The Dan Plan

[Faulky63]

ST KILDA coach Brett Ratten believes injury-plagued star Dan Hannebery can put a nightmare start to his time at Moorabbin behind him and play plenty of football in 2022.

The three-time Therabody AFL All-Australian has been riddled with soft-tissue injuries since arriving at RSEA Park at the end of 2018, managing only 15 of a possible 63 appearances due to hamstring, calf and groin problems.

Hannebery played only two senior games in 2021 – the final two games of the home and away season – after finally overcoming the persistent calf issues that started in January, shortly after he won St Kilda's 3km time trial.

But the former Swan hasn’t missed a session across the off-season and pre-season, following a meticulously tailored running and gym program that should see him feature in match simulation in the coming weeks and St Kilda's intra-club later this month.

Under the guidance of new high performance manager Nick Walsh, Hannebery has followed a slower build this pre-season, with the club carefully managing his workload across December and January in attempt to get him to the starting line for the first time since moving to the club after 208 games at Sydney.

Those inside RSEA Park know how unlucky Hannebery has been with his body. They've seen the amount of work he has put in to get back on the park, only to be left despondent. They refuse to think too far ahead but are hoping he is rewarded for his persistence.

"He's had a pre-season that I think by the numbers is the most he's done in the three or four years here, which is great," Ratten told AFL.com.au.


"We still have a go-slow approach with him; we don’t need him firing like a 20-year-old right now; we need him to build and he's doing that.

"Last year he won the time trial when we got back and then within a week, he was sore. We started slowly (this pre-season). We're not getting him to jump into those sort of events. That’s the thing with Dan, he's so competitive, he wants to win it and show everyone. We don’t need him to be doing that right at the moment.

"As you get older people look at your performance in terms of handballs and kicks. He is one of those players that might not need as many handballs and kicks, but his voice and direction is critical to our team. That's so valuable for us and maybe we lack a little bit of that at times. He is a standout in that area.

"I think he'll have a contribution this year. Who knows with the soft tissue? We're working to a plan, but when he's out there we're a better team. We'd love to get him out there as much as possible."

While things haven’t gone to plan at St Kilda, the 30-year-old is regarded as one of the most diligent preparers at the club and has left no stone unturned in his pursuit of returning to full fitness. He has tried almost everything to improve his luck, turning to Pilates, yoga, acupuncture and dynamic neuromuscular stabilisation training, as well as tweaking his diet and sleep patterns in search of anything that will aid his return.

Hannebery has worked closely with physio Richard Citreon, rehab coordinator Marcus Krygger and strength and conditioning coach Steve Forcone at the club, as well as seeing renowned sports movement coach Mark McGrath – who helped Hawthorn star Tom Mitchell return from a horrific broken leg – on a regular basis.

Four years of persistent injuries can make you forget how good Hannebery was at Sydney. He played a key role in Sydney's 2012 premiership, earned three All-Australian blazers in the Harbour City, polled at least 20 votes in the Brownlow Medal on the three separate occasions – 107 in total – and won the 2015 AFL Coaches Association Champion Player of the Year Award, ahead of that year's Brownlow Medal winner Nat Fyfe.

St Kilda doesn’t expect to see that version of Hannebery. But if they can get 15 to 18 games out of him in 2022 – and performances like the 2020 finals series against the Western Bulldogs and Richmond – it could provide them with the extra boost they need this season.

Hannebery is out of contract at the end of this season and will need to play a chunk of football across the winter if he is going to get another deal at the Saints. But right now, club and player are only focused on building towards his next appearance in the red, white and black.

[Sanctorum]

Could not agree more that Dan Hannebery has the potential to transform the team's chances of winning a lot more games in 2022, his on-field presence is akin to experienced players like Pendlebury, Fyfe, Sloane and others by not only playing well but in ensuring the younger ones follow the game plan. Which is exactly what the recruiters had in mind when they brought him over from the Swans.

There's no point in harking back over his major injury problems in recent years, if he has definitely got his legs back in shape than the sky's the limit!

[The_Dud]

Sounds like he's on track for round 1...

I think expectations of what he could deliver on field need to be lowered. Realistically Dan hasn't been A-grade since his 2nd last year at Sydney. He's an upgraded Seb Ross in my book, but still behind the likes of Steele, Jones, Crouch and the young blokes.

[shanegrambeau]

A “meticulously tailored running and gym program”….

Mmn, sounds like the rough and tumble of an AFL season, doesn’t it?

[Gershwin]

Virtual betting only.

