AFL Player 7: Indefatigable Zach Merrett

[Phone]

Maybe they cough up a better player than Hustwaite

ok so now the chat just changes to "name a player"

and in any case, we might have been able to get a better player from the Hawks in the first place if we tried, but we made no effort

 

[Howard Moon]

ok so now the chat just changes to "name a player"

and in any case, we might have been able to get a better player from the Hawks in the first place if we tried, but we made no effort

That was probably due to their negotiating style of waiting til the last moment to try and force a pressure fold. If the rumours were true McKenzie might have been swayed if we had time in his ear

Anyway it's all moot, it is what it is we are stuck with an unhappy player, so be it

 

[Phone]

That was probably due to their negotiating style of waiting til the last moment to try and force a pressure fold. If the rumours were true McKenzie might have been swayed if we had time in his ear

Anyway it's all moot, it is what it is we are stuck with an unhappy player, so be it

as I said at the time, the Hawks try to recruit our captain and we sit around on our hands waiting for the Hawks to give us permission to speak to McKenzie or some other kid? it makes literally no sense. We could have got into McKenzie's ear whenever we wanted.

We didn't speak to McKenzie because we weren't interested in doing so. We didn't want to trade Zach. We didn't want to take any steps that might lead to trading Zach. We sat on our hands waiting for the Hawks to offer us everything and more, and when that didn't happen, we didn't trade Zach, which is exactly what we wanted to do. We put in no work. We didn't want to put in any work.

 

[Saddlemanbags]

Wowzers who could have seen this coming?

 

[Old Campaigner]

Wowzers who could have seen this coming?

Certainly not MPMonkeys

 

[MarkJohnson#1]

as I said at the time, the Hawks try to recruit our captain and we sit around on our hands waiting for the Hawks to give us permission to speak to McKenzie or some other kid? it makes literally no sense. We could have got into McKenzie's ear whenever we wanted.

We didn't speak to McKenzie because we weren't interested in doing so. We didn't want to trade Zach. We didn't want to take any steps that might lead to trading Zach. We sat on our hands waiting for the Hawks to offer us everything and more, and when that didn't happen, we didn't trade Zach, which is exactly what we wanted to do. We put in no work. We didn't want to put in any work.

We didn't need to put in any work. The onus was always on Hawthorn in this scenario. I don't begrudge our recruitment team for not seeking out fringe best 22 players for our club captain and best player...

 

[BrunoV]

We didn't need to put in any work. The onus was always on Hawthorn in this scenario. I don't begrudge our recruitment team for not seeking out fringe best 22 players for our club captain and best player...

It wasnt about Hawthorn it was about Merrett. He wanted out.

We spent all of our time posturing and look who is suffering as the result of its refusal to be pragmatic again?

We alreadly went through this with Joe Daniher.

We are now getting a first hand look at what a contract for the sake of a contract is worth.

 

[MarkJohnson#1]

It wasnt about Hawthorn it was about Merrett. He wanted out.

We spent all of our time posturing and look who is suffering as the result of its refusal to be pragmatic again?

We alreadly went through this with Joe Daniher.

We are now getting a first hand look at what a contract for the sake of a contract is worth.

It was about Hawthorn to get the deal done.

We didn't receive an offer until the day before trade deadline, so by all of our time you mean about 24 hours? If you mean we are suffering imagine how we'd be going without our best player...

Not too dissimilar scenario with Joe, we ended up receiving a similar pick anyway the following year.

Contracts are in place for a reason, to protect both parties, it's not about benefiting one party over the other.

 

[BrunoV]

It was about Hawthorn to get the deal done.

We didn't receive an offer until the day before trade deadline, so by all of our time you mean about 24 hours? If you mean we are suffering imagine how we'd be going without our best player...

Not too dissimilar scenario with Joe, we ended up receiving a similar pick anyway the following year.

Contracts are in place for a reason, to protect both parties, it's not about benefiting one party over the other.

Neither Hawthorn nor Merret and his manager played the situation well.

But we should be protecting ourselves. Once the captain says he wants out, trade him. Don't stuff around with stupid posture because that's not what gets deals done.

And we did not get the same pick for Joe 12 months later. It cost us a first round pick. There was a deal in the works that sent Papley to Carlton and both Sydney and Carlton first round picks to us which fell through because we would not entertain trading Daniher (despite bloody well knowing that he was refusing to play for us for reasons that had nothing to do with his physical fitness).

