Restricted Free Agent Tom De Koning

[Jeremias]

This thread might be going for a while. Please respect board rules and each other.

As a starting point, let's leave any references to 'culture' at the door.

Thread bans and infractions will be handed out as necessary.

Thanks.

 

[Taylor]

Realistically the only year we'd have to worry about matching is 2026 and possibly 2027 after we finish re-signing players this season. We don't have enough players signed up past either year to have any issues in terms of matching the coin.

Hence why the Saints would intend on front loading the crap out of it to have a huge amount of that money come in the first two years when the Blues would be stretched.

Restricted free agent contract offers are required to be a two year minimum which could be a problem for Carlton in two ways.

You're right that it makes it hardest to match, the longer the offer the easier it is to hide the salary in the back years where nobody is really contracted and none of that cap is committed - but the AFL now includes the years of the deal in the points system that determines compensation.

So a two year deal, even at huge money, might not be enough to push his total points into the top 5% to trigger band one without those extra points for long term deals. You can see how the points not being issued can turn the same pay in a player over 30 giving no compensation to a player at 25 resulting in a second round pick. It can move a lot.

It could get very interesting. I don't think St Kilda want to take the risk that he then leaves after two years.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

He might on paper. It’ll depend how much Carlton can pay him outside the cap.

Jeanne shouldn't have any issues making up the difference

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

Restricted free agent contract offers are required to be a two year minimum which could be a problem for Carlton in two ways.

You're right that it makes it hardest to match, the longer the offer the easier it is to hide the salary in the back years where nobody is really contracted and none of that cap is committed - but the AFL now includes the years of the deal in the points system that determines compensation.

So a two year deal, even at huge money, might not be enough to push his total points into the top 5% to trigger band one without those extra points for long term deals. You can see how the points not being issued can turn the same pay in a player over 30 giving no compensation to a player at 25 resulting in a second round pick. It can move a lot.

It could get very interesting. I don't think St Kilda want to take the risk that he then leaves after two years.

Once again though, this scenario would require TDK to essentially allow the Saints to f*** over the Blues. Something that seems incredibly unlikely given he's on many occasions expressed his love for the club and his mates and a desire to stay if the offer is close enough to the mark.

If TDK knew Carlton were going to get a 2nd rounder for him leaving I highly doubt he'd have any part in it.

 

[stavro#4]

Once again though, this scenario would require TDK to essentially allow the Saints to f*** over the Blues. Something that seems incredibly unlikely given he's on many occasions expressed his love for the club and his mates and a desire to stay if the offer is close enough to the mark.

If TDK knew Carlton were going to get a 2nd rounder for him leaving I highly doubt he'd have any part in it.

You are getting a band 1 compo. No one is getting ****ed over.

It’s the buddy Franklin scenario. It is what it is.

TDK in this instance isn’t going to turn around and be like hey. Stkilda - you’re going to need to pay up more for me.

Ultimately he is only coming because of the money. So as long as he gets paid that’s all that’s going to matter. By you or by us.

Your belief that the player is going to get involved in a process because he “loves” Carlton - is some serious supporter copium.

 

[sexyhunk]

Don't look at it from that perspective, money spent is gone and planned around.

I offer this suggestion, look at it from money already committed to but not spent.

These are the players contracted at Carlton (as far as I know) in each of these years.

2027 (Salary cap $18,440,415):
Cripps, Acres, Pittonet, Cottrell, Smith, Curnow, McKay, Weitering

2028 (Salary cap ~$19m):
Curnow, McKay, Weitering

2029 (Salary cap ~$19.5m):
Curnow, McKay, Weitering

2030 (Salary cap ~$20m):
McKay, Weitering

2031 (Salary cap ~$20.5m):
Weitering

You'll see how much space there is to fit players in that way.

didnt adam cerra signed a long term one start of the year.

 

[stavro#4]

It almost doesn't matter though at 1.7m per year. That's 10% of the salary cap. I'm astonished Saints are able to offer it.

Ross Lyon made it clear last night that we are spending 95% of our cap this year and that includes an element of FORWARD paying deals to reach that.

So next year we could pay 105% of the cap and take a fair bit of that TDK salary upfront. Something like $2-2.5m.

