Tyrone Peachey Signs until 2023..

[tigger]

Peachy is a gun and will go into another gear being at a awesome club like Tigers.

As soon as he puts on that black and gold jerseys he will become a star.

He'll look to the back and see the weapon, Laurie. Carving up.

Then see the young gun pack with stand outs like Twal, Stef and Seyfarth all running over opposition.

Then AD choppin 40/20s from all over the palace.
He will feel like a super human within a team that plays to his strengths and respects his character as well as his playing ability.

Go Tigers !!

You're delusional, but I like it! Well done.

 

[Tiger5150]

How many utilities do we have? Do we even have any?
And people have to remember that he was being shopped at 400k and there were no takers. So the asking price dropped. If multiple clubs were interested then we might have to pay more than everyone else but chances are it's hopefully still less than 400k.

Our club is very stupid don't forget. There's every chance they pay $400k

Even if the club doesnt pay $400k, people here will say they did. By the end of his Contract he will be being paid closer to $800k according to some here.

 

[Crucible]

Tiger 5150 is obviously a Brooks Tragic.

 

[Tiger5150]

Tiger 5150 is obviously a Brooks Tragic.

Cant argue with solid logic like that.

 

[tonza]

Honestly..

Not too sure about the 400K price tag..

I'd be offering 280-300K max.

Who is to say we didnt.

 

[Nelson]

Honestly..

Not too sure about the 400K price tag..

I'd be offering 280-300K max.

Yeah and then you wouldn’t get him and could enjoy sitting around with your big pile of unspent funds which you then have to give to even less desirable players in order to reach the cap floor.

 

[Coastie_Tiger]

Honestly..

Not too sure about the 400K price tag..

I'd be offering 280-300K max.

I saw someone say earlier in the thread it was $450 this yr and $250 the next which is $350 a season. I dunno where their mail comes from or if its true but for me that is the max Peachy is worth, but who knows really.

 

[tony soprano]

A utility who competes on every play.

Not sure why the hate.

I think the Peach will be great for us!

Gold Coast didn't utilise him I'd look to see him put on weight for the 13 role.

https://youtu.be/aWXGRpY7u-Y

 

[happy_tiger]

IMO 400k is a little overs but I don’t get the “we could have got him for 250 or 200 because no other NRL team wanted him”. If he can get that in ESL or rugby then that’s his value.

We need first graders. There’s not much out there. There’s cap space and roster spots. It’s reportedly a short term deal so I’m all for it ??

I absolutely agree with you. I don't get all the angst about whether we might have paid $100k too much for Peachey. The forum has been saying for ages now that we can't attract top players, so what's the opportunity cost here? Are we going to miss out on a great recruitment opportunity because we've overpaid $100k for Peachey? (If we did).
I reckon he'll be a reasonable fit for us. Probably paying overs but not enough to cause dissent amongst the troops. and not enough to cause us salary cap problems.

Peachey isn't a top player ...definitely not ranked in the Top 50 players

 

[tigger]

IMO 400k is a little overs but I don’t get the “we could have got him for 250 or 200 because no other NRL team wanted him”. If he can get that in ESL or rugby then that’s his value.

We need first graders. There’s not much out there. There’s cap space and roster spots. It’s reportedly a short term deal so I’m all for it ??

I absolutely agree with you. I don't get all the angst about whether we might have paid $100k too much for Peachey. The forum has been saying for ages now that we can't attract top players, so what's the opportunity cost here? Are we going to miss out on a great recruitment opportunity because we've overpaid $100k for Peachey? (If we did).
I reckon he'll be a reasonable fit for us. Probably paying overs but not enough to cause dissent amongst the troops. and not enough to cause us salary cap problems.

Peachey isn't a top player ...definitely not ranked in the Top 50 players

Nope. Didn't suggest that he was.

 

[happy_tiger]

IMO 400k is a little overs but I don’t get the “we could have got him for 250 or 200 because no other NRL team wanted him”. If he can get that in ESL or rugby then that’s his value.

We need first graders. There’s not much out there. There’s cap space and roster spots. It’s reportedly a short term deal so I’m all for it ??

