Training 2021 Pre-Season

[gringo2011]

At the time I was incredibly upset that he chose the Bombers but in hindsight I’m extremely happy Shiel did. Have not rated him at all the last two years.

He started to look okay last year. His best footy at the Giants was really dynamic with speed and contested ball winning. I would have liked him but under Ratts he would have struggled, he's got pretty poor disposal. Essendon are a strange side, they had lots of good individuals but Worsfold didn't get much out of them. They look a good list on paper most years but just can't get the job done. They are like one of those rich guys that shop at Armani but still look like a gawky nerd somehow.

 

[stavro#4]

Rommmmmaaaaaaaas

 

[Tyrian Lonestar]

Rommmmmaaaaaaaas

Say wot?

 

[SaintsSeptember]

The Robbo contract was a shocker too, as was Armo’s. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Under the system , you HAVE to pay someone. Armo deserved it.

 

[stavro#4]

Say wot?

Big fella is on the track

 

[SaintsSeptember]

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.

And what we did was ideal for the situation. Overpay, the likes of Armitage and Geary (who had a limited shelf life ) and bring in an older player to pay handsomely, knowing that when his contract was over , he'd probably be off the books.
Not sure it works so well for what the Hawks have done, bringing in injury prone younger players.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

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.

Blah blah fail fail.

I'm able to be convinced we got it wrong. But only if you can explain what we gave up for him.
I'd consider it a fail if the club stopped trying things.

 

[stavro#4]

And what we did was ideal for the situation. Overpay, the likes of Armitage and Geary (who had a limited shelf life ) and bring in an older player to pay handsomely, knowing that when his contract was over , he'd probably be off the books.
Not sure it works so well for what the Hawks have done, bringing in injury prone younger players.

I’ve purposely tried to avoid the Hanners discussion and I’m not quoting you to discuss your point but to purely continue the hanners discussion.

There are two sides to this and I’ll touch on both. So physically we probably haven’t gotten enough games out of him as to what we would have liked and this is evident as he won’t trigger the 5th year of his contract - which was a get out clause for us. However when he has played, it is hard to argue he hasn’t contributed and again this was evident in the doggies final last year. Personal opinion was that he was huge in lifting the group during the heat of that final and his cleanness under pressure was a big difference maker early doors. So if you grade this aspect. It’s a C because we just haven’t gotten enough games out of him.

However....

What he has provided off the field in terms of establishing standards in training and developing the leadership of his peers including a certain co captain. He has also been huge in the recruitment of another swan who will be a saint long after Hanners leaves. You have heard the example of another poster and what he did on the track. But he has also been a fantastic conduit between coaches and players during meetings including smashing certain players where the effort was poor and ensuring the group recognised when someone meet the standards we wanted to set. You can always see the value of someone within a group when a coach rushes back a player off limited game time.

He also filled a void that we had when we cut hard at the end of 17’ and probably lacked leadership. So if I grade the off field value. It’s an A.

When I personally look over all of this, I see a group that was at the bottom of the ladder when he got here and they are coming off a season where we won a final. So it has to have been a success when you see the turnaround he has been apart of. So overall in my opinions it’s been a B score and i would do that trade over and over again for this outcome.

 

[phantom13]

Yeah but why the (soft) hate at Hanners?
If we can accept that Robbo has effectively been an assistant coach paid from the SC, then why isn't Hanners afforded that respect when it's very obviously true?

It's just double standards from a few people.

The money (SC) side of it is utterly irrelevant, and we've actually got more games from Hanners than Robbo in the same timeframe. So what gives?

I think alot of the off field rumours that have dogged Hanners his whole career havent helped.

Has he done EVERYTHING he can to get back on the park?

 

[Tyrian Lonestar]

Big fella is on the track

Great news. Just don't bring him back too early and risk breaking him for longer

 

[puppy_dog7]

I think alot of the off field rumours that have dogged Hanners his whole career havent helped.

Has he done EVERYTHING he can to get back on the park?

I’d say winning the time trial is enough to say he worked his ass off to be in the best shape possible this year. Unfortunately for him his soft tissue injuries seem to come back to bite him.

 

[CaptainRisky]

Has anyone been to training this week , more to the point has anyone seen max since that golf ball hit him in the head ....Cough

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Has anyone been to training this week , more to the point has anyone seen max since that golf ball hit him in the head ....Cough

Shhhh its a secret, he's missing and its going to be a while, we are trying to get hold of Ben while convincing Gold coast he has caught a rare disease that makes him shrink and look like this....

 

[LiterallyNobody]

Shhhh its a secret, he's missing and its going to be a while, we are trying to get hold of Ben while convincing Gold coast he has caught a rare disease that makes him shrink and look like this....View attachment 1079679

I'm starting to understand where all the hype on the D-Train comes from now. Look at that stunning specimen of a footballer.

