Recommitted Zach Merrett [UFA 2027] - Wanted a trade to Hawthorn, but it didn't get done

[Lore]

There we go, that's the clip:

 

[Jeremy McLovin]

The only problem was they couldn’t convince there captain for weeks that they weren’t going to trade him as he still wanted to be traded!

Sure is a good thing they didn't need to convince him.

 

[triple treat]

Sure is a good thing they didn't need to convince him.

Tell me about it, it’s like we have thrown 5 grenades behind enemy lines. Hahaha gonna be good viewing

 

[triple treat]

I'm sorry - were we asking for four premium first rounders?

I'm confused. Perhaps you can explain to me what the hell you're talking about?

Mate, your club asked for 4 1st rounders and a 2nd, and in your post you said that pick 10, pick 22 and our future 1st was not premium!

 

[Duckworth]

Mate, your club asked for 4 1st rounders and a 2nd, and in your post you said that pick 10, pick 22 and our future 1st was not premium!

Are all first-rounders premium

 

[noobermensch]

Mate, your club asked for 4 1st rounders and a 2nd, and in your post you said that pick 10, pick 22 and our future 1st was not premium!

I'm finished with this convo after this as you're not making any sense. We did not at any time ask for 4 premium first rounders as you just suggested earlier.

Essendon were disinclined to trade Merrett and needed an overs offer to consider it. The Hawks offer was not overs, inspite of all this garbage about "first rounders". Merrett and his manager did not engineer a situation where it was likely we would get a sufficient offer.

The Hawks were under no obligation to offer overs. I think their strategy was a bit questionable with delaying until tuesday, but at the end of the day they obviously were only prepared to make the trade under their terms which is entirely their right as a club. The party that needs to take the blame for this not going through is Petroro and Merrett.

 

[bluespooner]

Wasted year coming up from Merrett.

 

[Duckworth]

I'm finished with this convo after this as you're not making any sense. We did not at any time ask for 4 premium first rounders as you just suggested earlier.

Essendon were disinclined to trade Merrett and needed an overs offer to consider it. The Hawks offer was not overs, inspite of all this garbage about "first rounders". Merrett and his manager did not engineer a situation where it was likely we would get a sufficient offer.

The Hawks were under no obligation to offer overs. I think their strategy was a bit questionable with delaying until tuesday, but at the end of the day they obviously were only prepared to make the trade under their terms which is entirely their right as a club. The party that needs to take the blame for this not going through is Petroro and Merrett.

So, we know Hawthorn offered 10,22 and F1. Is it really that much more to offer FF1 in a heavily compromised Tassie draft, that could be a pick in the 40s? (the extra 2nd was already being walked back in the media). Seems a strange place to draw a line, while the top tier teams both brought in new players and improved. Could have had some Essendon 2nd rounders going back. That late play ultimatum cost Hawthorne Merrett IMO.

 

[Yoda_]

Ok, ok , can you give a name of a player that has gone for 4x premium 1st rounders?
I’ll wait…..

are we going with the 4 first round picks, shouldn't it read 4 picks inside 35?

 

[noobermensch]

So, we know Hawthorn offered 10,22 and F1. Is it really that much more to offer FF1 in a heavily compromised Tassie draft, that could be a pick in the 40s? (the extra 2nd was already being walked back in the media). Seems a strange place to draw a line, while the top tier teams both brought in new players and improved. Could have had some Essendon 2nd rounders going back. That late play ultimatum cost the Hawthorne Merrett IMO.

Perhaps, I look at it this way.

There were three parties in this deal. The Essendon camp, the Hawthorn camp, the Merrett camp.

The Essendon camp - their objective was to hold on to Merrett unless they got a deal that was too good to refuse. They executed their strategy successfully.

The Hawthorn camp - their objective was to trade for Merrett if they could get him for a price they considered resonable. The asking price was above what they considered reasonable so they pulled out. They executed their strategy.

The Merrett camp - their objective was to get Merrett to Hawthorn. They failed to achieve their objective.

 

[QuietB]

Perhaps, I look at it this way.

There were three parties in this deal. The Essendon camp, the Hawthorn camp, the Merrett camp.