I absolutely agree with you. I don't get all the angst about whether we might have paid $100k too much for Peachey. The forum has been saying for ages now that we can't attract top players, so what's the opportunity cost here? Are we going to miss out on a great recruitment opportunity because we've overpaid $100k for Peachey? (If we did).
I reckon he'll be a reasonable fit for us. Probably paying overs but not enough to cause dissent amongst the troops. and not enough to cause us salary cap problems.

Peachey isn't a top player ...definitely not ranked in the Top 50 players

Nope. Didn't suggest that he was.

I don't agree paying 25 % more on market value for a player who isn't ranked in the Top 50 .......

 

[tigger]

IMO 400k is a little overs but I don’t get the “we could have got him for 250 or 200 because no other NRL team wanted him”. If he can get that in ESL or rugby then that’s his value.

We need first graders. There’s not much out there. There’s cap space and roster spots. It’s reportedly a short term deal so I’m all for it ??

I absolutely agree with you. I don't get all the angst about whether we might have paid $100k too much for Peachey. The forum has been saying for ages now that we can't attract top players, so what's the opportunity cost here? Are we going to miss out on a great recruitment opportunity because we've overpaid $100k for Peachey? (If we did).
I reckon he'll be a reasonable fit for us. Probably paying overs but not enough to cause dissent amongst the troops. and not enough to cause us salary cap problems.

Peachey isn't a top player ...definitely not ranked in the Top 50 players

Nope. Didn't suggest that he was.

I don't agree paying 25 % more on market value for a player who isn't ranked in the Top 50 .......

Fair enough. Is that just a general view that you shouldn't pay more than something is worth or do you have other reasons for saying that?

 

[carltonleach]

I don’t see the problem in signing peachey, he’s a solid player who’s versatile also is better then the centers we currently have available. He’s proven in the NRL not as the best but someone who plays the game for what it is, a simple game! He can get carried away abit with trying to be flashy but most the time he plays well. If it came to it I’d much prefer to play him in the centre’s then James roberts!! But he will be the 14 for us IMO and will be a far better 14 then mbye ever was for us! It also puts extra pressure on so many players because he’s so versatile. I know he’s not a Brendan smith or a luai but he’s quality and for the price tag I think he’s a great addition!!

 

[happy_tiger]

IMO 400k is a little overs but I don’t get the “we could have got him for 250 or 200 because no other NRL team wanted him”. If he can get that in ESL or rugby then that’s his value.

We need first graders. There’s not much out there. There’s cap space and roster spots. It’s reportedly a short term deal so I’m all for it ??

I absolutely agree with you. I don't get all the angst about whether we might have paid $100k too much for Peachey. The forum has been saying for ages now that we can't attract top players, so what's the opportunity cost here? Are we going to miss out on a great recruitment opportunity because we've overpaid $100k for Peachey? (If we did).
I reckon he'll be a reasonable fit for us. Probably paying overs but not enough to cause dissent amongst the troops. and not enough to cause us salary cap problems.

Peachey isn't a top player ...definitely not ranked in the Top 50 players

Nope. Didn't suggest that he was.

I don't agree paying 25 % more on market value for a player who isn't ranked in the Top 50 .......

Fair enough. Is that just a general view that you shouldn't pay more than something is worth or do you have other reasons for saying that?

What other reasons would I have .....

But getting back to your original question .....you spend 25% extra on mid range players your going to end up with a very poor roster ......we already have 2 Nofa / brooks ......

 

[TigerWest]

IMO 400k is a little overs but I don’t get the “we could have got him for 250 or 200 because no other NRL team wanted him”. If he can get that in ESL or rugby then that’s his value.

**We need first graders**. There’s not much out there. There’s cap space and roster spots. It’s reportedly a short term deal so I’m all for it 👌🏻

Exactly.

It was also reported 3 clubs (Raiders, Parramatta and Bronco’s) were after him.

We need first graders to compliment our younger blokes, who will be another season older, tougher and smarter.

 

[Tiger5150]

IMO 400k is a little overs but I don’t get the “we could have got him for 250 or 200 because no other NRL team wanted him”. If he can get that in ESL or rugby then that’s his value.

We need first graders. There’s not much out there. There’s cap space and roster spots. It’s reportedly a short term deal so I’m all for it ??