 

[Dr Spaceman]

Has anyone been to training this week , more to the point has anyone seen max since that golf ball hit him in the head ....Cough

Saw some footage of him at training on The Front Bar last night.


PS: if that’s a covid cough you best isolate and get rid of it before we get on the beers in Round 2

 

[LiterallyNobody]

Saw some footage of him at training on The Front Bar last night.


PS: if that’s a covid cough you best isolate and get rid of it before we get on the beers in Round 2

Well they don't call him CaptainRisky for nothing.

 

[Imtellingya]

Well they don't call him CaptainRisky for nothing.

Was doing some forward skills work with Roughy today. Stayed away from any contact stuff.

 

[LiterallyNobody]

Was doing some forward skills work with Roughy today. Stayed away from any contact stuff.

I hope Roughy also stayed away from any contact stuff. Surely he's learnt his lesson...

 

[jwikked]

Coffield and Clarke have resigned for 2 more years. Great news.

 

[XhazzafootyX]

Coffield and Clarke have resigned for 2 more years. Great news.

What a good Thursday!
Them 2 re-signing and Roma back on the track. Wooo

 

[Remboy]

Coffield and Clarke have resigned for 2 more years. Great news.

Hopefully they’ll both play great games on Sunday. I’ve seen a lot of guys sign contracts and play brilliantly the next week. Hopefully it will happen this weekend.

 

[phantom13]

I’d say winning the time trial is enough to say he worked his ass off to be in the best shape possible this year. Unfortunately for him his soft tissue injuries seem to come back to bite him.

Winning a time trial doesn’t necessarily mean he followed his rehab plan and has improved what’s causing his soft tissues.

In any event I wasn’t talking about my opinion, I was saying why some people are particularly unkind about his issues.

I imagine that for some his off field rumors make him much less sympathetic and would feed into the narrative that he isn’t professional.

Personally I couldn’t care less what he does in his spare time and think it’s horribke that his body is letting him down.

 

[gringo2011]

I’ve purposely tried to avoid the Hanners discussion and I’m not quoting you to discuss your point but to purely continue the hanners discussion.

There are two sides to this and I’ll touch on both. So physically we probably haven’t gotten enough games out of him as to what we would have liked and this is evident as he won’t trigger the 5th year of his contract - which was a get out clause for us. However when he has played, it is hard to argue he hasn’t contributed and again this was evident in the doggies final last year. Personal opinion was that he was huge in lifting the group during the heat of that final and his cleanness under pressure was a big difference maker early doors. So if you grade this aspect. It’s a C because we just haven’t gotten enough games out of him.

However....

What he has provided off the field in terms of establishing standards in training and developing the leadership of his peers including a certain co captain. He has also been huge in the recruitment of another swan who will be a saint long after Hanners leaves. You have heard the example of another poster and what he did on the track. But he has also been a fantastic conduit between coaches and players during meetings including smashing certain players where the effort was poor and ensuring the group recognised when someone meet the standards we wanted to set. You can always see the value of someone within a group when a coach rushes back a player off limited game time.

He also filled a void that we had when we cut hard at the end of 17’ and probably lacked leadership. So if I grade the off field value. It’s an A.

When I personally look over all of this, I see a group that was at the bottom of the ladder when he got here and they are coming off a season where we won a final. So it has to have been a success when you see the turnaround he has been apart of. So overall in my opinions it’s been a B score and i would do that trade over and over again for this outcome.

Good post but I don't think we were at the bottom of the ladder when he came though. At the moment Jones is looking as banged up as Hanners too. It was a gamble that didn't work out. Burgoyne looked a worse bet than Hanners and he's still playing about 20 years after he was meant to be too injured to play.

 

[t_94]

I’ve purposely tried to avoid the Hanners discussion and I’m not quoting you to discuss your point but to purely continue the hanners discussion.

There are two sides to this and I’ll touch on both. So physically we probably haven’t gotten enough games out of him as to what we would have liked and this is evident as he won’t trigger the 5th year of his contract - which was a get out clause for us. However when he has played, it is hard to argue he hasn’t contributed and again this was evident in the doggies final last year. Personal opinion was that he was huge in lifting the group during the heat of that final and his cleanness under pressure was a big difference maker early doors. So if you grade this aspect. It’s a C because we just haven’t gotten enough games out of him.

However....

What he has provided off the field in terms of establishing standards in training and developing the leadership of his peers including a certain co captain. He has also been huge in the recruitment of another swan who will be a saint long after Hanners leaves. You have heard the example of another poster and what he did on the track. But he has also been a fantastic conduit between coaches and players during meetings including smashing certain players where the effort was poor and ensuring the group recognised when someone meet the standards we wanted to set. You can always see the value of someone within a group when a coach rushes back a player off limited game time.

