hard go at. Paying 900K for an unproven talent on top of that seems well out of balance.

[bornadog]

What if they ask pick 6 and Roughead? I can't see them chasing our young mids or half forwards, they have plenty.

why would they give up a tall for another tall? And for that matter why would we? KPPs are like hens teeth.

[Templeton31]

Paying 'overs' is one thing. Paying 'well overs' should be challenged and at least discussed.
Reid at 600K (for example) that might cost us pick 5 and getting something back in return is currently seen as paying overs which I understand.
Patton at 900K costing us the same pick plus a very good player as you have pointed out is seen as bold which I don't quite get.

I guess it's good for discussions but to me paying a good player and pick 5 for Patton is worth a good hard go at. Paying 900K for an unproven talent on top of that seems well out of balance.

But surely the 900K is the only thing thats gonna get Patton to say "hey I want to go to the Bulldogs!"? And if he doesn't say that then he's not going anywhere.

[bornadog]

But surely the 900K is the only thing thats gonna get Patton to say "hey I want to go to the Bulldogs!"? And if he doesn't say that then he's not going anywhere.

Yep, the $800k for Ward made his ears prick

[GVGjr]

But surely the 900K is the only thing thats gonna get Patton to say "hey I want to go to the Bulldogs!"? And if he doesn't say that then he's not going anywhere.

The only thing?

So the lure of being the main man up forward in a team on the improve rather than one of 3 at GWS isn't already a significant lure?
If it's only money I wonder what the incentive for him to become the best footballer he can would be?

I have no problems with us having a red hot go for any good young player especially in a position we need to fill. I'm challenging why we would need to give him such a deal. I know the times are changing and clubs need to creative and pro active but we would be paying a significant premium on good will rather than demonstrated results.

[Twodogs]

Paying 'overs' is one thing. Paying 'well overs' should be challenged and at least discussed.
Reid at 600K (for example) that might cost us pick 5 and getting something back in return is currently seen as paying overs which I understand.
Patton at 900K costing us the same pick plus a very good player as you have pointed out is seen as bold which I don't quite get.

I guess it's good for discussions but to me paying a good player and pick 5 for Patton is worth a good hard go at. Paying 900K for an unproven talent on top of that seems well out of balance.


But we have to pay the money mandated in our salary cap to someone. It's not like if we dont pay it then we get to do something else with it like retire debt or improve facilities. we are obliged to pay a certain figure to the players on our list. If Patton is seen as the best prospect and a player who could really help with our next push for a flag then pay it to him.

[GVGjr]

But we have to pay the money mandated in our salary cap to someone. It's not like if we dont pay it then we get to do something else with it like retire debt or improve facilities. we are obliged to pay a certain figure to the players on our list. If Patton is seen as the best prospect and a player who could really help with our next push for a flag then pay it to him.

It can't be as simple as that. Happy to see the club spend 100% of the cap but I'd want to be certain that the player we are apparently willing to pay 900K of it too is worth it. I think there is more than a degree of speculation and frustration amongst supporters that believe Patton has done enough to deserve this sort of deal.

As I said, I'm happy to pay overs and realise that we will need to do so to get him but we can't be reckless for the sake of it.

If we can get the deal done then kudos to the club

[lemmon]

why would they give up a tall for another tall? And for that matter why would we? KPPs are like hens teeth.

Why would they give up a tall for a mid? They are well stocked in every position on the ground except key defenders, let alone a 23 year old KPP with 60 games under his belt and noted leadership potential. Roughy fits their age profile, gives experience and is a relative need. If they believe Roughy is a 10 year full back he would be as desirable as anyone else on our list as well as probably future captain.

[bornadog]

Why would they give up a tall for a mid? They are well stocked in every position on the ground except key defenders, let alone a 23 year old KPP with 60 games under his belt and noted leadership potential. Roughy fits their age profile, gives experience and is a relative need. If they believe Roughy is a 10 year full back he would be as desirable as anyone else on our list as well as probably future captain.

Well I doubt we would give up Roughead for the exact reasons you point out above

[boydogs]

Are we really now measuring everything by the Franklin deal?

Patton's good but he doesn't have Franklins runs on the board...not by a long shot.
900K largely based on potential is more than a bit rich I would have thought.

The Franklin & Tippett deals are the most relevant to the discussion. They are the last two key power forwards to move clubs. Franklin got $10m over 9 years at age 26 which is likely to turn into 6 years of service at over $1.5m per year, Tippett got $3.5m over 4 years including an 11 week suspension which puts him on $1m per year.

Ablett, Scully & Ward were overpaid because of an enhanced salary cap, Sydney do have the cost of living allowance but there aren't a lot of other KPP movements to compare to. That fact alone should suggest that it takes a lot to lure good talls. Frawley as a defender is asking $800k for 7 years despite turning 26 next month.

Unless we could get a better player for the same money, it's not overpaying

[westdog54]

Heath shaw joining in the fun.

https://twitter.com/heathshaw23/status/499862186345263104

The AFL's biggest practical joker strikes again.

[jeemak]

The AFL's biggest practical joker strikes again.

I don't think GWS would be overly enthused by that effort.

Why would Shaw care though?

[lemmon]

Well I doubt we would give up Roughead for the exact reasons you point out above
His name deserves to be in the discussion as much as Hrovat, Dahl, Macrae and Bonti. These are the sorts of names GWS will be asking and if we want to get the deal done that's what it will cost.

[Topdog]

GVG without being disrespectful i think you are living in the AFL world before free agency. $900k a season now would not be reckless and with the collective bargaining agreement running out in 2016 this won't be a high contact for more than 2 years

[MrMahatma]

We won't win a flag without a big key forward (IMO).

No point keeping all our so called guns and winning nothing.

Young Key forwards don't move without a big deal being struck.

[SlimPickens]

Paying 'overs' is one thing. Paying 'well overs' should be challenged and at least discussed.
Reid at 600K (for example) that might cost us pick 5 and getting something back in return is currently seen as paying overs which I understand.
Patton at 900K costing us the same pick plus a very good player as you have pointed out is seen as bold which I don't quite get.

I guess it's good for discussions but to me paying a good player and pick 5 for Patton is worth a good hard go at. Paying 900K for an unproven talent on top of that seems well out of balance.

I get your point and at this stage if career he isn't worth that kind of money but to pry him away from GWS you have to make an offer that he will have to consider.

[Bulldog Joe]

The only concern I have with salary is about the ability to meet future offers for our emerging players.

Bontempelli, Stringer and Macrae and looking like top end players and we need to retain them long term. They will have clubs talking to their managers at every contract renewal over the next 5 to 7 years.
Liberatore also fits in that category.

[ReLoad]

The only concern I have with salary is about the ability to meet future offers for our emerging players.

Bontempelli, Stringer and Macrae and looking like top end players and we need to retain them long term. They will have clubs talking to their managers at every contract renewal over the next 5 to 7 years.
Liberatore also fits in that category.

We are in the midst of a fair bit of front loading, so there is no reason to think we cant keep them together with good contract management.

Its fair to say that over the last 15 years the only decent players we have lost have been to ridiculous expansion team offers, or those that follow an ex coach but later regret the decision ;)

One could also argue that by bringing in Patton it would make the young players even more excited about wanting to stay.

I say we go to town on Patton and leave no stone unturned, im sick to death of the whole no power forward thing, put it to bed for the next 10 years.

[whythelongface]

Are we really now measuring everything by the Franklin deal?

Patton's good but he doesn't have Franklins runs on the board...not by a long shot.
900K largely based on potential is more than a bit rich I would have thought.

Unfortunately that is the market and that is the type of money required to recruit a potential superstar key forward.

Whether it is money well spent is another question. I believe it is and if it means losing our first rounder plus another quality player then so be it. As others have stated he would be a massive coup for our forward line and would shape it for the next 10 years. We need to be ballsy and make a play for him (or similar player).

[always right]

It's a high risk strategy paying overs for a KPF. If it doesn't work out and the bloke you trade turns out to be an AFL champion, then we'll be bleating about it for years to come.

I get the need for us to be bold but personally I would put the following players on the must not trade list;
Bonts, Stringer, Macrae, Libba, Dahlhaus.......these are cream of the crop players, marketable, leaders, and elite talents. Players you build your club around.
Griffen.......the impact on our club culture would be a concern if we decided to trade our captain

Roughy is borderline simply because of the dearth of key position options we have at our club....but I wouldn't put him on the must not trade list.

[Dancin' Douggy]

Same as last time I bought it - had to check I hadn't picked up 'The Liberal Party Gazette' by mistake.

It was only the Patton article that made me think it was The Australian.

At least they're finally addressing the issue of global cooling.

[whythelongface]

It's a high risk strategy paying overs for a KPF. If it doesn't work out and the bloke you trade turns out to be an AFL champion, then we'll be bleating about it for years to come.

I get the need for us to be bold but personally I would put the following players on the must not trade list;
Bonts, Stringer, Macrae, Libba, Dahlhaus.......these are cream of the crop players, marketable, leaders, and elite talents. Players you build your club around.
Griffen.......the impact on our club culture would be a concern if we decided to trade our captain

Roughy is borderline simply because of the dearth of key position options we have at our club....but I wouldn't put him on the must not trade list.

Of course it is a risk but so too is every trade. He is a known player and has shown loads of potential. I would rather the risk associated with trading for him then risk our no. 1 draft pick for as yet an unproven tall (which we have done in the past with Walsh/ Williams etc.) or using another trade on a middle of the road player from another club (eg. Morgan/ Hunter/ Rawlings).

I agree that all those on your list are non-tradeable except for Dahlhaus.

[Hotdog60]

I get a little worried about what people what to give up. I'm also concerned about what message it will send to our players when contracts are up for negotiation.
If we are to give away high profile players (e.g. Dahlhaus who the club is using for kids marketing) do these players we have recruited that are of good character start to think differently about the value the club has on them and what loyalty do the return.

I'm all for the power forward but I wouldn't want to destroy the fabric of the club in the process.

I think we may have a strong forward half in the making already, what concerns more is our back half.

[jeemak]

I get a little worried about what people what to give up. I'm also concerned about what message it will send to our players when contracts are up for negotiation.
If we are to give away high profile players (e.g. Dahlhaus who the club is using for kids marketing) do these players we have recruited that are of good character start to think differently about the value the club has on them and what loyalty do the return.

I'm all for the power forward but I wouldn't want to destroy the fabric of the club in the process.

I think we may have a strong forward half in the making already, what concerns more is our back half.

For the most part players understand the realities of modern footy. The fabric of the club will be just fine.

[Templeton31]

At least they're finally addressing the issue of global cooling.

Yeh exactly. I mean it's a nice day today so every things good in that area.

[Twodogs]

We are in the midst of a fair bit of front loading, so there is no reason to think we cant keep them together with good contract management.

