List Mgmt. Dan Hannebery - 5 year deal & Pick 28 to St.Kilda for Pick 39 & 2019 2nd Round Pick

[lewdogs]

The thing that bugs me about the Hannebery deal was the future second we paid. It was overs, should have been a future 3rd.

When it comes to the deal itself and getting him into the club it was a no-brainer and we can still see today why we did it. We needed leadership at the club. Interesting comments from Finnis today saying when he is on the track you notice the difference in voice.

He has played about 13 games for the club, but two of them are our biggest wins of the decade. The idea that Lethlean knew he was injured is insane, he tried to use his contacts to get someone to the club that we needed. It nearly worked, but unfortunately his injuries have been shocking.

When fans say "see we all knew it wouldn't work" well the same fans were saying that Ryder was past it. Fans don't know what the injuries are. If you're suggesting that the club doctors were corrupt when they did their medical check, I just think that's insane.

The best we can do is hope he still comes good. I know that sounds ridiculous but jeez we could use him. I see absolutely no point in paying him out, we probably can't afford it under this years salary cap anyway. Try to get his body right and see if he can positively impact for us on the field, because if he is out there I can guarantee you he will, and we probably miss him more than any of our injured players right now other than Marshall.

 

[batfink]

The thing that bugs me about the Hannebery deal was the future second we paid. It was overs, should have been a future 3rd.

When it comes to the deal itself and getting him into the club it was a no-brainer and we can still see today why we did it. We needed leadership at the club. Interesting comments from Finnis today saying when he is on the track you notice the difference in voice.


He has played about 13 games for the club, but two of them are our biggest wins of the decade. The idea that Lethlean knew he was injured is insane, he tried to use his contacts to get someone to the club that we needed. It nearly worked, but unfortunately his injuries have been shocking.

When fans say "see we all knew it wouldn't work" well the same fans were saying that Ryder was past it. Fans don't know what the injuries are. If you're suggesting that the club doctors were corrupt when they did their medical check, I just think that's insane.

The best we can do is hope he still comes good. I know that sounds ridiculous but jeez we could use him. I see absolutely no point in paying him out, we probably can't afford it under this years salary cap anyway. Try to get his body right and see if he can positively impact for us on the field, because if he is out there I can guarantee you he will, and we probably miss him more than any of our injured players right now other than Marshall.

It wasn’t even close to nearly working
Best we can hope for is him to retire immediately and save us paying him a cent next year

 

[lewdogs]

Yeah in a fantasy land that would be great. Let's get Hill to retire too that hasn't really worked out.

 

[Mowman]

When fans say "see we all knew it wouldn't work"

The fans were right

 

[lewdogs]

The fans were right

But were they right about Ryder? If you whinge about every move you'll be right about a few.

 

[Mowman]

But were they right about Ryder? If you whinge about every move you'll be right about a few.

But this is the Dan Hannebery thread not about Ryder
You said paying a 2nd round pick was to much 3rd round pick not to many 3rd rounders are worth $800k year but you still think it was a good trade lol
No but you’re right everyone that has different opinion than you and doesn’t blow wind up the club butt is a whinger

 

[lewdogs]

But this is the Dan Hannebery thread not about Ryder
You said paying a 2nd round pick was to much 3rd round pick not to many 3rd rounders are worth $800k year but you still think it was a good trade lol
No but you’re right everyone that has different opinion than you and doesn’t blow wind up the club butt is a whinger

I find it funny how you bang on about Hannebery stopping us getting Treloar, who is currently out injured.

If we'd picked up Treloar you'd be whinging about getting him too

 

[Ricmel]

But were they right about Ryder? If you whinge about every move you'll be right about a few.

If you review the welcome threads for Ryder and Hannebury, the Ryder one is overwhelmingly positive. The Hannebury welcome thread - well, 65% answered the poll that the deal was bat sh#t crazy.

I think Ryder was a risk and most recognised that. At 33 and battered, would he ever be competitive again? But he cost nothing. Freeman was a bigger risk. But he cost nothing.

Hannebury, in 2019, by the estimates of the vast majority of footy pundits was well past his best. His last decent year was 2017 and that was well down on his golden years 2012 - 2016. Add to his reduced output, just getting him on the park was difficult, he had chronic soft tissue issues in hamstring AND calf and everyone in footy knew that.

The difference is we we locked into Hannebury for 5 years at a lot. It is wilful ignorance to compare the Hannebury decision to the Ryder decision (2 years on not a lot).

The only thing Hannebury advocates hold onto is his leadership attributes. Well he has been there 4 years and our leadership stocks have never been lower.In fact you could argue our lack of on field leaders is our biggest problem.

You can't polish a turd no matter how hard you try. This was a Xavs old boy deal and everyone in the know knows that.

 

[gringo2011]

But were they right about Ryder? If you whinge about every move you'll be right about a few.

Ryder wasn't long term planning. They got a 32 year old ruckman that wasn't playing regular footy at Port. He was pretty much Shawn McKernen. He's been amazing but lets not pretend it was a bit of elite recruiting. Most people were more worried that being a good player that we'd be playing him and making it slower to develop Marshall who had just come of an amazing season as a solo ruck and was one of the few positives in 2019.