As I posted in the Brad Scott thread a competent organisation could have turned Merrett into 3 or 4 really important pieces of a rebuild. The 2025 draft was supposedly horrible but, as far as we can tell at this very early stage, we're looking at 4 x 200 game players. We could have a fifth on the list which would be Hawthorn's first round pick. Or that pick could have been used to secure value for the 2026 draft. If Jarrod Berry and Josh Dunkley can be integral parts of a premiership team and Ned Long can play every game he is fit to play for Collingwood (from the MSD) Henry Hustwaite can play 200 ALF games and can certainly be fodder to protect our next gen midfield for the next 100 games. He's something between Berry and Dunkly physically and stylistically . The current justification for playing Parish and the rest of the front running underperformers in our midfield is that there is no one else. Hustwaite could have been that someone else. Sure, put McKenzie's name here instead, if you prefer him, but I don't think his name would have been given a moment's thought if he wasn't a former top 10 pick. We had a bite at Macginness 12 months earlier and maybe we could have targeted him more aggressively. You bring him in because of his elite running power, his intensity and defensive discipline, 3 characteristics that are desperately needed at Essendon in games and on the track.

But none of this was considered. We left it to Hawthorn to do our work for us. In reality we had no intention of doing the deal. Merrett has now checked out and is playing bruise free, further undermining our culture and his trade value. Were exactly am I supposed to look for benefit at this point in time, especially given that I said all along how much of a mistake it was to not trade Merrett and move on?

**** Hawforne, yeah? That's what motivated Welsh and those at the club who agreed with him and now we have Tim Watson doing PR control trying to ransome Merrett into staying at Essendon for the money.

 

[cobra land]

I was in the trade Merrett camp and my stance hasn't changed.

He'd already checked out and nothing I've seen to date tells me otherwise.

I think he's a big part of the mess we're in now, he feels he's entitled to have success and has basically told his teammates it won't be at Essendon, so f**k you all.

As much as they have tried to look like they're behind him, I feel like his teammates are sick of the Merrett trade saga that gets brought up every week.

I can't lie, I've lost respect for him and I feel his heart isn't in it anymore and he looks to be moping around, we'd be better off playing him at H/B and giving a younger player the midfield minutes.

 

[TheFrenchCut]

Neither Hawthorn nor Merret and his manager played the situation well.

But we should be protecting ourselves. Once the captain says he wants out, trade him. Don't stuff around with stupid posture because that's not what gets deals done.

And we did not get the same pick for Joe 12 months later. It cost us a first round pick. There was a deal in the works that sent Papley to Carlton and both Sydney and Carlton first round picks to us which fell through because we would not entertain trading Daniher (despite bloody well knowing that he was refusing to play for us for reasons that had nothing to do with his physical fitness).

As I posted in the Brad Scott thread a competent organisation could have turned Merrett into 3 or 4 really important pieces of a rebuild. The 2025 draft was supposedly horrible but, as far as we can tell at this very early stage, we're looking at 4 x 200 game players. We could have a fifth on the list which would be Hawthorn's first round pick. Or that pick could have been used to secure value for the 2026 draft. If Jarrod Berry and Josh Dunkley can be integral parts of a premiership team and Ned Long can play every game he is fit to play for Collingwood (from the MSD) Henry Hustwaite can play 200 ALF games and can certainly be fodder to protect our next gen midfield for the next 100 games. He's something between Berry and Dunkly physically and stylistically . The current justification for playing Parish and the rest of the front running underperformers in our midfield is that there is no one else. Hustwaite could have been that someone else. Sure, put McKenzie's name here instead, if you prefer him, but I don't think his name would have been given a moment's thought if he wasn't a former top 10 pick. We had a bite at Macginness 12 months earlier and maybe we could have targeted him more aggressively. You bring him in because of his elite running power, his intensity and defensive discipline, 3 characteristics that are desperately needed at Essendon in games and on the track.

But none of this was considered. We left it to Hawthorn to do our work for us. In reality we had no intention of doing the deal. Merrett has now checked out and is playing bruise free, further undermining our culture and his trade value. Were exactly am I supposed to look for benefit at this point in time, especially given that I said all along how much of a mistake it was to not trade Merrett and move on?