I will give 100/1 that he gets through the season without a leg injury
50/1 that he plays more than half our games
50/1 that he finishes in top 10 B&F
2/1 that he plays more than 6 games

[MC Gusto]

Way too much preseason positivity for my liking…seen this movie before and only know too well how it ends

[Impatient Sainter]

Ill be surprised if Hannebrey plays more than 5 games this year. He was cooked 4 years ago and the Swans knew it, just the brains trust at the Saints thought they knew better. IMO history will show that salary cap wise, he will go down as one of the worst recruiting decisions ever by the club.

The club have made plenty of recruiting & trading mistakes over my time, but I cant recall us ever paying a player such an extraordinary amount for 5 games per year. Lethlean has done some very good things at the club, but Hannebery is a major blunder.

[shanegrambeau]

Virtual betting only.

I will give 100/1 that he gets through the season without a leg injury
50/1 that he plays more than half our games
50/1 that he finishes in top 10 B&F
2/1 that he plays more than 6 games

I think you should qualify your third odd.
If he FINISHES 6 games.

several of his 15 games were started but not finished.

[saynta]

Give the guy a break FFS. No one tries harder than Dan to get on the field. His injuries are not his fault. The club values his imput, even if some of you guys don't. He sets a good training example to the younger players to whom he is only too willing to pass on his knowledge.

The club has repeatedly stated that we are a better side with Dan in it than when he is not playing.

Anyone reading all the disparaging remarks would think it was the supporters money he was being paid and not the AFL's.

On that question, nobody, I repeat nobody on here would have a f****** clue just what he was being paid anyway and how much his initial salary has been reduced.

[mcadam05]

Fun Fact - Dan Hannebery has more footy cards as a Stk player then he's played games 24 to 15

[desertsaint]

if we can get 15-18 games out of him? more likely to see Paddy McCartin win the Coleman.

[Ghost Like]

Give the guy a break FFS. No one tries harder than Dan to get on the field. His injuries are not his fault. The club values his imput, even if some of you guys don't. He sets a good training example to the younger players to whom he is only too willing to pass on his knowledge.

The club has repeatedly stated that we are a better side with Dan in it than when he is not playing.

Anyone reading all the disparaging remarks would think it was the supporters money he was being paid and not the AFL's.

On that question, nobody, I repeat nobody on here would have a f****** clue just what he was being paid anyway and how much his initial salary has been reduced.

To be fair saynta, all players try hard to get back on the field, most succeed.
His injuries are not his fault.
He's the fall guy, a well paid fall guy, for a stupid, knee jerk reaction by a club desperate to sign someone, anyone.
If it is only AFL money then why are we paying our memberships? If our membership money doesn't matter then why should our debt? Our club should be held to poor financial decisions, by the members as well as the AFL.

[The_Dud]

Has he played more games for us than Damian Monkhorst or Tony Francis yet?

[bangaulegend]

I hope he can be a integral part of our push for a flag & I'm more than happy for the club to take a conservative approach if that what it takes to get him on the park. But the the bottom line is he needs to deliver to earn the money we outlaid to get him IMO anyway

[Impatient Sainter]

Give the guy a break FFS. No one tries harder than Dan to get on the field. His injuries are not his fault. The club values his imput, even if some of you guys don't. He sets a good training example to the younger players to whom he is only too willing to pass on his knowledge.

The club has repeatedly stated that we are a better side with Dan in it than when he is not playing.

Anyone reading all the disparaging remarks would think it was the supporters money he was being paid and not the AFL's.

On that question, nobody, I repeat nobody on here would have a f****** clue just what he was being paid anyway and how much his initial salary has been reduced.

The media outlets had his salary at 800k per year and I think they would have a much better read on it than yourself. So you think he has been a good value recruit because he shares his experience - what a load of bollocks. Frawley had played a similiar amount of games to Hannebery and they both provided zip to the club because their bodies were cooked. Yet Frawley's minimum salary for one year is a lot more palatable than Hanners.

Yes he took a pay cut and thats a credit too him, but it doesn't relinquish the $$$ wasted on him prior to that. Yes it may well be AFL money, but wouldn't the club have been much better served paying it to someone who can at least get out on the track?

[CQ SAINT]

Give the guy a break FFS. No one tries harder than Dan to get on the field. His injuries are not his fault. The club values his imput, even if some of you guys don't. He sets a good training example to the younger players to whom he is only too willing to pass on his knowledge.

The club has repeatedly stated that we are a better side with Dan in it than when he is not playing.

Anyone reading all the disparaging remarks would think it was the supporters money he was being paid and not the AFL's.

On that question, nobody, I repeat nobody on here would have a f****** clue just what he was being paid anyway and how much his initial salary has been reduced.

The media outlets had his salary at 800k per year and I think they would have a much better than yourself. So you think he has been a good value recruit because he shares his experience - what a load of bollocks. Frawley had played a similiar amount of games to Hannebery and they both provided zip to the club because their bodies were cooked. Yet Frawley's minimum salary for one year is a lot more palatable than Hanners.

