Someone on our other forum saying Brooks to Knights on again.
Swap with Klemmer being mentioned.
who knows?
I would take that. We need an experienced leader up front.
Agree, Klemmer for Brooks 👍
Wests Tigers Podcast - Talking everything Wests Tigers!
Someone on our other forum saying Brooks to Knights on again.
Swap with Klemmer being mentioned.
who knows?
I would take that. We need an experienced leader up front.
Agree, Klemmer for Brooks 👍
Even I would probably be in favour of that, depending on the deal.
In memory of Geoff Chisholm (1965-2022)
I’m can’t stomach paying players to play for another club, swapping is fine but no cash. Much rather drop underperformers to reserves.
I’m can’t stomach paying players to play for another club, swapping is fine but no cash. Much rather drop underperformers to reserves.
I hate it as well.
In memory of Geoff Chisholm (1965-2022)
I looked at our odds against Parra, we are $9 for a win in a 2 horse race but Parra’s money is safe.
You wouldn't touch the WT's at $18 in a 2 horse race
I’m can’t stomach paying players to play for another club, swapping is fine but no cash. Much rather drop underperformers to reserves.
its not ideal and highlights a previous management decision not working out.
but compounding management mistakes with stubbornness can be equally counterproductive.
I believe @Frullens said in a post we need to be ruthless and I totally agree.
I follow a couple of American Sports, notably MLB and NFL.
When a team is not competing they have a test,
will Player X be here contributing when we are contending for the title again?
That test is followed by further questions?
Is player X providing some current value ie. on field results, leadership, ticket sales(club legend for example)
Is player X taking up a roster spot of someone who maybe around when we are next competing?
Is players salary (or part of) better spent on players who maybe here when next competing?
If strategically it makes sense to move player on even if it evolves eating some money than it has to be considered.
Lets get straight to it, Luke Brooks, will he part of Wests Tigers next contending level roster?
I wanted him to be but contending is so far down the road that I think the Answer is No.
Results- We are currently showing we can successfully lose with him in the team so we can just as successfully lose without him.
Is his leadership needed? Does he drive crowds to our Games?
So is the roster spot better utilised by Madden, AD, Hastings, Simpkin, Rua, etc allowing them to develop/see if they will be here when we are hopefully contending?
We are paying 100% Brooks Salary currently, the decision to put him under contract was made previously, too late to undo that.
What can be done now is pay him to play elsewhere (unpalatable I accept) but every dollar another club pays of his current salary (i.e even 50%) can then be put into players we think will be here during the next contending Window, or the next crop after that. While he is here, all that money goes to Brooks.
Don't get me wrong if you can trade for another player or get another club to throw in all the cash or both, Great,
but just because you cant doesn't mean it should not be considered.
American teams trade star players, playing well if they fail the future contending team test. and I think we all agree Luke is not playing well.
Not every contract works out as hoped, We need to be flexible as a club to not let stubbornness over prior well intentioned decisions get in the road of making smart roster decisions now for the future.
Jacob Liddle seems to be another player mentioned, perhaps the forum/podcast can run him through the above test, Ive taken up enough space.
I looked at our odds against Parra, we are $9 for a win in a 2 horse race but Parra’s money is safe.
You wouldn't touch the WT's at $18 in a 2 horse race
Parra -32 @ $4.15 is far more enticing..
I’m can’t stomach paying players to play for another club, swapping is fine but no cash. Much rather drop underperformers to reserves.
its not ideal and highlights a previous management decision not working out.
but compounding management mistakes with stubbornness can be equally counterproductive.
I believe @Frullens said in a post we need to be ruthless and I totally agree.
I follow a couple of American Sports, notably MLB and NFL.
When a team is not competing they have a test,
will Player X be here contributing when we are contending for the title again?
That test is followed by further questions?
Is player X providing some current value ie. on field results, leadership, ticket sales(club legend for example)
Is player X taking up a roster spot of someone who maybe around when we are next competing?
Is players salary (or part of) better spent on players who maybe here when next competing?
If strategically it makes sense to move player on even if it evolves eating some money than it has to be considered.
Lets get straight to it, Luke Brooks, will he part of Wests Tigers next contending level roster?
I wanted him to be but contending is so far down the road that I think the Answer is No.
Results- We are currently showing we can successfully lose with him in the team so we can just as successfully lose without him.
Is his leadership needed? Does he drive crowds to our Games?
So is the roster spot better utilised by Madden, AD, Hastings, Simpkin, Rua, etc allowing them to develop/see if they will be here when we are hopefully contending?
We are paying 100% Brooks Salary currently, the decision to put him under contract was made previously, too late to undo that.
What can be done now is pay him to play elsewhere (unpalatable I accept) but every dollar another club pays of his current salary (i.e even 50%) can then be put into players we think will be here during the next contending Window, or the next crop after that. While he is here, all that money goes to Brooks.
Don't get me wrong if you can trade for another player or get another club to throw in all the cash or both, Great,
but just because you cant doesn't mean it should not be considered.
American teams trade star players, playing well if they fail the future contending team test. and I think we all agree Luke is not playing well.