 

[Blue By Blood]

Blues match

Saints walk

TDK either goes to the Saints as a free agent and Carlton receive a 1st Round DP or he stays at the Blues for an amount that breaks their Salary Cap or breaks their average list apart.

Carlton supporters ..... your club or the AFL can't force St Kilda to trade

Adelaide were going to match for Brad Crouch to force a trade because they didn't like the FA compensation but ...... they didn't because we said we would walk and they really weren't in a position to match amount to keep him if we walked

There is some really dumb reasoning/discussion being put forth here some Blues fans.

I agree that a trade cannot be forced. Any supporter saying this has no clue. If we match, in theory yes you could walk away.

However, in the extremely unlikely situation that we match that offer (we won’t and can’t).. it would get interesting because after chasing him so hard and finally getting a big name trade/free agent target to agree to come to your club after chasing so many and failing to get their signature.. I don’t think you just walk away. That would be an appalling look and make other players potentially interested in St. Kilda have second thoughts.

Despite what many people think, the optics around these situations do impact future players requesting trades, how player managers deal with that club etc. So the two clubs generally wax the system to get the best outcome for both clubs. He’s emerging as one of the best rucks in the competition and the one compensation pick wouldn’t be enough which only makes this situation all the more intriguing. This adds more fuel for the other 16 clubs supporters to sit back hoping either Carlton get screwed or the Saints blow a huge chunk of their cap on a ruckman.

 

[CatToTheFuture]

Ross Lyon made it clear last night that we are spending 95% of our cap this year and that includes an element of FORWARD paying deals to reach that.

So next year we could pay 105% of the cap and take a fair bit of that TDK salary upfront. Something like $2-2.5m.

Yeah that tracks. They probably could put a 2 year $4m in front of him that could not be matched with extension clauses or similar

 

[stavro#4]

Yeah that tracks. They probably could put a 2 year $4m in front of him that could not be matched with extension clauses or similar

Bassat our president was interviewed during the day yesterday and also touched on the salary cap point and the health of our cap allowing us to “Bring in a few free agents” and retain our current playing list. Ie NWM.

They have been planning for this since 2022 when they sacked Ratten.

 

[THE_GUN]

Carlton should just up their offer to $1.5 and TDK will just sign it

 

[stavro#4]

I agree that a trade cannot be forced. Any supporter saying this has no clue. If we match, in theory yes you could walk away.

However, in the extremely unlikely situation that we match that offer (we won’t and can’t).. it would get interesting because after chasing him so hard and finally getting a big name trade/free agent target to agree to come to your club after chasing so many and failing to get their signature.. I don’t think you just walk away. That would be an appalling look and make other players potentially interested in St. Kilda have second thoughts.

Despite what many people think, the optics around these situations do impact future players requesting trades, how player managers deal with that club etc. So the two clubs generally wax the system to get the best outcome for both clubs. He’s emerging as one of the best rucks in the competition and the one compensation pick wouldn’t be enough which only makes this situation all the more intriguing. This adds more fuel for the other 16 clubs supporters to sit back hoping either Carlton get screwed or the Saints blow a huge chunk of their cap on a ruckman.

When Carlton supporters make this hypothetical about matching. It’s never in the context that the player wants to actually stay.

So if you match. Why wouldn’t he just stay?

He isn’t choosing to leave because he wants to be a saint. Any stkilda supporter will admit this freely. He is choosing to leave because of the money but if both paid the same amount he would remain a blue.

That’s why the entire matching talk to force a trade for better compensation is a fallacy.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

You are getting a band 1 compo. No one is getting ****ed over.

It’s the buddy Franklin scenario. It is what it is.

TDK in this instance isn’t going to turn around and be like hey. Stkilda - you’re going to need to pay up more for me.

Ultimately he is only coming because of the money. So as long as he gets paid that’s all that’s going to matter. By you or by us.

Your belief that the player is going to get involved in a process because he “loves” Carlton - is some serious supporter copium.

Liam Baker last year was reportedly asked by WCE if he'd be willing to go via the PSD and told them he won't be departing Richmond unless a deal they're also happy with is struck.

Only sour grapes force their way out the door without trying to make sure all parties are reasonably happy with what they're getting.

That's sort of how it works when you're stuck dealing with the same group of people over and over every year. AFL is a very tight-nit community.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

Carlton should just up their offer to $1.5 and TDK will just sign it

And have no money to do anything else to improve the list?

