I like to think he’s getting ready for a potential September run already.
Training 2021 Pre-Season
- Thread starter George
- Start date
- Tagged users None
I like to think he’s getting ready for a potential September run already.
What a bust he has turned out to be.
I was hoping that he could run before Sept
Kind of hard to believe that someone with such a broken body could pass a medical.
gringo2011
Premium Platinum
You'd rather he plays his 4 games in the finals than now.
CrossRiverSaint
Rookie
- Aug 13, 2019
- 31
- 113
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
From a bigger perspective I totally disagree Hanners has been a bust. Aside from the fact he came into a club that was lacking leaders I feel he was the recruit that started the whole “destination club” thing. I’m not convinced without him signing we would have been able to follow up signing Howard, Jones, Hill or Ryder. They’ve all mentioned really being excited by the direction the club is heading. Reckon that all started with the recruitment of Hanners. He clearly said the same things influenced his decision. Players notice.
Viewed in isolation from his on field output it’s very hard to mount an argument against the “bust” perspective. Many ways to crack an egg, and many puzzle pieces go into winning the flag. Hanners an integral part of that puzzle for mine.
Sent from my iPad using BigFooty.com
Still have high hopes for Hanners, but am viewing it as bonus country. Would really like to see Bytel get a run at it. Having Hanners there can only benefit the group. And he'll come in at some point probably when we really need him. I'm being patient.
- Jun 17, 2018
- 3,351
- 13,428
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Does Hanners have one more year after this, or two?
StCicatriz
Brownlow Medallist
- Aug 3, 2016
- 28,330
- 61,739
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
You'd love to hear the story on Stephen Hill then... only player to fail two medicals and get a 2 year contract extension...
It's a shame , he has a outstanding time trail preseason and now the same problem again.
Uno
If you have read my posts on Hanners lately you would understand I agree with the first part of your post.
My post you quoted is purely in terms of getting him on the park. Absolute failure.
gringo2011
Premium Platinum
He'd been struggling since 2016 and we went in with eyes open but took a risk. I still looks like it might have been Lethers only real misstep and probably a bit of old boy nepotism but as others have said, he was the first big player to want to come in years and probably had some fringe benefits in setting standards at training and professionalism.
If Hanners has shown guys like Hunter Clark, Coffield, King etc tips and tricks to get more out of themselves, he’ll be worth every cent. If he’s helped empower Steele and any other potential leaders to speak up when needed, he’s worth every cent.
we had a major lack of on field leadership and presumably off field leadership and that is where he shines. It takes a ton of guts to not be playing games of footy but still not be afraid to speak up when the team isn’t doing so well. I’d hoped he would be a bit like a playing coach, he was involved with a very successful team and it’s not something that happens by accident.
I’m glad we’ve got him, but as much as I love him - I’m glad he won’t hit the trigger to extend his contract.
SufferingS8INT
Club Legend
- Dec 17, 2017
- 1,259
- 3,262
- AFL Club
- St Kilda
Yes exposure increases composure
We traded a pick swap for Hannebury , that gave us a 2nd round pick 2018, while giving up our 2nd rounder 2019, and our pick 38.
We used the 2018 second rounder (28 ) to get pick 36--( pick 41 -Bytel ) and a later pick for Parker .
Essentially we got Hanner's and got the Bytel pick instead of the Josh Worrell 2019 pick. That's a bit of Lethlean genius right there.
Unless his salary has stopped us landing a free agent, ( Caldwell? ), we lost nothing by having him at the club.
Treloar
I think the argument is if Hannebury hadn't come, the ball wouldn't have started rolling and all the salary cap space in the world wouldn't have mattered, we still would have struggled to land a free agent or high profile trade target.
Personally I think moving back to Moorabbin had a bit to do with it as well.
Personally I think moving back to Moorabbin had a bit to do with it as well.
