#32 Travis Cloke

[mooretreloar]

Who are so called "experts" who say he is "done".

Robert Walls said he was done 2 years ago.
David King says the same.
Jason Dunstall said at the end of 2015 we should have traded him at the end of 2015.
Leigh Matthews said after the GF that he couldn't see a spot for Cloke at Footscray, unless he could play the forward/ruck role.
Nathan Buckley said in early 2016 that Cloke's form slump was oot a new thing, it had been apparent for 18 months.

Robert Walls - I thought he was in France 2 years ago.
David King - pls find the source
Dunstall trade views were right but that doesn't say he is done just what his value was at the time
Leigh's views that you've quoted doesn't mean he's done
That Bucks couldn't get the best out of him is another matter

So really you have possibly 2 names in that list, not plenty of experts

The freeing up of his salary however combined with a form slump & as Cloke Senior was quoted as saying recently playing for a coach that believes in you is another matter.

Robert Walls - article in Herald Sun 16/9/16. Says Cloke's AFL days are over in his opinion. In his view, Cloke has struggled for 3 years.
David King - multiple times on AFL 360, don't know episodes or exact times, as I didn't think at the time that watt price tully would want the exact details.
Dismiss Leigh's views if you want, but just quietly I would back him over you.
Your view that Buckley can't get the best out of him, no fact to this statement.

My view is he is done, don't care if you don't agree with me or not. He used to be a great contested mark, he isn't anymore. Used to apply great forward defensive pressure, doesn't anymore. Happy to wear his bad kicking based on him bringing the other two, but if he can't contested mark, doesn't provide defensive pressure and can't kick, he is done.

[Damien]

It's a bit like auctioning your house. If you don't have two bidders you're screwed. Trav is worth way more than the dogs are offering but they know we need to clear out SC so they will offer a pittance. We need another club to be interested. Surely there is a Victorian club that could use him. He's been a fine servant and we should try to accomodate him but in my book, if another Vic based club wants him and makes a better offer, then that's who we should deal with. Also then we'll see how much the dogs really want him.

[RudeBoy]

It's a bit like auctioning your house. If you don't have two bidders you're screwed. Trav is worth way more than the dogs are offering but they know we need to clear out SC so they will offer a pittance. We need another club to be interested. Surely there is a Victorian club that could use him. He's been a fine servant and we should try to accomodate him but in my book, if another Vic based club wants him and makes a better offer, then that's who we should deal with. Also then we'll see how much the dogs really want him.

It's pretty clear that no-one else wants him. That's why he's worthless.

[thompsoc]

79. Tell em they're dreamin'!

Whilst that is probably the beginning of the bidding process, its insulting to both the club and Travis' worth.

If it is 79 then that is ZERO points.
If it is 71 then that is 29 points.
So he is basically worthless.
May as well delist him with Travs blessing.

[Pies4shaw]

Yes. The Club got this woefully wrong, didn't it? It could have traded him for sheep stations at the end of 2015. You have to know when to hold and when to fold.

[MightyMagpie]

79. Tell em they're dreamin'!

Whilst that is probably the beginning of the bidding process, its insulting to both the club and Travis' worth.

If it is 79 then that is ZERO points.
If it is 71 then that is 29 points.
So he is basically worthless.
May as well delist him with Travs blessing.

No - if we delist we still have to pay his salary!

Yes he is worthless (in trade currency) and has had to renegotiate his contract with WBD for them to even take him. If I had to guess based on all the smoke and shadows behind the mirrors, I would say it went something like this: 2016 (4th year) $800K, 2017 (5th year) highly conditional at Pies so dropped to say $500K. Renegotiated 2 years at $300-350K at Bulldogs which arguably justifies the manager's claim of a more than 50% reduction (if you compare to 2016 and not what he would have got in 2017).

We already have pick 79 as things stand. RudeBoy must have made a error. Pick 71 was mentioned on Trade Radio. Indicative Draft Order: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-10-02/i ... raft-order

[5 from the wing on debut]

Yes. The Club got this woefully wrong, didn't it? It could have traded him for sheep stations at the end of 2015. You have to know when to hold and when to fold.

That's right Kenny. No trade then because they were The Coward of the County.

[thompsoc]

79. Tell em they're dreamin'!

Whilst that is probably the beginning of the bidding process, its insulting to both the club and Travis' worth.

If it is 79 then that is ZERO points.
If it is 71 then that is 29 points.
So he is basically worthless.
May as well delist him with Travs blessing.

No - if we delist we still have to pay his salary!

Yes his is worthless (in trade currency) and has had to renegotiate his contract with WBD for them to even take him.

