Dan Hannebery - 2 weeks

[The_Dud]

It sounds like we've heard this exact story before... is it 2021 or 2019??

https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/han ... 577b2.html

[The Billings Method]

I'm afraid you're right, TD. You didn't have to be Nostradamus to call this one. Is the club just softening us up with the non committal piece that will lessen the blow? 13/41 possible games does not augur well for the future.

[shanegrambeau]

Luckily, we are going back to longer games, fewer specialists and ancillary staff and as a bonus, the 75 interchanges rule means more on field time for Dan. I am sure it is gonna help strengthen those hammies.

[realdeal]

A.Hamill - 2 weeks

[bangaulegend]

I think everyone knows my stance on the decision to pick up Hanneberry & my opinion hasn't changed

[B.M]

Well worth the risk

He cost us a downgrade from pick 29 to 38 (Battle)

For that price we got a 3 x AA and premiership player, albeit past his best... he’s still better quality that most of our list when he’s playing.

Yes, he did cost money, but at the time we had FA else to spend cap space on and there weren’t many suitors at the time!

How many games did Michael Gardner play in his first two seasons at StK?

[bangaulegend]

Well worth the risk

He cost us a downgrade from pick 29 to 38 (Battle)

For that price we got a 3 x AA and premiership player, albeit past his best... he’s still better quality that most of our list when he’s playing.

Yes, he did cost money, but at the time we had FA else to spend cap space on and there weren’t many suitors at the time!

How many games did Michael Gardner play in his first two seasons at StK?

MG wasn't on anything like the money DH is on & just maybe if he could of played in the GF could have been the difference long bow I know but nice to dream

[bigred]

Gotta admit.

It's just what this forum needs.

[bangaulegend]

Gotta admit.

It's just what this forum needs.

Yeah you're right I took the bait & this issue has been discussed to death my bad

[roskilde]

Well worth the risk

He cost us a downgrade from pick 29 to 38 (Battle)

For that price we got a 3 x AA and premiership player, albeit past his best... he’s still better quality that most of our list when he’s playing.

Yes, he did cost money, but at the time we had FA else to spend cap space on and there weren’t many suitors at the time!

How many games did Michael Gardner play in his first two seasons at StK?

Kind of an insult to our better midfielders who actually have the physical ability to play regularly and perform.

Let's be honest as well when he can get his body right he's never been better than mediocre for the Saints.

It's been the better part of a decade since he's been elite.

Why is that so hard for people to acknowledge?

[shanegrambeau]

Well worth the risk

He cost us a downgrade from pick 29 to 38 (Battle)

For that price we got a 3 x AA and premiership player, albeit past his best... he’s still better quality that most of our list when he’s playing.

Yes, he did cost money, but at the time we had FA else to spend cap space on and there weren’t many suitors at the time!

How many games did Michael Gardner play in his first two seasons at StK?

Kind of an insult to our better midfielders who actually have the physical ability to play regularly and perform.

Let's be honest as well when he can get his body right he's never been better than mediocre for the Saints.

It's been the better part of a decade since he's been elite.

Why is that so hard for people to acknowledge?

let A = factor DH is better than our
B = typical midfield median prototype player at St Kilda
A = 3 (he's three times as good)
B = 1
Hanners is three times better than Ross when playing

H = happiness for hanners
R = rolling in it for Ross

41 Games for StKFC
13 games available

So H = A x 13/41
=0.95

So R B x 41/41
=1

Ross wins by a slim margin.

I expect a contract from Smart Footy Stats Ltd. or Champion Data anytime. (no more English teaching)

[saynta]

I think everyone knows my stance on the decision to pick up Hanneberry & my opinion hasn't changed

No. Remind me. On second thoughts, don't.

[iwantmeseats]

A complete bust at the time, whch was obvious to everyone.
Colossal waste of money.
So St.Kilda.

[shanegrambeau]

A complete bust at the time, whch was obvious to everyone.
Colossal waste of money.
So St.Kilda.

We all knew it.
Even the club.
We just have to keep massaging it in...in case the knots in our brows smooth out...

A case of having to spend the mullah....to square the ledger.....a punt...rather, an attempted torp...that went off the side...and up.

[Joffa Burns]

Summary:

The positive argument (no idea the legitimacy of the points)
Had to pay cap to someone
Front ended contract
Helped us attract other players
Leadership
Is handy when he's on the field
Experience & successful career
AA, premiership player, was elite
Cost little in trade
Is another assistant coach

The negative argument (no idea the legitimacy of the points)
Was a salary dump by Sydney so trade value too high
Questionable lifestyle
Left the leadership group
Soft tissue injuries
Lack of injury due diligence
Desperation to sign a "name" player
Paid a lot of money to not get on the park
4-5 year contract tenure
Inhibits us recruiting other players and has made us trade players due to salary cap

The balance
Worth the punt but why the tenure? Surely we could have gone shorter?
Worth the spend in YR1 but what is he getting now?
If judging on playing performance & output he's a massive bust to date.
How do we value the non playing factors he brings to the club?

