Recommitted Zach Merrett [UFA 2027] - Wanted a trade to Hawthorn, but it didn't get done

[Lore]

There we go, that's the clip:

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

If Merrett took the Charlie Curnow approach, the question is where would he have ended up at? My feeling is it would have been Adelaide and deal would have been more or less centred around Josh Rachele + 3 1st rounders . I think midfield minutes and money turns his head

Curnow after the trade went through said how relieved he was that he did not have to do this again in 12 months time.

In the end Merrett will likely ask again in 12 months time and Essendon will get way less just like they did with Daniher its probably the worst non-trade decision i can recall a club making.

 

[Jeremias]

Not going to answer the question?

No surprise.

Be gone.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

don't know why you're trying to present troll remarks as factual statements, but that doesn't particularly matter in the case of this trade. hawthorn tabled their first offer at the "final-ish" moment in the trade cycle for zach, including a player we had no real interest in beyond "rumours" from the same "ITKs" that said merrett was going to hawthorn.

we saw a successful trade this period between sydney and carlton wherein will hayward was treated as a bargaining chip successfully. players have plenty of autonomy, and clubs can push the screws in to get a deal done. it's laziness on behalf of hawthorn.

why would we exactly do this, since welsh, vozzo, scott, rosa and every other plodder under the sun at the club with a modicum of power said he's not being traded. why would the club do hawthorn's job for them since we, again, consistently held the perspective that he was not going anywhere. at no stage has the club (<-- very important here) stated otherwise, and would not entertain offers.

why does getting a "blessing" from hawthorn matter when it's clear that they don't really give a shit about contracts and the like already? why pussyfoot around when we're not interested?

why? did essendon do anything except stick by the clubs word of "we won't trade him". such an illogical and remarkably stupid remark.

you've typed a lot here, good work! but it's a whole steaming pile of shit that is essentially blaming essendon for hawthorn being lazy campaigners, and how it wasn't being fair when essendon categorically stood by it's word of "not trading zach merrett"

Essendon publicly said they weren't trading but sent a list management team to the trade period final day that didn't speak to any club except Hawthorn. It undermines their whole "we will not trade him thing" line (unless they enjoy wasting the time of their own list management team.)

Hayward was traded to a club that didn't have its captain trying to leave. It's a different proposition. Would Hayward have wanted to go to Essendon? Who knows. All we know is that Hayward agreed to go to Carlton, which is a completely different club. GC didn't roll players into the trade for Petracca - in fact they got 2x second rounders back for their high draft picks.

Hawthorn had our limit on trading. We stuck to it. We always do. Disappointing it wasn't enough to get merrett but trading out of two years worth of drafts for a single player isn't a good idea. The cost there is more than the gain to us.

Essendon missed a golden opportunity to turn those picks into someone that wanted to be at Essendon, either through trading up in the draft or with one of the targets that they had been talking to through the year (although it doesn't seem they actually considering going after players - possibly another missed opportunity there). That's a decision they made and they seem happy with it.

Both clubs had their limit - and there was no overlap to get a deal done. The obsession with trying to criticise Hawthorn for it is bizzare. We don't throw players at clubs they don't want to go to. We have standards.

 

[Back Pocket Rocket]

There is way too much focus on the two clubs involved here, and way too little focus on the player manager and the media.

Essendon were clear he wasn’t going to be traded.

Hawthorn were clear they weren’t going to include a star player or pay what they perceived as overs.

The deal was never getting done. The people who mucked the most shit and made this a disaster aren’t being held accountable, and that’s the media and Petoro.

Bingo!

 

[boncer34]

We don't throw players at clubs they don't want to go to. We have standards.

Ryan Burton wishes those standards existed when he was a Hawk.

 

[TheFourPillars]

Ryan Burton wishes those standards existed when he was a Hawk.

Ryan Burton was a bit up himself. Did not get along with the playing group.

 

[jannissary]

Hayward was traded to a club that didn't have its captain trying to leave. It's a different proposition. Would Hayward have wanted to go to Essendon? Who knows. All we know is that Hayward agreed to go to Carlton, which is a completely different club. GC didn't roll players into the trade for Petracca - in fact they got 2x second rounders back for their high draft picks.

a lot of what you've said is trite and irrelevant, but i'll focus on this.

GC has some highly rated acadmy kids that'll likely be taken earlier, having those second round picks is good for matching. it makes sense that they'd do that. essendon does not currently have the list spots avaliable, nor the probable interest in el-akchar or sweid attracting top 10 bids from oppo clubs, which means we'd have no real interest in trading up unless we bundle picks together to get number 1 off west coast (never happening). since the trade period has ended, we've delisted hobbs and lual, and might with setterfield too, having more essentially valueless picks for us to use would've been a significant waste. as for hayward, i believe i read/heard that he wasn't interested in being traded to carlton, but still agreed to it. very different than a club not doing their due diligence and finding a comparable best 22 player to trade back for a significant player upgrade.

 

[Lore]

Essendon publicly said they weren't trading but sent a list management team to the trade period final day that didn't speak to any club except Hawthorn. It undermines their whole "we will not trade him thing" line (unless they enjoy wasting the time of their own list management team.)

It’s mandatory for clubs to attend on day 1 and deadline day

 

[Lore]

Essendon missed a golden opportunity to turn those picks into someone that wanted to be at Essendon, either through trading up in the draft or with one of the targets that they had been talking to through the year (although it doesn't seem they actually considering going after players - possibly another missed opportunity there). That's a decision they made and they seem happy with it.