**** Hawforne, yeah? That's what motivated Welsh and those at the club who agreed with him and now we have Tim Watson doing PR control trying to ransome Merrett into staying at Essendon for the money.

On the failure to learn the lesson from the Daniher experience, here are some of the guns taken in that part of the 2019 draft we could've picked if we did the two first rounders deal:

7 - Hayden Young
8 - Caleb Serong
12 - Kozzie Pickett
13 - Will Day

Instead, we wait a year, he leaves anyway, and we end up with half the return but also in what is probably now one of the all time worst drafts due to covid.

 

[Phone]

We didn't need to put in any work. The onus was always on Hawthorn in this scenario. I don't begrudge our recruitment team for not seeking out fringe best 22 players for our club captain and best player...

I begrudge our club not doing what was best for our club.

 

[MarkJohnson#1]

Neither Hawthorn nor Merret and his manager played the situation well.

But we should be protecting ourselves. Once the captain says he wants out, trade him. Don't stuff around with stupid posture because that's not what gets deals done.

And we did not get the same pick for Joe 12 months later. It cost us a first round pick. There was a deal in the works that sent Papley to Carlton and both Sydney and Carlton first round picks to us which fell through because we would not entertain trading Daniher (despite bloody well knowing that he was refusing to play for us for reasons that had nothing to do with his physical fitness).

As I posted in the Brad Scott thread a competent organisation could have turned Merrett into 3 or 4 really important pieces of a rebuild. The 2025 draft was supposedly horrible but, as far as we can tell at this very early stage, we're looking at 4 x 200 game players. We could have a fifth on the list which would be Hawthorn's first round pick. Or that pick could have been used to secure value for the 2026 draft. If Jarrod Berry and Josh Dunkley can be integral parts of a premiership team and Ned Long can play every game he is fit to play for Collingwood (from the MSD) Henry Hustwaite can play 200 ALF games and can certainly be fodder to protect our next gen midfield for the next 100 games. He's something between Berry and Dunkly physically and stylistically . The current justification for playing Parish and the rest of the front running underperformers in our midfield is that there is no one else. Hustwaite could have been that someone else. Sure, put McKenzie's name here instead, if you prefer him, but I don't think his name would have been given a moment's thought if he wasn't a former top 10 pick. We had a bite at Macginness 12 months earlier and maybe we could have targeted him more aggressively. You bring him in because of his elite running power, his intensity and defensive discipline, 3 characteristics that are desperately needed at Essendon in games and on the track.

But none of this was considered. We left it to Hawthorn to do our work for us. In reality we had no intention of doing the deal. Merrett has now checked out and is playing bruise free, further undermining our culture and his trade value. Were exactly am I supposed to look for benefit at this point in time, especially given that I said all along how much of a mistake it was to not trade Merrett and move on?

**** Hawforne, yeah? That's what motivated Welsh and those at the club who agreed with him and now we have Tim Watson doing PR control trying to ransome Merrett into staying at Essendon for the money.

The Hawthorn deal wasn't going to improve our hand last year. What I meant was we'd end up with a similar pick this year if we trade Merrett at the end of the year as what we wouldlve got from Hawthorn last year (ie their future first). Perhaps even a better pick depending on who (if) we trade him this year of course.

Hawthorn absolutely had to do the work, and they left it til the last minute and put an expiry on the offer in an attempt to strong arm the club. If you fold to that sort of shithousery then clubs will continue to bend you over year after year.

It was the right move to trade Merrett but Hawks couldn't offer up a remotely worthy deal given our existing draft hand (see Gold Coast/Petracca and Sydeny/Curnow deals). End of story really.

 

[MarkJohnson#1]

I begrudge our club not doing what was best for our club.

You think pick 20~ this year and Henry Hustwaite for our Captain and best player was best for our club? Lucky you're not in charge of our recruitment...

 

[Phone]

obviously the huge success we've had since that decision makes my position dicey, but I'm comfortable with it

also I wouldn't have taken Hustwaite because I would have negotiated. That's something that the Essendon Football Club wouldn't dare lower themselves to, and hey, with such success, who can blame them

 

[MPMonkeys]

Trading Merrett would have just led to the opposite argument.
We would still be in a losing situation if not worse.

The media would just be saying this is what happens when you trade your best player for 3 picks in the late teens.