Its fair to say that over the last 15 years the only decent players we have lost have been to ridiculous expansion team offers, or those that follow an ex coach but later regret the decision ;)

One could also argue that by bringing in Patton it would make the young players even more excited about wanting to stay.

I say we go to town on Patton and leave no stone unturned, im sick to death of the whole no power forward thing, put it to bed for the next 10 years.


It was the other way around. Brown went to Richmond a year before Wallace.

[Hotdog60]

For the most part players understand the realities of modern footy. The fabric of the club will be just fine.

That's most likely true and maybe it's my generation but I would be peeved if I got shafted to another club I had no intention of playing for and even more so if I had to leave my home state. Also if I got pushed off and the player that took my place got to play a grand final and I didn't with my club. We are talking about the suggestions that we will give up our 1st pick and a best 22 player.

[Scorlibo]

In the last two years we've had 3 top 6 picks, they've been Bontempelli, Stringer and Macrae. They also happen to be the three players most posters are declaring off-limits. Why, then, are the same posters so bullish about not only trading a top 6 pick (which could net us another top-end talent) but also a young gun such as Luke Dahlhaus? It's as though no one realises the true value in top draft picks until they materialise, if you like, into players. Who would trade Macrae and Dahlhaus for Patton? Or Bontempelli and Hrovat? Think about it in those terms when you're suggesting trading our first pick.

Here's a joke: what's the difference between a contemporary number one draft pick and a number one draft pick with three quarters of their career left? The former is worth three quarters as much.

I agree with GVGjr, there's risk and boldness, and then there's recklessness. When we're offering up what is in all likelihood 2 quality players, who together could play 300 games of football for us, plus nearly one tenth of our salary cap, for a player with one promising year under their belt, that is reckless.

[jeemak]

In the last two years we've had 3 top 6 picks, they've been Bontempelli, Stringer and Macrae. They also happen to be the three players most posters are declaring off-limits. Why, then, are the same posters so bullish about not only trading a top 6 pick (which could net us another top-end talent) but also a young gun such as Luke Dahlhaus? It's as though no one realises the true value in top draft picks until they materialise, if you like, into players. Who would trade Macrae and Dahlhaus for Patton? Or Bontempelli and Hrovat? Think about it in those terms when you're suggesting trading our first pick.

Here's a joke: what's the difference between a contemporary number one draft pick and a number one draft pick with three quarters of their career left? The former is worth three quarters as much.

I agree with GVGjr, there's risk and boldness, and then there's recklessness. When we're offering up what is in all likelihood 2 quality players, who together could play 300 games of football for us, plus nearly one tenth of our salary cap, for a player with one promising year under their belt, that is reckless.

I don't think any of us don't understand that. It's just what it takes to get things done. We're not saying it's fair.

[Topdog]

What is the fabric of our club?

[Mofra]

For the most part players understand the realities of modern footy. The fabric of the club will be just fine.
You mean like when Chris Grant never forgave Wallace for trading away Brad Wira, or when we screwed over North/Rawlings to nab a player who didn't want to come to us?

We do have a tendency to forget footballers are actually people.

[jeemak]

That's most likely true and maybe it's my generation but I would be peeved if I got shafted to another club I had no intention of playing for and even more so if I had to leave my home state. Also if I got pushed off and the player that took my place got to play a grand final and I didn't with my club. We are talking about the suggestions that we will give up our 1st pick and a best 22 player.

I appreciate what you're saying and this is going to sound cold, but I don't think the club could care less as you wouldn't be their problem any more. It would be more of an issue for your new club.

[jeemak]

You mean like when Chris Grant never forgave Wallace for trading away Brad Wira, or when we screwed over North/Rawlings to nab a player who didn't want to come to us?

We do have a tendency to forget footballers are actually people.

Those happened 20 years ago and ten years ago respectively. I think footy has changed too much since then, and players are groomed from a very young age to accept it's just a business, which is sometimes better and easier to deal with than it is other times.

[LostDoggy]

Round 23 will be interesting!

[whythelongface]

In the last two years we've had 3 top 6 picks, they've been Bontempelli, Stringer and Macrae. They also happen to be the three players most posters are declaring off-limits. Why, then, are the same posters so bullish about not only trading a top 6 pick (which could net us another top-end talent) but also a young gun such as Luke Dahlhaus? It's as though no one realises the true value in top draft picks until they materialise, if you like, into players. Who would trade Macrae and Dahlhaus for Patton? Or Bontempelli and Hrovat? Think about it in those terms when you're suggesting trading our first pick.

Here's a joke: what's the difference between a contemporary number one draft pick and a number one draft pick with three quarters of their career left? The former is worth three quarters as much.

I agree with GVGjr, there's risk and boldness, and then there's recklessness. When we're offering up what is in all likelihood 2 quality players, who together could play 300 games of football for us, plus nearly one tenth of our salary cap, for a player with one promising year under their belt, that is reckless.

Totally understand what you are saying but we also need to address key areas within our structure. If this means snaring a potential gun forward by off-loading our no. 1 pick and a good player then so be it.

I would trade a Dahlhaus or a Hrovat plus our no. 1 pick for Patton - definitely. But that is just me and my opinion and after all that is all that it is, an opinion.

[Mofra]

Those happened 20 years ago and ten years ago respectively. I think footy has changed too much since then, and players are groomed from a very young age to accept it's just a business, which is sometimes better and easier to deal with than it is other times.
I'm not so sure - we still have players staying with a club for less money out of loyalty (e.g. Griffen) and coaches who try and develop a group of players at the same time to develop an instinct about what each player is likely to do on field at any one point of time. Trading a player against their will is likely to erode the sense of loyalty when the rest of the group start thinking "that could have been me".

I could launch a monologue on the effects of morale on group performance but that would take the thread waaay off track.

[Throughandthrough]

I wonder how much his manager paid Heath Shaw to send out that tweet.

[Bulldog4life]

We might have little hope of getting Patton but at least player managers out there know we will pay big money for the right player. It might be their player. So it is a good move by the Club...even though they haven't confirmed it....

[chef]

You mean like when Chris Grant never forgave Wallace for trading away Brad Wira, or when we screwed over North/Rawlings to nab a player who didn't want to come to us?

We do have a tendency to forget footballers are actually people.

The Monty and Powell trades weren't well received by the playing group too apparently.

[Templeton31]

Here's a joke: what's the difference between a contemporary number one draft pick and a number one draft pick with three quarters of their career left? The former is worth three quarters as much.

.

Its not quite that simple when the first quarter of a players career is usually their least productive (i.e. they are learning the game etc.). You could argue the last 3/4 of the career is better because you don't have to spend time and money developing the player - their closer to their best for longer.

[Throughandthrough]

reading this, the answer is nope

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/jonathan-patton-is-a-wanted-man-but-the-sunny-sydney-weather-could-keep-him-at-gws/story-e6frf3e3-1227024632015

[bulldogsthru&thru]

reading this, the answer is nope

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/jonathan-patton-is-a-wanted-man-but-the-sunny-sydney-weather-could-keep-him-at-gws/story-e6frf3e3-1227024632015


yeah he won't be leaving any time soon....although it would be hard to turn back 900k a year

[Twodogs]

reading this, the answer is nope

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/afl-premiership/jonathan-patton-is-a-wanted-man-but-the-sunny-sydney-weather-could-keep-him-at-gws/story-e6frf3e3-1227024632015


900k a year buys you some pretty good central heating. :)

[Remi Moses]

What is the fabric of our club?

No flags in 60 plus. No GF for over 50.

[Remi Moses]

The Monty and Powell trades weren't well received by the playing group too apparently.

The monty and Powell trades effectively allowed us to pick up some quality players in the 99 draft.
Gutsy move by Wallace

[Axe Man]

The monty and Powell trades effectively allowed us to pick up some quality players in the 99 draft.
Gutsy move by Wallace

Not exactly.

Monty + pick 28 to Port for Nathan Eagleton (pick 28 turned out to be Brent Guerra out of interest).
Powell to Melbourne for Pick 35 (Patrick Wiggins).

The trades that actually netted us some talent were:
Leon Cameron to Richmond for pick 37 (Mitch Hahn) and pick 66 (Ryan Hargrave).
Michael Martin to Brisbane for Trent Bartlett and pick 32 (Daniel Giansiracusa).

[bulldogtragic]

Not exactly.

Monty + pick 28 to Port for Nathan Eagleton (pick 28 turned out to be Brent Guerra out of interest).
Powell to Melbourne for Pick 35 (Patrick Wiggins).

The trades that actually netted us some talent were:
Leon Cameron to Richmond for pick 37 (Mitch Hahn) and pick 66 (Ryan Hargrave).
Michael Martin to Brisbane for Trent Bartlett and pick 32 (Daniel Giansiracusa).

It cuts both ways too though. Brent Guerra wasn't ready to play AFL footy and would not have cut it if you believe the rumours, also he said as much on Open Mike recently.

Pick 35 on Wiggins may have allowed for Gia to be taken with 32.

Nathan Eagleton is in my eyes a club great and was worth the trade every day:

300+ day and night AFL and representative games
221 games with us - Ranked 16th in our history
231 goals with us - Ranked 24th in our history
Averaging over 16 touches, 4.5 marks and over a goal a game.
Loved by his team mates

I'm not sure how such a long serving player with these numbers isn't a winning trade. But you may have been diretly responding to the draft aspect of the point you responded to.

[Axe Man]

But you may have been diretly responding to the draft aspect of the point you responded to.

Yep. I didn't comment on the worth of the trades at all. Eagle took a few years to repay the faith shown in him by Wallace but it turned out well in the end.

I was simply pointing out that it was the Cameron and Martin trades that got us the picks that allowed us to ace the 99 draft rather than Monty (minus a pick) and Powell (Wiggins turned out to be a bust). Who was drafted at 28 isn't really relevant, I just put it in there as a piece of trivia.

[Remi Moses]

Not exactly.

Monty + pick 28 to Port for Nathan Eagleton (pick 28 turned out to be Brent Guerra out of interest).
Powell to Melbourne for Pick 35 (Patrick Wiggins).

The trades that actually netted us some talent were:
Leon Cameron to Richmond for pick 37 (Mitch Hahn) and pick 66 (Ryan Hargrave).
Michael Martin to Brisbane for Trent Bartlett and pick 32 (Daniel Giansiracusa).

There was angst about Trading Leon as well. Thought Powell was dead stiff to be honest

[Webby]

You know, at the end of last season I was pretty keen on trading Will Minson plus our pick 4 for Patton. I posted as much on this forum. My rationale was that GWS needed a mature ruckman and I thought Will's stocks were clearly at an all-time high. I also thought that Campbell and Cordy could develop into a strong ruck duo and should be backed to do so at this point in our development. I still think that offer would've landed us Patton.

I was feeling pretty self-righteous on all fronts a few rounds into the year... Then Bontempelli ran out.... Big lesson learned for me!

