Can or could we afford to keep Ball

bendigo bob · Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:01pm

Dont know if its been discussed yet or not but can we now afford to keep Ball if a trade cant be done? Now that Lovett has become a Saint for somewhere between $300 - $400000 a year could we afford to keep Ball and remain under the salary cap?

Armoooo · Post: # 843611Post **Armoooo** » Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:02pm

Well if we cant deal with Collingwood we will give him the choice, play for us for minimum wage or off to Melbourne with you...

Mr Magic · Post: # 843612Post **Mr Magic** » Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:03pm

Probably not.

Hurricane · Post: # 843613Post **Hurricane** » Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:03pm

Honestly I hope he decides to enter the pre season draft. I have lost all respect for Luke Ball and I dont want to see him in a St Kilda jumper next season

BANG BANG

Bardon Saint · Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:05pm

Well they offered him a contract knowing that they were targeting Lovett at the time. I suppose they do have money left under the cap. Also, given that the saints are asking for a player in exchange for ball suggests that they have a spare $300K??/year. If they did not have any money under the cap they would exchange ball for draft picks.

bendigo bob · Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:09pm

Balls contract offer was on the table months before the trade period so they did not know they would be able to get Lovett. I would think the contract they have given Lovett is what they would have offered Ball.

bigcarl · Post: # 843625Post **bigcarl** » Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:13pm

i've a theory that he'd be a better player not having to live up to his reportedly massive pay check.

a lesser salary would take immense pressure off him.

SainterK · Post: # 843628Post **SainterK** » Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:15pm

I have a theory that his body has fallen behind his aspirations

Bardon Saint · Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:15pm

bendigo bob wrote:Balls contract offer was on the table months before the trade period so they did not know they would be able to get Lovett. I would think the contract they have given Lovett is what they would have offered Ball.

Then assuming that the saints will trade Ball for a player of similar value, one would assume that the traded player will have a similar salary. Otherwise the saints would ask for draft picks, knowing that they'd only have to pay the minimum salary for a draft pick.

S.A Saint · Post: # 843632Post **S.A Saint** » Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:17pm

Hurricane wrote:Honestly I hope he decides to enter the pre season draft. I have lost all respect for Luke Ball and I dont want to see him in a St Kilda jumper next season

BANG BANG

+1

Milton66 · Post: # 843634Post **Milton66** » Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:17pm

No. Why keep him if he won't get a game?

I'd be withdrawing his initial contract to be honest.

Luke has painted himself into a corner. IMO.

Mr Magic · Post: # 843640Post **Mr Magic** » Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:19pm

Milton66 wrote:No. Why keep him if he won't get a game?

I'd be withdrawing his initial contract to be honest.

Luke has painted himself into a corner. IMO.

No Luke and his manager have painted Luke Ball into a corner.
Totally dependant on Collingwood being able to do something they haven't been able to do for years.

I wonder how Connors' other client at the Saints, Goose, is vewing all this?

Sainterman · Post: # 843645Post **Sainterman** » Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:22pm

Mr Magic wrote:
Milton66 wrote:No. Why keep him if he won't get a game?

I'd be withdrawing his initial contract to be honest.

Luke has painted himself into a corner. IMO.
No Luke and his manager have painted Luke Ball into a corner.
Totally dependant on Collingwood being able to do something they haven't been able to do for years.

I wonder how Connors' other client at the Saints, Goose, is vewing all this?

Might want to think about getting a new manager...rather than a muppet!

Milton66 · Post: # 843647Post **Milton66** » Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:22pm

Mr Magic wrote:
Milton66 wrote:No. Why keep him if he won't get a game?

I'd be withdrawing his initial contract to be honest.

Luke has painted himself into a corner. IMO.
No Luke and his manager have painted Luke Ball into a corner.
Totally dependant on Collingwood being able to do something they haven't been able to do for years.

I wonder how Connors' other client at the Saints, Goose, is vewing all this?

True, but here's the reality. With someone like Tuck available as a back up, why pay extra to keep an unhappy Luke Ball?

If Luke was trying to bluff the club for a better deal, and I doubt he was... because it seems to be about game time... then the club has called his bluff.

Very immature behaviour on his part.

Lovett has no guarantees and will need to prove himself, and knows he may not get 100% game time. Yet he has sacrificed $$ for a crack at a flag.

Ironic, don't you think?

PJ · Post: # 843648Post PJ » Wed 07 Oct 2009 4:23pm

Yes Goose is an interesting one, he could end up one of those last second drafts that just scrapes through - i.e. someone saying what the hell let's give it a punt.