Lomax is reputably on 800k, I am not sure when his contract expires. No one's going to get him for a bargain
When his 800 at Saints expires you might!.............he has been a Saints junior and prodigy the whole time, I think its a bit sad when you come through that type of upbringing (lets face it he is overpaid and was never worth 800) but when you are a non destination club as Bup points out, what you pay is irrelevant if you have NRL grants and have to pay that money to retain him.i.e. your not spending your money in the sense that your being prudent, just spending what someone (NRL) gives you and you have to spend it!
This concept really exposes the fault of player values, if you are good enough you go to a destination club and take the lower dollars, it finds them out if you are not as good as you think. BUT you do get to play with better players and your showcase improves. A guy like Lomax has received his big pay early and is now struggling at the the back end and he has to re earn it.
The question is he really as good as he or someone else thinks he is.
The interesting thing is we now see a number of players that that have left their premier clubs and getting paid a fortune.
The Penrith exit is rewarding players like the ones that have gone to the dogs, Luai going to Wests next year, even Pappalini and Mahoney leaving us. Korisau going to Tiges..... its pay day and picking up Lomax means you have to be pretty sure he is as good as some think.....personally I watched him last year closesly and didn't like what I saw, but then I cannot judge how much of that was unhappiness with his position at Saints.
I do not believe that many on here understand values, when trading players. We made a choice with Moses, Brown and Gutherson and it has worked.....some can argue that Matterson, Lane, Sivo and Paulo have not....subjective in it its self. RCG sits/stands out there an outstanding choice when he was not happy with his foundation club. Maybe Lomax may fit that image?
I think our team this year is much more cognisant of the realities after the good fortune of them making a GF and thinking that they only have to turn up the next year. Home truths like the one this blog alludes to are coming home.
A lot of criticism is landed on the recruitment and retention committee. This year we know what we are short of but the R&R mob have been selective in not taking any profile players, because the judgements being made here to say that there is limited value. If we don't have the right level of juniors coming through then we will have no choice.
The intermediate answer is that the extra money they now have can be allocated for retention of players we want to keep and this allows latitude for retention of the juniors we are developing as keepers.
Makes you think doesn't it.... there is more to R&R then a lot understand and it is not just a subjective decision on which player WE like.
Replies
I can see Lomax situation being like Moses, where he came to Parra to improve as a player and money is not a factor. I really don't think Lomax is leaving for a big pay day, i think there are a whole bunch of reasons for him wanting to leave. This year he has been good, he is only 24 also, more room to grow as a player as he hits his peak years.
Only issue is what happens with Talagi if Lomax is brought in? Could Lomax be that last piece BA needs to get us over the line? He has wanted a class Centre for years now; started with Staggs, then Farnworth, looked at Xerri too. BA has wanted another Centre for a long time and he feels it is needed then lets go for it. But of course, thankfully, Parra are also a club that only go for what they feel the player is valued. If they do not want Lomax for $800k, they wont do it.
I think the club is doing the right thing not paying 600 k to 800k for a good first grade player that can boost our chances of winning comp when they can sign 3 or 4 players for the same money that may boost our chances of winning a reserve grade comp.
Pops, good blog.
Absolutely. R&R & managing the cap would be a nightmare. Gould says it keeps him up at night. Every signing is a risk with are so many balls in the air. Player managers, business associates and partners, spouses, family influences, kids, schools, player personal coaches, lifestyle desires, personality fit, etc A mind boggling obstacle course on every player punt.
Also, it's getting harder. On top of the usual external poachers (RU and SL), the expansion of the NRL with the Dolphins and potentially more coming up is spreading talent more thinly. Thus, it will cause upward pressure on player salaries and meeting additional demands players have besides money in a more competitive and less abundant landscape. FOMO and desperation rises.
In the Arthur era, we've been quite good at Moneyball though: finding valued priced diamonds in the rough. Ipap, Manu Mua, Cartwright, Lane (better and more consistent than he was). Don't forget Panthers were paying freight for the RCG, so we got the punt with him at some value. Player Development, doesn't always work out, but that's one of our best recent attributes or attractiveness (your last blog). We can't offer a much creative top-ups on NRL contracts, or opportunities that heavyweight wizardry or as much premiership-hopes that our top-heavy competitors can.
Lomax is a far more expensive punt but he should work out for us (Waqa didn't) in the centres - due to his talent and broad skill set - assuming the money side can be sorted out and that BA and our R&R really want him badly enough. If not, he'll probably go somewhere else for a fresh start. Hard to predict what will happen here or what's really happening behind the scenes.
Gus thinks Lomax is origin standard and he's ended up so expensive because Saints wanted to make him a fullback. I don't see him as a fullback, either - not the heir apparent to Gutho. But he could play there if we don't find Mr X-factor speedster-fullback. He would be better than any current alternatives. So, there is some additional backline utility value with him for us.
Other than the risk of over-paying for a centre who is being paid about fullback money, Lomax is quick enough but not a out-and-out speedster (Waqa was quicker but Lomax has a higher skill set). We do need more speed (not just relying on Moses and Dylan). Also, I don't know enough about Lomax to make a call on his attitude.
If we get Lomax, it will probably make us a better team - a more complete team - unless something out of our control intercedes. We can't compare Lomax with centres like Harper, Simonson or even Talagi IMO. But it won't fix all our issues out wide.
Yeah Lomax wont fix all our issues, but he does improve others. Those slight improvements could be enough to go over the line. If Lomax can fix some issues than he is worth bringing in as you bring players in to improve your team.
BA tried to get a lot out of Waqa Blake, he had world class speed but was more rocks and diamonds than Lomax. Lomax at least is a decent defender. I agree too that Lomax cannot be compared to Harper, Simonsson or even Talagi. I think Talagi has the best future of the three, but his future more likely wont be at Centre.
One name. Bryce Cartwright! Look at the difference between when we got him until now. Lomax will be no different in my opinion.
Well Lomax will be a lot more expensive, Carty would have been on minimum for most of the time and probably only 350/400 now. Carty is not that marketable unless he sell himself attached to the coach LOL
Hardly the point that I was making!
If you pay 600k for Lomax and get the same improvement as we did from Carty than you have a million dollar player on 600. Pretty easy to get your point if you're willing , EE.
Id rather that approach than paying 400k too much for players in anticipation they reach that level of input half a season before their contracts expire and then do it all over again .
Yeh! take your point with Wiz's explanation EE.
if they sign lomax why would talagi stay
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next