AFL Player 7: Indefatigable Zach Merrett

[Ants]

The difference with those examples is that the cupboard wasn’t as bare for those clubs as it is for us right now, even though they weren’t yet the premiership sides they became.

I’m not opposed to either option. If he signs on, great, we need quality players and he is the only one we have right now. If he wants to leave again, I’d happily take the best deal and wish him well. What I wouldn’t want to do, is be in a position where he doesn’t accept the deal and we decide to keep him. For mine, it has to be one or the other going forward.

If anything, that makes the decision not to trade him even stupider. If your cupboard is pretty bare, then choosing to keep the 30 year old versus taking 3 first round picks is a terrible idea. Which is why some of us at the time said we should do the trade.

The simple reality is that keeping Merrett is only a good idea if we become a top 4 contender within 3-4 years OR can get as good or better deal this year. I think both of those are long odds.

 

[King Patty]

Wasn't part of the issue list spots....one would have freed up with Merrett leaving, but because we committed to 3 x SSP we simply could not use the picks Hawthorn would give us.

And cause draft considered average, no one wanted to trade into it. So would have been hard to move second rounders we couldn't use.

What we potentially missed - either one of Oskar Taylor/Lachy Dovaston.

and use second rounders to match Adam Sweid.

And then not match the bid on Huss.

In: Dovaston, Sweid, clear air (no Merrett controversy)
Out: Merrett (Hawthorn), El-Achkar (richmond Bid not matched)

maybe Tsatas gets a run as a mid...

b: McGrath McKay Ridley
hb: Roberts Reid Redman
c: Duursma Parish Fiorini
hf: Sweid Caddy Sharp
f: Dovaston Wright Kako
r: Bryan Caldwell Durham
int: Tsatas, Johnson, Clarke, Prior, Perkins

 

[Ants]

wasnt part of the issue list spots....one would have freed up wth Merrett elaving, but because we commited to 3 x SSP we simply could not use the picks Hawthorn would give us.
And cause draft considered average, no one wanted to trade into it. So would have been hard to move second rounders we couldn't use.

What we potentially missed - either one of Oskar Taylor/Lachy Dovaston.

and use second rounders to match Adam Sweid.

And then not match the bid on Huss.

In: Dovaston, Sweid
Out: Merrett, El-Achkar

Just to be clear, I'm suggesting we don't take HH even if we accept the rest of Hawks offer. I was never interested in him, and it sounds like neither were Essendon (or the Hawks!).

Only two of the proposed picks were for 2025. Merrett opens up one vacancy for pick #10. With respect to pick #22, there are several ways we could have gone:

• The easiest: commit to an actual rebuild and don't trade for Fiorini and give him a 4yr deal. Instead, keep our 2026 third and use the list spot on pick #22. On a side note, under this scenario we also don't bring Setterfield back!!!!
• Most complex: trade Ridley to Brisbane for future picks, opening up a 2025 list spot. As part of the deal, pay Ridley's salary and they offer Draper Band 1. #21 becomes #7. Use #22 instead of #21 in the Carlton deal. Go into the draft with picks #5, #6, #7, #10, #11 instead of #5, #6, #9.
• Yes, clubs reputedly didn't want to trade 2026 picks at value .... although 3 clubs did trade 2026 second rounders to move picks up 1-4 spots. Anyway. For us, 2027 picks are valuable to match players. If list spots are tight, trade #22 for 2027 picks.
• Delist McMahon. Or May. Or Guelfi. Bring them back as SSP instead of Setterfield if you really want them.

Pretty easy to get around the list spot issues.

In a perfect scenario, you do the first two options, and trade back #11 like Hawks actually did and get Dovaston, one of Schubert, Barker, Allan, Nairn, take either Blamires or Oudshoorn-Bennier, and have an additional two 2026 second rounders in addition to the extra 2026 and 2027 picks from Brisbane and Hawks. Then give Tsatas Merrett's spot in the middle in 2026.

