List Management for 2020/21

[Bulldog4life]

Thanks HD. Fair point. What if the Trealor rumours are true and if our future first rounder (among other fine detail) was good enough to secure him? Then there's Treloar, Martin & Hannan with JUH & Hollands (who both could play forward quickly) et al on the list for next season?

Welcome back BT your wisdom was missed. What worries me about Treloar is 1/ his salary and 2/ the red flag with Collingwood saying he is likely going to struggle without his partner. He has unfortunately had some mental problems in the past too. Apparently Collingwood are only prepared to pay $100,000 towards his salary as well. Whether that is only next season I am not sure. Plus Treloar's $900,000 is tipped to go higher in the following years. I don't think he is worth that. How will our other players feel about that too?

[1eyedog]

Welcome back BT your wisdom was missed. What worries me about Treloar is 1/ his salary and 2/ the red flag with Collingwood saying he is likely going to struggle without his partner. He has unfortunately had some mental problems in the past too. Apparently Collingwood are only prepared to pay $100,000 towards his salary as well. Whether that is only next season I am not sure. Plus Treloar's $900,000 is tipped to go higher in the following years. I don't think he is worth that. How will our other players feel about that too?

I still believe they will take on 200k and as for how our players perceive it I think there is a fair amount of sympathy for his situation. It was Collingwood who agreed to pay him that and if he was to come to us it would be on the proviso that we are prepared to take that on. I can't see how Treloar would be singled out for that.

He's pretty wounded at the moment and I think Bevo is the perfect coach for him right now. I actually think he could be a better player with us. I don't want him but I get the allure.

[bulldogtragic]

Welcome back BT your wisdom was missed. What worries me about Treloar is 1/ his salary and 2/ the red flag with Collingwood saying he is likely going to struggle without his partner. He has unfortunately had some mental problems in the past too. Apparently Collingwood are only prepared to pay $100,000 towards his salary as well. Whether that is only next season I am not sure. Plus Treloar's $900,000 is tipped to go higher in the following years. I don't think he is worth that. How will our other players feel about that too?

Hey B4L. All valid points. But he could come cheap as it's clear he's not going back (like with Stringer). Treloar doesn't want to go to Brisbane or GCS, so I imagine that's not a major issue. The club would obviously probe his mental health and work out if out organisation is the right fit. Collingwood only offering $100,000... Hilarious! That's a laughable ambit claim by Collingwood. I'd be looking between 1/3 to 1/2 his wage, and I reckon that's where it lies in these circumstances. We may extend his contract and look to see if we can find a good number after his Collingwood subsidy expires. If that comes down to near Dunkley wage levels then I don't thing the players would be annoyed. I imagine he'd meet the leadership group too. I assume Matty Boyd is still at Collingwood and can offer us a trustworthy assessment of any and all matters.

My strong preference, beyond salary paid, is a future first rounder and something coming back (draft points this year). If all the points you raise get ticked off. Now if he comes out and nominates us and suggests to Collingwood he will air all his grievances if they don't trade him, I might want even more back. This isn't exactly the Stringer situation, but it's not far off. Collingwood need it to happen. But we would need to tick all the boxes as you say if the Treloar rumours have any substance. And the trade needs to really work for us.

[The Underdog]

I still believe they will take on 200k and as for how our players perceive it I think there is a fair amount of sympathy for his situation. It was Collingwood who agreed to pay him that and if he was to come to us it would be on the proviso that we are prepared to take that on. I can't see how Treloar would be singled out for that.

He's pretty wounded at the moment and I think Bevo is the perfect coach for him right now. I actually think he could be a better player with us. I don't want him but I get the allure.

If anything, Treloar next year is going to be motivated as all hell. And his first game against Collingwood would be must see.

[EasternWest]

If anything, Treloar next year is going to be motivated as all hell. And his first game against Collingwood would be must see.

Hopefully not motovated.

[DOG GOD]

Ok, so what the chances of getting all 3 of Treloar, Stephenson and Tippa out of all this.
Our fwd line needs a massive overhaul and there’s 2 guys above would would generate pace and excitement. Throw JUH in there as well, and it is exactly what we need.

