FB Rumour RE Hannebery’s hamstring

[skeptic]

Just a question?
Who have we lost because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Hannerbury?
Who didn't we recruit because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Dan Hannerbury?

We play in a competition where we must pay x% of our salary cap every year.
What does it matter who we pay it to if it doesn't impact who we keep or go after?

Acres maybe?
Was given away for next to nothing reportedly post Hill deal.
Seems to be the only one squeezed out for nothing in return.

Don’t know if he was squeezed out or it was more of a case of hard bargaining by Freo... but it’s a decent example nonetheless. Acres didn’t reach the hype with us that we hoped he would, and Hanners form when he was playing is/was a cut above that of Blake.

But, I’d have preferred to have Blake on the list because chances were very high... that even after an injury plagued start to the season, he would actually be available to play far more than Dan would.
Would be mighty handy about now.

It’s not who didn’t we get or lose... we’ve recruited a player that’s not playing and won’t be playing for the majority of his contract. That’s a spot on the list for no benefit.

The only potential positive I can see is based on the rumour that Sydney cut us some slack on the Jones deal on account of us doing them a favour with Hannerbery

[Ghost Like]

Just a question?
Who have we lost because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Hannerbury?
Who didn't we recruit because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Dan Hannerbury?

We play in a competition where we must pay x% of our salary cap every year.
What does it matter who we pay it to if it doesn't impact who we keep or go after?

Acres maybe?
Was given away for next to nothing reportedly post Hill deal.
Seems to be the only one squeezed out for nothing in return.

Don’t know if he was squeezed out or it was more of a case of hard bargaining by Freo... but it’s a decent example nonetheless. Acres didn’t reach the hype with us that we hoped he would, and Hanners form when he was playing is/was a cut above that of Blake.

But, I’d have preferred to have Blake on the list because chances were very high... that even after an injury plagued start to the season, he would actually be available to play far more than Dan would.
Would be mighty handy about now.

It’s not who didn’t we get or lose... we’ve recruited a player that’s not playing and won’t be playing for the majority of his contract. That’s a spot on the list for no benefit.

The only potential positive I can see is based on the rumour that Sydney cut us some slack on the Jones deal on account of us doing them a favour with Hannerbery

Acres is a great example & in my opinion he would not have been released if we believed DH would play less games than Byrnes (highly likely).

I'm also not convinced what we did with Sydney was a favour. I believe we were beaten in the trade by our desperation. That includes salary, length of contract plus a trade pick for a player they wanted off their books.

Who came in the 2019 draft, "players that saw us as a destination club" is a narrative now used to justify DH because nothing else about it makes a whole lot of sense.

[skeptic]

Just a question?
Who have we lost because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Hannerbury?
Who didn't we recruit because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Dan Hannerbury?

We play in a competition where we must pay x% of our salary cap every year.
What does it matter who we pay it to if it doesn't impact who we keep or go after?

Acres maybe?
Was given away for next to nothing reportedly post Hill deal.
Seems to be the only one squeezed out for nothing in return.

Don’t know if he was squeezed out or it was more of a case of hard bargaining by Freo... but it’s a decent example nonetheless. Acres didn’t reach the hype with us that we hoped he would, and Hanners form when he was playing is/was a cut above that of Blake.

But, I’d have preferred to have Blake on the list because chances were very high... that even after an injury plagued start to the season, he would actually be available to play far more than Dan would.
Would be mighty handy about now.

It’s not who didn’t we get or lose... we’ve recruited a player that’s not playing and won’t be playing for the majority of his contract. That’s a spot on the list for no benefit.

The only potential positive I can see is based on the rumour that Sydney cut us some slack on the Jones deal on account of us doing them a favour with Hannerbery

Acres is a great example & in my opinion he would not have been released if we believed DH would play less games than Byrnes (highly likely).

I'm also not convinced what we did with Sydney was a favour. I believe we were beaten in the trade by our desperation. That includes salary, length of contract plus a trade pick for a player they wanted off their books.

Who came in the 2019 draft, "players that saw us as a destination club" is a narrative now used to justify DH because nothing else about it makes a whole lot of sense.