 

[King Patty]

5 Robey
6 Farrow
7 X Taylor
10 Sharp
11 Dovaston
22 Sweid

That would have been a pretty sweet draft.

Taylor fills in Ridley hole.

b: McGrath McKay X Taylor
hb: Roberts Reid Redman
c: Duursma Parish Farrow
hf: Sweid Caddy Sharp
f: Dovaston Wright Kako
r: Bryan Caldwell Durham
int: Tsatas, Johnson, Clarke, Robey Perkins

 

[BrunoV]

Seems to me like most are still failing to see what hides in plain sight, that Merret's contract is worth jack shit to Essendon. The only reason to hold Merrett to his contract was pride. And we know what comes before the fall.

What exactly is the value of retention of 1 A grade player on a list? What impact does it have onfield during a season, on the bottom line, not the stat sheet? Do we think it might be worth a goal a game?

Does he sets standards for the players and drive them to be more professional? There is no evidence of that in his past. Why would the players be inspired by / start listening to him now?

Merrett was retained because it got personal for those who run Essendon. They wanted to set a standard, be tough and to spite Hawthorn.

So here we are, facing a bottom 4 finish, in the 4th year of the current coach's tenure having gotten worse each season, with no intensity, no discernable game style, our A grader kick chasing and now facing the prosect of the distraction of him leaving a contract offer on the table week after week.

The rest of the competition no doubt terrified of this new 'hard' Essendon.

It is actually a perfect reflection of Andrew Welsh

Andrew Welsh

Age

43

Ht

188cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

16.4

4star

K

9.7

4star

HB

6.7

4star

M

4.6

4star

T

2.9

4star

CL

1.6

4star

No current season stats available

D

9.6

3star

K

7.4

3star

HB

2.2

2star

M

4.0

4star

T

3.6

5star

the player: all hot air.

Edit: and I didn't even mention that we won't be good at any time during this contract.

 

[dank420_]

**** yeah bruno is back

 

[doug85]

I wonder whether the contract is just a tool to shut the noise down for the rest of the season. He may still request a trade at the end of the year, but if he decides to stay - he gets a healthy pay rise. Win-win for Zach. And means we have a little more leverage in a trade.

 

[madrigal]

You think if he signed a long term extension the media will keep asking if he's going to request a trade every week?

I was being flippant, however the media will do anything for attention and will probably just pivot to asking every week if he made the wrong decision in signing and whether Essendon would have been better off trading.

 

[nipst@r]

You think if he signed a long term extension the media will keep asking if he's going to request a trade every week?

Yep. Maybe not every week but the saints offer, hawks offer and speculation stories all happened with multiple years left on his last contract extension.

I think the media know he's not happy at essendon so I dont think contract terms stop the media.

Disgruntled a grader = speculation and approaches from other clubs. Noise goes away only if happy, he has stated only happy with team success.

So not sure anyone going to think merrets locked in if he signs an extension and we contunie to suck.

 

[JayJ20]

Why do we want to keep him? I don't see the point. We're not going to contend while he is here and he wants team success.

I hope he saves us from ourselves and rejects the extension.

 

[Happyskeret]

I think I’ve got infatiguable fatigue!

 

[Calthorpe14]

If anything, that makes the decision not to trade him even stupider. If your cupboard is pretty bare, then choosing to keep the 30 year old versus taking 3 first round picks is a terrible idea. Which is why some of us at the time said we should do the trade.

The simple reality is that keeping Merrett is only a good idea if we become a top 4 contender within 3-4 years OR can get as good or better deal this year. I think both of those are long odds.

I was for the idea of trading him last year as well, but that’s now largely irrelevant. The 3 first round pick argument also gets easily skewed when you look at where those picks ended up and project to end up.

3-4 years we should be in a far better position provided we use our cap space smartly & draft and develop well. That doesn’t mean we’ll be premiership contenders at all, but you’d expect the list to be in far better condition.