He also filled a void that we had when we cut hard at the end of 17’ and probably lacked leadership. So if I grade the off field value. It’s an A.

When I personally look over all of this, I see a group that was at the bottom of the ladder when he got here and they are coming off a season where we won a final. So it has to have been a success when you see the turnaround he has been apart of. So overall in my opinions it’s been a B score and i would do that trade over and over again for this outcome.

Good summary but you’ve weighted the off field leadership stuff too heavily imo. Performance on match day is still the most important part by far. Been a fail in that aspect which is a shame because he’s looked pretty good when he has been able to get on the park.

 

[Armoooo]

For the people who think that Hannebery hasn't been worth it, I would encourage you to revisit what we have actually paid for him.

When assessing a trade that involves draft picks, I think it's more important that we consider what players were available for selection between the traded pick, and the teams next pick as this is what was essentially lost, not what the other team drafted as for all we know, the two teams could have had entirely different rankings of the players taken during that window.

We traded Pick 39 and our 2019 2nd Round Pick for Hannebery and Pick 28

We then traded Pick 28 for Pick 36 and Pick 46

Pick 39 is a bit confusing because it was traded to us from West Coast and then was absorbed into Sydney using it to bid on Blakey from their academy. So if we had have kept it, it would have essentially been taken after what was the last pick of round 2 (43 - Jack Ross) and the first pick of round 3 (44 - Justin McInerny). Given we drafted Parker 3 picks later, the only players we could have possibly missed out on are McInerny, Curtis Taylor or Ben Cavarra.

Pick 36 moved out to Pick 41, which we used on Jack Bytel. Pick 46 moved to Pick 47, which we used on Matthew Parker.

Our 2019 2nd Round Pick ultimately stretched out to Pick 36, which Sydney used on Elijah Taylor (Yikes), our next pick was Ryan Byrnes at pick 52. So essentially we lost access to a group of players including Elijah Taylor, Keidean Coleman, Chad Warner and a bunch of other guys who haven't done anything of not.

So from a draft capital perspective, we secured the following:

Daniel Hannebery, Jack Bytel and Matthew Parker

We gave up the possibility to secure two of the following:

(McInerny / Curtis Taylor / Cavarra**) and (Elijah Taylor / Keidan Coleman / Chad Warner)

**There is a chance that Bytel could have also been in this group, however we would have allowed Melbourne, Sydney, North Melbourne and the Western Bulldogs a chance to snag him.

From a salary perspective, we take a far bigger hit. It was reported that the salary was around $800k P/A. There were rumours that Sydney would pay some of it, however I don't believe that ever came to fruition. This is where we need to combine what was reported with some healthy speculation. Hannebery was due to have his contract expire in 2021, however we gave him five years (with the fifth having a games trigger which will apparently not be met.).

I would not be surprised, if the total value of the contract was around $3.5M, looking something like this:

2019: $1M
2020: $800k
2021: $600k
2022: $500k
2023: $500k (with trigger)

This would have given him his contracted $800k P/A over the following 3 years, plus give him a further year of financial security, with a trigger for another year as a 33 year old if his body held up.

So the question needs to be asked whether this salary, particularly over 2019-2021 could have been used to entice better talent to the club? I would suggest it would be very unlikely. It would have seemed even more so in 2018, when the idea of luring guys like Crouch and Hill would have been unthinkable. Could we have used it to front load our kids? sure, but would we have just been paying kids more than they deserved, would have have helped us long term? Given that guys like Clark / Coffield / King / Paton / Marshall were all on their first contracts, I don't think this would have been a realistic option. It could have only gone to guys like Acres / Billings / Gresh etc. and none of these blokes were exactly being underpaid.

The other big question I would pose, is would we have won the Bulldogs final last year if we replaced Hannebery with our first emergency? If not, how much value was that win worth, should we fail to win a final this year, we could be going into the period we all think we will really start to hit our straps with a monkey on our back, for mine that win was incredibly valuable and justified the recruitment of both Hannebery and Ryder.

In Summary, I think the following table shows how worthwhile the Hannebery acquisition was:

What we got...	What we could have had...
Daniel Hannebery	$2.4M in Cap Space from 2019-2021
Jack Bytel	(McInerny / Curtis Taylor / Cavarra)
Matthew Parker	(Elijah Taylor / Warner / Coleman)
2020 Finals Win	Monkey on the Back
Potential Domino Effect leading to the recruitment of Hill -> Howard and Ryder	No Howard / No Ryder / No Hill