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

[Lore]

There we go, that's the clip:

 

[Duckworth]

Are you sure about that. He was invited, probably through his manager to speak with Sam Mitchell, no doubt they told him that they liked him as a player and thought he could make a difference (needle mover if you like).

Hawthorn finished fourth this year, but even if Merrett lands at Hawthorn performs at a high level, their midfield is still going to be a few echelons below that of Brisbane. So, unless they get a lot of internal improvement I can't see hawthorn bridging that gap.

How was this post able to escape the Hawthorne Board groupthink?

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Keep going with the personal insults, champ.

Comments were a general observation that picks alone may not suffice in trades, given the compromised drafts.

Your argument makes even less sense. It's a simple equation: You want quality, you have to pay for quality. Clubs may no longer accept a bunch of secondary picks as opposed to genuine top 10 picks.

In your feeble attempt to get the upper hand, you are conflating the reality of the marketplace with your biased opinion of what is smart and what is dumb. And you accuse me of emotional nonsense.

I look forward to your next round of condescending personal remarks.


Jog on thanks.

"Picks will not suffice" is moronic.

If we got picks 1,2 and 3 that would have sufficed. Your argument is that the picks we offered were not enough but you think the argument is "we needed a player as well". Essendon fans and representatives don't even know what they're arguing.

The fans have fallen for the dumb argument that Hawthorn should be doing Essendon's recruiting for them. Wrong. What if we got Mitch Lewis all ready as part of the deal and Essendon only offered him 3 years at a sub-par salary? What a waste of everyone's time that would be. We can't offer contracts on Essendon's behalf. We can't make players want to go there when the captain wants to leave. What if we offered McKenzie and Essendon said "ya know what, we've got enough young midfielders, nope" then we've pissed off two players for absolutely no gain. Club culture is a delicate thing and we're not just going to treat players like cattle.

As a hawks fan the whole scene is odd. The Mtichell and Clarko regimes generally help players get to where they want to go.

But yeh, Essendon couldn't even make players want to go there. They can't even make their own captain want to go there hahaha.

So to say that players should have been part of the deal is just such a failure of critical thinking.

I mean, look, Essendon could have demanded it but it would have been a stupid demand. They had the upper hand so could ask for anything in the world. But saying Hawthorn should have provided players seems to be Essendon's way of obscuring the fact they had no targets and no interest from any players across the league except Fiorini.

But yeh it's a moot point. Apparently Essendon never wanted to trade. But also wanted players as part of the trade. End of the day Hawthorn didn't get their man.

 

[bomberlegend2007]

Hypothetically, does anyone think that the AFL should adopt the NBA system and allow clubs to trade players to other clubs regardless of whether the player is happy to be traded or not?

I personally believe that more player movement would occur if picks were a points based system. And rather trading pick 22, or pick 10, you a trading an allotment of points over a three year period.

 

[Jeremy McLovin]

So like I said - you can say that hawks didn't offer enough, that's fine - but smart clubs would prefer picks because they can convert those to the players they actually want, or use them to adapt their draft strategy. Getting players as part of these trades is just opportunism - it is dumb to make it your trade strategy.

Melbourne is a good example. Even though they were losing their midfield (Petracca and Oliver) they didn't faff aroudn with GC and GWS grandstanding to make them include players. They did painless pick trades (including sending some second rounders back to GC) and then went and got Heath, CJ, Steele and Mihocek in SEPARATE trades targeting players that acutally suited them.

Melbourne had a very smart trade period and turned the negative of two key players leaving into a genuine reset of their squad. Well done Melbourne. Carving their own path. Very active and doing all that they can to improve in 2026. Reckon they'll do ok

Smart clubs can convert picks to players. Clubs that want their offer of picks to be valuable actually give them the time to do so by lodging an offer early.

Also, I note that Melbourne haven't on traded the picks that they got from gold coast for players, they kept them for the draft. Because gold coast offered two top ten picks to a club that had none. You guys offered one top ten pick to a club that already had two, with both being better than the one you offered. Surely you understand that it's a totally different value proposition?

