Saints chasing big names

[SaintPav]

cost very little in terms of draft picks

Giving away a round two draft pick is way too expensive for an injury prone 28 year old coming off two very ordinary seasons!

But we got pick 28 back in that deal (as well as outlaying pick 39)... It is just plain dishonest to characterize the deal as Hannebury for a 2nd rounder when we got a second rounder back.

In the end we traded 28 for 2 picks and got Bytel (who we wanted at around 33-35, which is known because we tried to trade up in picks for him i.e. where 28 ended after priority picks etc) as well as Parker. Parker we got with a pick around the mark of where 39 ended so that cancels out.

The other player we apparently liked was Will Hammill who went to Adeliade at 30... we could not have got him with the pick 28 we traded out... so that did not affect us

So in the end we more or less traded next years second for Hannebury *and Bytel*

So, lets judge on that basis rather than Hannebury for a second which is plain wrong.

Good post

I still think an injury prone 28 yo Hannebury coming off two very poor seasons is a big mistake and he is in no way worth $800,000 for four or five years.
I'll be surprised if he plays more games than he misses through injury and poor form.
Very happy to be proven wrong on this.

I think you are right but I really hope you are wrong.

I was totally against the recruitment of DH but now he is a Sainter I’m hoping for the best.

[SaintPav]

Yep, 2018 all over again. Joffa keeps stalking Ted like a school yard bully boy...then has nothing original to offer the forum like the SS.net mature aged online gang on here. Lol!

78 replies and my first topic for 2019 has only been active for 48 hours. Ted brings discussion to this forum whether you like it or not.

Wow, referring to yourself in the third person......winning....

Why do I always think of George Costanza when I read Teddysainters posts?

Classic

[HitTheBoundary]

I've heard the same from my sources.

Our people are talking to their people, but their people are also talking to other people, but we're not talking to them.

Not sure how it will play out, it depends on a lot of factors, especially with their people. We may talk to the other people, but if one of the big fish is landed then dominos may fall and the next thing you know it's all Berlin wall all over again and you never know your luck in a big city.

Watch this space.

[samoht]

Went backwards with Stan Alves? The guy who got us into our first Grand Final for a generation, in a season in which we finished on top of the ladder for only the second time in 100 years, plus our first Night Grand Final win since 1958? Nah, don't think so.

Backwards relative to the previous sacked coach (Sheldon) on the basis of W/L vs W/L.
Despite the fact that we had a star-studded list in 1997 (thanks to some great recruiting, what else?) and made the Grand Final (and should have won it), Alve's W/L percentage was 6% below Sheldon's (48% cf 54%) and we lost more games than we won during his tenure.
The following year (1998) St Kilda finished 6th under Alves (with a percentage of only 102%) - there were only 16 teams back then. We only won 1 out of our last 8 games that year (if we include the 2 lost finals).
Maybe Sheldon would have played someone else on Jarman, not Shanahan - in the 1997 grand final (had he been the coach)?


Ken Sheldon 89 48 40 1 54.49% W/L 1990–93
Stan Alves 115 55 59 1 48.26% W/L 1994–98

[Jacks Back]

Went backwards with Stan Alves? The guy who got us into our first Grand Final for a generation, in a season in which we finished on top of the ladder for only the second time in 100 years, plus our first Night Grand Final win since 1958? Nah, don't think so.

Backwards relative to the previous sacked coach (Sheldon) on the basis of W/L vs W/L.
Despite the fact that we had a star-studded list in 1997 (thanks to some great recruiting, what else?) and made the Grand Final (and should have won it), Alve's W/L percentage was 6% below Sheldon's (48% cf 54%) and we lost more games than we won during his tenure.
The following year (1998) St Kilda finished 6th under Alves (with a percentage of only 102%) - there were only 16 teams back then. We only won 1 out of our last 8 games that year (if we include the 2 lost finals).
Maybe Sheldon would have played someone else on Jarman, not Shanahan - in the 1997 grand final (had he been the coach)?


Ken Sheldon 89 48 40 1 54.49% W/L 1990–93
Stan Alves 115 55 59 1 48.26% W/L 1994–98

And then we sacked Alves and appointed Timmy Watson. What a great move!

[samoht]

And then we sacked Alves and appointed Timmy Watson. What a great move!

Exactly!
The aim is always to improve the sacked coach with the replacement coach - but it mostly backfires (if history is our guide).

Instead of trying to improve the coach, how about concentrating on improving the list?
For that we need to focus on improving our recruiting.

[samuraisaint]

Went backwards with Stan Alves? The guy who got us into our first Grand Final for a generation, in a season in which we finished on top of the ladder for only the second time in 100 years, plus our first Night Grand Final win since 1958? Nah, don't think so.

Backwards relative to the previous sacked coach (Sheldon) on the basis of W/L vs W/L.
Despite the fact that we had a star-studded list in 1997 (thanks to some great recruiting, what else?) and made the Grand Final (and should have won it), Alve's W/L percentage was 6% below Sheldon's (48% cf 54%) and we lost more games than we won during his tenure.
The following year (1998) St Kilda finished 6th under Alves (with a percentage of only 102%) - there were only 16 teams back then. We only won 1 out of our last 8 games that year (if we include the 2 lost finals).
Maybe Sheldon would have played someone else on Jarman, not Shanahan - in the 1997 grand final (had he been the coach)?