I absolutely agree with you. I don't get all the angst about whether we might have paid $100k too much for Peachey. The forum has been saying for ages now that we can't attract top players, so what's the opportunity cost here? Are we going to miss out on a great recruitment opportunity because we've overpaid $100k for Peachey? (If we did).
I reckon he'll be a reasonable fit for us. Probably paying overs but not enough to cause dissent amongst the troops. and not enough to cause us salary cap problems.

Peachey isn't a top player ...definitely not ranked in the Top 50 players

Nope. Didn't suggest that he was.

I don't agree paying 25 % more on market value for a player who isn't ranked in the Top 50 .......

We are going to have to pay 25% more on market value for ANYONE. 25% on $300K doesnt hurt as much as 25% on $800K.

 

[tigger]

IMO 400k is a little overs but I don’t get the “we could have got him for 250 or 200 because no other NRL team wanted him”. If he can get that in ESL or rugby then that’s his value.

We need first graders. There’s not much out there. There’s cap space and roster spots. It’s reportedly a short term deal so I’m all for it ??

I absolutely agree with you. I don't get all the angst about whether we might have paid $100k too much for Peachey. The forum has been saying for ages now that we can't attract top players, so what's the opportunity cost here? Are we going to miss out on a great recruitment opportunity because we've overpaid $100k for Peachey? (If we did).
I reckon he'll be a reasonable fit for us. Probably paying overs but not enough to cause dissent amongst the troops. and not enough to cause us salary cap problems.

Peachey isn't a top player ...definitely not ranked in the Top 50 players

Nope. Didn't suggest that he was.

I don't agree paying 25 % more on market value for a player who isn't ranked in the Top 50 .......

Fair enough. Is that just a general view that you shouldn't pay more than something is worth or do you have other reasons for saying that?

What other reasons would I have .....

But getting back to your original question .....you spend 25% extra on mid range players your going to end up with a very poor roster ......we already have 2 Nofa / brooks ......

I would be concerned if I though he wasn't going to be a reasonable fit for us. If he wasn't, he's not worth buying at any price. If he is, then paying a little bit more to get him (big percentage but off a fairly low base) isn't likely to damage our salary cap position or upset other players.

But you make a fair point. What it might do is set a benchmark (if we haven't already) for what we are willing to pay for mid range players. I guess that there is a danger in that.

 

[happy_tiger]

IMO 400k is a little overs but I don’t get the “we could have got him for 250 or 200 because no other NRL team wanted him”. If he can get that in ESL or rugby then that’s his value.

We need first graders. There’s not much out there. There’s cap space and roster spots. It’s reportedly a short term deal so I’m all for it ??

I absolutely agree with you. I don't get all the angst about whether we might have paid $100k too much for Peachey. The forum has been saying for ages now that we can't attract top players, so what's the opportunity cost here? Are we going to miss out on a great recruitment opportunity because we've overpaid $100k for Peachey? (If we did).
I reckon he'll be a reasonable fit for us. Probably paying overs but not enough to cause dissent amongst the troops. and not enough to cause us salary cap problems.

Peachey isn't a top player ...definitely not ranked in the Top 50 players

Nope. Didn't suggest that he was.

I don't agree paying 25 % more on market value for a player who isn't ranked in the Top 50 .......

We are going to have to pay 25% more on market value for ANYONE. 25% on $300K doesnt hurt as much as 25% on $800K.

4 lots of 25% end up costing you a 500 k player ......we already have 3 we are paying that extra 25% if you include Peachey / Nofa / Brooks ......

I'd rather we pay an extra 25% for a player in that 900 -1.1 range ...they are the players that get you to finals and then help you win finals once your there

Nothing personal ...Tyrone Peachey doesn't win you a premiership ...nor does Nofa or Brooks .....

 

[DJG]

If anyone watches Peachy play, you'd see that he's more of a ball hog then king Douhie - sure they think they can do it themselves, but we need a team.

 

[das tigers]

I'm happy,it's a good start buy.
Finished the well at 5/8.
Played SOO in 18 for NSW.
Covers positions walters,mybe and chee kam play.
30 man squad.
Off season is firing up!
Let's see aye!

Forwards now....Defense!
New D coach too!