It's easy to flippantly say "Let's trade our pick". It's basically a faceless number for a known quantity. I think our current recruiting staff have a 'hot hand' at present and we should back them to nab us another good kid. Because I wouldn't trade Bontempelli for Patton in a fit! Let alone with Will thrown in as steak knives!

Then considering our recruiters have grabbed Macrae, Stringer and Bonts with our last three top 6 picks, I know which bowlers I'd be throwing the ball!! Our U/18 recruiters!

I'm glad Patton likes Sydney. He can stay there! However I do think we can make one or two crafty trades for some lesser lights. The Darley trade will prove to be a good one. I think that a similar later round pick trade would be worthwhile this year. Particularly for a tall defender (ie Jaksch). However a high-profile mega contract trade is not something we should be chasing. Not until later in our development, anyway. If anything, this little episode is just a bit of a shot across the bow. Just the Doggies letting the world know that we're about. I'm pleased with the result.

[GVGjr]

GVG without being disrespectful i think you are living in the AFL world before free agency. $900k a season now would not be reckless and with the collective bargaining agreement running out in 2016 this won't be a high contact for more than 2 years


No problems with you questioning my stance and maybe I am behind the times.

From my perspective I don't get the 900K offer for someone who would currently be on not a lot more than rookie wages and to be honest hasn't done enough to earn that sort of kick in market value. By the end of the year he will have played 30 senior games of football and while I'd love to recruit him I just don't think he warrants that sort of financial commitment.
I'd like to get him to the club but I still genuinely can't see why so many people are happy to throw that sort of money at him.

If I was sure he would offer us a lot more than just an improved forward line structure perhaps I would be on board with the majority of others that want him.

[Remi Moses]

Aren't we investing into the future as well?
Would have thought our forward structure needs attention.
Gotta be prepared to pay overs, otherwise you get a player who doesn't cut it.

[GVGjr]

I see a little but of irony in all this and maybe we have all had a reality check in recent years and are just getting with the times.

I wonder how many people who blasted the Ward decision are now embracing and encouraging a potential bidding war for Patton?
Are we now going to be as willing to accept our players departing for better offers from other clubs and simply write it off as the new paradigm of free agency?

[Remi Moses]

You know, at the end of last season I was pretty keen on trading Will Minson plus our pick 4 for Patton. I posted as much on this forum. My rationale was that GWS needed a mature ruckman and I thought Will's stocks were clearly at an all-time high. I also thought that Campbell and Cordy could develop into a strong ruck duo and should be backed to do so at this point in our development. I still think that offer would've landed us Patton.

I was feeling pretty self-righteous on all fronts a few rounds into the year... Then Bontempelli ran out.... Big lesson learned for me!

It's easy to flippantly say "Let's trade our pick". It's basically a faceless number for a known quantity. I think our current recruiting staff have a 'hot hand' at present and we should back them to nab us another good kid. Because I wouldn't trade Bontempelli for Patton in a fit! Let alone with Will thrown in as steak knives!

Then considering our recruiters have grabbed Macrae, Stringer and Bonts with our last three top 6 picks, I know which bowlers I'd be throwing the ball!! Our U/18 recruiters!

I'm glad Patton likes Sydney. He can stay there! However I do think we can make one or two crafty trades for some lesser lights. The Darley trade will prove to be a good one. I think that a similar later round pick trade would be worthwhile this year. Particularly for a tall defender (ie Jaksch). However a high-profile mega contract trade is not something we should be chasing. Not until later in our development, anyway. If anything, this little episode is just a bit of a shot across the bow. Just the Doggies letting the world know that we're about. I'm pleased with the result.

Good points Webby. The only issue is if you look at fringe type Key forwards, you get no value.

[LostDoggy]

I see a little but of irony in all this and maybe we have all had a reality check in recent years and are just getting with the times.

I wonder how many people who blasted the Ward decision are now embracing and encouraging a potential bidding war for Patton?
Are we now going to be as willing to accept our players departing for better offers from other clubs and simply write it off as the new paradigm of free agency?

We all have a right to be hypocritical don't we? Nice guys finish last, or more poignantly don't finish first!

[Remi Moses]

We all have a right to be hypocritical don't we? Nice guys finish last, or more poignantly don't finish first!

GWS paid overs for Ward, Scully and Davis. They had to get their signatures somehow .
The Ward decision changed the landscape for me.

[boydogs]

From my perspective I don't get the 900K offer for someone who would currently be on not a lot more than rookie wages and to be honest hasn't done enough to earn that sort of kick in market value. By the end of the year he will have played 30 senior games of football and while I'd love to recruit him I just don't think he warrants that sort of financial commitment.
I'd like to get him to the club but I still genuinely can't see why so many people are happy to throw that sort of money at him.

Would you pay $900k a year for Tom Hawkins?

To me, Patton is Hawkins 5 years ago. It sounds like you don't see him as being that good

[Webby]

Good points Webby. The only issue is if you look at fringe type Key forwards, you get no value.

I get what you're saying, but on reflection, I think that we're best to keep building our defence and midfield and then look at luring a quality big forward when the time comes. That's if someone like Bonts doesn't turn out to be one. For me, I think good sides are built from midfield and defence. I'm gutted that Talia isn't coming on as well as we'd hoped... but hope springs eternal for he and Roberts. I'd like to see the club drafting and rookie listing a glut of tall defenders in the hope a couple blossom. That way we might even find that one of them can swing forward.

Another observation is that, on reflection, I'd like to have seen Liam Jones playing a prolonged period in defence. Even if he is rubbish there, we could just plonk him at CHB in the reserves for a few weeks. (Although the preference would be at AFL level). I think that a period there would help him to see how life can be made difficult for a defender. I think it'd help to make the penny drop.

I'd just give him a directive to stop the CHF at all costs. It'd also help him to get some consistency and confidence. Anyway, I digress.. Point is, with a reserves team setup, I think we could focus on drafting and developing our own. The last 24 months have been pretty damn good on that side of things. I'd like to see another 12 months of it prior to making a play.

Nonetheless, as I say, I don't mind this week's little shot across the bow to let the comp know we're about. It might not flush out Patton, but one or two young forwards might prick their ears up and think "geez, I might look alright in red, white and blue..!"

[LostDoggy]

I get what you're saying, but on reflection, I think that we're best to keep building our defence and midfield and then look at luring a quality big forward when the time comes. That's if someone like Bonts doesn't turn out to be one. For me, I think good sides are built from midfield and defence. I'm gutted that Talia isn't coming on as well as we'd hoped... but hope springs eternal for he and Roberts. I'd like to see the club drafting and rookie listing a glut of tall defenders in the hope a couple blossom. That way we might even find that one of them can swing forward.

Another observation is that, on reflection, I'd like to have seen Liam Jones playing a prolonged period in defence. Even if he is rubbish there, we could just plonk him at CHB in the reserves for a few weeks. (Although the preference would be at AFL level). I think that a period there would help him to see how life can be made difficult for a defender. I think it'd help to make the penny drop.

I'd just give him a directive to stop the CHF at all costs. It'd also help him to get some consistency and confidence. Anyway, I digress.. Point is, with a reserves team setup, I think we could focus on drafting and developing our own. The last 24 months have been pretty damn good on that side of things. I'd like to see another 12 months of it prior to making a play.

Nonetheless, as I say, I don't mind this week's little shot across the bow to let the comp know we're about. It might not flush out Patton, but one or two young forwards might price their ears up and think "geez, I might look alright in red, white and blue..!"

Named CHB for Footscray this week!

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I get what you're saying, but on reflection, I think that we're best to keep building our defence and midfield and then look at luring a quality big forward when the time comes. That's if someone like Bonts doesn't turn out to be one. For me, I think good sides are built from midfield and defence. I'm gutted that Talia isn't coming on as well as we'd hoped... but hope springs eternal for he and Roberts. I'd like to see the club drafting and rookie listing a glut of tall defenders in the hope a couple blossom. That way we might even find that one of them can swing forward.

Another observation is that, on reflection, I'd like to have seen Liam Jones playing a prolonged period in defence. Even if he is rubbish there, we could just plonk him at CHB in the reserves for a few weeks. (Although the preference would be at AFL level). I think that a period there would help him to see how life can be made difficult for a defender. I think it'd help to make the penny drop.

I'd just give him a directive to stop the CHF at all costs. It'd also help him to get some consistency and confidence. Anyway, I digress.. Point is, with a reserves team setup, I think we could focus on drafting and developing our own. The last 24 months have been pretty damn good on that side of things. I'd like to see another 12 months of it prior to making a play.

Nonetheless, as I say, I don't mind this week's little shot across the bow to let the comp know we're about. It might not flush out Patton, but one or two young forwards might prick their ears up and think "geez, I might look alright in red, white and blue..!"

There's definitely merit in building up our defense (which is terrible in its current state) and bolstering the midfield for the next 1-2 years, and then luring a big key forward when we're 'ready to challenge' through free agency which is effectively for free. Trading still the other option, but we'll be a more attractive place to come to by then, possibly without even having to offer 'over the odds' contracts.

I won't be disappointed if we take this path, and like you, I would like to see us take a few tall defenders on the main list & rookie list and hope a couple develop into good players. In the past, I feel as though we draft one tall player and then think "that'll do" (ie. Talia our last big defender since, well, forever? - Roberts drafted as a forward and isn't a key defender).

Having said all that, I still want us to be proactive in trying to lure a quality key forward now if the fit is right. The trick is knowing when we'd have to pay too much. Paying overs is OK given the circumstances are OK, but we can't afford to be desperate.

Weighing up the quality of the draft is obviously a huge key to all of this. The talent was pretty good last year, it doesn't appear this year's crop is as good, so I don't mind us being a little more aggressive in trading. You have to pick your spots, this could be a good year to do it if the above is true.

[Remi Moses]

I think it's a shot across the bow as well, but it's a bit of food for thought for GWS.
Going to be interesting to see what happens with their young kp players, and in particular ones coming out of contract.
One might fall out, but let's hope we don't settle on a fringe player.

[GVGjr]

Would you pay $900k a year for Tom Hawkins?

To me, Patton is Hawkins 5 years ago. It sounds like you don't see him as being that good

I've actually pointed out a number of times I hope we do make a play for him. I just struggle with the concept of paying an unproven talent the biggest money ever at our club and the fact that so many think it's what is required to get the deal done.

Hawkins and Patton is a far better comparison than the Franklin/Tippet vs Patton deals comparison. Do you think Hawkins is on that sort of money at Geelong?

Just how many years at 900K can we absorb until he starts to put 2013/14 Hawkins type performances?

[jeemak]

Interesting to know whether the talent in this year's draft seems thin, or even and whether a level of relativism across the pool will make it even in output or a dud draft (like the overall output of 2003).

TBB, if any club is going to benefit from it, those within the top handful are most likely to. You make a good point, and perhaps with some positional climb up the ladder next year if the talent pool in the draft is better pick 8 could be better than pick 5 this year.