He ended up one of our best players but he was more happy accident than elite recruiting.

 

[Mowman]

I find it funny how you bang on about Hannebery stopping us getting Treloar, who is currently out injured.

If we'd picked up Treloar you'd be whinging about getting him too

Haven’t mentioned Treloar for long time also he is not out with a soft tissue injury his last 5 years have been ok

anyhow I will keep whinging about AFL players you keep whinging about posters-with different opinions then yours

 

[lewdogs]

If you review the welcome threads for Ryder and Hannebury, the Ryder one is overwhelmingly positive. The Hannebury welcome thread - well, 65% answered the poll that the deal was bat sh#t crazy.

I think Ryder was a risk and most recognised that. At 33 and battered, would he ever be competitive again? But he cost nothing. Freeman was a bigger risk. But he cost nothing.

Hannebury, in 2019, by the estimates of the vast majority of footy pundits was well past his best. His last decent year was 2017 and that was well down on his golden years 2012 - 2016. Add to his reduced output, just getting him on the park was difficult, he had chronic soft tissue issues in hamstring AND calf and everyone in footy knew that.

The difference is we we locked into Hannebury for 5 years at a lot. It is wilful ignorance to compare the Hannebury decision to the Ryder decision (2 years on not a lot).

The only thing Hannebury advocates hold onto is his leadership attributes. Well he has been there 4 years and our leadership stocks have never been lower.In fact you could argue our lack of on field leaders is our biggest problem.

You can't polish a turd no matter how hard you try.

If you could turn back time and take the deal back of course you do. My point is that the lack of current on field leadership shows why we picked him up and that we are actually missing him on the field.

 

[Ricmel]

If you could turn back time and take the deal back of course you do. My point is that the lack of current on field leadership shows why we picked him up and that we are actually missing him on the field.

I don't disagree his leadership ON THE FIELD would be great - as would his value as a footy player. But if that is what you want as a club, why select a player that hasn't been able to do a full pre-season since 2016 and was showing clear signs of being cooked.

Hannebury came to St Kilda on a 5 year, lots of money deal and there is no doubt in my mind it was a golden handshake from his mates in the AFL. Nothing to do with the welfare of the St Kilda footy club. To me, you cannot compare it to taking a risk with players on 1 and 2 year deals.

 

[batfink]

Yeah in a fantasy land that would be great. Let's get Hill to retire too that hasn't really worked out.

Least you agree Hannebery should retire now and not stay on just to take another 800k from us

 

[gringo2011]

If you could turn back time and take the deal back of course you do. My point is that the lack of current on field leadership shows why we picked him up and that we are actually missing him on the field.

I still think that is one of those spin campaigns that the club put out to cover their arses. He was party boy up in Sydney. Him and Buddy had a reputation for getting out on the town. He'd just smashed a row of cars and Buddy took the rap or maybe it was the other way around. Sydney hadn't been able to get him playing to capacity since 2016 as well. He might have had better standards of training but this year we look the worst drilled least fit side in AFL so it wasn't long term.

He just goes down as a bust trade. It was like that girlfriend you get when you're desperate and 6 months in you realised your standards were rock bottom and it's going to be awkward having the conversation about her moving out.
Sometimes you have a go and it fails, hopefully we have learnt to be a bit more selective after the Hill and Hanners trades. Like never take a player who's name starts with the letter "H".

 

[kernelT]

But were they right about Ryder? If you whinge about every move you'll be right about a few.

Honestly bringing up Ryder is like the old "look over there, it's a squirrel!"

Even if you weren't in favour of recruiting Paddy, the risk was zero… he came on minimum wage, a short term deal and cost us nothing in draft collateral.

Would much rather Paddy at the club for leadership and culture than el chapo.

If we really needed a leadership injection we should have gone the Hodge / Lewis route… again, cost nothing in picks and were only 2 year commitments.

We were played like fiddles by Sydney.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

I still think that is one of those spin campaigns that the club put out to cover their arses. He was party boy up in Sydney. Him and Buddy had a reputation for getting out on the town. He'd just smashed a row of cars and Buddy took the rap or maybe it was the other way around. Sydney hadn't been able to get him playing to capacity since 2016 as well. He might have had better standards of training but this year we look the worst drilled least fit side in AFL so it wasn't long term.

He just goes down as a bust trade. It was like that girlfriend you get when you're desperate and 6 months in you realised your standards were rock bottom and it's going to be awkward having the conversation about her moving out.
Sometimes you have a go and it fails, hopefully we have learnt to be a bit more selective after the Hill and Hanners trades. Like never take a player who's name starts with the letter "H".

Damn , i just told Heeney to piss off. He was disappointed but understanding.

 

[kernelT]

Damn , i just told Heeney to piss off. He was disappointed but understanding.

Harry Mckay was also pretty gutted.

 

[Dr Spaceman]

Damn , i just told Heeney to piss off. He was disappointed but understanding.

