Confirmed Jack Steven [traded to Geelong for #58]

Shadow89

Premiership Player
Feb 20, 2018
4,573
8,946
AFL Club
Geelong
If you think that's what i'm saying... i really don't know what to tell you
If you don't understand what I was trying to say, then I'm not sure what to tell you, lol. Perhaps respond to the whole argument, rather than just selecting one line you don't like.

I'll clarify again. If you're simultaneously stipulating that he has mental health issues, whilst stating that we're exploiting the situation by not offering purported 'fair value', then you're trying to have both sides of the argument.

You can't say that Steven has mental health issues, whilst playing the 'big bad wolf Geelong' card, and then say that we're exploiting your club because of his need to get home.

Real exploitation would have been saying 'you can have Pick 93, and pay more than half his salary, because he'll retire anyway and doesn't want to go anywhere else'...and then it coming out later that we counselled Steven to say that he'll retire so we didn't have to pay a thing in draft picks or salary.

As it stands, we offered a lower pick, due to us paying the vast majority of his salary. That was already explained as the sticking point, as both clubs didn't want to pay a large amount of his salary. We ended up footing the bill, at the cost of you getting a negligible draft pick (which is still more than the Hawks paid for Patton who is 3 years younger and physically fit right now; as I pointed out earlier).

You need to understand, that there are several moving cogs involved in this deal. Brad Hill, Zac Smith, Steven, salary, draft picks etc. You acting liking it's just us getting a 'freebie' because we only gave up Pick 58, is disingenuous given that you've failed to mention the aforementioned in your argument.

If St Kilda had of held him, it would have been no different to GC holding Ablett to his contract, whilst his sister had documented issues that he needed to be home for - something they haven't been panned for despite the eventual outcome (nor should they). You had every right to hold him, but it was mutually agreed by all parties (once Brad Hill nominated you guys on big money), that he would come to Geelong. The sticking point was the salary, which is why it took so long for negotiations to go through.

For the record, I pushed for Jack to remain all year, if he was comfortable to return to St Kilda. I thought that was the best outcome for all concerned. You're speculating and sensationalizing, given that no-one has said anything bad about St Kilda possibly holding Jack to his contract (if that had of happened). As it stands, everyone got what they want and you're still here acting like we're the bad guys. Despite the fact that we're paying a big enough portion of his salary, that it allowed you to get Brad Hill, Zak Jones and Dougal Howard through the door on big money.

As I said before, it's done.

Move on.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

BrutThough

Norm Smith Medallist
Oct 2, 2010
6,250
23,233
AFL Club
St Kilda
The devil is in the detail. Unless you know specifics you're not really in a position to comment.
It's on the record that StKilda are playing for part of his contract in his first year and none of it in his 2nd year.
I didn't mention specifics just what's already public knowledge.
 

StCicatriz

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 3, 2016
17,903
34,472
AFL Club
St Kilda
It's on the record that StKilda are playing for part of his contract in his first year and none of it in his 2nd year.
I didn't mention specifics just what's already public knowledge.
That's supported by the rules. You can only pay part of the contract in the first 12 months. Beyond that there's nothing the old club can do.
 

StCicatriz

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 3, 2016
17,903
34,472
AFL Club
St Kilda
The point you seem to be missing is that "what they'd be willing to accept" was guided by the fact that the issues involved were related to mental health.... not something like suspect hammies etc. If St Kilda had said "no, 58 isn't good enough. You can't go and be closer to your family, Jack. We're making you see out your contract" It would have been a terrible look for the club. Geelong knew that, and took advantage it.

I believe Saints genuinely wanted what was best for Jack. I applaud them for that. Geelong?... not so much

Let's see how this plays out. My guess is next year the commentary will be along the lines of "Look at what Jack Steven is doing a Geelong, I can't believe they got him for pick 58"
Agree with this. The commentary from geelong this on Jack was pretty poor
 

Sully111

Team Captain
Jun 10, 2018
455
1,453
AFL Club
St Kilda
If you don't understand what I was trying to say, then I'm not sure what to tell you, lol. Perhaps respond to the whole argument, rather than just selecting one line you don't like.