[skeptic]

Summary:

The positive argument (no idea the legitimacy of the points)
Had to pay cap to someone
Front ended contract
Helped us attract other players
Leadership
Is handy when he's on the field
Experience & successful career
AA, premiership player, was elite
Cost little in trade
Is another assistant coach

The negative argument (no idea the legitimacy of the points)
Was a salary dump by Sydney so trade value too high
Questionable lifestyle
Left the leadership group
Soft tissue injuries
Lack of injury due diligence
Desperation to sign a "name" player
Paid a lot of money to not get on the park
4-5 year contract tenure
Inhibits us recruiting other players and has made us trade players due to salary cap

The balance
Worth the punt but why the tenure? Surely we could have gone shorter?
Worth the spend in YR1 but what is he getting now?
If judging on playing performance & output he's a massive bust to date.
How do we value the non playing factors he brings to the club?

Let me add a positive - no idea on validity just a theory

Reckon getting him did Sydney a favour and they reciprocated by not being a pain in the butt about Jones. Thought we got a good deal there

[The_Dud]

The balance
Worth the punt but why the tenure? Surely we could have gone shorter?

This is the crux right here.

17 other clubs (including Sydney) didn't want him, only one did. Why pay $4M over 5 years when <$2M over 3 years would have been enough (and a much more accurate value and sensible length)?

The only reason I started this thread is because I saw the new article on it, and its resemblance to the same article (lies/spin) we were reading exactly 2 years ago was uncanny (and we all know how that went).

I'm just sick of the lies/spin constantly coming out of the club about it. Be honest about it or don't say anything at all, but don't piss down our backs and tell us it's raining.

[shanegrambeau]

The balance
Worth the punt but why the tenure? Surely we could have gone shorter?

This is the crux right here.

17 other clubs (including Sydney) didn't want him, only one did. Why pay $4M over 5 years when <$2M over 3 years would have been enough (and a much more accurate value and sensible length)?

The only reason I started this thread is because I saw the new article on it, and its resemblance to the same article (lies/spin) we were reading exactly 2 years ago was uncanny (and we all know how that went).

I'm just sick of the lies/spin constantly coming out of the club about it. Be honest about it or don't say anything at all, but don't piss down our backs and tell us it's raining.

Really, what can the club say?

"Sorry, we made a mistake, we know it, Dan knows it, the leadership knows it...etc.."

The press will pounce.

All Rhyce Shaw had to do was drop his guard a fraction during a press conference and show a glimpse of honesty..... "we don't know what is wrong" kinda thing..

Caroline Wilson and co. were all over him for saying 'inappropriate remarks' etc.,
next minute we are talking 'nervous breakdown' material....the guy, much loved by accounts I have read...is toast. I would say his career as a head coach is over.

The plp at thc club have among them astute business types and politicians ...the only way they'd say something like that is if it 'end oriented' ...as a gambit to get something further down the road...

It is just us supporters who can whine, cry and laugh, and shake our fists etc.

The AFL itself know it all too well as well..

Within the clublands...many will say of DH, 'Good luck to him...well played...etc.". Others will call him a cheeky sod, but grant him the respect for pulling it off.

[The Billings Method]

A complete bust at the time, whch was obvious to everyone.
Colossal waste of money.
So St.Kilda.

We all knew it.
Even the club.
We just have to keep massaging it in...in case the knots in our brows smooth out...

A case of having to spend the mullah....to square the ledger.....a punt...rather, an attempted torp...that went off the side...and up.

A mongrel punt. Agreed, but one of those that lobs into the lap of a team mate. Not a write off yet. The benefits of his experience, IP, leadership (on the track at least) training standards etc.

In the end, Lethers long term aim was to make RSEA Park a destination for good players / FAs. We've done well in that regard with Lethers, Ratts, Gubby and Gags involved.

Not all the big ticket players you bring in become successful, but our strike rate since Hanners was brought on board is excellent. The building of a list is a long game. So far, so good. Hanners may end up as "collateral damage" in the overall plan.

Who knows, he may still come good and play 2-3 years of solid footy. I suspect not, though. There is an omen. Hanners' and Hamill's names start with Ha. There's something in that for all of us, don't you think?

[Saintmatt]

The balance
Worth the punt but why the tenure? Surely we could have gone shorter?