As I’ve said, I’m indifferent on the idea on keeping him or trading him. There’s too many unknowns at this point around what his market looks like, where our list is at by seasons end and there are positives for both positions. I don’t anticipate him signing the deal any time soon, but we wouldn’t have put a deal in front of him without his team showing a level of interest. The only thing that is important is that if he commits, he actually commits. This cannot drag on to 2027

 

[bombadeer]

I don't understand why the club is talking about contract extensions with Merrett. It worries me, it has the whiff of politics and dumb-dumb about it. I think we're perfectly set up to trade Merrett next year. I hope that is what the club is looking at doing.

Usually when ego & politics is involved, that's when "stupid" becomes the strategy - it's possible that is where we are with Merrett leaving the club, i don't know what's going on behind closed doors. Fingers crossed it's not, and if so they can grab the opportunity to get some draft capital. We need it more than we need Merrett.

He's under contract - so clubs are obligated to give us a bit more.
He's disgruntled - so everyone know's he's on the table.
He's A grade - so he's got significant trade value.

If the club and Merrett are on the same page - then the strategy around PR management is thus:

• "Merrett is a required player, we love him at Essendon" - the line trotted out to the media by the club - he's on the table, but he's going to cost the buyer
• "I am committed to Essendon and believe in the direction of the club" - Merrett's response - which is essentially not to answer the question, perfectly.

Meanwhile.... Merrett's manager quietly finds the suitor - trade capital and good faith negotiations can commence, and the club and Merrett can part ways. There will be a shit-storm as usual in the media, but if the player and club have already agreed to part ways and they're both supportive of each others needs behind closed doors then everyone walks away a winner.

If he goes to a club other than Hawthorn, that would be obviously be delicious. A Geelong, Brisbane, Gold Coast, Sydney, GWS - he would be an absolute weapon in a great team. But I fully expect him to be in Hawthorn colours in 2027 assuming the two clubs can put the ego's aside and hammer out a deal like adults. Merrett holding a premiership cup in another jumper is going to hurt - but it will hurt less if it's not the poos and wees. Alas.... It is what it is. Pile on the scar tissue, we're used to it. We have been through worse.

 

[King Patty]

Its probably akin to Brian Lake

Brian Lake

Age

44

Ht

195cm

Wt

98kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

14.7

4star

K

9.4

4star

HB

5.3

4star

M

6.5

5star

T

1.6

4star

MG

163.0

3star

No current season stats available

D

4.6

1star

K

2.6

1star

HB

2.0

2star

M

1.0

1star

T

0.6

3star

at the Bulldogs.

At the Bulldogs he was their best player or one of the best in a middling / bottom team.

At the Hawks he was a useful cog in a premiership lineup.

missing piece from losing grand final team.

potentially even more important than Buddy leaving the next year as game had switched from offence to defence.

(traded for 21+41) which at the time was hawks first and second round picks and couldn't trade future picks.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

I wonder whether the contract is just a tool to shut the noise down for the rest of the season. He may still request a trade at the end of the year, but if he decides to stay - he gets a healthy pay rise. Win-win for Zach. And means we have a little more leverage in a trade.

It's the smart move on behalf of the club I reckon because it forces him to make a decision now (and making no decision is still a decision).

He signs it and we know he's Essendon for the rest of his career.

If he doesn't, we'll know he's still looking to leave.

Either way it tells us now, instead of waiting for the end of the year for a trade request.

We can get on the front foot in May or June, rather than October, say Zach you obviously want out, what is it you want (success) and let's work together to find a deal over the next 4-5 months that suits everybody.

He got sold the Hawthorn thing last year but there's plenty of clubs in the premiership window and he is a valuable player. Once it gets around that he's available, we'll have time to give him some options - ie we can send you to X because they will get us a trade done. We can't send you to Y because they have absolutely nothing to trade for you, so forget that now.

And once there's a shortlist of clubs, we can actually get to work on players at those clubs that could be involved in a trade. rather than having 24 hours to do it.

All in all, it gives us a lot more clarity and time to work things out.

