Toast Stephen Wells

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

4quarter_cat said:
Did I miss something?
Click to expand...

There have been a few Hawk fans questioning how wise it was to draft Gartlett with pick 38, especially as they could have used that pick on Jake Kolodjashnij.
 
lots we can toast stephen wells for without the need to make light of a young guy struggling with life.

hawks took a chance on him, and it didnt work out.

i for one hope he is happy with his decision to quit football. as much as most on here might wish they had a chance in the AFL, not everyone wants it, and not everyone will become better people as a result of playing the game at the highest level, or indeed any level.

good luck to garlett — hope he has made the right decision for himself, and can find something in life he does wish to pursue.
 
barmy44 said:
lots we can toast stephen wells for without the need to make light of a young guy struggling with life.

hawks took a chance on him, and it didnt work out.

i for one hope he is happy with his decision to quit football. as much as most on here might wish they had a chance in the AFL, not everyone wants it, and not everyone will become better people as a result of playing the game at the highest level, or indeed any level.

good luck to garlett — hope he has made the right decision for himself, and can find something in life he does wish to pursue.
Click to expand...

Didn't give any thought to DG, this is not a dig at him. I for one was a little disappointed we didn't snap him up before the Hawks, but given the wraps on JJ and seeing JK in the flesh on the weekend, who looks like a 10 year player for mine, again I'm happy to defer to Wells' better judgement.

More than happy to have a dig at the Dawks though..
 
supahoops said:
Didn't give any thought to DG, this is not a dig at him. I for one was a little disappointed we didn't snap him up before the Hawks, but given the wraps on JJ and seeing JK in the flesh on the weekend, who looks like a 10 year player for mine, again I'm happy to defer to Wells' better judgement.

More than happy to have a dig at the Dawks though..
Click to expand...

But Geelong were right to pass on Garlett weren't we? Hawthorn if anything were far too trusting.
 
In all fairness to the dawks though.

We don't know why they picked him, and now they have to delist 1 fewer players at the end of the year, and will have 1 fewer list cloggers from this years draft on their list.

Could be a big advantage for them.
 
4quarter_cat said:
In all fairness to the dawks though.

We don't know why they picked him, and now they have to delist 1 fewer players at the end of the year, and will have 1 fewer list cloggers from this years draft on their list.

Could be a big advantage for them.
Click to expand...

Despite what the media and society tell you, football clubs aren't charities. They're under no obligation to draft anyone, and those players are employees - they're there to do a job. If they can't do that job they don't need to keep them. If a player is too much trouble to handle they're perfectly entitled to cut them loose. I've got no problem with what Hawthorn did at all, especially as Geelong have done the same.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Partridge said:
But Geelong were right to pass on Garlett weren't we? Hawthorn if anything were far too trusting.
Click to expand...

Absolutely!

4quarter_cat said:
In all fairness to the dawks though.

We don't know why they picked him, and now they have to delist 1 fewer players at the end of the year, and will have 1 fewer list cloggers from this years draft on their list.

Could be a big advantage for them.
Click to expand...

Wow, drawing a positive out of this is for the Dawks is a long bow to draw.
 
supahoops said:
Wow, drawing a positive out of this is for the Dawks is a long bow to draw.
Click to expand...

Every cloud has a silver lining. All I'm saying is that its possible Hawthorn drafted him thinking this could happen, and if it did that would open up more space for them to negotiate with the apparently large number of high quality free agents at the end of the year, without having to delist other players they see something in. (kinda like delaying a draft pick 12 months cause you think it will be more valuable then)

also, think partridge needs to re-read my post cause his response makes no sense what so ever to my original statement.
 
Partridge said:
Despite what the media and society tell you, football clubs aren't charities. They're under no obligation to draft anyone, and those players are employees - they're there to do a job. If they can't do that job they don't need to keep them. If a player is too much trouble to handle they're perfectly entitled to cut them loose. I've got no problem with what Hawthorn did at all, especially as Geelong have done the same.
Click to expand...

Huh? Please re-read my post. Seems you missed the point entirely. Not for one minute did I suggest hawthorn considered anyone other than themselves.
 
4quarter_cat said:
Every cloud has a silver lining. All I'm saying is that its possible Hawthorn drafted him thinking this could happen, and if it did that would open up more space for them to negotiate with the apparently large number of high quality free agents at the end of the year, without having to delist other players they see something in. (kinda like delaying a draft pick 12 months cause you think it will be more valuable then)

also, think partridge needs to re-read my post cause his response makes no sense what so ever to my original statement.
Click to expand...

They would 100% prefer having a player on their list who is too good to cut than having another list spot open.
Would you rather be in the Cats position in the last few years of having to make hard calls on delistings or in Melbournes case where they could get rid of 20 players and not feel it?
It is definitely not a positive.
 
Partridge said:
But Geelong were right to pass on Garlett weren't we? Hawthorn if anything were far too trusting.
Click to expand...
After securing arguably the recruit of the year, Ben McEvoy, and having done this year after year in recent times, hawks are entitled to one bad selection
 
Catatonic Shock said:
They would 100% prefer having a player on their list who is too good to cut than having another list spot open.
Would you rather be in the Cats position in the last few years of having to make hard calls on delistings or in Melbournes case where they could get rid of 20 players and not feel it?
It is definitely not a positive.
Click to expand...

You are probably right CS, I am just playing devils advocate.

It is possible that Hawthorn figured it was worth the punt is the point I was makeing.
 
4quarter_cat said:
You are probably right CS, I am just playing devils advocate.

It is possible that Hawthorn figured it was worth the punt is the point I was makeing.
Click to expand...

Absolutely it was, especially for a team that arguably has a full list as it is.
His talent is immense so if it worked out they had an outstanding player ready to go, unfortunately for the hawks and AFL in general he enjoys drugs and parties too much to knuckle down to play the game at the highest level.
 
Catatonic Shock said:
Absolutely it was, especially for a team that arguably has a full list as it is.
His talent is immense so if it worked out they had an outstanding player ready to go, unfortunately for the hawks and AFL in general he enjoys drugs and parties too much to knuckle down to play the game at the highest level.
Click to expand...
Does this sound like someone we all know and hate, who used to wear brown and gold but now dresses in different colours?
 
Teriyakicat said:
Does this sound like someone we all know and hate, who used to wear brown and gold but now dresses in different colours?
Click to expand...
Campbell Brown was sacked. :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top