Agreed.

Certainly not suggesting the Sydney narrative. It’s just the best explanation I’ve heard other than a desperate Richo was willing to take a HUGE and costly long shot in a desperate attempt to save his job.

There’s absolutely no evidence, no reports, no rumours, no anecdotes of any players that said geeeez if Hannerbery is willing to go to the Saints, then I’d definitely now consider going too.
The smoking gun is quite literally that the season after he came... the season where we sacked the coach and got a better one, more players came.

[saintly]

Just a question?
Who have we lost because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Hannerbury?
Who didn't we recruit because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Dan Hannerbury?

We play in a competition where we must pay x% of our salary cap every year.
What does it matter who we pay it to if it doesn't impact who we keep or go after?

Acres maybe?
Was given away for next to nothing reportedly post Hill deal.
Seems to be the only one squeezed out for nothing in return.

has Acres done anything since going to Freo?

[perfectionist]

has Acres done anything since going to Freo?

I believe he has found more space since going to Freo - so much so that he's changed his name to Hectares.

[Ghost Like]

Just a question?
Who have we lost because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Hannerbury?
Who didn't we recruit because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Dan Hannerbury?

We play in a competition where we must pay x% of our salary cap every year.
What does it matter who we pay it to if it doesn't impact who we keep or go after?

Acres maybe?
Was given away for next to nothing reportedly post Hill deal.
Seems to be the only one squeezed out for nothing in return.

has Acres done anything since going to Freo?

He's got over a soft tissue injury and beginning to string games together.

[Saintmatt]

Just a question?
Who have we lost because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Hannerbury?
Who didn't we recruit because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Dan Hannerbury?

We play in a competition where we must pay x% of our salary cap every year.
What does it matter who we pay it to if it doesn't impact who we keep or go after?

Acres maybe?
Was given away for next to nothing reportedly post Hill deal.
Seems to be the only one squeezed out for nothing in return.

has Acres done anything since going to Freo?

He's done not much at all. Last sighted at the top of Geelong's goal square fumbling a chest mark last night. The only thing I understand about Acres situation regarding his departure was that he was due a pretty sizeable pay increase this season (which would've taken his salaru up to somewhere in the order of $550K pa). I was a big Acres fan (admittedly based on relatively small number of random actions and hype) but not even I could justify that salary for Blake.

I would love to have kept him but, in the end - he'd become a list clogger. I dare say that's more the fault of our seriously poor record of player development as much as anything. Am I happy Dan's not playing? No. Am I happy that Blake's still not with us? No. But I do know that one player has won a flag and is seriously highly regarded by his peers (teammates and opposition) and the other is now largely invisible at Freo. I wish Blake the best but, I'm not unhappy having Dan on out books for playing / direction credibility alone.

[skeptic]

Just a question?
Who have we lost because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Hannerbury?
Who didn't we recruit because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Dan Hannerbury?

We play in a competition where we must pay x% of our salary cap every year.
What does it matter who we pay it to if it doesn't impact who we keep or go after?

Acres maybe?
Was given away for next to nothing reportedly post Hill deal.
Seems to be the only one squeezed out for nothing in return.

has Acres done anything since going to Freo?

He's done not much at all. Last sighted at the top of Geelong's goal square fumbling a chest mark last night. The only thing I understand about Acres situation regarding his departure was that he was due a pretty sizeable pay increase this season (which would've taken his salaru up to somewhere in the order of $550K pa). I was a big Acres fan (admittedly based on relatively small number of random actions and hype) but not even I could justify that salary for Blake.

I would love to have kept him but, in the end - he'd become a list clogger. I dare say that's more the fault of our seriously poor record of player development as much as anything. Am I happy Dan's not playing? No. Am I happy that Blake's still not with us? No. But I do know that one player has won a flag and is seriously highly regarded by his peers (teammates and opposition) and the other is now largely invisible at Freo. I wish Blake the best but, I'm not unhappy having Dan on out books for playing / direction credibility alone.

