The Value Of a Big Willie

[MightySharks]

What I am saying is not everyone is the same and some players are more susceptible to injuries, such as Johns, Barrett, Gasnier, Ryles and Rogers and to spend huge money on them for 8-10 games a year is sometimes not worth the risk. Rogers leaving has turned out not too bad as he very rarely plays

 

[PJ]

Some players are injury prone and then have a great run without injuries, I think both Daley and Clyde did this as dis Isemonger.

The you get players who barely or don't miss a game who ahve a horrible run like Paul Green.

 

[black_dot]

FIrman ? If we needed a 5/8 would you want him ?

not me for the injury reason.

Isururus said "Signing anyone is some sort of risk. Whether you pay $50k or $400k, it is still a risk. "

of course it is, any player is an injury risk like sparrow says and as you say, but there is $350K difference in that risk you speak of mate. worth taking into account in ANY negotiations and it MUST play a part, NOT if we sign the player, but how MUCH we sign him for, that's my point.

 

[Frenzy.]

What I am saying is not everyone is the same and some players are more susceptible to injuries, such as Johns, Barrett, Gasnier, Ryles and Rogers and to spend huge money on them for 8-10 games a year is sometimes not worth the risk. Rogers leaving has turned out not too bad as he very rarely plays

Well it's a bit like not going out because you may get hit by a bus.

You don't know you'll get hit till you do but you still have to go out.

 

[Frenzy.]

FIrman ? If we needed a 5/8 would you want him ?

not me for the injury reason.

Isururus said "Signing anyone is some sort of risk. Whether you pay $50k or $400k, it is still a risk. "

of course it is, any player is an injury risk like sparrow says and as you say, but there is $350K difference in that risk you speak of mate. worth taking into account in ANY negotiations and it MUST play a part, NOT if we sign the player, but how MUCH we sign him for, that's my point.

Firman? Nuh, let the Bulldogs have him.

 

[MightySharks]

So you are saying all players are of equal make up body structure wise and all players carry the same risk of getting injured. Therefore a player being "injury prone" is a fallacy?

 

[Frenzy.]

So you are saying all players are of equal make up body structure wise and all players carry the same risk of getting injured. Therefore a player being "injury prone" is a fallacy?

No. You are. I didn't say or infer anything like that.

Don't tell me what I am saying. Thankyou.

 

[MightySharks]

For the record

The Sharks and every other team is full of "injury prone" players. That's the nature of the game.

Injury prone is an argument that bugs me no end when talking about recruitment. Every player that steps out onto an NRL playing field is prone to injury.

What are you saying?
Do you believe some players are more injury prone than others?

 

[Isurus]

FIrman ? If we needed a 5/8 would you want him ?

not me for the injury reason.

Isururus said "Signing anyone is some sort of risk. Whether you pay $50k or $400k, it is still a risk. "

of course it is, any player is an injury risk like sparrow says and as you say, but there is $350K difference in that risk you speak of mate. worth taking into account in ANY negotiations and it MUST play a part, NOT if we sign the player, but how MUCH we sign him for, that's my point.

Agreed - the $400k player is a much greater risk than the $50k player. However it is the same as any investment - the greater the risk, the greater the potential return. Its a matter of balancing the risk against the possible return, and at the end of the day, it comes down to a matter of opinion.

One may think the potential reward outweigh the risks, another thinks the risk is to great to for the possible rewards.

 

[black_dot]

well said mate, I personally think the potential reward from investing in 2 or 3 players for the same money that mason is asking is a far better risk than the potential reward for throwing it all at one player. but I also understand the other side of the arguement for sure.

I was keen for kimmorley at any price remember, but I looked at him and the risk involved with the knowledge that he'd been a VERY stoic player throughout his career. He has had more games off through injury at sharks than his entire career at storm and eagles, but I have to say, we've still got our value for money with him.

 

[Frenzy.]

What are you saying?
Do you believe some players are more injury prone than others?

I am saying that a high impact, high velocity sport makes all players injury prone the minute they step on the paddock.