We already have pick 79 as things stand. RudeBoy must have made a error. Pick 71 was mentioned on Trade Radio. Indicative Draft Order: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-10-02/i ... raft-order

According to a freo mate he reckons Mayne has the yips in front of goal.
Might not be much of a change over re salary vs output.

[MightyMagpie]

If it is 79 then that is ZERO points.
If it is 71 then that is 29 points.
So he is basically worthless.
May as well delist him with Travs blessing.

No - if we delist we still have to pay his salary!

Yes his is worthless (in trade currency) and has had to renegotiate his contract with WBD for them to even take him.

We already have pick 79 as things stand. RudeBoy must have made a error. Pick 71 was mentioned on Trade Radio. Indicative Draft Order: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-10-02/i ... raft-order

According to a freo mate he reckons Mayne has the yips in front of goal.
Might not be much of a change over re salary vs output.

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pc-f ... pher-mayne

Facts are better than mates' opinions ...

[HAL]

I can't decide. You choose.

[thompsoc]

No - if we delist we still have to pay his salary!

Yes his is worthless (in trade currency) and has had to renegotiate his contract with WBD for them to even take him.

We already have pick 79 as things stand. RudeBoy must have made a error. Pick 71 was mentioned on Trade Radio. Indicative Draft Order: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-10-02/i ... raft-order

According to a freo mate he reckons Mayne has the yips in front of goal.
Might not be much of a change over re salary vs output.

http://www.footywire.com/afl/footy/pc-f ... pher-mayne

Facts are better than mates' opinions ...

Friggin hell!
Averaging only 6 or 7 goals more than the hobbit!
And nearly as old as Trav.
OMG.

[Cruisinwithdids]

Youre mate is right Thom. He used to be a dead eye, but his set shots have gone off:
2012 39 goals 7 behinds, 2013 37 goals 12 behinds, 2014 13 goals 11 behinds, 2015 28 goals 17 behinds, 2016 18 goals 17 behinds. Played 22-24 games in each of those years. Kicked 59 goals in his last 67 games, so we can only expect a goal a game 28 year old. Very durable player however having played 136 games in 6 years. Not sure?

[magpieazza]

So why cant we keep Travis Cloke to his contract and if he walks , then he has to go into the pre season draft where Essendon could pick him up.

Surely we wouldnt have to pay out his salary if he walks out on the club.

All this talk of letting him go for pick 70 whatever ( which even worse than what i first thought we dont even get any points to put towards Daicos and Brown)and having him bend us over the barrell this year like the last contract negotiations which affected our year, (remember how it went on and on ).

Why are we so accommodating to him. You would think after getting $800K from us this year ( omg how overpaid is that!!) he would at least ask the doggies to give us something.

Where is the fair trading bloke in all this anyway?!!

BTW with all this talk of freeing up salary space, what about Tooveys salary space,and McCaffers and N.Brown and Frost and Witts and Blair and Swans and Williams??

If what we get is nothing then why dont we say "you can play with us one more year".
Do what Liverpool did to Louis Suarez and make him play out the year. They soon get the point and put in the effort as there is no use hanging around like a bad smell.
Ever since when has a player been bigger than a club? Why are we so accommodating ?

[magpieazza]

I understand all the arguments put forward about the salary space because we need to fit in Wells, Mayne and WHE. I know that WB know we want the salary space and are feeding off that, but it still stinks that less than 12 months ago we could have asked for first round pick plus more.

A players value just cant diminish so quickly can it?
It will hurt us if he has a good year and it will be with our direct competitor!!

That is why I am in the camp for make Cloke stay and dont worry about getting Mayne.

[mooretreloar]

79. Tell em they're dreamin'!

Whilst that is probably the beginning of the bidding process, its insulting to both the club and Travis' worth.

If it is 79 then that is ZERO points.
If it is 71 then that is 29 points.
So he is basically worthless.
May as well delist him with Travs blessing.

No - if we delist we still have to pay his salary!

Yes he is worthless (in trade currency) and has had to renegotiate his contract with WBD for them to even take him. If I had to guess based on all the smoke and shadows behind the mirrors, I would say it went something like this: 2016 (4th year) $800K, 2017 (5th year) highly conditional at Pies so dropped to say $500K. Renegotiated 2 years at $300-350K at Bulldogs which arguably justifies the manager's claim of a more than 50% reduction (if you compare to 2016 and not what he would have got in 2017).

We already have pick 79 as things stand. RudeBoy must have made a error. Pick 71 was mentioned on Trade Radio. Indicative Draft Order: http://www.afl.com.au/news/2016-10-02/i ... raft-order[/quote

You google AFL draft order and go into the first article, here Dogs don't have 71. But, then you look at the date and it says 5/7/16, which obviously turns out to be the order on that day based on ladder positions, so maybe RudeBoy was looking at an old order. I was too earlier today.

Your link is the most up to date link.