I'll clarify again. If you're simultaneously stipulating that he has mental health issues, whilst stating that we're exploiting the situation by not offering purported 'fair value', then you're trying to have both sides of the argument.

You can't say that Steven has mental health issues, whilst playing the 'big bad wolf Geelong' card, and then say that we're exploiting your club because of his need to get home.

Real exploitation would have been saying 'you can have Pick 93, and pay more than half his salary, because he'll retire anyway and doesn't want to go anywhere else'...and then it coming out later that we counselled Steven to say that he'll retire so we didn't have to pay a thing in draft picks or salary.

As it stands, we offered a lower pick, due to us paying the vast majority of his salary. That was already explained as the sticking point, as both clubs didn't want to pay a large amount of his salary. We ended up footing the bill, at the cost of you getting a negligible draft pick (which is still more than the Hawks paid for Patton who is 3 years younger and physically fit right now; as I pointed out earlier).

You need to understand, that there are several moving cogs involved in this deal. Brad Hill, Zac Smith, Steven, salary, draft picks etc. You acting liking it's just us getting a 'freebie' because we only gave up Pick 58, is disingenuous given that you've failed to mention the aforementioned in your argument.

If St Kilda had of held him, it would have been no different to GC holding Ablett to his contract, whilst his sister had documented issues that he needed to be home for - something they haven't been panned for despite the eventual outcome (nor should they). You had every right to hold him, but it was mutually agreed by all parties (once Brad Hill nominated you guys on big money), that he would come to Geelong. The sticking point was the salary, which is why it took so long for negotiations to go through.

For the record, I pushed for Jack to remain all year, if he was comfortable to return to St Kilda. I thought that was the best outcome for all concerned. You're speculating and sensationalizing, given that no-one has said anything bad about St Kilda possibly holding Jack to his contract (if that had of happened). As it stands, everyone got what they want and you're still here acting like we're the bad guys. Despite the fact that we're paying a big enough portion of his salary, that it allowed you to get Brad Hill, Zak Jones and Dougal Howard through the door on big money.

As I said before, it's done.

Move on.
Salary dump? So you know how much of his wage Geelong are paying? You honestly don't think if Jack had wanted to stay that would have been our preferred option? Bollocks.

I'll say it again. Geelong went too far in taking advantage of a delicate no win situation for the Saints. Their reputation has been affected.
 

DanA

Norm Smith Medallist
May 15, 2006
8,468
4,375
Richmond
AFL Club
Geelong
Salary dump? So you know how much of his wage Geelong are paying? You honestly don't think if Jack had wanted to stay that would have been our preferred option? Bollocks.

I'll say it again. Geelong went too far in taking advantage of a delicate no win situation for the Saints. Their reputation has been affected.
Again. You state this as fact without enough information being publically available to evaluate.
 

sgt5

Rookie
May 30, 2014
25
91
AFL Club
Geelong
I'll say it again. Geelong went too far in taking advantage of a delicate no win situation for the Saints. Their reputation has been affected.
Geelong has already been burned in this type of situation - when it traded out Varcoe for Clark. Everyone will agree Geelong lost badly on that trade. Steven wanted to return to Geelong and Geelong had every right to evaluate the risk and determine what they were willing to pay to take on the same risks again. No way was Steven worth a higher pick when it's very possible he may only play a few games for Geelong.
 