We already have more picks than we can use…

We still have picks enough to move up in the draft

We can still get players who want to be here

Hawthorn’s piddling second rounders aren’t moving the dial on any of that

 

[Lore]

Ryan Burton was a bit up himself. Did not get along with the playing group.

So Hawthorn only push players out that have flaws?

 

[TheFourPillars]

So Hawthorn only push players out that have flaws?

The question was raised about Burton mate. In general clubs do what they think is best for the club that is not exclusive to Hawthorn.

 

[GoEaglesGoSGIO]

Curnow after the trade went through said how relieved he was that he did not have to do this again in 12 months time.

In the end Merrett will likely ask again in 12 months time and Essendon will get way less just like they did with Daniher its probably the worst non-trade decision i can recall a club making.

He aint going to Hawthorn in 2026. Its done and dusted

 

[Lore]

The question was raised about Burton mate. In general clubs do what they think is best for the club that is not exclusive to Hawthorn.

In the Merrett thread, in relation to Hawthorn refusing to even contemplate attaching any other player to this trade except for Henry Hustwaite.

 

[TheFourPillars]

In the Merrett thread, in relation to Hawthorn refusing to even contemplate attaching any other player to this trade except for Henry Hustwaite.

Henry wanted to leave so we provided a pathway. Essendon had already spoken to him Ramsden. Your interest in rucks and ruck forwards cooled. I am not sure anyone else wanted to leave and we were not going to push them out.

 

[boncer34]

Henry wanted to leave so we provided a pathway. Essendon had already spoken to him Ramsden. Your interest in rucks and ruck forwards cooled. I am not sure anyone else wanted to leave and we were not going to push them out.

The comment was Hawthorn don't push players out because "standards."

I was simply pointing out a past Hawthorn player that wished those standards existed when he played.

 

[Lance Uppercut]

As I've already stated and burnt bridges in the process doing so. Hawthorn could have potentially enquired half their own team by constantly going back and forth, back and forth, etc.. about how they felt about moving to one of the worst performing teams in the league for the past 20 years or so, if they had to entirely guess what sort of player the Bombers were interested in and still not correctly identify the player the Bombers thought could seal the deal.

That would have been extremely dumb and a recipe for disaster as that would have no doubt have had huge negative impact on their culture. Treating players as disposable commodities never goes down well for a club.

The very least the Bombers could have done is give Hawthorn a list of say at least 3 players, and maybe as many as 10, that they were keen on that in their opinion would get them to agree to a trade for Merrett. If Hawthorn refuses to any suggested player then that's that, nobody would have wasted their time but I suspect that's precisely what Essendon wanted.

If Hawthorn had been open to 1 or more of the suggested players than Hawthorn would then have given Essendon their blessing so-to-speak to approach them and woo them to come to the Bombers.

I understand that the Bombers were not the ones pushing for a trade but keeping a player against their will, especially when the suitor offered a more than fair deal, would have not gone unnoticed by their own players and those at other clubs and I have no doubt that the bad reputation acquired from this failed trade will have dire repercussions for the Bombers in future trade periods.

the concept of meeting the terms of a contract as "holding someone against their will" is pretty funny.

I should take that approach with the bank and see if those dastardly pricks will hold me to my mortgage against my will. It's just not fair!

 

[jannissary]

Henry wanted to leave so we provided a pathway. Essendon had already spoken to him Ramsden. Your interest in rucks and ruck forwards cooled. I am not sure anyone else wanted to leave and we were not going to push them out.

i think our team probably watched ramsden's footage when he had the opportunity to play this year and lost interest very quickly, same as hustwaite (though i don't think essendon ever explicitely stated "we want him")

 

[Lore]

Henry wanted to leave so we provided a pathway. Essendon had already spoken to him Ramsden. Your interest in rucks and ruck forwards cooled. I am not sure anyone else wanted to leave and we were not going to push them out.

Another one held against their will

 

[jannissary]

Another one held against their will

talk about alcatraz!

 

[EBERT THE KING]

I have no idea how the team that ended the trade period with a deal of

Hawthorn out: Worpel, Jiath, Serong, 9, 31 and a 2026 4th

Hawthorn In: Pick 10, 22, future third (Sydney) and a future 4th (Melbourne)\

Is seen as the winners here...

Thats a horrible trade period for Hawthorn.

 

[Jeremy McLovin]

Another one held against their will

How could hawthorn do this

 

[HirdsTheWord]

The question was raised about Burton mate. In general clubs do what they think is best for the club that is not exclusive to Hawthorn.

No actually.

The statement was made (by a hwks supporter) that Hawks don't throw players out of the club who don't want to leave. Which is a factually incorrect statement as someone mentioned Burton, who didn't want to leave the Hawks when you traded him.

You than, true to hawthorn supporters form in this thread, providing a coping mechanism why you traded him.

Irrespective though, the original statement is still incorrect. Hawthorn do indeed trade players who want to be there.

 

[FootyGuru]

I noticed there isn’t a weddle thread yet?

Bombers offered him a 10 million dollar contract.

Hawks will have to pony up big time to keep him.

 

[Mitchell Madness]

I noticed there isn’t a weddle thread yet?

Bombers offered him a 10 million dollar contract.

Hawks will have to pony up big time to keep him.

Weddle will take a pay cut yo avoid going to essendon

 

[Lore]

To the Weddle thread!

Speculation - Josh Weddle [OOC 2026] - Essendon offer huge contract

The Bombers revenge tour begins. https://www.afl.com.au/news/1444535/bold-essendon-bombers-put-forward-massive-offer-to-hawthorn-hawks-young-gun-josh-weddle AFL.com.au can reveal the Bombers have put forward an offer of at least seven years for Weddle, which would take him through to 2033...

www.bigfooty.com