I heard one commentator (I forget exactly who) on radio say earlier in the season that they thought the failure of Vickery was evidence of arrogance from the Hawks expecting they could take a failing player from another club into their system and turn him around.
But even at the time I thought the Hawks releasing Hill so cheaply (after three gra nd finals... we owe, love him) seemed a little arrogant to me - like we got so used to success we forgot the tooth and nail nature of AFL releasing such a great player. I thought at the time there must be more to the story of his trade than we know, but geeeeee he was always a gun.
If Hill didn't want to leave he'd still be a hawk. Clubs hands tied when out of contract player wants to go home.