I'm glad we actually have a list manager now, and we can hasten slowly.

[jeemak]

I've actually pointed out a number of times I hope we do make a play for him. I just struggle with the concept of paying an unproven talent the biggest money ever at our club and the fact that so many think it's what is required to get the deal done.

Hawkins and Patton is a far better comparison than the Franklin/Tippet vs Patton deals comparison. Do you think Hawkins is on that sort of money at Geelong?

Just how many years at 900K can we absorb until he starts to put 2013/14 Hawkins type performances?

GVG, this discussion is about what we have to do to get him.

Of course Hawkins isn't on that sort of cash, and if he stays a one club man he isn't likely to be, ever.

But if we are to secure Patton, we need to be happy with paying him that sort of cash. It's fine to say we shouldn't or won't pay that (and I'm with you, it's over the mark compared to value repaid) however, without the luck of a decent draft position this is the only option we have if a Patton type is to be secured.

Personally, I'd be happy with a good forward system and a Cam Mooney type.....apart from Sam Reid, is there a Cam Mooney out there for us to grab?

[Remi Moses]

Interesting hearing Gerard Whately tonight say tonight clubs are chasing Higgins hard.
( usually not one for outandish comment)
Wonder if two second rounders would get Reid over the line?

[GVGjr]

GVG, this discussion is about what we have to do to get him.

Of course Hawkins isn't on that sort of cash, and if he stays a one club man he isn't likely to be, ever.

But if we are to secure Patton, we need to be happy with paying him that sort of cash. It's fine to say we shouldn't or won't pay that (and I'm with you, it's over the mark compared to value repaid) however, without the luck of a decent draft position this is the only option we have if a Patton type is to be secured.

Personally, I'd be happy with a good forward system and a Cam Mooney type.....apart from Sam Reid, is there a Cam Mooney out there for us to grab?

To me if he wants a move back to Melbourne and he wants to come to a club where he will be the key target amongst an emerging player group then he would welcome the chance to come to us on a significantly lower and more reasonable value.
That's what I believe we need to focus on with any trade. We sell the player the vision of the emerging group of talented youngster and we pay them handsomely. If the only way we can attract them is by paying twice a reasonable market figure then maybe they aren't coming to us for the right reasons.

The comments I keep reading are we wont be a threat to a premiership unless we have a genuine key forward and I think this is close to the mark. The questions I have are around what type of performances would Patton have to do to make us a genuine threat and when would we expect to see him start to make a significant difference to our side?

[Remi Moses]

That's all nice in theory, but you have to over pay to pry someone out.
Pat tons a decade long investment, and if we want a sustained period of finals and success he fits the bill.
Obviously injuries are the biggest question, but if we're worried about a player getting injured we'd never recruit anyone.
It would be a big risk, but I'd hope the club aim high.

[GVGjr]

That's all nice in theory, but you have to over pay to pry someone out.


I have not only acknowledged that but have done so a few times. There is a critical difference between overs and well overs that might be missed.



Pat tons a decade long investment, and if we want a sustained period of finals and success he fits the bill.
Obviously injuries are the biggest question, but if we're worried about a player getting injured we'd never recruit anyone.
It would be a big risk, but I'd hope the club aim high.

No one has mentioned potential injuries as a concern to the deal. It's just the nature of doing business and shouldn't be a huge consideration.

[Dry Rot]

FWIW, there's rumours about us going after Jaksch and Frost from the Pies on BF.

I wonder if these $900k Patton rumours are part of a cunning plan to get Jaksch?

[Remi Moses]

I have not only acknowledged that but have done so a few times. There is a critical difference between overs and well overs that might be missed.



No one has mentioned potential injuries as a concern to the deal. It's just the nature of doing business and shouldn't be a huge consideration.
There were a few posts earlier ( not yourself) that were worried about injury.

[1eyedog]

FWIW, there's rumours about us going after Jaksch and Frost from the Pies on BF.

I wonder if these $900k Patton rumours are part of a cunning plan to get Jaksch?

Sounds like a plan doesn't it? Wouldn't be surprised to see big money pressure on a number of GWS boys in order to make them spend up big to retain them. We can then see what comes out in the wash.

[Dry Rot]

Sounds like a plan doesn't it? Wouldn't be surprised to see big money pressure on a number of GWS boys in order to make them spend up big to retain them. We can then see what comes out in the wash.

Agreed.

And there's a possible flow on effect to another club. If they're willing to pay silly money it will make their list retention harder too.

And ASADA haven't finished with the Bombers. If their players get rubbed out for a season, the AFL may let them become delisted free agents, rather than play again for a doping club. Some spare cash my be useful for us to get a bloke called Jake.

[chef]

FWIW, there's rumours about us going after Jaksch and Frost from the Pies on BF.

I wonder if these $900k Patton rumours are part of a cunning plan to get Jaksch?

We had our chance with Frost(and could have picked him up for next to nothing), but that ships sailed now.

[Webby]

FWIW, there's rumours about us going after Jaksch and Frost from the Pies on BF.

I wonder if these $900k Patton rumours are part of a cunning plan to get Jaksch?

It's funny, you know, I had the same exact thought.

The point people make about free agency being free is a good one. If it's there, I see no reason not to use it and use it well. I like the fact that we seem to be in the game this year. A leaked nibble at Patton is a brilliant way to announce it to the world.

I'm used to free agency and player trading via my following of US sport. What's unique with AFL is the compensation given to the club who lose a player. To me it's a potential win/win for any two clubs that transact. Ie if Frawley goes to Hawthorn, suddenly Melbourne get a second pick (probably pick 4) and Hawthorn get another good player. Both of them benefit, but it's the rest of the comp who pick up the tab... ie by ourselves and everyone else moving down one pick apiece to wedge in MFC's compo pick. Traders on F/A are actually rewarded.

When I saw that model, I did think that it's pretty flawed, but an obvious opportunity for someone to get going and exploit it. The lower a club finishes, the greater the benefit that compensation brings. So the logical thing is to target a GWS, Sht Kilda, Melbourne or Brisbane. This is where you'll get the least path of resistance. It's also the reason why people are critical of it. It effectively makes climbing off the bottom of the ladder a slower process, whilst making staying atop the ladder easier for the top clubs.

If we are to climb out of the bottom rung,we need to keep our head down and get ourselves to a point where we've developed into an excellent young, up and coming list. Then we hit the market at the top end. Until then, we'll be pissing in the wind. That's not to say we can't cannily land a couple of the Jaksch or Darley types as we build.

[boydogs]

Anyway, I digress.. Point is, with a reserves team setup, I think we could focus on drafting and developing our own. The last 24 months have been pretty damn good on that side of things. I'd like to see another 12 months of it prior to making a play.

There's two sides to a trade, supply & demand. If Patton is the best KPF under 23 in the AFL, then it makes sense to make a play for him before he's signed up longer term


I've actually pointed out a number of times I hope we do make a play for him. I just struggle with the concept of paying an unproven talent the biggest money ever at our club and the fact that so many think it's what is required to get the deal done.

Hawkins and Patton is a far better comparison than the Franklin/Tippet vs Patton deals comparison. Do you think Hawkins is on that sort of money at Geelong?

Just how many years at 900K can we absorb until he starts to put 2013/14 Hawkins type performances?

Hawkins I would guess would be on $700-800k. I don't think you would get him somewhere else for under $1m though, which is the important figure for us. It's cheaper to develop your own, but it doesn't mean you can go without a key piece of the puzzle if you haven't managed to do that. We've missed on Tom Lynch, Tom Boyd, Jonathon Patton, Jeremy Cameron, Charlie Dixon etc. with the expansion clubs coming in, we've done well with the picks we've had but we need to find a way to get what we're missing to avoid a repeat of 2008-2010.

Tom Hawkins was pretty good in the 2011 Grand Final, that's 2 years away from where Patton is now.

[azabob]

Call me naive and a romantic but I would love us to win the flag without the need of doing a massive trade or free agency signing. It would be great to have the satisfaction knowing we built from the ground up and developed our own.

[bornadog]

Call me naive and a romantic but I would love us to win the flag without the need of doing a massive trade or free agency signing. It would be great to have the satisfaction knowing we built from the ground up and developed our own.

Tried that for 60 years :D

[Mofra]

It's cheaper to develop your own
For a genuine KPF it costs a first round draft pick, some luck, years of development and it our case about 20 odd years of waiting.

[Mofra]

Call me naive and a romantic but I would love us to win the flag without the need of doing a massive trade or free agency signing. It would be great to have the satisfaction knowing we built from the ground up and developed our own.
It would be the first time for perhaps two decades that it has happened - every premiership club has completed a big trade or three

[Guido]

This is a $4.5mil contract - Patton, on current performance and output, with a little bit added in for potential, should be looking at about $300k-$400K a year, 3-4 year contract.

So unless he kills it next year, at this stage, you're looking at offering a $3mil premium.

If he turns into one of the top 5 key forwards in the comp and stays on the list for 10 years, totally worth the premium paid.

However if he turns into a mid-ranger, like Dawes - who mind-you was probably better performed at the same age than Patton - then it's $3mil wasted, and that $3mil will cost you a premiership. And that's totally ignoring the elite talent possibly given up in the trade.

For the suggestion of trading pick 6 + Roughead - people will rubbish this, but IMO Roughead, at the same age and stage of his development to Patton's, 100% fit and healthy, with 90% game time in the forward line, IMO would have got similar numbers to what Patton has this year.

Tried that for 60 years :D
I can think of about 50 outside players we've brought in, 90% of them failures, so I'd argue that in the last 20 years at least, we have not in any way given that strategy a go.

It cuts both ways too though. Brent Guerra wasn't ready to play AFL footy
Limiting who we potentially lost to only the player selected isn't the right way to look at it - you have to look at everyone available before the club's next pick. That pick would have given us a crack at Guerra, Adam Hunter and Paul Chapman. Clayton was on fire in that draft, who knows who he would have chosen. In Chapman, you take one of your direct premiership competitors key top 20 in the comp players and add him to yours for the best part of 15 years.

Even if we had have selected Giansiracusa earlier than we did with that pick, then that maybe would have freed a pick later for Ling, and you get a premiership captain standard player on to your list, your competition loses him.

As an AA standard player, Monty in his own right had his own high draft pick value had we not went with going for Eagleton - so, say, a late first/early second rounder for Monty, plus the Pick 28. Again, possibly another top level player.

Every single draft pick has the potential for repercussions for generations of flag tilts - given flags and prelims come down to a kick or two, every single one can change a club's history.

[boydogs]

This is a $4.5mil contract - Patton, on current performance and output, with a little bit added in for potential, should be looking at about $300k-$400K a year, 3-4 year contract.

Yet he has come out and said he is happy where he is

[GVGjr]

This is a $4.5mil contract - Patton, on current performance and output, with a little bit added in for potential, should be looking at about $300k-$400K a year, 3-4 year contract.

