Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion
- Thread starter MacDougall
- Start date
earl
Well-known member
I really like the idea of signing top tier talent from the lower grades as well as established first graders. Look at how Twal has gone since getting here.
Gus Gould on his podcast said that the following clubs will benefit from other teams being over the cap for next season - Warriors, Knights, Dragons and Tigers.
jirskyr
Well-known member
@ said:
Not possible with the recent contract offers we've reported to have put out. Haven't Tigers even publicly stated (Pascoe?) that we'd have space to move if the setting of the 2018 salary cap squeezed other clubs?
Twal'sFirstTry
Member
@ said:
I'd say with woods going to dogs and Reynolds coming here, there's a fair chance we'll be playing dogs round 1.
N
newtiger
Guest
@ said:
SG said a few months ago that WT had spent about 6.3million of their cap.
They haven't spent that much more sense that.
G
Guest
Guest
@ said:
Also remember we're still paying Farah and possibly Sironen this season. That's >700k of a dead cap space which will be freed up for next year so we're already sitting on a roster that's well under the cap as is.
Consider a few more big contracts coming off the books including Moses, Tedesco and Woods (likely together in the 2 million range) that's around 2.5-3 mil in cap space available. Reynolds, Lolohea, McQueen, Matulino, Packer, Milne and Fonua are probably equal trade-offs for that. Considering a few other contracts we won't be renewing and the general increase in the cap we should certainly have substantial space left - even more so considering that we'll have the leverage when it comes to teams offloading players and will likely be able to get subsidised contracts.
Really impressed with how our management has dealt with the situation at hand. Not only is the team looking more competitive each week, we're in a position where young talents are being locked up on long-term deals and the core members of our squad are for the most part going to be around til 2020.
My only real disappointment was I feel we were a bit too trigger happy with Brooks because of all the controversy surrounding the "big 4" at the time and signed him to a deal larger than we should have, but 550k is below market for a halfback and it's only a 2 year deal so by the time we progress to having a squad probably ready to compete, Brooks will either have taken the next step and we can just bump that up or we'll be able to put our funds towards a game breaking half.
Consider a few more big contracts coming off the books including Moses, Tedesco and Woods (likely together in the 2 million range) that's around 2.5-3 mil in cap space available. Reynolds, Lolohea, McQueen, Matulino, Packer, Milne and Fonua are probably equal trade-offs for that. Considering a few other contracts we won't be renewing and the general increase in the cap we should certainly have substantial space left - even more so considering that we'll have the leverage when it comes to teams offloading players and will likely be able to get subsidised contracts.
Really impressed with how our management has dealt with the situation at hand. Not only is the team looking more competitive each week, we're in a position where young talents are being locked up on long-term deals and the core members of our squad are for the most part going to be around til 2020.
My only real disappointment was I feel we were a bit too trigger happy with Brooks because of all the controversy surrounding the "big 4" at the time and signed him to a deal larger than we should have, but 550k is below market for a halfback and it's only a 2 year deal so by the time we progress to having a squad probably ready to compete, Brooks will either have taken the next step and we can just bump that up or we'll be able to put our funds towards a game breaking half.
G
Guest
Guest
@ said:
Correct, we are sitting pretty in terms of our cap for next season, hence why we could afford to retain Woods if he were to somehow backflip on the Bulldogs, which I think is unlikely.
Even if we finish low for the year we can always front load players and make ourselves competitive in the market for 2019.
JD Tiger
New member
To confirm, is this right?
At the moment unofficial salary cap for 2018 is $9.2m, and that is for 30 players.
The 6 extra "development" players, on top of the original 30, are they being paid from that bucket of money as well? Or separate?
At the moment unofficial salary cap for 2018 is $9.2m, and that is for 30 players.
The 6 extra "development" players, on top of the original 30, are they being paid from that bucket of money as well? Or separate?
I don't like front or back loading. The benefit quickly becomes a disadvantage. Okay, fine if it's for a small percentage of the contract, but no for large chunks.
\
\
This is okay:
Year 1: 500
Year 2: 350
Year 3: 350
Not Okay:
Year 1: 700
Year 2: 250
Year 2: 250
The only way it really should be used is if there is a player on a large sum who is due to retire/leave at a certain date, in which case utilising their cap space for future periods is acceptable. Requires planning though. :roll
\
\
This is okay:
Year 1: 500
Year 2: 350
Year 3: 350
Not Okay:
Year 1: 700
Year 2: 250
Year 2: 250
The only way it really should be used is if there is a player on a large sum who is due to retire/leave at a certain date, in which case utilising their cap space for future periods is acceptable. Requires planning though. :roll
JD Tiger
New member
If we had $50k unspent in our cap for 2017 right now, then it would make sense to use it up and take the ease of future years.
And if the cap is $9.2m for 2018, if it's $9.5m for 2019, if it's $10m for 2020, then a salary like
2017: $450k + 50k
2018: $475k
2019: $500k
2020: $525k
(for a salary of $2m over 4 years)
may be feasible. Lots of "ifs" in those sentences though.
And if the cap is $9.2m for 2018, if it's $9.5m for 2019, if it's $10m for 2020, then a salary like
2017: $450k + 50k
2018: $475k
2019: $500k
2020: $525k
(for a salary of $2m over 4 years)
may be feasible. Lots of "ifs" in those sentences though.
WestsBenTigers
New member
@ said:
Can you please explain what's wrong with:
Year 1: 700
Year 2: 250
Year 3: 250
@ said:
Player X plays year one, receives the $700k and asks for early release to join another club.
Also bad news the other way around where player X is recieves $200k year 1 and is promised $700k in year 2 and gets pushed into leaving by the club.
I think this is one of the major issues Robbie and Benji had with the club. Both players took unders and were promised more in backended contracts but were told to look around effectively being pushed out without receiving all the contract money promised.
Staff online
-
Suzie-QModerator