I am saying that you should not rule out recruiting players based solely or even primarily on possible injury because to do so would also mean, by virtue of logic, getting rid of all the injured players already in a club as they carry the same risk.

There would be no game.

 

[Frenzy.]

Agreed - the $400k player is a much greater risk than the $50k player. However it is the same as any investment - the greater the risk, the greater the potential return. Its a matter of balancing the risk against the possible return, and at the end of the day, it comes down to a matter of opinion.

One may think the potential reward outweigh the risks, another thinks the risk is to great to for the possible rewards.

What risk though? The financial risk or the risk of being without the player and dimishing your chances of winning?

Luck has to come into it too. What if your $400k player stays healthy and 4 x $100k players get long term injuries. Same dollar value in the end except you have 4 now to replace and pay.

Could, and is likely to, happen. It seems to be a cyclic thing that happens to all teams. Knights appear to be on their bad run now.

Look at Barrett. What was St George like without him early in the year. Terrible. When he came back they started winning. Although he is injured now, what he did to turn them around was probably worth what they pay him, at the moment.

 

[Frenzy.]

Back to the topic

I see only 1 vote for $500k a year.

hmm

 

[carcharias]

Back to the topic

I see only 1 vote for $500k a year.

hmm

wasn't me.

I said four hunge....it was a nice fence sitter.

 

[Isurus]

You are right Captain in saying that Luck has to come into it.

In terms of injuries, you would have to think that if we buy 4 @ $100k, it is unlikely that all 4 will get long term injuries. Buying 4 instead of 1, is diversifying - the risk is spread!! However that is over simplifying the matter.

The combined value of the 4 @$100k players may not be anywhere near that of your $400k player.

We need a dominant forward at the club - Mason is the best on the market. I say get him for $400k (may not be enough though). It is a financial risk if he gets or injured or doesn't produce what he has in the past, but its a risk I would be willing to take.

I can however see the point those who don't want him are making.

 

[Frenzy.]

You are right Captain in saying that Luck has to come into it.

In terms of injuries, you would have to think that if we buy 4 @ $100k, it is unlikely that all 4 will get long term injuries. Buying 4 instead of 1, is diversifying - the risk is spread!! However that is over simplifying the matter.

The combined value of the 4 @$100k players may not be anywhere near that of your $400k player.

We need a dominant forward at the club - Mason is the best on the market. I say get him for $400k (may not be enough though). It is a financial risk if he gets or injured or doesn't produce what he has in the past, but its a risk I would be willing to take.

I can however see the point those who don't want him are making.

Yes it is over simplifying a little because I wasn't necessarily talking about new recruits. Some existing lower tier players could fall into the same boat.

The combined value PLUS the replacement cost would get you pretty close to the value of the $400k player though.

I also would think there is little difference in insurance premiums from player to player so with a $400k player we pay one premium and one for his replacement if need be as against potentially 8 premiums or whatever number we use for discussion.

In the end it comes down to opinion. In this case the opinions that are going to matter are those of the board and S Rogers.

I think he's worth $400k myself for what he might bring. I think 1 Mason = 4 Isemongers for example.

 

[Nuffs]

In the end it comes down to opinion. In this case the opinions that are going to matter are those of the board and S Rogers.

don't you mean the only opinion is Rapers?

i thought he was another player Raper said he didn't want

 

[MightySharks]

I am saying that a high impact, high velocity sport makes all players injury prone the minute they step on the paddock.

I am saying that you should not rule out recruiting players based solely or even primarily on possible injury because to do so would also mean, by virtue of logic, getting rid of all the injured players already in a club as they carry the same risk.

There would be no game.

Are you a politician answer the question

 

[Frenzy.]

don't you mean the only opinion is Rapers?

i thought he was another player Raper said he didn't want

No quite the opposite.

 

[Frenzy.]

Are you a politician answer the question

Sorry if you can't comprehend it, but that IS the answer and it IS what I said in the first place.

Now go stalk someone else Swimfan.