 

[stavro#4]

Liam Baker last year was reportedly asked by WCE if he'd be willing to go via the PSD and told them he won't be departing Richmond unless a deal they're also happy with is struck.

Only sour grapes force their way out the door without trying to make sure all parties are happy with what they're getting. That's sort of how it works when you're stuck dealing with the same group of people over and over every year.

Liam baker wasn’t getting Richmond band 1 compensation.

Had he, they would have received pick 2. Do you think there would have needed to be a trade?

The scenarios also differ in-terms of the reason for the trade.

TDK is seeking a move interstate. If he leaves it’s because of money. If you match he will remain with the blues because that’s where he wants to be.

 

[Blue By Blood]

When Carlton supporters make this hypothetical about matching. It’s never in the context that the player wants to actually stay.

So if you match. Why wouldn’t he just stay?

He isn’t choosing to leave because he wants to be a saint. Any stkilda supporter will admit this freely. He is choosing to leave because of the money but if both paid the same amount he would remain a blue.

That’s why the entire matching talk to force a trade for better compensation is a fallacy.

Because if a player accepts the FA offer, there’s usually a 99% chance their heart is set on the move and they wouldn’t want to return with their tail between their legs. Not to mention if they agree to move but then stay at the original club, it can cause friction amongst the playing group. If TDK doesn’t re-sign with us prior and he accepts your offer, even if we match he’d want to get to you. This is all most likely moot as we won’t match..

In reality this all plays out well before free agency period as both clubs will be in constant dialogue about this. We’d be saying we’ll match and you’ll know we’re either a) bluffing or b) that if you really want him you’d have to prepare some picks. What won’t happen is you walking away from a big target that verbally commits to you after failing to get a big name in the past IMO and also we’d fight tooth and nail to get more than just a compensation pick for a player who’s emerging as a seriously good player. He’s in the bracket of Cripps, Weitering, Curnow etc. in terms of the level of fight we’d do to keep him. Even if it means expending other players I think the club would bend over backwards to keep him personally. But either way, I’m intrigued how it all plays out. Personally I’ve always felt he will re-sign. His body language and interaction with the group has always been invested. In an interview recently he also mentioned something along the lines of ‘a lot of players have recommitted to the club to build something special’ or something along those lines.. I’m just a nuffy supporter reading into words but that sounded like language of someone who will stay. Time will tell anyways.

 

[stavro#4]

And have no money to do anything else to improve the list?

Jfc.

That isn’t the problem of TDK the man wants to play for Carlton and get paid.

If you match. You can do both and he will stay. Not his fault that the saints are willing to put such a significant deal infront of him.

Stkilda pov is that they are willing to pay so much to get him as a free agent. He isn’t worth 1.7m against the current backdrop. We are paying the premium to ensure we don’t use assets to attain him.

Carlton’s issue is the above. Retain and blow the cap and lose players to fit him in and have no room to bring others.

Lose him and take a compo pick that might be under his worth. But so be it. That’s the game.

There isn’t a win win here where you get assets because that’s not what we want to do as evidenced by president and coach saying we want to target FREE AGENTS.

That is why the club hasn’t panicked about not landing a big fish. Eventually we will because salary caps are so tight that clubs just can’t get near these offers and they will need to accept letting the players leave.

 

[stavro#4]

Because if a player accepts the FA offer, there’s usually a 99% chance their heart is set on the move and they wouldn’t want to return with their tail between their legs. Not to mention if they agree to move but then stay at the original club, it can cause friction amongst the playing group. If TDK doesn’t re-sign with us prior and he accepts your offer, even if we match he’d want to get to you. This is all most likely moot as we won’t match..

In reality this all plays out well before free agency period as both clubs will be in constant dialogue about this. We’d be saying we’ll match and you’ll know we’re either a) bluffing or b) that if you really want him you’d have to prepare some picks. What won’t happen is you walking away from a big target that verbally commits to you after failing to get a big name in the past IMO. But either way, I’m intrigued how it all plays out. Personally I’ve always felt he will re-sign. His body language and interaction with the group has always been invested. In an interview recently he also mentioned something along the lines of ‘a lot of players have recommitted to the club to build something special’ or something along those lines.. I’m just a nuffy supporter reading into words but that sounded like language of someone who will stay. Tine will tell anyways.