Things change. Josh Dunkley was dead keen to come to Essendon but a trade couldn't get done. 12 months later he goes to Brisbane. Daniher was dead keen on Sydney and 12 months later went to Brisbane. If Zach leaves at the end of this year it could be to any number of clubs, and we have plenty of time to work a deal in our favour too.

 

[King Patty]

Petracca tried to get to Collingwood in 2024, but ended up at Gold coast in 2025 trade period.

 

[Bunk Moreland]

Why do we want to keep him? I don't see the point. We're not going to contend while he is here and he wants team success.

I hope he saves us from ourselves and rejects the extension.

There's this view that he currently has zero value to Essendon, because we're shit at the moment. That was the view of many during trade period but I'm not convinced it's true.

He does make us a significantly better team. That is important. Plenty of rebuilds have failed miserably because they've completely shed all quality experienced players and thrown the kids to the wolves. Keeping a few around (including our most valuable player) does make a difference and will make us more competitive.

Not to mention it can significantly ease the transition and development of younger midfielders as they are not getting all of the negative opposition attention.

Finally, I don't think it's a forgone conclusion that he's not around and contributing strongly in a rebuilt Essendon side. He's a pretty unique case. He's said he wants to play deep into his 30s and there's really nothing to suggest he can't. He's barely missed a game in his career and has incredible durability. It's not ridiculous to suggest he could quite easily play another 100+ games at a high level. If Harvey, Burgoyne and Pendlebury can do it, no reason he can't.

None of this is to say you keep him at any cost. But the idea that there's no point at all in keeping him is inaccurate imo.

 

[Donflicted]

There's this view that he currently has zero value to Essendon, because we're shit at the moment. That was the view of many during trade period but I'm not convinced it's true.

He does make us a significantly better team. That is important. Plenty of rebuilds have failed miserably because they've completely shed all quality experienced players and thrown the kids to the wolves. Keeping a few around (including our most valuable player) does make a difference and will make us more competitive.

Not to mention it can significantly ease the transition and development of younger midfielders as they are not getting all of the negative opposition attention.

Finally, I don't think it's a forgone conclusion that he's not around and contributing strongly in a rebuilt Essendon side. He's a pretty unique case. He's said he wants to play deep into his 30s and there's really nothing to suggest he can't. He's barely missed a game in his career and has incredible durability. It's not ridiculous to suggest he could quite easily play another 100+ games at a high level. If Harvey, Burgoyne and Pendlebury can do it, no reason he can't.

None of this is to say you keep him at any cost. But the idea that there's no point at all in keeping him is inaccurate imo.

Yes but if he walks at the end of his contract at 2027 we get nothing for our best and really only valuable asset that is my issue

All good and well if he commits but if he wants to go and we dont let him go after this year we are shooting ourselves in the foot

 

[doug85]

Petracca tried to get to Collingwood in 2024, but ended up at Gold coast in 2025 trade period.

And I’m hoping that if Zach wants to go, he’s open to several clubs. It makes it far less likely we get bent over in a trade

 

[Yoda_]

Paying Zac means we're likely committing to this re-build so may as well pay our best player. Tacking on extra year(s) is probably just basic negotiations 101

 

[BrunoV]

I just got around to listening to an 1116 Breakfast podcast titled 'Our club has been destabilised' which needs to be heard.

It is a segement of Tim Watson doing completely obvious / not subtle PR for Essendon.

Part of the segment is Watson talking about the Merrett contract offer. Watson said that Merrett's options are pursuit of team success (elsewhere) or money (with Essendon).

The whole thing was expressed as a ransome in which, reading between the lines, he said 'Zach, things are going to be hell for you if you try to leave so just take the money because you wont get it if you leave at the end of 2027'.

Do people have any idea how ****ed Essendon is when this is the best it can do and those in charge think it's best to proceed? You're deluded if a group of kids will claw us out of this on their individual qualities. The club is infested with a rot that is a type of contagious mind virus.