That is what we’re getting for the length of his contract

100% conceding that Hanner’s form on the park is better than Blake’s has been, I would prefer the gamble of trying to transform Acres into a better player like how a few others have stepped up then accept the 4-6 games we’ll get a season from Dan as a good outcome

You’re paying the money either way... the difference is one will play and one will not

[Joffa Burns]

Just a question?
Who have we lost because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Hannerbury?
Who didn't we recruit because we didn't have sufficient salary cap space after signing Dan Hannerbury?

We play in a competition where we must pay x% of our salary cap every year.
What does it matter who we pay it to if it doesn't impact who we keep or go after?

Acres maybe?
Was given away for next to nothing reportedly post Hill deal.
Seems to be the only one squeezed out for nothing in return.

has Acres done anything since going to Freo?

Not much IMO, and I was not sorry to see him leave as I was not a big fan.
It is easy to be seduced by the odd great thing he did that made him look like the next Nat Fyfe, but fact is he still hasn't established himself as anything better than a C grade AFL player.

The query was around who may have been squeezed out if we were not paying Hannebery, to which Acres seems plausible to me.
Whether he's any good or not is probably not relevant.

[SaintPav]

Freo kicked 16 points last night. Wow.

[sunsaint]

Freo kicked 16 points last night. Wow.

If i remember rightly the previous once great coach was quoted as saying "Its not important how many points you kick as long as its one more than the opposition"

They have one part of the equation - but not the other

[sunsaint]

Not much IMO, and I was not sorry to see him leave as I was not a big fan.
It is easy to be seduced by the odd great thing he did that made him look like the next Nat Fyfe, but fact is he still hasn't established himself as anything better than a C grade AFL player.

The query was around who may have been squeezed out if we were not paying Hannebery, to which Acres seems plausible to me.
Whether he's any good or not is probably not relevant.

all may well be true - but there may have also been a very large go home factor in there as well
So MrMs question may not be so much now who was actually pushed out by DHs contract
but has now morphed into something like this
Lethlean took a swim in our money pool and said to DH half way through the year we can cover your 2016/17 form contracts and then some 5 years into the future - he jumped ( & given a gentle nudge)
Injury - it was then touted "he has immense value on the training track"
Dropped from leadership group
Still more injury - he has "immense value to attract other high profile players to our club to join him"
Still more injury "he has great value as a coach"
Still more injury - left the group for surgery and gone home

So what it boils down to is which contracted saints players were pushed out by the new high profile contract players attracted to our club to play with Hannebery ?

[saynta]

Not much IMO, and I was not sorry to see him leave as I was not a big fan.
It is easy to be seduced by the odd great thing he did that made him look like the next Nat Fyfe, but fact is he still hasn't established himself as anything better than a C grade AFL player.

The query was around who may have been squeezed out if we were not paying Hannebery, to which Acres seems plausible to me.
Whether he's any good or not is probably not relevant.

all may well be true - but there may have also been a very large go home factor in there as well
So MrMs question may not be so much now who was actually pushed out by DHs contract
but has now morphed into something like this
Lethlean took a swim in our money pool and said to DH half way through the year we can cover your 2016/17 form contracts and then some 5 years into the future - he jumped ( & given a gentle nudge)
Injury - it was then touted "he has immense value on the training track"
Dropped from leadership group
Still more injury - he has "immense value to attract other high profile players to our club to join him"
Still more injury "he has great value as a coach"
Still more injury - left the group for surgery and gone home

So what it boils down to is which contracted saints players were pushed out by the new high profile contract players attracted to our club to play with Hannebery ?

no go home factor with Acres. He wanted to stay at the saints

[fugazi]

Interesting with Acres, as with Bruce, it seems to me Ratten had a good look at them, Could see the potential but in the end decided on workrate and whether they would actually do it.

[SaintPav]

Freo kicked 16 points last night. Wow.

If i remember rightly the previous once great coach was quoted as saying "Its not important how many points you kick as long as its one more than the opposition"

They have one part of the equation - but not the other

Brilliant - who cares.

[saint6709]

What is his actual contract situation ?
3 years after this year ?
If he is unable to get on the park can they let him go ?

[saynta]

What is his actual contract situation ?
3 years after this year ?
If he is unable to get on the park can they let him go ?

He will be back.