The Essendon camp - their objective was to hold on to Merrett unless they got a deal that was too good to refuse. They executed their strategy successfully.

The Hawthorn camp - their objective was to trade for Merrett if they could get him for a price they considered resonable. The asking price was above what they considered reasonable so they pulled out. They executed their strategy.

The Merrett camp - their objective was to get Merrett to Hawthorn. They failed to achieve their objective.

Excellent assessment. This sort of common sense is not going to get us through the off season though

 

[Duckworth]

Perhaps, I look at it this way.

There were three parties in this deal. The Essendon camp, the Hawthorn camp, the Merrett camp.

The Essendon camp - their objective was to hold on to Merrett unless they got a deal that was too good to refuse. They executed their strategy successfully.

The Hawthorn camp - their objective was to trade for Merrett if they could get him for a price they considered resonable. The asking price was above what they considered reasonable so they pulled out. They executed their strategy.

The Merrett camp - their objective was to get Merrett to Hawthorn. They failed to achieve their objective.

Fair enough. I think if they had made an offer earlier, instead of the arrogant game-playing, Hawthorn could have found an acceptable deal. But, it doesn't matter now.

 

[triple treat]

I'm finished with this convo after this as you're not making any sense. We did not at any time ask for 4 premium first rounders as you just suggested earlier.

Essendon were disinclined to trade Merrett and needed an overs offer to consider it. The Hawks offer was not overs, inspite of all this garbage about "first rounders". Merrett and his manager did not engineer a situation where it was likely we would get a sufficient offer.

The Hawks were under no obligation to offer overs. I think their strategy was a bit questionable with delaying until tuesday, but at the end of the day they obviously were only prepared to make the trade under their terms which is entirely their right as a club. The party that needs to take the blame for this not going through is Petroro and Merrett.

Where did I say your club asked for 4 premium 1st rounders? You’re the one that bought the premium theme!! Go have a lie down

 

[triple treat]

are we going with the 4 first round picks, shouldn't it read 4 picks inside 35?

Depends, are the 4 first rounders inside the first 35?

 

[Duckworth]

Where did I say your club asked for 4 premium 1st rounders? You’re the one that bought the premium theme!! Go have a lie down

Ok, ok , can you give a name of a player that has gone for 4x premium 1st rounders?
I’ll wait…..

 

[Ka Norkers]

FYI, 45 minutes before the trade deadline, the Bombers football department agreed to the trade offered by the Hawks, it went up the line to the Board, and it was there the deal was vetoed. In particular, the Pres and Dean Solomon

Dean Solomon

Age

45

Ht

189cm

Wt

102kg

Pos.

M/F

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.8

4star

K

9.4

4star

HB

5.5

4star

M

3.9

4star

T

3.7

5star

No current season stats available

D

17.6

5star

K

13.4

5star

HB

4.2

4star

M

6.2

5star

T

2.8

5star

refused the offer.
So, the initial smiles all round from Roughead, manager and co. was for the assumed trade being successful, only for the change after review by Essendon Board.
This decision was political, not football related, the Essendon Board drawing their line in the sand.
This comes directly from an Essendon Board member I played golf with the other day.

I have absolutely no issue with this, the player signed a contract, and therefore his "12 years of service" has nothing to do with it. Utter BS.
In addition, the idea of "keeping a disgruntled player will harm the Club's culture" is also utter BS. I'd imagine Zach is by far the biggest contributor to the Bombers culture, and will remain so in 2026.

Personally, I thought the Hawks offer was overs, but my biggest disappointment in the Hawks offer is that they must have very little confidence Cooper Hodge is going to choose Hawks over Lions next year, as with the new rules, Hawks are going to require their first round pick top get him in.

Like many, if not the majority, of Hawks supporters, I am comfortable the deal didn't go thru, too much risk IMO, even though Zach is a great player.

I'm truly excited to see what Hustwaite and Butler can bring to the table next year.

 

[jannissary]

source is above, but you know what, I really don't care if you think it's BS or not.
I won't say any more on the matter, and you can rant and name-call all you want.

i think you should post the source, i'd like to read it, please. thank you!

 

[Milanista28]

source is above, but you know what, I really don't care if you think it's BS or not.
I won't say any more on the matter, and you can rant and name-call all you want.