So unless he kills it next year, at this stage, you're looking at offering a $3mil premium.



I probably see his value a bit over the 400K mark and understand that you have to pay overs to attract a player in demand.
I'd be far more positive about Patton if the financials being discussed were somewhere between your valuation the the media speculation number.

[GVGjr]

If you assume we are going to offer pick 5 or 6 plus a player does anyone care to nominate the players that we would regard as off limits?

[Remi Moses]

I'd say Bonts, Macrae, Stringer, Libba would be off limits.

[Twodogs]

Those four and probably almost Dahl maybe.

[azabob]

I'd say Bonts, Macrae, Stringer, Libba would be off limits.


Those four and probably almost Dahl maybe.

What about Roughead? He hasn't been great the last four or so weeks but he has shown potential.

[Guido]

I probably see his value a bit over the 400K mark and understand that you have to pay overs to attract a player in demand.
I acknowledge that he's in a weaker team, but I can think of about a dozen better performed key forwards this year off the top of my head, so I don't think based on this year's performance he's, say, a $450K a year key forward. Anything more than $400K is based on potential and assumptions on his improvement.

This is very different to an equivalent multi-million dollar offer (with a significant premium attached) to, say, a Selwood, Reiwoldt, Pavlich or a Judd at the age of 20/21, where they were already established top 50 in the comp material, with an 80%-90% chance of becoming long term superstars.


I'd be far more positive about Patton if the financials being discussed were somewhere between your valuation the the media speculation number.
I agree somewhere in the middle ground ($600K-$650K p.a.) would make a lot of us more comfortable, but you have to assume that GWS will stump up an offer of at least $500K per year - when you take the tax out of the equation, for most people a $50K-$100K difference per year isn't anywhere near enough to uproot their lives and move cities, especially if they're happy. So if we want to make ourselves a realistic choice, this is the kind of offer that needs to be made.

But it doesn't change my view that at the end of the day Patton is a 50/50 to be one of the top few key forwards in the comp - for $4.5m, gut feel says you'd want some better odds.

[chef]

I'd say Bonts, Macrae, Stringer, Libba would be off limits.

Those 4 plus Dahl and Roughie.

[Webby]

Tried that for 60 years :D

I know this is just a tongue-in-cheek comment, but I think we need to keep something in perspective:

Our club have won just 14 finals games in our history in the VFL/AFL. The lowest in the league (GC and GWS aside). We won seven finals games in our first 66 seasons in the league. However since the draft and salary cap was introduced, we've won seven more. Since 1992 we've won seven finals and made six prelims. In the days since the cap and draft, we've actually been very successful. We should've actually won the flag in '97, but that's another discussion. Point is, we've been in the mix over the past 20 odd years. I don't think we need to be overly rash.

It's a different playing field today. We have a shot at it. I'm fully behind us going after a good KPF, however my issue is just with the timing. I think we need at least one more year (ideally two) of developing via the draft before we try to recruit a boom piece of the puzzle.

I'd prefer us to keep progressing towards 8th or so with a good young list and then go for the boom recruit when we're closer. For me, getting Patton at this stage is too soon. It also sends a poor message by rewarding someone who's effectively done nothing in his career to date.

And, just quietly, I think Bonts is the better prospect...

[Remi Moses]

Patton's more than a 50% chance of being a successful power forward!

[Mofra]

This is a $4.5mil contract - Patton, on current performance and output, with a little bit added in for potential, should be looking at about $300k-$400K a year, 3-4 year contract.
How did you came up with those figures? That don't seem anywhere near realistic.

A no 1 draft pick who plays as a genuine developing power forward in an era where at least five clubs are ready to cut off the president's right arm for a genuine power forward, he is only going to get better with time and he's only worth average AFL salary?

Genuine no 1 forwards command a high salary - heck, Tippett as a ruck/forward is on $700k or so pa, and Sam Reid is on $500k+ pa as a fourth string forward.
Barry Hall took a significant pay cut to play with us years ago, when the cap was smaller, and he was on a rumoured $300k pa.

Forwards normally cost more than other positions, and even extra now there are so many clubs trying to get one.

[Remi Moses]

How did you came up with those figures? That don't seem anywhere near realistic.

A no 1 draft pick who plays as a genuine developing power forward in an era where at least five clubs are ready to cut off the president's right arm for a genuine power forward, he is only going to get better with time and he's only worth average AFL salary?

Genuine no 1 forwards command a high salary - heck, Tippett as a ruck/forward is on $700k or so pa, and Sam Reid is on $500k+ pa as a fourth string forward.
Barry Hall took a significant pay cut to play with us years ago, when the cap was smaller, and he was on a rumoured $300k pa.

Forwards normally cost more than other positions, and even extra now there are so many clubs trying to get one.

Exactly. I'm surprised by some on here

[jeemak]

It's a circular argument.

One group of people is talking about true value based on output and potential, while another group is talking about the cost to get the bloke to our club (enticement to the player and enough to ward off the competition).

Both sides are right, and unlikely to reconcile with each other! :)

[boydogs]

Tippett as a ruck/forward is on $700k or so pa

$3.5m over 4 years, including an 11 game suspension


Barry Hall took a significant pay cut to play with us years ago, when the cap was smaller, and he was on a rumoured $300k pa.

At 33 years of age after being suspended by his club for belting people


Forwards normally cost more than other positions, and even extra now there are so many clubs trying to get one.

I know we're still in season, but Patton has come out following our offer and said he wants to stay. We need to discuss how much we need to increase our offer, not decrease it.

[LostDoggy]

My only concern is the on flowing opportunity cost. Does Stringer then get $900k a year for 5 years if he continues his development? If he's kicking 3-4 goals a game next year he gets a fair argument to demand it. If he does then does Bonti if his development continues? If Bonti does then Libba? What if Libba wins the Brownlow next year? Gotta find some money somewhere. At some point tying up $1Mill a year to attract a maybe key forward would cost us far a more likely A+ future in those three players. There is a good chance we have drafted some true guns in the last 4 drafts - guns that could cost us over $500K each to retain in the not to distant future. Or it could more likely cost us some of the Hunter/Smith/Dahl et al. Great players, not A+ but needed to win a premiership, as we would be forced to offer under the odds to the middle of our list. I'd love Patton and I'm still in the camp that says get him but those are my concerns.

[Webby]

My only concern is the on flowing opportunity cost. Does Stringer then get $900k a year for 5 years if he continues his development?.

I share those concerns. Another question i'd pose is: Would anyone straight swap Bomtempelli for Patton?
(For the record, I certainly wouldn't.)

Yet last year I would've swapped pick 4 for Patton in a heartbeat. Our recruiters are on a roll at the moment and are creating value. I say let them use the pick.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Our recruiters are on a roll at the moment and are creating value. I say let them use the pick.

It's not as simple as that though.

We need to work collaboratively as a team to make the best informed decisions in regards to list management. This means working closely with the recruiting staff in terms of rating the current draft and projecting who is likely to be at our pick.

If the recruiters believe a high end talent in the form of Macrae/Stringer/Bonti exists, by all means, keep the pick and wait another 1-2 years before targeting a KPF through FA (preferred) or trading. However, if an opportunity to grab a star KPF becomes available this year and we think it's more valuable than pick 5/6/7 (or whatever it will be), let's capitalize.

[bulldogtragic]

It's not as simple as that though.

We need to work collaboratively as a team to make the best informed decisions in regards to list management. This means working closely with the recruiting staff in terms of rating the current draft and projecting who is likely to be at our pick.

If the recruiters believe a high end talent in the form of Macrae/Stringer/Bonti exists, by all means, keep the pick and wait another 1-2 years before targeting a KPF through FA (preferred) or trading. However, if an opportunity to grab a star KPF becomes available this year and we think it's more valuable than pick 5/6/7 (or whatever it will be), let's capitalize.

Spot on. Even Geelong recruited Kane Tenace. The memories of Sam Power and Tim Walsh must be gone because there's no such thing as a rolled gold guarantee with top 10 picks. We've just got try every possible avenue to improve the list, whether that's trade, draft or FA it's not that important as the decision being the best one.

[Twodogs]

I share those concerns. Another question i'd pose is: Would anyone straight swap Bomtempelli for Patton?
(For the record, I certainly wouldn't.)

No. Bont could be anything. He might be our Carey in terms of how good he is and his impact on games.


Yet last year I would've swapped pick 4 for Patton in a heartbeat. Our recruiters are on a roll at the moment and are creating value. I say let them use the pick.

I'd love to get a big name recruit but I'm loathe to give away a draft pick that Dalrymple could use to snare us another young gun. I think the best thing for us to do is wait until a suitable player becomes available under Free Agency and offer him the big deal. There's still plenty of other positions that need fixing that we can be getting on with in the meantime. The marquee tall forward can wait until a/ a suitable candidate becomes available and b/ we're totally sure we don't have the solution already sitting under our noses

We don't need to be throwing huge amounts at players who are still contracted to other clubs and offering up draft picks and players. Especially clubs we've had a fairly positive relationship with thus far. I understand they recommended us to Darley after they realised he was surplus to their requirements but thought he still had a future in the game. I know the Callan Ward situation tore the fabric for a lot of us but at least we parlayed it into Jack Macrae. If GWS are happy to send us the odd Sam Darley then I'd rather not get their nose out of joint unnecessarily. I can see that may be a little obsequious but with the amount of talent they have on their list more and more good players are going to be surplus to their list requirements. Especially when they have to lose 10 a year from their list in 3and 4 years time I think. If we can become the first club they want to turn to with a cheap deal for a player who'd be best 22 at any other club that's great.

[Guido]

How did you came up with those figures? That don't seem anywhere near realistic.

A no 1 draft pick who plays as a genuine developing power forward in an era where at least five clubs are ready to cut off the president's right arm for a genuine power forward, he is only going to get better with time and he's only worth average AFL salary?

Genuine no 1 forwards command a high salary - heck, Tippett as a ruck/forward is on $700k or so pa, and Sam Reid is on $500k+ pa as a fourth string forward.
Barry Hall took a significant pay cut to play with us years ago, when the cap was smaller, and he was on a rumoured $300k pa.

Forwards normally cost more than other positions, and even extra now there are so many clubs trying to get one.
I'm going by what I think he's inherently worth.

I don't have the evidence, but would put my house on Jarryd Roughead, between the ages of 20-23, never being on above $300k a season. Tom Hawkins, in that team 07-10 team, I would say he wasn't on above $350K til he hit 23/24. Both equivalent to about $400k in today's dollars. I don't think they were absurdly underpaid, as you're making out $400K for Patton in this environment would be.

Travis Cloke, after 3/4 outstanding years having him undoubtedly among the top 3 key forwards in the comp, re-signed for $750K per year. Again, against that backdrop, yes, I think a 20 year old with a heap of potential but without the runs on the board shouldn't be near that.