How can he cause friction if Carlton decide they want to match?

He isn’t setting these prices. The market is being set and the choice is Carlton’s.

This is the argument no Carlton fan is understanding. It’s all these make believe emotional scenarios.

If Carlton wants to retain him. They agree a lower deal before free agency - that still probably cripples your cap.

Or they let him go for band 1 compo. There isn’t going to be a matching and trading as the player has already made clear he wants to stay at Carlton.

 

[Blue By Blood]

How we he cause friction is Carlton decide they want to match?

He isn’t setting these prices. The market is being set and the choice is Carlton’s.

This is the argument no Carlton fan is understand. It’s all these make believe emotional scenarios.

If Carlton wants to retain him. They agree a lower deal before free agency - that still probably cripples your cap.

Or they let him go for band 1 compo. There isn’t going to be a matching and trading as the player has already made clear he wants to stay at Carlton.

You don’t think some of the other Carlton players would be annoyed at him for accepting the Saints offer? Especially when they’ve accepted less to stay themselves. Emotions are a part of human existence. Footballers aren’t immune to that. Things like this do impact a playing group. If TDK accepts your offer and in some dreamworld where we match, he wouldn’t come back to us. He will either accept the offer we put forward or knowing our club we will fight tooth and nail to not accept a single compensation pick. Like I said, the club would see him in the Cripps, Weitering, Curnow mould of player that we would fight and fight and fight for.

Also, you say if he agrees to a lower deal with us that it would cripple our cap.. surely a higher deal would cripple yours. Maybe not initially but a 7 year deal at that money is going to cause issues at some point. These kind of big contracts nearly always do. Your supporters know this. It’s largely why quite a few of you are saying ‘it’s madness to pay that much for a ruck’.

And ultimately if he leaves he leaves.. that’s life. The situation would then be how do we best replace him and utilise the money. Would prefer we keep him but him leaving could allow a rejig of our roster.

 

[jh38]

• AFL Mediation:
  The AFL has a process where it can mediate trade disputes between clubs, acting as a neutral party to help facilitate a resolution.
  
  
• When Mediation is Used:
  If clubs are unable to reach an agreement on a trade, the AFL can step in to mediate, potentially leading to a trade being brokered through their intervention.
  
  
• Example:
  In the past, the AFL has used mediation to try and resolve disputes over the trade value of players, such as in the case of Robert Warnock.
  
  
• Player Consent:
  Even if a club wants to trade a player, the player's consent is required if they have a contract with the club for at least one more year.
  
  
• "Nuclear Option":
  The Herald Sun's Jon Ralph revealed that a player could use the AFL's collective bargaining agreement to force a trade through mediation.

So they'll force us to trade, which is the point that was originally made.

 

[WalshistheGOAT]

Liam baker wasn’t getting Richmond band 1 compensation.

Had he, they would have received pick 2. Do you think there would have needed to be a trade?

The scenarios also differ in-terms of the reason for the trade.

TDK is seeking a move interstate. If he leaves it’s because of money. If you match he will remain with the blues because that’s where he wants to be.

Congratulations on missing the point once again. Baker wanted his club adequately compensated even when he left, as most good people would that don't have a gripe with the club they're leaving.

Clubs work together on these deals along with players and player managers to make sure all parties are satisfied as best as possible. If the Saints knew Carlton weren't going to be happy with the compensation obviously they're going to have communications as to how to best go forward and try and get something done.

Same stuff happened with Battle and Ben McKay in years past. The only difference is TDK is potentially too good a player for Band 1 compo to considered 'adequate' (depending how he and Carlton go the rest of this year).

 

[stavro#4]

You don’t think some of the other Carlton players would be annoyed at him for accepting the Saints offer? Especially when they’ve accepted less to stay themselves. Emotions are a part of human existence. Footballers aren’t immune to that. Things like this do impact a playing group. If TDK accepts your offer and in some dreamworld where we match, he wouldn’t come back to us. He will either accept the offer we put forward or knowing our club we will fight tooth and nail to not accept a single compensation pick. Like I said, the club would see him in the Cripps, Weitering, Curnow mould of player that we would fight and fight and fight for.