Ken Sheldon 89 48 40 1 54.49% W/L 1990–93
Stan Alves 115 55 59 1 48.26% W/L 1994–98

I spoke with Kenny Sheldon at a club function and told him that I believe his tenure as coach was the beginning of St. Kilda becoming a professional competitive outfit onfield again, and I wasn't being disingenuous. To this day I believe that we played some of the most exciting footy under Kenny that I have ever seen as a Saints supporter in my lifetime. I was upset when he wasn't re-contracted. However, we were on a downward spiral after 1992. Players were leaving (McAdam, Lockett) and I believe Winmar probably had one foot out the door too in 1993. Regardless of the win/loss ratio, I don't think we went backwards under Alves because we achieved more things.
Losing our ruck combo on the eve of the finals in 1997 which was one of our strengths, and a key line breaker in Joel Smith late in the season proved to be the difference on Grand Final day. Add to that Nicky Winmar's dad passing away the very night before the game and Stewie Loewe's sister being hospitalised in serious circumstances days before the Grand Final compounded the herculean effort it would take to win the Flag on that ill-fated day. No way could Stan be blamed for that. Talk about Bad Moon Rising
Although I wholeheartedly agree that the decision to play Shanahan one out like a shag on a rock against Jarman - and leaving him there in the last quarter was a grave error - but we must remember, a coach of the ilk of Denis Pagan, no less, did exactly the same thing the very next year, in exactly the same circumstances.

[samoht]

I spoke with Kenny Sheldon at a club function and told him that I believe his tenure as coach was the beginning of St. Kilda becoming a professional competitive outfit onfield again, and I wasn't being disingenuous. To this day I believe that we played some of the most exciting footy under Kenny that I have ever seen as a Saints supporter in my lifetime. I was upset when he wasn't re-contracted. However, we were on a downward spiral after 1992. Players were leaving (McAdam, Lockett) and I believe Winmar probably had one foot out the door too in 1993. Regardless of the win/loss ratio, I don't think we went backwards under Alves because we achieved more things.
Losing our ruck combo on the eve of the finals in 1997 which was one of our strengths, and a key line breaker in Joel Smith late in the season proved to be the difference on Grand Final day. Add to that Nicky Winmar's dad passing away the very night before the game and Stewie Loewe's sister being hospitalised in serious circumstances days before the Grand Final compounded the herculean effort it would take to win the Flag on that ill-fated day. No way could Stan be blamed for that. Talk about Bad Moon Rising
Although I wholeheartedly agree that the decision to play Shanahan one out like a shag on a rock against Jarman - and leaving him there in the last quarter was a grave error - but we must remember, a coach of the ilk of Denis Pagan, no less, did exactly the same thing the very next year, in exactly the same circumstances.

That's why I cringe when coaches are rated based purely on their W/L (33% from 100 games, or whatever) - and the details, reasons and factors (like the ones you've expressed) are not taken into account - worse still , completely ignored/glossed over and forgotten.
We need to pay all coaches the same courtesy as you have with Sheldon and Alves.

Our list is average, at best - it's not balanced (we lack outside run, kicking skills in general, and A graders in general - an A grade ruckman would be nice, etc.. ) .... so we need an easy draw and a good run with injuries to finish around the middle of the ladder, with 50% w/l - which we did in 2016 and 2017.
The 2016 season took me and I bet everyone else here by surprise - but other teams have kept recruiting better than we have and we copped a lot of injuries to our average list last year.

We need to focus on improving our recruiting - land some proven, healthy big fish and not just rely on the draft - and we need to draft and recruit according to our needs, and not be so speculative.

[Spinner]

In all seriousness...did anyone see us or even for a microsecond of their life think we would pick up Dan H this time last year? No, so stand by and watch this space.

In all seriousness imho Hannebury is a massive mistake.
800,000 over 4 or 5 years for a 28 yo who last year was ranked around 365 in the AFL
His best football is way behind him.
I watched his last game for Sydney where he was soft in some contests and turned it over almost every time he touched the ball and I prayed they would not be so stupid as to waste a pick on him.
Then they paid way too much money and gave away the second round pick in next years draft
I fully expect him to be sidelined for more games than he plays.
And then you carry on like we just snared Dustin Martin
SERIOUSLY

Hannebery was a step towards being elite talent in - with the intention of getting him back to his best which he did for 8 years straight. He has been injured like what happens to a lot of players.

And if you hadn't noticed there wasn't a long list of other waiting to come. Hannebery is the bridge towards getting elite talent in at the top of their game.

That 800k would have to go to other non performing players already on the list. A chance w Hannebery but a chance we needed to take to move the club forward towards being a desination club. Remember, Dylan Shiel's 1.4m space also needs to be absorbed by non- performing players too.