Right now, and for the next couple of years, IMO Patton's numbers and influence will be at a Chris Dawes level - Chris Dawes is on $500K and IMO not proving excellent value for money in anyone's language.

In 2013, there were 22 players in the competition on $700K+ - these are your superstars, your Brownlow Medallists, multiple All-Australians, premiership captains - I don't think Patton deserves to be one of them on performances. Jeremy Cameron on the other hand, yes. He's had a quiet season, but kicking 62 goals from 20 games at the age of 19/20 screams once in a generation.

On potential, maybe Patton deserves to be worth $500K, but you only look to need through history for "next big thing"s that achieved very little. Jonathan Hay was being offered millions at the age of 20, was he worth it? Polac was a top 5 pick, at the age of 20 he was just as highly rated as what Patton currently is.

Adelaide offered Ben Holland (yes, Ben) the equivalent of $2.7mil over 3 years in 2001 (adjusted for today's dollars), it didn't mean he was inherently worth that much just because a bunch of idiots who didn't know any better put that offer together. At the time, Adelaide was one of the most professionally run footy departments in the country.

Ben Holland. The equivalent of $900K a year.

[Remi Moses]

A great relationship with GWS?
After they stole a future captain and star player!
As for comparisons of Ben Holland and Chris Dawes.please!!
I actually reckon they haven't offered Patton that much, I'd hazes to guess its a bit less.
The whole point is we've fired a shot across the bow and not become a feeder club .
Just reading on Nicks collingwood website, they want to know how a poverty stricken club like ours can offer a player that much!
Aim for the stars and not the outhouse

[Remi Moses]

I'm going by what I think he's inherently worth.

I don't have the evidence, but would put my house on Jarryd Roughead, between the ages of 20-23, never being on above $300k a season. Tom Hawkins, in that team 07-10 team, I would say he wasn't on above $350K til he hit 23/24. Both equivalent to about $400k in today's dollars. I don't think they were absurdly underpaid, as you're making out $400K for Patton in this environment would be.

Travis Cloke, after 3/4 outstanding years having him undoubtedly among the top 3 key forwards in the comp, re-signed for $750K per year. Again, against that backdrop, yes, I think a 20 year old with a heap of potential but without the runs on the board shouldn't be near that.

Right now, and for the next couple of years, IMO Patton's numbers and influence will be at a Chris Dawes level - Chris Dawes is on $500K and IMO not proving excellent value for money in anyone's language.

In 2013, there were 22 players in the competition on $700K+ - these are your superstars, your Brownlow Medallists, multiple All-Australians, premiership captains - I don't think Patton deserves to be one of them on performances. Jeremy Cameron on the other hand, yes. He's had a quiet season, but kicking 62 goals from 20 games at the age of 19/20 screams once in a generation.

On potential, maybe Patton deserves to be worth $500K, but you only look to need through history for "next big thing"s that achieved very little. Jonathan Hay was being offered millions at the age of 20, was he worth it? Polac was a top 5 pick, at the age of 20 he was just as highly rated as what Patton currently is.

Adelaide offered Ben Holland (yes, Ben) the equivalent of $2.7mil over 3 years in 2001 (adjusted for today's dollars), it didn't mean he was inherently worth that much just because a bunch of idiots who didn't know any better put that offer together. At the time, Adelaide was one of the most professionally run footy departments in the country.

Ben Holland. The equivalent of $900K a year.
So subscribing to this theory we should never chase a high priced recruit?
You could give examples also of players on big coin that has worked out well.

[josie]

No. Bont could be anything. He might be our Carey in terms of how good he is and his impact on games.



I'd love to get a big name recruit but I'm loathe to give away a draft pick that Dalrymple could use to snare us another young gun. I think the best thing for us to do is wait until a suitable player becomes available under Free Agency and offer him the big deal. There's still plenty of other positions that need fixing that we can be getting on with in the meantime. The marquee tall forward can wait until a/ a suitable candidate becomes available and b/ we're totally sure we don't have the solution already sitting under our noses

We don't need to be throwing huge amounts at players who are still contracted to other clubs and offering up draft picks and players. Especially clubs we've had a fairly positive relationship with thus far. I understand they recommended us to Darley after they realised he was surplus to their requirements but thought he still had a future in the game. I know the Callan Ward situation tore the fabric for a lot of us but at least we parlayed it into Jack Macrae. If GWS are happy to send us the odd Sam Darley then I'd rather not get their nose out of joint unnecessarily. I can see that may be a little obsequious but with the amount of talent they have on their list more and more good players are going to be surplus to their list requirements. Especially when they have to lose 10 a year from their list in 3and 4 years time I think. If we can become the first club they want to turn to with a cheap deal for a player who'd be best 22 at any other club that's great.

Totally agree with this, and the other woofers who noted that we will box ourselves in with spending this amount of money at this stage on a key forward. I also think, as do many other posters, that at present our backline is the real worry. I like the idea that the club possibly leaked this to let the coomp know we are on the prowl for good players though.

[bulldogtragic]

It's not just money to lure a big forward, it's offering a midfield that will offer them the best career by having a midfield that can feed them opportunity to get the best out of their career. Patton might be a very, very good forward at GWS. With what we have going on in the midfield for the next 10 years, our mids could make Patton great. This has got to be an great selling point to any decent KPF.

[Guido]

As for comparisons of Ben Holland and Chris Dawes.please!!
At no point did I compare Patton to Holland, it was just an example of how a smart club can make dumb decisions in trying to fix a problem (they would have only exacerbated the issue). And it was also to point out that just because one club makes a massively over the odds financial offer doesn't necessarily mean that player is inherently worth that much.

Re: Dawes tho, yes, right now and IMO probably for the next year or two, Patton, while in his developing stages, I think will be doing a very similar job to what Dawes is doing (while at his peak).

You might dismiss Dawes, but he had a run of games early in 2010 where he was one of the most wanted young key forwards in the game.

So subscribing to this theory we should never chase a high priced recruit?

Where did I say that bud?

With stupidly big money (which is what $4.5million is), my preference is to go with players that have some serious runs on the board.

i.e. I want the right high-priced recruit.

I think back to the superstar key forwards in my time, and most, by the age of 21, had already shown something phenomenal - Reiwoldt, Brown, Grant, Carey, Franklin, Pavlich, Lloyd and right now, Cameron. Of what I've seen, I don't think Patton falls into that category.

Hawkins to me is the exception to the above group, and if we were to secure him, there's nothing to say that Patton couldn't also fall into that "slower developer" category and suddenly step up from "he's going to be a long term contributor just below the out and out guns of the comp" to "OMFG he's a superstar" at 22/23.

And at no point have I completely written off the offer, I'm just saying that reality is that is massive overs for where he's at right now - if he steps up to be one of the top key forwards in the game, it's worth it, if he doesn't hit his potential and evolves into a not quite elite, middle of the road key forward, then IMO given the money involved it will be a bit of a disaster and the wasted salary cap space could very well cost the club a premiership.

It's not really a controversial or crazy opinion.

[bulldogtragic]

Sorry to throw a curve ball. What if JMac and Gordo had a catch up with Dalrymple and he said Patton was the best KPF he'd seen and would support the club 100%.

Then the lets back in Dalrymple mantra becomes more complex does it not. We will back him in with pick 6 but if he is of the view Patton was and is an elite talent then do we back Dalrymple with this assessment too? For me, logic says Dalrymple gets asked a few questions about Patton being that he would've watched him as a junior for 4 years plus his GWS time.

[Remi Moses]

Guido a couple of points
Patton's missed 12 months of development.
Obviously it's a risk, but we could go around in circles about players who have succeeded and failed on top money.
I'd say he's comparable to Tom Hawkins at this stage, and to be honest it's playing the futures market.
I actually don't even think it's the amount touted to be honest, but as I stated previously it's saying to the footy world we're not going to be a pauper in regards to landing a big fish.

[DISHLICKERS]

Patton may have done his knee again!

[Templeton31]

Patton may have done his knee again!

Yep. poor buggar. same knee as last time saying on fox.

[DISHLICKERS]

Hope it is not the ACL for his sake.

[comrade]

Fingers crossed it's not serious.

Almost impossible to come back from 3 big knee injuries for a bloke his size.

[G-Mo77]

Fingers crossed it's not serious.

Almost impossible to come back from 3 big knee injuries for a bloke his size.

I thought it was just the one knee injury. And we're throwing $900k at him?

[F'scary]

Now for the really bad news - he signed a secret deal with us...

[Dry Rot]

Well, if he's done his ACL again that rules out 2015 for him when he's off contract.

Wonder if a club would then take the chance? If so, it won't be $900k/season.

[G-Mo77]

Well, if he's done his ACL again that rules out 2015 for him when he's off contract.

Wonder if a club would then take the chance? If so, it won't be $900k/season.

And I hope it's not us taking that chance.

[Dry Rot]

In a peculiar way, it may help GWS as it will clarify what they might offer Cameron and Boyd end 2015, and not care too much about what happens to Patton.

[LostDoggy]

Likewise I don't think we should choose any player with an early pick for fear they'll do a knee and be a bust. I think the sensible thing would be to pass on our first round pick each draft to prevent wasting it.

Perhaps there's a injury riddled dud at another club who happens to be tall we could get for a late pick. Say around pick 125, it might be worth a punt.

You were saying?

[Remi Moses]

Are you for real ?
We should never ever offer big money at a player again.
Never know he might get hit by a bus, or struck by lightning.
We should be focusing on some dud with major flaws in his game.

[Dry Rot]

Can anyone confirm he's done the same knee? Saw a report he's done the other one.

[1eyedog]

Same knee - the right one.

[LostDoggy]

Small half forward, exactly what we need and don't have like 20 of already!

Smith is just said to be good because all of the other kids are so unimpressive. Dahlhaus is miles better at exactly the same thing, and he even passes the ball once in a while.

I love Lukey D but no way he is miles better. Devon is a gun and quality everyday of the week.

[Greystache]

You were saying?

Yep let's live in fear, it's the only way to succeed :rolleyes:

[Dry Rot]

Same knee - the right one.

Thanks. That's that then.

[Templeton31]

Thanks. That's that then.

its not confirmed hes done it. ran along boundary afterwards but now been sent for scans. i.e. already left the ground.

[bulldogtragic]

Perfect, his value just slashed. If he was in the super market he'd have a sticker on his head saying 'still fresh, 30% off'.

His talent hasn't gone anywhere, he won't play footy next year and if there's a chance he may leave then GWS would put a year of rehab into for nothing and his trade value next year would be a lottery.

Higgins, Roberts/Campbell and pick 25.

Do the deal all, his marketing value alone is worth the year out. Obviously the first year of our deal matches his final year at GWS. This is a good thing if we want him, I think we keep going hard and hope his re-hab with family in Melbourne and VU will be better and he can market the club to the kids, sit in the cheer squad, become a cult hero while getting better. No to a first rounder, but do the deal.