 

[jannissary]

Smart clubs can convert picks to players. Clubs that want their offer of picks to be valuable actually give them the time to do so by lodging an offer early.

Also, I note that Melbourne haven't on traded the picks that they got from gold coast for players, they kept them for the draft. Because gold coast offered two top ten picks to a club that had none. You guys offered one top ten pick to a club that already had two, with both being better than the one you offered. Surely you understand that it's a totally different value proposition?

you're forgetting they also traded that pick 9 into pick 10, devaluing the pick by 1 whole pick, making it an "even less enticing" deal

 

[Saints43]

hahaha.

End of the day Hawthorn didn't get their man.

You got there in the end.

 

[jannissary]

Apparently Essendon never wanted to trade.

what gave you that idea?

 

[big footy cyril]

what gave you that idea?

The grossly unrealistic demand for 4 firsts, including a top 10, a second and a player you’d been asking about for months is a fair indication. Effectively 6 players for one who has at most four strong seasons left

 

[Jeremy McLovin]

The grossly unrealistic demand for 4 firsts, including a top 10, a second and a player you’d been asking about for months is a fair indication. Effectively 6 players for one who has at most four strong seasons left

Really it should have been the weeks of essendon saying they wouldn't trade him that clued you in.

 

[Duckworth]

You got there in the end.

He didn't even read (or understand) your post and went on his own flog rant.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Hypothetically, does anyone think that the AFL should adopt the NBA system and allow clubs to trade players to other clubs regardless of whether the player is happy to be traded or not?

Absolutely not.

Clubs and players need to honour contracts better. The AFL can encourage this by having better or different penalties for a party that chooses to break a contract.

Merrett wanted to break his contract - there could have been penalties imposed on hawthorn (e.g. we have to have the Essendon contract AND the hawthorn ones on our salary cap) or there could be a penalty to the player himself (i.e. cannot earn a higher amount during the existing contract term) or something like that.

Much better to make contracts more of a commitment rather than less of one.

 

[jannissary]

The grossly unrealistic demand for 4 firsts, including a top 10, a second and a player you’d been asking about for months is a fair indication. Effectively 6 players for one who has at most four strong seasons left

not the president, ceo, coach etc saying that he wasn’t going to be traded? interesting

 

[Saints43]

The grossly unrealistic demand for 4 firsts, including a top 10, a second and a player you’d been asking about for months is a fair indication. Effectively 6 players for one who has at most four strong seasons left

And the fact the club, incoming president no less, said he wouldn't be traded?

 

[iameviljez]

The grossly unrealistic demand for 4 firsts, including a top 10, a second and a player you’d been asking about for months is a fair indication. Effectively 6 players for one who has at most four strong seasons left

That’s kind of Essendon’s point.

 

[big footy cyril]

That’s kind of Essendon’s point.

Yet their buffoon supporters claim that was ZM’s real value

 

[Lore]

That’s kind of Essendon’s point.

Does what it says on the lid in this case

 

[big footy cyril]

not the president, ceo, coach etc saying that he wasn’t going to be traded? interesting

You’re right, that too. Was just hard to believe they’d all willingly sacrifice a leg up at a rebuild rather than shackle an unwilling aging superstar for the price of their egos. I guess I learned my lesson…

 

[iameviljez]

Yet their buffoon supporters claim that was ZM’s real value

Only the really moronic ones (which every club has on this board). I think most Essendon fans - even throughout this thread - are realistic that he's not exactly the equivalent of Sam Darcy hitting the market, but just that they didn't want to bend to Hawthorn's attempts to prise him out.

 

[Lore]

Yet their buffoon supporters claim that was ZM’s real value

There is fair value, market value, and real value.

Fair value: whatever the neutrals reckon it is.

Market value: sellers market. He’s worth what we’re willing to agree to.

Real value: talent, determination, training standards, elite kick, multiple time BnF winner for us, likely Normie for you.

 

[joey_jo_jo]

You’re right, that too. Was just hard to believe they’d all willingly sacrifice a leg up at a rebuild rather than shackle an unwilling aging superstar for the price of their egos. I guess I learned my lesson…

An aging superstar that the hawks offered a 5 year contract to

 

[Dave]

Just tell me you love me already

Already taken, ironically by a hawthorn supporter.