Ricky Vaughn

Premiership Player
Feb 9, 2015
3,404
6,342
AFL Club
Geelong
My bet is he becomes an absolute gun for them. I'm guessing that the powers that be at Geelong feel that way too. They played the risk card to the max, but they knew what they were getting. St Kilda were in a no win situation. Geelong have shown no class in this situation. None.. zero.. nada.
Let's be real here. Mental health issues in the AFL is still an area where the industry as a whole is finding its feet. It's not the same deal as a bad knee for example.
As I said, St Kilda were pretty much painted into a corner. Jack presented with mental health issues. It was put to the club that regarding those issues, it would be helpful for him to play for Geelong so he could be closer to his family. Imagine if the Saints had said no.
There is a certain risk taking Jack.. but again, let's be real here. He missed the best part of a season. How much has Daniher been on the park over the last few seasons, yet look at what they were asking for him.
Geelong's narrative right from the get go was to pretty much portray Jack as being next to worthless due to the apparently huge risk of taking him on. Right from when petulant child Chris Scott starting talking about it on 360. Geelong showed ZERO consideration for a fair deal. They saw an opportunity to exploit a delicate situation, and they did so, and then some.
I think there needs to be some sort of mutual respect shown in the industry when dealing with mental health issues. Obviously many others don't feel that way, including the geelong football club.
Jack is a 4 time b&f winner, who missed some footy. Geelong exploited the situation and showed no class. None.. zero... nada.
Wait, your opinion isn’t clear. How much class have Geelong shown?
 

vanderlay industries

Team Captain
Oct 24, 2012
545
825
Underground
AFL Club
Geelong
Chappy traded to essendon at age 31 for pick 84
Stevie J traded at 32 to GWS for future 5th
Sam Mitchell traded to West Coast in THE YEAR HE WON THE B&F!!!! for a packet of chips.

Honestly, how much do you think these old codgers are worth? Steven might be a bit younger but is nowhere near the level of these guys at his best let alone after not even training or playing for best part of the year.

You blokes have no idea :rolleyes:. Saint's just got an ~300k to spend on Hill & Co they otherwise wouldn't have had. They will be there for the next 5 years. Steven wouldn't.

Operation Save Richo's Job is over. Operation Win Football has begun. You guys need to move on too.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

MacStradbroke

Club Legend
Jul 19, 2015
2,349
4,464
AFL Club
Geelong
Chappy traded to essendon at age 31 for pick 84
Stevie J traded at 32 to GWS for future 5th
Sam Mitchell traded to West Coast in THE YEAR HE WON THE B&F!!!! for a packet of chips.

Honestly, how much do you think these old codgers are worth? Steven might be a bit younger but is nowhere near the level of these guys at his best let alone after not even training or playing for best part of the year.

You blokes have no idea :rolleyes:. Saint's just got an ~300k to spend on Hill & Co they otherwise wouldn't have had. They will be there for the next 5 years. Steven wouldn't.

Operation Save Richo's Job is over. Operation Win Football has begun. You guys need to move on too.
I think you are severely underestimating how good a footballer Jack Steven has been. In Hawks or Cats colours for the last ten years you may be judging him a lot differently.
 

Jeff76

Club Legend
May 5, 2014
2,826
4,286
AFL Club
Geelong
Salary dump? So you know how much of his wage Geelong are paying? You honestly don't think if Jack had wanted to stay that would have been our preferred option? Bollocks.

I'll say it again. Geelong went too far in taking advantage of a delicate no win situation for the Saints. Their reputation has been affected.
Steven comes out and has a cracking year and all of a sudden our reputation is impeccable and Saints is screwed, you guys couldn’t get him right.
 

Disco7

Senior List
Mar 31, 2008
151
93
Perth
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
Crystal Palace
If you don't understand what I was trying to say, then I'm not sure what to tell you, lol. Perhaps respond to the whole argument, rather than just selecting one line you don't like.

I'll clarify again. If you're simultaneously stipulating that he has mental health issues, whilst stating that we're exploiting the situation by not offering purported 'fair value', then you're trying to have both sides of the argument.

You can't say that Steven has mental health issues, whilst playing the 'big bad wolf Geelong' card, and then say that we're exploiting your club because of his need to get home.