Verdun Howell's birthday today - old fella will be shattered

 

[pebblesofsand]

If you review the welcome threads for Ryder and Hannebury, the Ryder one is overwhelmingly positive. The Hannebury welcome thread - well, 65% answered the poll that the deal was bat sh#t crazy.

I think Ryder was a risk and most recognised that. At 33 and battered, would he ever be competitive again? But he cost nothing. Freeman was a bigger risk. But he cost nothing.

Hannebury, in 2019, by the estimates of the vast majority of footy pundits was well past his best. His last decent year was 2017 and that was well down on his golden years 2012 - 2016. Add to his reduced output, just getting him on the park was difficult, he had chronic soft tissue issues in hamstring AND calf and everyone in footy knew that.

The difference is we we locked into Hannebury for 5 years at a lot. It is wilful ignorance to compare the Hannebury decision to the Ryder decision (2 years on not a lot).

The only thing Hannebury advocates hold onto is his leadership attributes. Well he has been there 4 years and our leadership stocks have never been lower.In fact you could argue our lack of on field leaders is our biggest problem.

You can't polish a turd no matter how hard you try. This was a Xavs old boy deal and everyone in the know knows that.

Yeah and the Hawks made a huge mistake in trading in a clapped out Jaeger O'Meara.

PS He only signed for 4 years, cost us bugger all trade wise and not that much cost wise if you factor in the salary cap spending needs.

I'm happier with the club having a punt on securing a type of player desperately needed at the time rather than doing the alternative - overpaying GOP's.

 

[stavro#4]

If you review the welcome threads for Ryder and Hannebury, the Ryder one is overwhelmingly positive. The Hannebury welcome thread - well, 65% answered the poll that the deal was bat sh#t crazy.

I think Ryder was a risk and most recognised that. At 33 and battered, would he ever be competitive again? But he cost nothing. Freeman was a bigger risk. But he cost nothing.

Hannebury, in 2019, by the estimates of the vast majority of footy pundits was well past his best. His last decent year was 2017 and that was well down on his golden years 2012 - 2016. Add to his reduced output, just getting him on the park was difficult, he had chronic soft tissue issues in hamstring AND calf and everyone in footy knew that.

The difference is we we locked into Hannebury for 5 years at a lot. It is wilful ignorance to compare the Hannebury decision to the Ryder decision (2 years on not a lot).

The only thing Hannebury advocates hold onto is his leadership attributes. Well he has been there 4 years and our leadership stocks have never been lower.In fact you could argue our lack of on field leaders is our biggest problem.

You can't polish a turd no matter how hard you try. This was a Xavs old boy deal and everyone in the know knows that.

Freeman cost: Future second rounder (pick 23 - Will Drew) + slight upgrade from a pick 63 to pick 60


Hanners cost: future second (pick 21 - James Jordan ) + pick 39 and we received pick 28 which we on traded and landed Bytel and Parker

Freeman games: 2
Hanners games: 13


The Freeman trade was actually a lot worse. He also got a substantial pay rise to come to us after not playing a game at the pies.


We took on Hanners contract. Which is big. But the actual trade really isn’t that bad at all.

 

[gringo2011]

Harry Mckay was also pretty gutted.

Dougal Howard is sulking in a corner too.

 

[gringo2011]

Freeman cost: Future second rounder (pick 23 - Will Drew) + slight upgrade from a pick 63 to pick 60


Hanners cost: future second (pick 21 - James Jordan ) + pick 39 and we received pick 28 which we on traded and landed Bytel and Parker

Freeman games: 2
Hanners games: 13


The Freeman trade was actually a lot worse. He also got a substantial pay rise to come to us after not playing a game at the pies.


We took on Hanners contract. Which is big. But the actual trade really isn’t that bad at all.

Both were absolute s**t though. One doesn't out do the other.

 

[stavro#4]

Both were absolute sh*t though. One doesn't out do the other.

At least with Hanners we ended up with Bytel. So you can’t completely s**t can it.

 

[Joffaboy]

Ryder wasn't long term planning. They got a 32 year old ruckman that wasn't playing regular footy at Port. He was pretty much Shawn McKernen. He's been amazing but lets not pretend it was a bit of elite recruiting. Most people were more worried that being a good player that we'd be playing him and making it slower to develop Marshall who had just come of an amazing season as a solo ruck and was one of the few positives in 2019.

He ended up one of our best players but he was more happy accident than elite recruiting.

You really comparing Paddy Ryder who was AA a couple of seasons before joining us to Shaun McKernan?
Really?
Ryder was employed for his vast experience and still is one of the best tap rucks in the league. He was there to bring Rowan along.
McKernan was selected as insurance nothing more.

To you anything that works out AS IT INTENDED, is luck to you.

You need another break

 

[gringo2011]

Yeah and the Hawks made a huge mistake in trading in a clapped out Jaeger O'Meara.

PS He only signed for 4 years, cost us bugger all trade wise and not that much cost wise if you factor in the salary cap spending needs.

I'm happier with the club having a punt on securing a type of player desperately needed at the time rather than doing the alternative - overpaying GOP's.

O'Meara is a pretty s**t trade too. He's never got back to as good as he was. Overpaying on him and Wingard haven't been good for them. They are doing their rebuild like us.