 

[Yoda_]

None of that is relevant to what I said.

My point is - smart clubs use picks as currency and they use them well. They have clear player targets and they go for them.

It's got nothing to do with what individual players do to get to their destination. Not sure why you're harping on about it there.

Again I'll repeat, you can argue that Hawthorn should have provided more picks, or higher value picks - but I'll also repeat that any demands for getting a best 22 player as part of the deal is a thing that only dumb clubs or people demand. It's a pure powerplay and bravado instead of what's best for the club.

A best 22 (25) player was needed, we have enough young players on our list, we need quality but you weren't willing to offer up anything of note.

The picks offered were junk, no disrespect to Henry Hustwaite but if he was as good as some suggest, the poor midfield your own coach has said needed improvement couldn't be broken into.

We dont need picks, we already have enough, we dont need depth players (sorry Henry), we need best 22 players.


if unable to comprehend this then best we leave our differences here

 

[VDS66]

"Picks will not suffice" is moronic.

If we got picks 1,2 and 3 that would have sufficed. Your argument is that the picks we offered were not enough but you think the argument is "we needed a player as well". Essendon fans and representatives don't even know what they're arguing.

The fans have fallen for the dumb argument that Hawthorn should be doing Essendon's recruiting for them. Wrong. What if we got Mitch Lewis all ready as part of the deal and Essendon only offered him 3 years at a sub-par salary? What a waste of everyone's time that would be. We can't offer contracts on Essendon's behalf. We can't make players want to go there when the captain wants to leave. What if we offered McKenzie and Essendon said "ya know what, we've got enough young midfielders, nope" then we've pissed off two players for absolutely no gain. Club culture is a delicate thing and we're not just going to treat players like cattle.

As a hawks fan the whole scene is odd. The Mtichell and Clarko regimes generally help players get to where they want to go.

But yeh, Essendon couldn't even make players want to go there. They can't even make their own captain want to go there hahaha.

So to say that players should have been part of the deal is just such a failure of critical thinking.

I mean, look, Essendon could have demanded it but it would have been a stupid demand. They had the upper hand so could ask for anything in the world. But saying Hawthorn should have provided players seems to be Essendon's way of obscuring the fact they had no targets and no interest from any players across the league except Fiorini.

But yeh it's a moot point. Apparently Essendon never wanted to trade. But also wanted players as part of the trade. End of the day Hawthorn didn't get their man.

Jesus mate, what is wrong with you? Predictably leading with a personal insult.

You have misquoted my comment. Go back and reread the post.

A failure of critical thinking? Show me where I stated that a player should have been part of the deal? Show me where I said you should have offered up a player.

Seriously, please don't reply any more. It's tedious.

Cheers.

 

[joey_jo_jo]

Good read even though I already know the response to this is going to be "duhhhh will hayward

19

Will Hayward

Age

27

Ht

186cm

Wt

83kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.6

3star

K

6.6

3star

HB

4.0

3star

M

3.4

3star

T

2.8

4star

G

1.1

4star

D

9.0

2star

K

4.3

2star

HB

4.7

3star

M

2.7

3star

T

2.7

4star

G

0.7

4star

D

9.4

3star

K

6.2

3star

HB

3.2

3star

M

2.6

3star

T

3.4

5star

G

1.4

5star

is a fringe player, duhhhhhhhh" or "omg you didn't ask!!! Its your job to work out a deal for your contracted player that we need to improve our shithouse midfield"

No Cookies | CODE Sports

No Cookies | CODE Sports

www.codesports.com.au

 

[big footy cyril]

There is fair value, market value, and real value.

Fair value: whatever the neutrals reckon it is.

Market value: sellers market. He’s worth what we’re willing to agree to.

Real value: talent, determination, training standards, elite kick, multiple time BnF winner for us, likely Normie for you.

An aging superstar that the hawks offered a 5 year contract to

Agree with both. Much more value to us than you. Just like the suite of picks are more value to you than us. In effect a win - win had it gone through at the hawks offer. Ego and ‘line in the sand’ just got in the way.