This is the crux right here.

17 other clubs (including Sydney) didn't want him, only one did. Why pay $4M over 5 years when <$2M over 3 years would have been enough (and a much more accurate value and sensible length)?

The only reason I started this thread is because I saw the new article on it, and its resemblance to the same article (lies/spin) we were reading exactly 2 years ago was uncanny (and we all know how that went).

I'm just sick of the lies/spin constantly coming out of the club about it. Be honest about it or don't say anything at all, but don't piss down our backs and tell us it's raining.

My understanding is that Dan had a fair amount of time on his Sydney contract to go (from memory 3 years) and he could've just sat on his bum on Bondi beach and been paid his contract whether he played or not. In essence, we took over what Sydney had committed and then added 2 years to that in order to get him. The pay-off was getting Jones hassle-free (I have Sydney mates who are still filthy that they let Jones go when he was about to hit his prime playing years)

It's pretty clear that Dan's body is no longer durable enough to get ready to play a whole/majority of the season however, when he is available to play - he's been much better than any of our other mids (other than Steele last year and perhaps Jones at the start of the 2020 campaign).

Shame - I'd love to see a fit version of Dan on our list but, I suspect that's not to be now.

[sunsaint]

absolutely correct about DHs remaining contract - it was always going to be a lengthy 5yr deal to pinch it for SFC & DH to sign him over
To say that we are then in the good books with their club for any future trades is a long bow - it is not the reason we got Jones - as SFC saw his disposal a liability on the tight SCG ground where accuracy is critical
That is not to say I am unhappy with his trade I am more on board with him at the saints than I am with DH
A major point about DH coming to us was his close personal friendship with Lethlean - and I would go as far as saying if he wasnt at the club at the time we wouldnt have gone down this path

[The_Dud]

The balance
Worth the punt but why the tenure? Surely we could have gone shorter?

This is the crux right here.

17 other clubs (including Sydney) didn't want him, only one did. Why pay $4M over 5 years when <$2M over 3 years would have been enough (and a much more accurate value and sensible length)?

The only reason I started this thread is because I saw the new article on it, and its resemblance to the same article (lies/spin) we were reading exactly 2 years ago was uncanny (and we all know how that went).

I'm just sick of the lies/spin constantly coming out of the club about it. Be honest about it or don't say anything at all, but don't piss down our backs and tell us it's raining.

Really, what can the club say?

"Sorry, we made a mistake, we know it, Dan knows it, the leadership knows it...etc.."

The press will pounce.

All Rhyce Shaw had to do was drop his guard a fraction during a press conference and show a glimpse of honesty..... "we don't know what is wrong" kinda thing..

Caroline Wilson and co. were all over him for saying 'inappropriate remarks' etc.,
next minute we are talking 'nervous breakdown' material....the guy, much loved by accounts I have read...is toast. I would say his career as a head coach is over.

The plp at thc club have among them astute business types and politicians ...the only way they'd say something like that is if it 'end oriented' ...as a gambit to get something further down the road...

It is just us supporters who can whine, cry and laugh, and shake our fists etc.

The AFL itself know it all too well as well..

Within the clublands...many will say of DH, 'Good luck to him...well played...etc.". Others will call him a cheeky sod, but grant him the respect for pulling it off.

The Club can either tell the truth ("we have no idea when he'll be back") or just not say anything, but don't come out with the tired old, "He had a minor set back, but was feeling really good before that, we're confident he'll be right for round 1/2/3/14, he's being really professional about his recovery, yadda yadda yadda..."

[skeptic]

absolutely correct about DHs remaining contract - it was always going to be a lengthy 5yr deal to pinch it for SFC & DH to sign him over
To say that we are then in the good books with their club for any future trades is a long bow - it is not the reason we got Jones - as SFC saw his disposal a liability on the tight SCG ground where accuracy is critical
That is not to say I am unhappy with his trade I am more on board with him at the saints than I am with DH
A major point about DH coming to us was his close personal friendship with Lethlean - and I would go as far as saying if he wasnt at the club at the time we wouldnt have gone down this path

To be clear... am certainly not suggesting otherwise or that I have any sources. Just something I wondered about

[sunsaint]

all cool - Jones was also on the record saying he wanted out of sydney and wanted to come home
always did wonder if he would join his brother - but very glad we got him

[samuraisaint]

all cool - Jones was also on the record saying he wanted out of sydney and wanted to come home
always did wonder if he would join his brother - but very glad we got him

Jones wanted to fulfill his dream of playing for the Saints.

And I think Dan will play Round 1 - or 2. I really want him right for the finals anyway - that's the end game. He was great in that final against the 'Dogs. I'm backing Hannebury in.