This idea that that trading Merrett would have led to us recruiting three Chris Judd types is ludicrous. Most picks in the teens are just average AFL players. There are some outliers for better or worse but the standard of player is seldom a game/club changer.

 

[faible]

obviously the huge success we've had since that decision makes my position dicey, but I'm comfortable with it

also I wouldn't have taken Hustwaite because I would have negotiated. That's something that the Essendon Football Club wouldn't dare lower themselves to, and hey, with such success, who can blame them

There's not a lot to indicate the Hawks actually negotiated at all. They made an offer that they likely knew wouldn't get it done but thought the club would just cave for <reasons>, put an expiry on it, then traded the only decent pick they had away (which we then ended up with anyway).

Meanwhile Sydney basically forced Florent and Hayward out the door to get Curnow done.

Merrett also fired his manager afterwards, suggesting even he felt it was handled poorly.

People bemoan EFC not doing whatever it took to get the Dunkley deal done despite the Dogs asking for what was then the highest cost of any player ever traded, but then simultaneously blame EFC for not just taking whatever was offered for Merrett with the Hawks having no onus to actually make an effort.

 

[dank420_]

I was in the keep Merrett camp until I tried on a Dryp t shirt.

 

[dank420_]

i'm an idiot for doing that also

 

[Old Campaigner]

Trading Merrett would have just led to the opposite argument.
We would still be in a losing situation if not worse.

The media would just be saying this is what happens when you trade your best player for 3 picks in the late teens.

This idea that that trading Merrett would have led to us recruiting three Chris Judd types is ludicrous. Most picks in the teens are just average AFL players. There are some outliers for better or worse but the standard of player is seldom a game/club changer.

Better than having the former captain running around being utterly unaccountable and teaching bad habits to the kids we’re trying to develop

 

[BrunoV]

You think pick 20~ this year and Henry Hustwaite for our Captain and best player was best for our club? Lucky you're not in charge of our recruitment...

The other thing, which is why Hawthorn played its hand poorly, is that didn't it trade out what was previously a top 10 pick? They pushed us way too hard for it to be sensible strategy.

 

[Milanista28]

Just because Hawthorne had a terrible trade strategy doesn't mean we had to as well. If we said from the outset we'd trade him on our terms and welcomed them to the table maybe we get a greater offer, we still have the right to hold him in this scenario. Instead we went with a robust not for sale strat and acted offended and emotional.

 

[ant555]

Just because Hawthorne had a terrible trade strategy doesn't mean we had to as well. If we said from the outset we'd trade him on our terms and welcomed them to the table maybe we get a greater offer, we still have the right to hold him in this scenario. Instead we went with a robust not for sale strat and acted offended and emotional.

I was in the let him go for the three picks and Hustwaite but how the draft panned out I am not really sure it was 100% the right thing to do.
We ended up with the extra first round pick anyway.
We could not get any interest in players we wanted to move who have contracts so we could find spots on the list.
We drafted Sharp who is probably a better prospect than Hustwaite.
Not sure we wanted to take more than 5 guys in a medium type of draft.
Despite what people are saying here Merrett will play enough good footy to command a couple of 10 to 18 range picks at the end of this year. We will likely need a few 2027 first round picks.
Maybe the strategy to hold will be right. Of course that depends on Merrett not signing the current extension offer.

 

[nesko_25]

I wasn't opposed to trading Merrett but the compensation wasn't correct. I might be in an echo chamber but it appears that the Bombers cop the pointy end of the stick for not doing what ever possible to get Dunkley over the line and, almost the same for Shiel. Media harped on about clubs duties to secure a player once they've nominated them, yet the Bombers should have accepted what the Hawks were offering...

Also disagreed with the approach he, his management and Hawthorn undertook - essentially sought to undermine the playing group and the club to force a trade. If Essendon accepted this, it would become the basis moving forward and players would continue to utilise the strategy and the Club would continually accept unders... you don't negotiate with terrorists.

 

[eth-dog]

Just because Hawthorne had a terrible trade strategy doesn't mean we had to as well. If we said from the outset we'd trade him on our terms and welcomed them to the table maybe we get a greater offer, we still have the right to hold him in this scenario. Instead we went with a robust not for sale strat and acted offended and emotional.

No, if we go out and say that it immediately weakens our bargaining power. We played it correctly. Hawthorne ****ed it.