I have a source that contradicts your source, and my source could bash your source.

 

[cobra land]

source is above, but you know what, I really don't care if you think it's BS or not.
I won't say any more on the matter, and you can rant and name-call all you want.

Cool story bro, just name names so we can all go home.

 

[Duckworth]

source is above, but you know what, I really don't care if you think it's BS or not.
I won't say any more on the matter, and you can rant and name-call all you want.

So your source is Roughead smiling?? OMG. And you extrapolated a fact from that the Essendon board vetoed a trade that Rosa accepted.

Maybe Petoro stuffed up and thought he could get it through with that last offer... more likely.

It's hard to refrain from inferring a lack of intelligence from Hawthorn supporters when so many of you come on here with BS that you make up on your board, then circle jerk each other into believing it's a fact. I will leave it here too, with a simple, you made it up.

 

[triple treat]

Go back and have a good read mate, that was in response to what the other guy said!

 

[Vindicater]

So his source is someone from the Essendon board that he played golf with.

Who is just leaking stuff on the golf course casually but somehow none of the gutter journos who thrive on this stuff has gotten wind of it?

Yep.

Seems legit.

 

[triple treat]

Oh yes that's right, your senior coach who thinks the sun shines out of arse couldn't even make the effort to be in the country during trade period when your club is trying to close one of the biggest deals in trade history?, smug, arrogant pr##k...

I believe he was in the states with a very professional organisation trying to become a better coach ( if that is possible), not staying in OZ trying to convince his captain to stay at his club

 

[Duckworth]

Go back and have a good read mate, that was in response to what the other guy said!

That is some 'premium' BS right there.

 

[Yoda_]

If you think he left the country to display his contempt for Essendon, then you really overestimate how much most people care about Essendon.

amateurish if you ask the crowd. Do the right thing, be there when it comes to head and then go on your junket

 

[fishardansin]

FYI, 45 minutes before the trade deadline, the Bombers football department agreed to the trade offered by the Hawks, it went up the line to the Board, and it was there the deal was vetoed. In particular, the Pres and Dean Solomon refused the offer.
So, the initial smiles all round from Roughead, manager and co. was for the assumed trade being successful, only for the change after review by Essendon Board.
This decision was political, not football related, the Essendon Board drawing their line in the sand.
This comes directly from an Essendon Board member I played golf with the other day.

I have absolutely no issue with this, the player signed a contract, and therefore his "12 years of service" has nothing to do with it. Utter BS.
In addition, the idea of "keeping a disgruntled player will harm the Club's culture" is also utter BS. I'd imagine Zach is by far the biggest contributor to the Bombers culture, and will remain so in 2026.

Personally, I thought the Hawks offer was overs, but my biggest disappointment in the Hawks offer is that they must have very little confidence Cooper Hodge is going to choose Hawks over Lions next year, as with the new rules, Hawks are going to require their first round pick top get him in.

Like many, if not the majority, of Hawks supporters, I am comfortable the deal didn't go thru, too much risk IMO, even though Zach is a great player.

I'm truly excited to see what Hustwaite and Butler can bring to the table next year.

This is up there with "antifa did January 6". 100% not true. Essendon said their player was not up for trade. Just like you can say your house is not up for sale. However, if someone feels like they want to live in exactly your house right now, can they make you an offer that makes you sell the house and move? The price would want to turn your head to help you make the transition without the year-long planning of developing your house, or transport to and from work, etc. Hawthorn didn't meet that mark. Hawthorn made it almost impossible to reach that mark by leaving the trade to Tuesday.

If the deal had had a 22-year-old who would have been a starting mid, this year's first and 2027 first, it would have gotten done. Hawthorn wanted a bona fide star player who would have pushed their team up a notch or two. Essendon needed a decent, known quality AND two speculative picks with a decent probability of making Merrett's level in the future. MacKenzie is a downgrade on Merrett, but would improve a midfield sans Merrett. Pick 10 in this draft should get a good player, but this isn't a well-regarded draft. Your 2027 pick will likely be well into the 20s, but technically, being a first-round pick would help with Bewick and academy players that year.

Big miss by Hawks because you desperately wanted to move the dial this year.