Also, you say if he agrees to a lower deal with us that it would cripple our cap.. surely a higher deal would cripple yours. Maybe not initially but a 7 year deal at that money is going to cause issues at some point. These kind of big contracts nearly always do. Your supporters know this. It’s largely why quite a few of you are saying ‘it’s madness to pay that much for a ruck’.

As I’ve explained above referencing coach and president interviews from yesterday 1/4/25. Both have said this has been planned for and we are positioned to retain every player on our list and bring in free agents.

I’d say if the offers were comparable that may be the case. It’s hardly comparable. How could you be upset at someone for leaving when they are potentially having millions extra put infront of them.

Further to that, you’re not a true contender. Even if you recover from here you look a rung behind what we have seen from Hawthorn GWS Brisbane - even Adelaide. So it’s not like that’s a fair argument right now.

And to your last point if the club saw him in the mould of Cripps then you are trying to retain him - which is ultimately what the player wants.

 

[stavro#4]

Congratulations on missing the point once again. Baker wanted his club adequately compensated even when he left, as most good people would that don't have a gripe with the club they're leaving.

Clubs work together on these deals along with players and player managers to make sure all parties are satisfied as best as possible. If the Saints knew Carlton weren't going to be happy with the compensation obviously they're going to have communications as to how to best go forward and try and get something done.

Same stuff happened with Battle and Ben McKay in years past. The only difference is TDK is potentially too good a player for Band 1 compo to considered 'adequate' (depending how he and Carlton go the rest of this year).

There was no negotiations between hawthorn and stkilda with Battle.

He was an unrestricted free agent.


And again, you are getting band 1. You are getting compensated.

This is just the buddy Franklin scenario.

 

[HavUEvaSeenTheRain]

I don’t see why TDK would feel any obligation to get Carlton fairer compo then what looks like a top 10 pick. It’s unders but not by a stupid amount. I see less than a 1% chance of Carlton matching a bid if he is going.

 

[sexyhunk]

There was no negotiations between hawthorn and stkilda with Battle.

He was an unrestricted free agent.


And again, you are getting band 1. You are getting compensated.

This is just the buddy Franklin scenario.

except hawthorn won the flag and they got pick 18, carlton eyeing a top3 pick so much better band 1 compensation

 

[Blue By Blood]

As I’ve explained above referencing coach and president interviews from yesterday 1/4/25. Both have said this has been planned for and we are positioned to retain every player on our list and bring in free agents.

I’d say if the offers were comparable that may be the case. It’s hardly comparable. How could you be upset at someone for leaving when they are potentially having millions extra put infront of them.

Further to that, you’re not a true contender. Even if you recover from here you look a rung behind what we have seen from Hawthorn GWS Brisbane - even Adelaide. So it’s not like that’s a fair argument right now.

And to your last point if the club saw him in the mould of Cripps then you are trying to retain him - which is ultimately what the player wants.

As I said, regardless of his reasons for choosing to accept the FA offer, human nature dictates that those who have made sacrifices themselves to stay would feel annoyed if we matched and he stayed after requesting to leave. That’s just human nature unless you’re a robot without feelings and emotions.

Yes we look at least a rung below the contenders. I never used this in my points put forth. Not even once. And it’s a moot point because you are also not a true contender. Teams like GC, North etc have ridiculous levels of young talent and are more realistic premiership threats over the next 5 years.

You can plan for keeping every player on your list but situations can arise, just like we find ourselves in with TDK. List management isn’t full proof and blind faith in a list management team is foolish.

And lastly, yes we see him in the mould of Cripps and Curnow so the goal is to keep him. He’s one of about 5 untouchables on our list that we wouldn’t let go pretty much under any circumstance. Which is why I know the club will fight super hard to not accept an outcome of one compensation pick unless it’s looking like a top 5 pick. I’ve lost a lot of faith in our club over the years but on this point I know we very rarely lose the players we want to keep and we fight beyond hard for the star ones. So I can’t see an outcome where we accept a single pick. Saints will know we won’t accept that outcome so behind the scenes the clubs will be negotiating and in regular contact. Your continued pursuit of him suggests you won’t walk away. You’re all in on that basket and need to sell the win to your supporters even if that means trading for him IMO. You can either believe that or not as in your prerogative but after so many failed raiding attempts, if TDK says he wants your club you’ll not walk away. Anyways, that’s the last I’m going to say on this. Let’s just wait and se how it plays out.