Not every contract works out as hoped, We need to be flexible as a club to not let stubbornness over prior well intentioned decisions get in the road of making smart roster decisions now for the future.
Jacob Liddle seems to be another player mentioned, perhaps the forum/podcast can run him through the above test, Ive taken up enough space.
Great post 👍 we’ll mention on next pod.
Wests Tigers Podcast - Talking everything Wests Tigers!
I’m can’t stomach paying players to play for another club, swapping is fine but no cash. Much rather drop underperformers to reserves.
its not ideal and highlights a previous management decision not working out.
but compounding management mistakes with stubbornness can be equally counterproductive.
I believe @Frullens said in a post we need to be ruthless and I totally agree.
I follow a couple of American Sports, notably MLB and NFL.
When a team is not competing they have a test,
will Player X be here contributing when we are contending for the title again?
That test is followed by further questions?
Is player X providing some current value ie. on field results, leadership, ticket sales(club legend for example)
Is player X taking up a roster spot of someone who maybe around when we are next competing?
Is players salary (or part of) better spent on players who maybe here when next competing?
If strategically it makes sense to move player on even if it evolves eating some money than it has to be considered.
Lets get straight to it, Luke Brooks, will he part of Wests Tigers next contending level roster?
I wanted him to be but contending is so far down the road that I think the Answer is No.
Results- We are currently showing we can successfully lose with him in the team so we can just as successfully lose without him.
Is his leadership needed? Does he drive crowds to our Games?
So is the roster spot better utilised by Madden, AD, Hastings, Simpkin, Rua, etc allowing them to develop/see if they will be here when we are hopefully contending?
We are paying 100% Brooks Salary currently, the decision to put him under contract was made previously, too late to undo that.
What can be done now is pay him to play elsewhere (unpalatable I accept) but every dollar another club pays of his current salary (i.e even 50%) can then be put into players we think will be here during the next contending Window, or the next crop after that. While he is here, all that money goes to Brooks.
Don't get me wrong if you can trade for another player or get another club to throw in all the cash or both, Great,
but just because you cant doesn't mean it should not be considered.
American teams trade star players, playing well if they fail the future contending team test. and I think we all agree Luke is not playing well.
Not every contract works out as hoped, We need to be flexible as a club to not let stubbornness over prior well intentioned decisions get in the road of making smart roster decisions now for the future.
Jacob Liddle seems to be another player mentioned, perhaps the forum/podcast can run him through the above test, Ive taken up enough space.
Great post
if you have Luke Brooks playing elsewhere along with Mmbye you effectively have 800k playing for another team and not in your cap. That means that 450k "bargain you want to sign next (let's say it is Madden) is really 450k plus the 800k you are paying other clubs for someone to play against you.
If it was a straight swap then that makes more sense e.g. Brooks for Munster or someone else then that bargain buy can be had elsewhere
@helmesy the floor in that player test is I believe those competitions do not have a salary cap ? please correct me if I am wrong with NFL and NBA.
so you need to take into account who you are offloading at what price to play elsewhere that eats into your available cap space to replace them with
what happens if AD doesn't come back ? one more knee injury he could be gonski
Madden or Hastings get injury we are stuffed.
Only get rid of Brooks if it betters the team at this stage it doesn't not and in 2023 it does not, we jeed to see how Douhie comes back.
Don't swap Brooks for Klemmer, if we can offload Brooks e.g. most of his payment and sign Munster with the balance plus what we have then that is very enticing.
Do not hitch your wagon to a half who has only played 6 games the last time we did that it was Luke Brooks ... we need to buy quality, Douhie can go to centre then move Brooks on and buy a match winner in Munster to partner hastings
what happens if AD doesn't come back ? one more knee injury he could be gonski
Madden or Hastings get injury we are stuffed.
Only get rid of Brooks if it betters the team at this stage it doesn't not and in 2023 it does not, we jeed to see how Douhie comes back.
Don't swap Brooks for Klemmer, if we can offload Brooks e.g. most of his payment and sign Munster with the balance plus what we have then that is very enticing.
Do not hitch your wagon to a half who has only played 6 games the last time we did that it was Luke Brooks ... we need to buy quality, Douhie can go to centre then move Brooks on and buy a match winner in Munster to partner hastings
The only thing worse than paying for one of your players to play elsewhere is having your highest player, by a distance, playing reserve grade which is where Brooks is heading this year and rightly so.
We don't need to hitch our wagons to Madden but at his age he definitely deserves time to show if he can develop into an NRL standard number 7. Brooks has been given seven years to show this after all.
Madden will still be a fringe first grader when AD is fit until he can show that he's capable of improving.
@anygivensunday makes a good argument for offloading Brooks and paying freight for doing so. I’m still against this idea for a couple of reasons. Firstly, by paying freight we take away accountability from the player for his poor performance, spending time in reserves may motivate them to improve their form or improve on their deficiencies. Secondly, this artificially inflates player values. Mbye is a good example, he was ordinary at Canterbury, ordinary with us and now ordinary at the Dragons but still earning way more than his true worth. And lastly, whatever we freight we pay, it still appears on our cap so we can’t use it to pay for a replacement.