[LostDoggy]

Are you for real ?
We should never ever offer big money at a player again.
Never know he might get hit by a bus, or struck by lightning.
We should be focusing on some dud with major flaws in his game.

I did say we should have a crack at him, just buyer beware that's all. If we are going to throw that much at a player we are only going to get one shot at it.
I agree you need to take some risks to get ahead let's take calculated risks not reckless ones.

[bornadog]

GREATER Western Sydney forward Jonathan Patton has immediately gone for precautionary scans on his right knee after landing awkwardly during the second quarter of Sunday's clash against Melbourne.
Patton, who had a knee reconstruction on the same knee in 2013, clutched his knee in pain after landing and took several moments to compose himself.

He walked to the bench and went straight down to the rooms to be examined.

He reappeared briefly to run along the boundary but then went back down to the rooms.

The Giants decided to send him immediately for scans, as they were not able to confirm the extent of the injury.

Patton has played 18 games this season and kicked 25 goals, beginning to show why he was the No.1 selection in the 2011 NAB AFL Draft.

The Giants had earlier lost Phil Davis to concussion and then lost Callan Ward to a calf injury.

Doesn't sound that bad?

[comrade]

How bad are Melbourne! Patton, Davis and Ward all injured for GWS and they're still getting belted.

Much prefer to be a Doggies supporter today.

[GVGjr]

The report I heard was it was a jarred knee for Patton.

[Greystache]

How bad are Melbourne! Patton, Davis and Ward all injured for GWS and they're still getting belted.

Much prefer to be a Doggies supporter today.

It's because of the umpires.

The reason they can only kick 2 goals a game is because the umpires have confused the players.

[LostDoggy]

Yep let's live in fear, it's the only way to succeed :rolleyes:

It wasn't fear stache, I meant you can go again after one knee and still have a good career but when you have already done one there isn't much margin for error. Two knees and the poor bugger has a very limited career if any.

[LostDoggy]

I hope for his sake it's only jarred.

[F'scary]

Didn't we also make a big offer for...Gumbleton? :eek::eek::eek:

[Webby]

Perfect, his value just slashed. If he was in the super market he'd have a sticker on his head saying 'still fresh, 30% off

That did make me laugh!

[Webby]

Didn't we also make a big offer for...Gumbleton? :eek::eek::eek:

We certainly can pick 'em!

Just draft, boys!....

Or at least spread the risk...

[Mofra]

Didn't we also make a big offer for...Gumbleton? :eek::eek::eek:
Not big money, but we offered two years to Essendon's one

[The Bulldogs Bite]

I was working at the Melb/GWS game today, and it was as pathetic as I've ever seen from any side (Melbourne).

The Dees fans booed them off at HT, 3QT and loudly at FT.

Patton looked in enormous pain when he went down, was shaking and looked devastated. Hopefully it's good news for him.

[Templeton31]

Cameron said GWS docs dont think it was a "significant injury" but scans to check.

[Bumper Bulldogs]

How bad are Melbourne! Patton, Davis and Ward all injured for GWS and they're still getting belted.

Much prefer to be a Doggies supporter today.

Tanking maybe?

[Templeton31]

Giants have announced torn ACL for Patton. Dont think we will be seeing Patton in Red White and Blue next year now. Or very much in Orange. Poor bugger.

[whythelongface]

Giants have announced torn ACL for Patton. Dont think we will be seeing Patton in Red White and Blue next year now. Or very much in Orange. Poor bugger.

Well I think we can safely put this rumour to sleep, certainly for the near future anyway.

Always sad to see players go down with these types of injuries. Hopefully for him he makes a good comeback.

[bulldogtragic]

Patton has done the knee. Official.

Buy low. Let's do the deal.

Edit: Eddie and Derm saying Dogs have done a secret deal. Very strong hints.

[comrade]

This will make Jaksch more expensive you'd think?

[bulldogtragic]

Perfect, his value just slashed. If he was in the super market he'd have a sticker on his head saying 'still fresh, 30% off'.

His talent hasn't gone anywhere, he won't play footy next year and if there's a chance he may leave then GWS would put a year of rehab into for nothing and his trade value next year would be a lottery.

Higgins, Roberts/Campbell and pick 25.

Do the deal all, his marketing value alone is worth the year out. Obviously the first year of our deal matches his final year at GWS. This is a good thing if we want him, I think we keep going hard and hope his re-hab with family in Melbourne and VU will be better and he can market the club to the kids, sit in the cheer squad, become a cult hero while getting better. No to a first rounder, but do the deal.

Bump. Do the deal, the knee reco only brings the price down for trade and first year salary. Eddie & Derm saying we've done a secret deal, do the deal.

[GVGjr]

This will make Jaksch more expensive you'd think?

If he wants to come to Melbourne maybe money won't be a huge consideration.

Terrible news for Patton

[Twodogs]

If he wants to come to Melbourne maybe money won't be a huge consideration.

Terrible news for Patton


Yep awful luck for him. Maybe he can rehab with Clay Smith?

[Bulldog4life]

Bump. Do the deal, the knee reco only brings the price down for trade and first year salary. Eddie & Derm saying we've done a secret deal, do the deal.

Do the deal BT and what would our payment be to him next year?

[comrade]

Bump. Do the deal, the knee reco only brings the price down for trade and first year salary. Eddie & Derm saying we've done a secret deal, do the deal.

Terrible luck for Patton but if I put my optimistic hat on...I'm kind of with you on this one.

This could be our one chance to secure a genuine gorilla at a much reduced price and back our medical staff to get him cherry ripe for 2016 onwards.

What price would we be willing to pay for a 100kg bloke that's done 2 knees?

[Twodogs]

Terrible luck for Patton but if I put my optimistic hat on...I'm kind of with you on this one.

This could be our one chance to secure a genuine gorilla at a much reduced price and back our medical staff to get him cherry ripe for 2016 onwards.

What price would we be willing to pay for a 100kg bloke that's done 2 knees?

To play at Etihad every other week? Do we take that into account.

[bulldogtragic]

Do the deal BT and what would our payment be to him next year?

His salary he'd get at GWS ($300,000 ish) and to compensate him have a 6th year option with so much fine print and get our clauses it's a win our way (games played, fitness, goals kicked etc).

His value in terms of trade value just got ripped up. Pick 6 and a player is not even near the table. Pick 25, Higgins to reunite with Ward and maybe another trade able player. They use the wage savings to sign Boyd to a monster deal.

Fact is for GWS if Patton packs up and walks out next year, he's played his last game one way or another. If Patton wants us, wants treatment in Melbourne and his manager does his part, than this isn't bad for us if you believe Eddie & Derm in that we've done the deal in secret.

[SonofScray]

To play at Etihad every other week? Do we take that into account.

Have to, surely. He just isn't going to have the longevity at the quality he would've expected as an up and coming junior. Damaged goods in my books now. Buyer beware.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Interesting one.

Patton himself may want to come back home after today. I actually think this makes him more attainable, but with that comes alarm bells/great risk now that he's effectively done 2 knees in a very short space of time like Clay.

It would be extremely difficult to gauge in terms of what you'd cough up to GWS, too.

[bulldogtragic]

Interesting one.

Patton himself may want to come back home after today. I actually think this makes him more attainable, but with that comes alarm bells/great risk now that he's effectively done 2 knees in a very short space of time like Clay.

It would be extremely difficult to gauge in terms of what you'd cough up to GWS, too.

Yep. If Patton wants out, wants back home, then he and his manager need to make a few comments to GWS. Let GWS offer Patton a deal worth $4.5m next year when he's played no footy. If they don't I'm not sure too many clubs before our PSD pick either. GWS get salary for Boyd, and a highish pick, a player like Higgins and don't have to concern themselves with Patton's rehab and contract circus next year.

Garlick needs to give them a dose of karma and smile as he does it. Patton just became gettable.

[comrade]

Again, with the optimistic hat on...

If Higgins has decided to go (and I think it's best for all parties if he does), I could live with an arrangement where he goes to GWS and we agree to send with him the 2nd round compo pick in exchange for Patton.

[Scraggers]

Again, with the optimistic hat on...

If Higgins has decided to go (and I think it's best for all parties if he does), I could live with an arrangement where he goes to GWS and we agree to send with him the 2nd round compo pick in exchange for Patton.

I don't want to lose Higgins; but I'd be comfortable with this deal

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Again, with the optimistic hat on...

If Higgins has decided to go (and I think it's best for all parties if he does), I could live with an arrangement where he goes to GWS and we agree to send with him the 2nd round compo pick in exchange for Patton.

FWIW apparently Jon Ralph said Higgins is definitely on the move after speaking with his manager. Somebody might be able to confirm this? Although it wouldn't be big news, the writing's been on the wall for a while now.

On Higgins/a potential move, I can't see him being traded when he can effectively walk to a club for free. Although clubs try to abide by 'goodwill' gestures, I'd say this is an unlikely step. Plus - it sounds like he wants to remain in Melbourne (linked to Carlton, Richmond and Norf).

[bulldogtragic]

FWIW apparently Jon Ralph said Higgins is definitely on the move after speaking with his manager. Somebody might be able to confirm this? Although it wouldn't be big news, the writing's been on the wall for a while now.

On Higgins/a potential move, I can't see him being traded when he can effectively walk to a club for free. Although clubs try to abide by 'goodwill' gestures, I'd say this is an unlikely step. Plus - it sounds like he wants to remain in Melbourne (linked to Carlton, Richmond and Norf).

The other players which can be interchanged with Higgins, is probably Jones or maybe Campbell (replace Patton on the list, play second ruck while Boyd gets another year) or if they were interested Talia, but his value ain't much right now (Talia, Campbell & 26?). Package any of them or Higgins if he wants to GWS with pick 26. GWS just got screwed potentially by the footy gods, so I hope Eddie & Dermie are right that we've agreed in secret.

[LostDoggy]

900k, 500k, two knees

I'll take pick 5 or so thanks.

[LostDoggy]

FWIW apparently Jon Ralph said Higgins is definitely on the move after speaking with his manager. Somebody might be able to confirm this? Although it wouldn't be big news, the writing's been on the wall for a while now.

On Higgins/a potential move, I can't see him being traded when he can effectively walk to a club for free. Although clubs try to abide by 'goodwill' gestures, I'd say this is an unlikely step. Plus - it sounds like he wants to remain in Melbourne (linked to Carlton, Richmond and Norf).
​He can certainly hit up their targets!

[The Underdog]

The other players which can be interchanged with Higgins, is probably Jones or maybe Campbell (replace Patton on the list, play second ruck while Boyd gets another year) or if they were interested Talia, but his value ain't much right now (Talia, Campbell & 26?). Package any of them or Higgins if he wants to GWS with pick 26. GWS just got screwed potentially by the footy gods, so I hope Eddie & Dermie are right that we've agreed in secret.


Why would GWS do that deal?