What football related reason does Essendon have for its position in relation to Merrett? It's not even as though we have a problem with losing players in the way some non-Vic clubs have had. We pay our shit kickers far too much for them to consider the valuation of the market.

We're building a culture on the basis of ransoming our best player into settling for money.

Maybe Brad called Chris for some info on Opposite Day and this is all just the result of a prank.

 

[bommer16]

I believe you hold a player to their contract. Leaving because of no success is selfish. No I in Team. He needs to develop emotional maturity before he can have success. I’d rather be known for my own commitment to excellence in being a true leader on and off field than pissing on a club because they didn’t hand you a flag. Grow up and earn it. Club made him comfortable with steady employment. Offered captaincy, money and accolades. All which he accepted.

There will be a divide on whether this was right or wrong but the club simply held a player to a (willingly signed) contract. Well within their rights. Next time he might want to be more open to other clubs.

 

[jdstorm]

I just got around to listening to an 1116 Breakfast podcast titled 'Our club has been destabilised' which needs to be heard.

It is a segement of Tim Watson doing completely obvious / not subtle PR for Essendon.

Part of the segment is Watson talking about the Merrett contract offer. Watson said that Merrett's options are pursuit of team success (elsewhere) or money (with Essendon).

The whole thing was expressed as a ransome in which, reading between the lines, he said 'Zach, things are going to be hell for you if you try to leave so just take the money because you wont get it if you leave at the end of 2027'.

Do people have any idea how ****ed Essendon is when this is the best it can do and those in charge think it's best to proceed? You're deluded if a group of kids will claw us out of this on their individual qualities. The club is infested with a rot that is a type of contagious mind virus.

What football related reason does Essendon have for its position in relation to Merrett? It's not even as though we have a problem with losing players in the way some non-Vic clubs have had. We pay our shit kickers far too much for them to consider the valuation of the market.

We're building a culture on the basis of ransoming our best player into settling for money.

Maybe Brad called Chris for some info on Opposite Day and this is all just the result of a prank.

Yep just peak stupidity and entitlement.

Zac’s given a decade. Tried his hardest and wants a chance to win. Should benefit both Zac and the club to facilitate that.

Last offseason stupidity prevailed. This year hopefully it won’t (but also Essendon so seems the likely outcome )

 

[bommer16]

No doubt he tried hard. He carried us over the line in games. He wants out, ok, but why did he sign the contract when he had a chance to leave before resigning?

 

[Old Campaigner]

I just got around to listening to an 1116 Breakfast podcast titled 'Our club has been destabilised' which needs to be heard.

It is a segement of Tim Watson doing completely obvious / not subtle PR for Essendon.

Part of the segment is Watson talking about the Merrett contract offer. Watson said that Merrett's options are pursuit of team success (elsewhere) or money (with Essendon).

The whole thing was expressed as a ransome in which, reading between the lines, he said 'Zach, things are going to be hell for you if you try to leave so just take the money because you wont get it if you leave at the end of 2027'.

Do people have any idea how ****ed Essendon is when this is the best it can do and those in charge think it's best to proceed? You're deluded if a group of kids will claw us out of this on their individual qualities. The club is infested with a rot that is a type of contagious mind virus.

What football related reason does Essendon have for its position in relation to Merrett? It's not even as though we have a problem with losing players in the way some non-Vic clubs have had. We pay our shit kickers far too much for them to consider the valuation of the market.

We're building a culture on the basis of ransoming our best player into settling for money.

Maybe Brad called Chris for some info on Opposite Day and this is all just the result of a prank.

I think generally we've tried far too hard to retain players who don't really want to be there.

Granted I'm not paying as much attention to other clubs as I do Essendon but it feels like other clubs have usually been quite happy to get a trade done if a player wants out.

Maybe it's a hangover from the drug saga when the club was desperate to avoid perceptions of a player exodus, and as a result it's morphed into this idea that a player leaving is a massive vote of no confidence in the club that must be avoided at all costs.