-
14-11-2019, 08:50 AM
#226
Re: Jack Martin
Originally Posted by
bornadog
Good on him for trying.
No hint of criticism toward the player. This is his career and he has a limited time to do as well for himself as he can. That’s life.
I’m just amazed a player who has delivered so little can trade so highly on potential. When do the credits on potential run out? 5 years clearly not enough
-
14-11-2019, 12:40 PM
#227
Re: Jack Martin
Originally Posted by
AshMac
No hint of criticism toward the player. This is his career and he has a limited time to do as well for himself as he can. That’s life.
I’m just amazed a player who has delivered so little can trade so highly on potential. When do the credits on potential run out? 5 years clearly not enough
I was going to say that Jack was a tease and if he had played 100 games then that would have been enough for clubs to draw a line underneath and say "Nup, if he ain't playing his best footy ATM then he never will" and that being a tease was better than having actual exposed form."
THen I looked up how many games he had played and it's 97. I reckon the train has left the station with Jack. Let him cruise through another 100 games at Carlton without really making too much of an effort and we can take pick 13 and let our recruiters work their magic. I am confident that they come away with a player we will fall in love with straight away.
It's been a mighty long time since they let us down, would any of us swap Bailey Smith for Chad Wingard now? Because that was the deal we knocked back, Hawthorn wanted our first pick for Wingard, we offered this years first pick instead and they said "Thanks, but no thanks".
Could you imagine watching Bailey Smith absolutely dominating at Hawthorn while we watch Chad Wingard go through the motions each week?
They say Burt Lancaster has one, but I don't believe them.
-
14-11-2019, 12:52 PM
#228
Re: Jack Martin
He's more than welcome to put that price tag on his head but he's played nearly 100 games and hasn't really looked anything worth the hype. He's going to be 25 start of next year and he's still yet to deliver on his pre-draft hype, he's lucky to even be in the league still if it wasn't for the fact that he played for the Suns.
-
15-11-2019, 11:43 AM
#229
Re: Jack Martin
Martin's millions: early terms boost Blues bid
Jack Martin will be paid about $2 million over the first two years of his massively front-loaded five-year deal as a result of a deal struck between Martin and the exiting Gold Coast player's preferred destination club, Carlton.
Martin's terms – nominated in a bid to assure him of safe passage to Carlton in the pre-season draft – guarantee him more than a $1 million next year, and then close to that amount in year two of a five-year deal that pays him an aggregate of about $3.1 million, with incentives that could stretch that to about $3.5 million if he performs well.
The front-loading of the contract – designed to deter both his current team, Gold Coast, and Melbourne from picking him up – means that Martin will be close to Carlton's highest paid player, potentially ahead of Patrick Cripps, in those two years, although he will average a more moderate guaranteed salary of about $625,000 per season over the entire length of the contract.
The Age revealed on Monday that Martin's terms included a 2020 contract on more than $1 million to discourage the Suns and Demons from picking him, but this huge second year is a further disincentive for those clubs.
-
15-11-2019, 12:08 PM
#230
Re: Jack Martin
Is this strategy going to endear Martin to his new team mates?
This has been very poorly handled by Carlton.
Listening to Brahm's 3rd Racket
-
15-11-2019, 12:58 PM
#231
Re: Jack Martin
Originally Posted by
The Doctor
Is this strategy going to endear Martin to his new team mates?
This has been very poorly handled by Carlton.
I wouldn't want to play with him under those terms. I'd happily sit the year out in the medical room and transfer out ASAP.
They say Burt Lancaster has one, but I don't believe them.
-
15-11-2019, 01:55 PM
#232
Re: Jack Martin
Is there a reason Gold Coast couldn't afford that wage anyway? Who are they paying next year?
-
15-11-2019, 03:32 PM
#233
Re: Jack Martin
Originally Posted by
lemmon
Is there a reason Gold Coast couldn't afford that wage anyway? Who are they paying next year?
They can probably afford it if they really had to but also consider that even if they brought him back in, he would probably still be pushing for a move out, especially once those first two high earning years were done. Now at that point you'd have him under contract but he could make it a pretty horrible place to be around if he wanted to whilst trying to force your hand to move him on.
-
15-11-2019, 03:35 PM
#234
Re: Jack Martin
Originally Posted by
The Doctor
Is this strategy going to endear Martin to his new team mates?
This has been very poorly handled by Carlton.
The players will be happy. They love it when big contracts get handed out...
What should I tell her? She's going to ask.
-
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 2 Likes
-
19-11-2019, 04:29 PM
#235
Re: Jack Martin
Originally Posted by
Testekill
He's more than welcome to put that price tag on his head but he's played nearly 100 games and hasn't really looked anything worth the hype. He's going to be 25 start of next year and he's still yet to deliver on his pre-draft hype, he's lucky to even be in the league still if it wasn't for the fact that he played for the Suns.
Martin has been at best a good average player at the GCS and hardly justifies the sort of money being offered by Carlton. You wonder what impact it will have on the young talent at Carlton. Very happy that we didn’t go overboard when it appeared we were in the running.
-
19-11-2019, 06:30 PM
#236
Re: Jack Martin
Originally Posted by
Nuggety Back Pocket
Martin has been at best a good average player at the GCS and hardly justifies the sort of money being offered by Carlton. You wonder what impact it will have on the young talent at Carlton. Very happy that we didn’t go overboard when it appeared we were in the running.
Totally agree. Sam and the team including Chris Grant are very level headed academic thinkers. Appearing desperate by paying overs is never attractive. We killed trade week for need, the Aints may have got the attention but long term we will see our business was a class above.
-
19-11-2019, 06:53 PM
#237
Re: Jack Martin
To be fair, we did offer Martin more money and more years than Carlton. He just didn't want to accept our offer.
Rocket Science: the epitaph for the Beveridge era - whenever it ends - reading 'Here lies a team that could beat anyone on its day, but seldom did when it mattered most'. 15/7/2023
-
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 1 Likes
-
20-11-2019, 12:50 PM
#238
Re: Jack Martin
Originally Posted by
lemmon
Is there a reason Gold Coast couldn't afford that wage anyway? Who are they paying next year?
There were rumours a year or two ago they were under cap pressure as they had to pay overs to get players to stay.
GWS have been pretty open about trading players out as cap dumps - even kids who hadn't debuted (e.g. Ahern to North who was reportedly on $300-$400k!)
Western Bulldogs: 2016 Premiers
-
27-11-2019, 10:57 AM
#239
Re: Jack Martin
Originally Posted by
bulldogtragic
To be fair, we did offer Martin more money and more years than Carlton. He just didn't want to accept our offer.
Im not entirely convinced that was the case - it was what the media reported initially
-
Post Thanks / Like - 0 Thanks, 1 Likes
-
27-11-2019, 01:58 PM
#240
Re: Jack Martin
Originally Posted by
Bulldog Revolution
Im not entirely convinced that was the case - it was what the media reported initially
I'm sure that our offer may have resulted in more money but I'd probably bet it was tied into performance clauses and stuff like that. So it's a lower base wage but higher potential earnings and Martin may have been happier just going the higher base wage.