Strahany
Premiership Player
I am a big proponent of not overpaying players to force things to happen. For example, the mindset of "if superstar player [x] wants to come, then you pay whatever it takes to get it done" is absurd, as there is *always* an upper limit of value on players; even the Cripps, Fyfes, Martins of the world. The prime example, here, being those who wanted to offer figures as much as 1.5M to get Fyfe when he was a FA; every dollar that goes to one player is a dollar that can't be given to another, and you need to make sure you have a good enough side before you run out.
With that preface being said, I am comfortable with the Hanners signing. Yes, he is getting paid significantly more than what we would have liked, with respect to his on-field impact. But this was primarily during lowly years when we didn't really have any use for that cap space, anyway. We weren't challenging, and I doubt there was any major capacity to front-load contracts as we had already been doing that for the better part of 5 years at that time.
The only thing Hanners' inflated contract has really "cost" us is the opportunity to go after someone like Treloar last season. Even then, I wouldn't want to be saddled up with his contract when we are potentially trying to get the likes of McAsey, Bing, Taranto, etc.
Even if Hanners has had only a slight influence on training standards and in bringing players across, it was worth it, in my opinion. Cap space from 2-3 years ago cannot help you in a current season, outside the benefits provided from front-loading which, as I said, was effectively not available to use at the time. So, if spending that cap space on Hanners initiated the domino effect of our recent acquisitions, then that is very astute recruiting.
With that preface being said, I am comfortable with the Hanners signing. Yes, he is getting paid significantly more than what we would have liked, with respect to his on-field impact. But this was primarily during lowly years when we didn't really have any use for that cap space, anyway. We weren't challenging, and I doubt there was any major capacity to front-load contracts as we had already been doing that for the better part of 5 years at that time.
The only thing Hanners' inflated contract has really "cost" us is the opportunity to go after someone like Treloar last season. Even then, I wouldn't want to be saddled up with his contract when we are potentially trying to get the likes of McAsey, Bing, Taranto, etc.
Even if Hanners has had only a slight influence on training standards and in bringing players across, it was worth it, in my opinion. Cap space from 2-3 years ago cannot help you in a current season, outside the benefits provided from front-loading which, as I said, was effectively not available to use at the time. So, if spending that cap space on Hanners initiated the domino effect of our recent acquisitions, then that is very astute recruiting.
Yeah I think this is a solid way of looking at it, and is a reasonable middle ground. I don't think it's one that should be looked at through the extremes it tends to around here. There are legitimate arguments on both sides. He's clearly had some contributions to the club, including a really important final against the dogs as well as several off field contributions, that whilst hard to quantify, have likely had some impact.
Conversely, he's got some staunch defenders who seem to get their backs up as soon as anyone questions him. He seems to get attributed with all good that has come for the club ever since his signing, which seems to be a stretch to me. 13/41 games is clearly a shocking output and frustration from supporters is reasonable, particularly considering the size of his contract.
Probably only those within the club can accurately assess his worth. I don't fully buy the whole concept that we got the five recruits at the end of 2019 because Hannebery had come the year prior, but I reckon he's still probably had a good impact in some areas off field.
Last edited:
The thing that Hannebury points out to me is how ludicrous it is to that clubs have both a minimum salary floor and a maximum list size. You CAN'T have a situation like that without forcing rebuilding sides to overpay SOMEONE.
Fans are kidding themselves if they honestly think a busted up Dan Hannebery made the club more appealing to other potential recruits.
His addition has been a huge fail. Anybody who thinks the club does that trade again if given the chance are delusional.
It’s ok to admit we got it wrong, it happens in footy.
His addition has been a huge fail. Anybody who thinks the club does that trade again if given the chance are delusional.
It’s ok to admit we got it wrong, it happens in footy.
CaptainRisky
Premium Gold
I think the coach and as Punter said back at Moorabbin had a bit to do with it more than a busted Hanners , like you said we took a gamble and it looks like we got it wrong , s**t happens
CaptainRisky
Premium Gold
True dat