If it means losing Richards within all this, I’m all for it.

[bornadog]

I still believe they will take on 200k and as for how our players perceive it I think there is a fair amount of sympathy for his situation. It was Collingwood who agreed to pay him that and if he was to come to us it would be on the proviso that we are prepared to take that on. I can't see how Treloar would be singled out for that.

He's pretty wounded at the moment and I think Bevo is the perfect coach for him right now. I actually think he could be a better player with us. I don't want him but I get the allure.

Why would we pay Treloar $700k and not give that to Dunkley, if that is his issue?

[bornadog]

The Daniher compensation changes that now

The Joe Daniher compensation enables Essendon to trade a future R1 pick. But if Bombers trade a future R1, they must keep their two 2020 R1 picks, unless they bring another in (eg. Saad). They also couldn’t trade any other future picks without bringing another in (eg. Fantasia).

Thanks for that, which means Essendon must use this years 2 x 1st round picks. Therefore to trade, they need to get pick 8 for Saad, they can use that and next years first.

[GVGjr]

Why would we pay Treloar $700k and not give that to Dunkley, if that is his issue?

That is the issue for me but I think Treloar is the better footballer.
The hard part might be to give him a substantial pay increase about this contract given we didn't play him in the midfield enough this year

[bornadog]

That is the issue for me but I think Treloar is the better footballer.
The hard part might be to give him a substantial pay increase about this contract given we didn't play him in the midfield enough this year

I don't buy that we didn't play him in the midfield. AFL is a team sport, and you are lucky to be in the best 22 with so many footballers wanting your spot. You play in a position that best suits the team.

[GVGjr]

I don't buy that we didn't play him in the midfield. AFL is a team sport, and you are lucky to be in the best 22 with so many footballers wanting your spot. You play in a position that best suits the team.

His output was reduced, I don't think there is any argument about that. When Wood was moved forward and had a reduced output you were quick to say he needed to be moved back, why not the same for Dunks? He is a better midfielder than forward in my view

[bornadog]

His output was reduced, I don't think there is any argument about that. When Wood was moved forward and had a reduced output you were quick to say he needed to be moved back, why not the same for Dunks? He is a better midfielder than forward in my view

True, but I am talking from the team perspective, not the supporters perspective.

Perhaps he doesn't like playing forward or chop out in the ruck, fine, but in the end it is a team game. To me it is not a reason to leave. From the outside, it just seems like money, but perhaps to him he wants to be king in the middle.

[dog town]

His output was reduced, I don't think there is any argument about that. When Wood was moved forward and had a reduced output you were quick to say he needed to be moved back, why not the same for Dunks? He is a better midfielder than forward in my view

Wood wasn’t pushed out due to numbers though it was a poorly judged experiment. Dunkley and others haven’t been able to fit into the midfield full time.

To criticise Dunkley getting less minutes we need to assign a player to get fewer minutes don’t we? He wasn’t on his own either some other players copped the same treatment.

[DOG GOD]

I always thought Dunkley was a good team player, but this saga just reeks EGO.

[GVGjr]

Wood wasn’t pushed out due to numbers though it was a poorly judged experiment. Dunkley and others haven’t been able to fit into the midfield full time.

To criticise Dunkley getting less minutes we need to assign a player to get fewer minutes don’t we? He wasn’t on his own either some other players copped the same treatment.

Wood was tried forward because we wanted a more mobile back 6 and the thought was he could hold some marks there. We learned quickly that he's very limited in that way and had to move him back.

I actually think we tried to experiment with Dunkley spending more time forward as a pseudo 3rd tall forward and like what happened in the first 5 rounds of 2019 it was a failed experiment.

There is no question from my perspective that the combination of an opportunity of more minutes in the midfield and an early pay bump have given Dunkley reasons for a rethink. Power sort of acknowledges that

Our options are around backing his professionalism to just get on with it if we refuse to trade him. Offer him a pay bump in good faith and acknowledge that we can use him a bit more in the midfield or try and dance with the devil and do a trade with Essendon

I'd still prefer to keep him at the club.