The draft pick was a bargain. We got him incredible cheap in terms of picks because we took on his salary.

[Spinner]

Are there any names in this thread?

[Myron Gaines]

Recruiting Hanneberry was not all about his on field performance. It’s obvious we targeted him to bring in leadership, change the underperforming team culture & improve standards on & off the field. If Hanneberry’s inclusion means we get 5% more input from half a dozen players then the recruitment is justified. I couldn’t give a rats about how much he’s getting paid when there’s a minimum cap requirement which has forced the club to overpay underperforming players for years.

[SydneySainter]

In all seriousness...did anyone see us or even for a microsecond of their life think we would pick up Dan H this time last year? No, so stand by and watch this space.

In all seriousness imho Hannebury is a massive mistake.
800,000 over 4 or 5 years for a 28 yo who last year was ranked around 365 in the AFL
His best football is way behind him.
I watched his last game for Sydney where he was soft in some contests and turned it over almost every time he touched the ball and I prayed they would not be so stupid as to waste a pick on him.
Then they paid way too much money and gave away the second round pick in next years draft
I fully expect him to be sidelined for more games than he plays.
And then you carry on like we just snared Dustin Martin
SERIOUSLY

Hannebery was a step towards being elite talent in - with the intention of getting him back to his best which he did for 8 years straight. He has been injured like what happens to a lot of players.

And if you hadn't noticed there wasn't a long list of other waiting to come. Hannebery is the bridge towards getting elite talent in at the top of their game.

That 800k would have to go to other non performing players already on the list. A chance w Hannebery but a chance we needed to take to move the club forward towards being a desination club. Remember, Dylan Shiel's 1.4m space also needs to be absorbed by non- performing players too.

The draft pick was a bargain. We got him incredible cheap in terms of picks because we took on his salary.

That and also trying to sell supporters a bit of hope. The club has been promising big recruits for some years now and had failed to deliver, so this was also a bit of a PR move, even though Dan isn't in the elite category anymore.

Some good points above, so lets be realistic about Dan. He came cheaply, he was still under contract and Sydney didn't exactly fight to keep him. We still got a 2nd round pick in return! They were clearly skeptical about his ability to get back to even close his best.

We shouldn't expect miracles. I'm sure he's a handy addition, but even getting back to 70% of his best would be a big win for us.

[magnifisaint]

Has anyone given thought that maybe Hannerbury is sick of living in Sydney and just wanted to come home. Maybe he went through the motions in his last year and was sick of Sydney. Sometimes we just get sick of the job and the enviroment that we're in.

[magnifisaint]

Has anyone given thought that maybe Hannerbury is sick of living in Sydney and just wanted to come home. Maybe he went through the motions in his last year and was sick of Sydney. Sometimes we just get sick of the job and the enviroment that we're in.

Great post!
I think you hit the nail on the head.

[SydneySainter]

Has anyone given thought that maybe Hannerbury is sick of living in Sydney and just wanted to come home. Maybe he went through the motions in his last year and was sick of Sydney. Sometimes we just get sick of the job and the enviroment that we're in.

Unlikely.

Even if that was the case, he was still under contract at Sydney - to which he was a willing participant when he signed. If Sydney thought it was just a case of homesicknesses, they would have asked for a lot more than what we gave and we wouldn't have gotten a 2nd rounder back.

[Scollop]

Has anyone given thought that maybe Hannerbury is sick of living in Sydney and just wanted to come home. Maybe he went through the motions in his last year and was sick of Sydney. Sometimes we just get sick of the job and the enviroment that we're in.

Great post!
I think you hit the nail on the head.

Did you forget to log in with your other nic

[magnifisaint]

Has anyone given thought that maybe Hannerbury is sick of living in Sydney and just wanted to come home. Maybe he went through the motions in his last year and was sick of Sydney. Sometimes we just get sick of the job and the enviroment that we're in.

Great post!
I think you hit the nail on the head.

Did you forget to log in with your other nic

Sorry Ive forgotten my other nic.
What was it again?

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

Don't be surprised if another out of the blue Dan H type trade story pops up later on in the season.

[dragit]

Don't be surprised if a player or two get delisted and there is the possibility that someone will get traded in or maybe out. Watch this space.

Looking like we'll participate in next years draft too.

[satchmo]

Don't be surprised if nothing surprising happens.

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

Do be surprised if a surprise doesn't happen close to the trade period which is full of surprises on a daily surprise basis. As we know, the world is full of surprises, the AFL world is even more full of surprises. Don't also be surprised if certain posters on here can never understand what a surprise is. That will surprise me even further if they do.

[dragit]

We should just have a sticky for you ted:

Things might happen.*

You could put all your non-details of things that aren't happening in there and other beige vagaries.

[Gordo']

ffs, that should fix the flowering problem.

[Gordo']

Don't be surprised if nothing surprising happens.

i support st kilda and flowering scuntthorpe. ffs, nothing flowering surprises me.

[Joffa Burns]

Don't be surprised if another out of the blue Dan H type trade story pops up later on in the season.

Are we on trading Dan at the end of the season?