Real exploitation would have been saying 'you can have Pick 93, and pay more than half his salary, because he'll retire anyway and doesn't want to go anywhere else'...and then it coming out later that we counselled Steven to say that he'll retire so we didn't have to pay a thing in draft picks or salary.

As it stands, we offered a lower pick, due to us paying the vast majority of his salary. That was already explained as the sticking point, as both clubs didn't want to pay a large amount of his salary. We ended up footing the bill, at the cost of you getting a negligible draft pick (which is still more than the Hawks paid for Patton who is 3 years younger and physically fit right now; as I pointed out earlier).

You need to understand, that there are several moving cogs involved in this deal. Brad Hill, Zac Smith, Steven, salary, draft picks etc. You acting liking it's just us getting a 'freebie' because we only gave up Pick 58, is disingenuous given that you've failed to mention the aforementioned in your argument.

If St Kilda had of held him, it would have been no different to GC holding Ablett to his contract, whilst his sister had documented issues that he needed to be home for - something they haven't been panned for despite the eventual outcome (nor should they). You had every right to hold him, but it was mutually agreed by all parties (once Brad Hill nominated you guys on big money), that he would come to Geelong. The sticking point was the salary, which is why it took so long for negotiations to go through.

For the record, I pushed for Jack to remain all year, if he was comfortable to return to St Kilda. I thought that was the best outcome for all concerned. You're speculating and sensationalizing, given that no-one has said anything bad about St Kilda possibly holding Jack to his contract (if that had of happened). As it stands, everyone got what they want and you're still here acting like we're the bad guys. Despite the fact that we're paying a big enough portion of his salary, that it allowed you to get Brad Hill, Zak Jones and Dougal Howard through the door on big money.

As I said before, it's done.

Move on.
Unfortunately Geelong can't play the moral high ground on this one. The only thing that I agree with is 'whats done is done'.

All Saints fans wish Jack well and hope that he can get back to his 2018 form.

I think you'll find that the Saints are still paying a considerable part of his salary, thus the final trade of pick 58? is pretty pathetic. At the end of the day AFL is a business and I'm just happy that the Saints didn't look at this trade like that.

Enjoy Jack he is a great player and he will give you guys so many great moments. Absolute 🌟
 

SaintsSeptember

Hall of Famer
Mar 19, 2008
38,305
26,060
Narre Warren North
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
.
Geelong has already been burned in this type of situation - when it traded out Varcoe for Clark. Everyone will agree Geelong lost badly on that trade. Steven wanted to return to Geelong and Geelong had every right to evaluate the risk and determine what they were willing to pay to take on the same risks again. No way was Steven worth a higher pick when it's very possible he may only play a few games for Geelong.
Yeah lets compare to Clark.

Steven's situation is pretty simple.
His mental health issues are very closely tied to the fact that his ex is living in or near Lorne with his only child.
Lorne is a world away from Moorabbin when you are working a full time job where you can't turn up exhausted.

So very good chance he'll play a lot of footy, especially if the Cats give him a bit of concession, like maybe knock of a bit early some days.

All well and good, we let him go, but don't start giving the commentary half way through the season that the Cats always find a way to stay competitive, if its in relation to Jack doing it.


Steven comes out and has a cracking year and all of a sudden our reputation is impeccable and Saints is screwed, you guys couldn’t get him right.

We couldn't get him right.
Correct . We cannot move Moorabbin closer to Lorne. Nothing to gloat about from the Cats side though.

I predict he'll have a pretty decent year, not his best ever, but enough that he sure as hell won't be borderline in the 22.
 

The Jack

Club Legend
Aug 24, 2013
1,346
3,047
AFL Club
St Kilda
Finished top 8 in the Brownlow in a side that only won a few games just over 12 months ago. If he can get himself right, both mentally and physically, he will be huge for the Cats. Massive loss for the Saints. Clearly our best player until the issues of this year.
 

Top Bottom