I think it’s a great deal for GWS. Stringer will put his best foot forward, especially year 1, will be away from any bad influences. They’re contending and he’s got some match winning ability. They’re not selling the farm for a 42!!! a year goal kicker.
No brainer for GWS.
6 Likes
We’re not one way or the other.
That’s why we’re playing it the way it is. If we push for a trade and we get stuff all offers, we then need to repair the relationship with Stringer to complete his final year of the contract.
I think he’ll honour it and play for it if he has to, but there is the risk that it affects the ‘culture’ we are trying to build.
I’m fine with the way we’re playing the Laverde and Stringer situations. Everyone who is contracted will be honoured. If their manager’s can find another club willing to offer a contract they want, then we’ll deal with them. I don’t expect any trades to be completed until the last day because of the way we’ve handled it.
I suspect this will be the way we handle trades moving forwards. We’ve shown commitment with other players (rightly or wrongly) by offering long term contracts and I’m sure we will
honour them but also leave the door open for them to explore their options at another club. It’s likely to occur once their front loaded contracts reduce to the point they can get better salaries at another club.
Unless we get the Daniher situation where the compensation is a top 5 pick and we’re certain to be towards the bottom of the ladder, I’d prefer to deal with a trade for picks across multiple years (if need be).
2 Likes
Sure he kicked 42 goals, but they were the wrong type of goals. We need more sensible and well behaved goals.
5 Likes
It’s not that simple.
How many goals do we give away with a forward line that doesn’t chase or apply pressure?
2 Likes
I’m assuming the answer is 42???
1 Like
He’s coming home (Harley, that is)
2 Likes
GWS are a pretty good shout for the flag next year. Stringer might not even be in their best 22 but will be a huge luxury to bring in as required. For all his challenges, he’s a game winner. Hogan, Green , Stringer and their fleet of smalls will decimate most back lines.
I’ve enjoyed his time at Essendon, but happy to let him go. I’d be targeting getting Stone and a late pick in return.
1 Like
Are we competing for a Top 4 spot next year against GWS ?
If not, why does this matter ?
We are dumping Stringer so we don’t win those 2 or 3 meaningless games and have a top 3 pick.
All the long term plans to get Harley.
1 Like
I heard it mentioned just after the season ended that chains beginning from his direct opponent resulted in more goals than he contributed to.
What they are likely referring to when the talk was all about the ‘behind the goals vision’
9 Likes
Why is winning games meaningless?
yup.
it’s not.
But 14th last year and 11th this year is meaningless.
The wins become meaningful if we beat St Kilda, GC and Adelaide.
If I was an opposition club looking to trade for Stringer, I’d be talking him down publicly via Matty Lloyd as well.
2 Likes
Can gws hurry up and say they want Jake so a trade can be done i feel like this is holding us up in trying to get involved in other deals.
Jake’s contracted next year. GWS have always struggled with their cap and we have massive cap space.
We should offer to pay what we owe him for next, therefore spreading their cost over two years and halving what they pay.
In return for a better pick - effectively buying pick.
Apparently Jake getting 400k is incorrect - closer to 700k I think Edmund reported. And GWS have him on 700k for 2. We pay the 700k next and they effectively only pay him 350k a year.
9 Likes
This is such a misconception of trade period. Deals get done in the end, communication is open all the time. One deal getting delayed doesn’t stop other deals from happening it just gets dragged out. It’s just how it is
1 Like
Apparently over the next couple of years we will be going after Reid, Cadman & Callaghan.
1 Like
Getting
Kissing.