[Twodogs]

Did Eddie or Derm mention a figure?

[Scraggers]

Confirmed ACL

[Twodogs]

Why would GWS do that deal?


Frank Spencer somehow getting involved in the process is the only reason I can think of.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

so I hope Eddie & Dermie are right that we've agreed in secret.

What kind of context was it said in? Did they elaborate?

It sounds like a bit of a tongue in cheek comment, and although they'd have connections, you wouldn't think they'd 'break the news' before a journo.

[bornadog]

What kind of context was it said in? Did they elaborate?

It sounds like a bit of a tongue in cheek comment, and although they'd have connections, you wouldn't think they'd 'break the news' before a journo.

Dermie is down there coaching as well.

[Remi Moses]

Was the deal for next season?
Sounds like tongue in cheek B/S to me

[lemmon]

Just playing devil's advocate here but for the life of me I can't remember a guy that big coming back from two knees. It will basically write off all of 2015 and the year after recovery is generally spent getting back full confidence in the knee. We potentially aren't getting him at full fitness until 2017 when he will be a 23-24 year old with maybe 40 odd games under his belt. I know Darcy was 30 when he did his second but he never came back the same, while Primus went pretty much straight into retirement after his second, yes age and position are factors but they are the only guys that big I can recall doing two. I'm still not adverse to dealing but pick 5 is well and truly off the table

It may be horribly unlucky but what's the old adage "whom the Gods wish to destroy they first call promising"

[bulldogtragic]

What kind of context was it said in? Did they elaborate?

It sounds like a bit of a tongue in cheek comment, and although they'd have connections, you wouldn't think they'd 'break the news' before a journo.

Jon Ralph was there, if he counts. The conversation started with Ed saying the dogs had made the offer and words like 'if they've done the deal' then where does it stand. Ed said something similar again and then Derm said (I think) the offer was done in secret because the rules prohibit it so it wouldn't be legally enforceable if the dogs want to walk away. My impression from the words and body language was both thought the deal was signed off by us and accepted.

[bulldogtragic]

Why would GWS do that deal?

Jones and 26 for a guy out for 12 months now and who if he's agreed to walk out, gets to the dogs for free next year. If he and his manager can get GWS to lose confidence in their position, GWS hold on to an injured player for 12 months, pay him and not use the cash on Boyd or Cameron and risk getting nothing. Not a good outcome for GWS if it eventuates.

So we go them hard, honour any agreement with Jon and tinker with some details. Patton could be the most ever loved player at the club next year if his focus was rehab and investing in membership and the fans. I wouldn't even start with Jones and 26, but I'd do it, or offer Jones to Freo if Freo have something GWS want.

[Twodogs]

What kind of context was it said in? Did they elaborate?

It sounds like a bit of a tongue in cheek comment, and although they'd have connections, you wouldn't think they'd 'break the news' before a journo.


Ed Is a journo. Maybe not just a journo these days but it's what he's trained in.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Just playing devil's advocate here but for the life of me I can't remember a guy that big coming back from two knees. It will basically write off all of 2015 and the year after recovery is generally spent getting back full confidence in the knee. We potentially aren't getting him at full fitness until 2017 when he will be a 23-24 year old with maybe 40 odd games under his belt. I know Darcy was 30 when he did his second but he never came back the same, while Primus went pretty much straight into retirement after his second, yes age and position are factors but they are the only guys that big I can recall doing two. I'm still not adverse to dealing but pick 5 is well and truly off the table

It may be horribly unlucky but what's the old adage "whom the Gods wish to destroy they first call promising"

It's a good point and it's a huge concern. Certainly not worth offering the mega deal and coughing up a first pick + a good player. Not at this point of our development, though it may be for a club closer to contention.

Just on the question, did Bradshaw or Lynch do 2 knees? I cannot remember who, might not even be either of them, but I seem to recall a couple of players coming back well from two knees. But you're right - history is against Patton, regardless of his age.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Ed Is a journo. Maybe not just a journo these days but it's what he's trained in.

True, what I meant was that it's not Eddie's job to go and find/break the latest news in its rawest form like Ralph/Wilson/Barrett/Hutchy.

[bulldogtragic]

It's a good point and it's a huge concern. Certainly not worth offering the mega deal and coughing up a first pick + a good player. Not at this point of our development, though it may be for a club closer to contention.

Just on the question, did Bradshaw or Lynch do 2 knees? I cannot remember who, might not even be either of them, but I seem to recall a couple of players coming back well from two knees. But you're right - history is against Patton, regardless of his age.

Bradshaw, Lynch had chronic fatigue. Staker did two and looked good still as well. Darcy did two. Did Richo do two? Did Modra do two?

Walker's a modern player who has done 1, and I'd take him if he did another.

[Dry Rot]

I was never really enthusiastic about getting Patton, and now I wouldn't touch him with a barge pole.

Save our ammo and cash for 2015 when there's a lot of FAs.

[Dry Rot]

Just playing devil's advocate here but for the life of me I can't remember a guy that big coming back from two knees. It will basically write off all of 2015 and the year after recovery is generally spent getting back full confidence in the knee. We potentially aren't getting him at full fitness until 2017 when he will be a 23-24 year old with maybe 40 odd games under his belt. I know Darcy was 30 when he did his second but he never came back the same, while Primus went pretty much straight into retirement after his second, yes age and position are factors but they are the only guys that big I can recall doing two. I'm still not adverse to dealing but pick 5 is well and truly off the table

It may be horribly unlucky but what's the old adage "whom the Gods wish to destroy they first call promising"

In that scenario, he'd consider rookie-ing him at best.

Sadly, I don;t hold high hopes for Smith either.

[LostDoggy]

Next....cant see why we would even consider him now.

[The Underdog]

Jones and 26 for a guy out for 12 months now and who if he's agreed to walk out, gets to the dogs for free next year. If he and his manager can get GWS to lose confidence in their position, GWS hold on to an injured player for 12 months, pay him and not use the cash on Boyd or Cameron and risk getting nothing. Not a good outcome for GWS if it eventuates.

So we go them hard, honour any agreement with Jon and tinker with some details. Patton could be the most ever loved player at the club next year if his focus was rehab and investing in membership and the fans. I wouldn't even start with Jones and 26, but I'd do it, or offer Jones to Freo if Freo have something GWS want.

On the GWS side:

*How does Patton walk for free next year? He might be out of contract but unless free agency rules change markedly they still have to trade him if he wants to get to a club. Jones has almost no value to them (nor any of our other bigs) and pick 26 is of marginal value. They can play hardball knowing that they have huge depth at Patton's position and if it turns out for the worst they can write it off as a sunk cost and still have a billion first round picks on the list already, plus the pick 3 they'll get this year and likely a top 10 next year.
*In a year he'll have finished his rehab and his value will likely be markedly higher.
*What will he threaten them with in the meantime? Refusing to play? Not doing his rehab? If he doesn't show up at the club he'll be in breach of contract so if he wants to get paid, he shows up and rehab's.
*They'd likely continue to demand our first pick or a top line junior from us safe in the knowledge that they have the upper hand and the cover in the lower levels plus Boyd will get another pre-season in and Cameron will be fit again, still a better set-up than most teams. They might even decide to try to extend Jon as a show of faith.

I'm not against trying to deal for him but I think that to say we can just offer unders and manipulate everything behind the scenes underestimates GWS position.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

On the GWS side:

*How does Patton walk for free next year? He might be out of contract but unless free agency rules change markedly they still have to trade him if he wants to get to a club. Jones has almost no value to them (nor any of our other bigs) and pick 26 is of marginal value. They can play hardball knowing that they have huge depth at Patton's position and if it turns out for the worst they can write it off as a sunk cost and still have a billion first round picks on the list already, plus the pick 3 they'll get this year and likely a top 10 next year.
*In a year he'll have finished his rehab and his value will likely be markedly higher.
*What will he threaten them with in the meantime? Refusing to play? Not doing his rehab? If he doesn't show up at the club he'll be in breach of contract so if he wants to get paid, he shows up and rehab's.
*They'd likely continue to demand our first pick or a top line junior from us safe in the knowledge that they have the upper hand and the cover in the lower levels plus Boyd will get another pre-season in and Cameron will be fit again, still a better set-up than most teams. They might even decide to try to extend Jon as a show of faith.

I'm not against trying to deal for him but I think that to say we can just offer unders and manipulate everything behind the scenes underestimates GWS position.

He isn't a free agent next year and being out of contract he can walk into the preseason draft. Same scenario as Crameri last year. Agree with the rest though. I dont see how things have changed for himself or GWS. He wont want to come back to Melbourne any more now than he did prior to yesterday and GWS will still want to stick with him. What might change is his value. Instead of pick 6 + a decent player he may now just command pick 6 which i think is fair value now. But this is still dependent on him wanting to come back to Melbourne.

[G-Mo77]

Next....cant see why we would even consider him now.

This. Do not touch!!!!

[Greystache]

Jon Ralph was there, if he counts. The conversation started with Ed saying the dogs had made the offer and words like 'if they've done the deal' then where does it stand. Ed said something similar again and then Derm said (I think) the offer was done in secret because the rules prohibit it so it wouldn't be legally enforceable if the dogs want to walk away. My impression from the words and body language was both thought the deal was signed off by us and accepted.

Given Patton is contracted at GWS next season the whole debate was pure sensationalist bullshit. We may well have said to Patton we'll offer you X if you tell GWS you want to come to us and we'll try to get a trade done, but for Eddie to claim we may already have a contract in place with him that we're legally bound to is just him being a wanker. No doubt like everything else on that show it will be a public relations exercise to in some way benefit Collingwood, there's probably one of their players being approached by another club and he's trying to scare people.

That show is more of a Collingwood propaganda exercise than The Club.

[The Underdog]

He isn't a free agent next year and being out of contract he can walk into the preseason draft. Same scenario as Crameri last year. Agree with the rest though. I dont see how things have changed for himself or GWS. He wont want to come back to Melbourne any more now than he did prior to yesterday and GWS will still want to stick with him. What might change is his value. Instead of pick 6 + a decent player he may now just command pick 6 which i think is fair value now. But this is still dependent on him wanting to come back to Melbourne.

Hadn't considered the PSD. The fault I can see there is that we'd be planning to not be picking in that draft until after GWS or at least half a dozen others. He'd be no certainty to get to us if we even mildly improve next year. I still feel like GWS can play this from a position of strength. They've got such a wealth of young high draft picks coming through, they can sit on Patton and not give him up for a cut rate deal. I know players wanting out tend to get where they want to go, but for GWS there is just no reason to do this now when his value is at its lowest, unless someone makes decent offer with something they need.

[FrediKanoute]

Didn't Paul Salmon come back from 2 knees in the 80's?

I thought Danny Southern had had 2 knee op's before we drafted him as well.

To me everything is a risk, but the upside of Patton making it back outweighs the risk he doesn't.