Yes he took a pay cut and thats a credit too him, but it doesn't relinquish the $$$ wasted on him prior to that. Yes it may well be AFL money, but wouldn't the club have been much better served paying it to someone who can at least get out on the track?

That's a really fair assessment. In hindsight, who would that someone have been?

Hanners deal went down 6 days before the deadline. No one wanted to come and who would blame them.

Hanners first 2 years were basically free, thanks to the well publicised "war chest'.
His effect on the following 2 years cap was a reasonable risk, when the decision was made and his pay cut decreased that further.
Also, when contracts are signed they include all sorts of performance based incentives including being in leadership group, making finals, finishing top 10 in B&F, games played and so on. Their actual salary is different.
The media sell it as 'potentially $800k per year, when infact, its more like $650k plus bonuses and incentives.
Now we learn that his 5th year trigger was believed to have been 50 games (according to the media, again) which, by the way, he can't reach. If his salary was $650 and he played 50 games, that's $26k a game.
That tells me the expectations were set low and the possible benefits were very high.

If he played 50 games in 3 years, polled in the top 10, played half a dozen finals, was recognised as a quality leader and COVID never came, I reckon we'd be right in the window, top 5 for sure and almost out of debt, considering the actual growth of our membership (which would definitely be even greater) and the increase in quality and value of our assets.
We would be a destination club. Didn’t happen but was worth a shot.

[SaintPav]

This is his fourth season with us.

Unbelievable.

[spert]

I wouldn't be including a player with chronic injury problems, who is not the player he was, in plans going ahead as a club.

[skeptic]

Give the guy a break FFS. No one tries harder than Dan to get on the field. His injuries are not his fault. The club values his imput, even if some of you guys don't. He sets a good training example to the younger players to whom he is only too willing to pass on his knowledge.

The club has repeatedly stated that we are a better side with Dan in it than when he is not playing.

Anyone reading all the disparaging remarks would think it was the supporters money he was being paid and not the AFL's.

On that question, nobody, I repeat nobody on here would have a f****** clue just what he was being paid anyway and how much his initial salary has been reduced.

The media outlets had his salary at 800k per year and I think they would have a much better than yourself. So you think he has been a good value recruit because he shares his experience - what a load of bollocks. Frawley had played a similiar amount of games to Hannebery and they both provided zip to the club because their bodies were cooked. Yet Frawley's minimum salary for one year is a lot more palatable than Hanners.

Yes he took a pay cut and thats a credit too him, but it doesn't relinquish the $$$ wasted on him prior to that. Yes it may well be AFL money, but wouldn't the club have been much better served paying it to someone who can at least get out on the track?

That's a really fair assessment. In hindsight, who would that someone have been?

Hanners deal went down 6 days before the deadline. No one wanted to come and who would blame them.

Hanners first 2 years were basically free, thanks to the well publicised "war chest'.
His effect on the following 2 years cap was a reasonable risk, when the decision was made and his pay cut decreased that further.
Also, when contracts are signed they include all sorts of performance based incentives including being in leadership group, making finals, finishing top 10 in B&F, games played and so on. Their actual salary is different.
The media sell it as 'potentially $800k per year, when infact, its more like $650k plus bonuses and incentives.
Now we learn that his 5th year trigger was believed to have been 50 games (according to the media, again) which, by the way, he can't reach. If his salary was $650 and he played 50 games, that's $26k a game.
That tells me the expectations were set low and the possible benefits were very high.

If he played 50 games in 3 years, polled in the top 10, played half a dozen finals, was recognised as a quality leader and COVID never came, I reckon we'd be right in the window, top 5 for sure and almost out of debt, considering the actual growth of our membership (which would definitely be even greater) and the increase in quality and value of our assets.
We would be a destination club. Didn’t happen but was worth a shot.

I can’t accept the argument that absolutely no one would come to this club for a $650-800k a year contract and therefore this was the only thing we could do… as a valid one.
I guess it just points to how inept the club was across the board at that time that the only viable outcome was spending that large some of money with huge injury concerns and a chequered reputation.

I don’t think anybody really blames Hannebery for snapping up a good deal when he saw one… but your last paragraph… if he’d played 50 games, if he polled top 10, if he’d played top 10, if he was a quality leader… a lot of that was predictably unlikely.
Obviously you get points for Covid and maybe he’s a decent leader but there’s no particularly evident reverence coming across from the outside looking in… not like with our other leaders.

Steel, Howard and Membrey seem to be the guys everyone looks to and though he’s stepped down, Geary has a presence too.

The particular challenge with the DH situation is that so many laymen supporters here and on FB so clearly identified this as a terrible trade from the onset.
High risk, high cost in terms of money and relatively low potential reward in context… it’s not as though his returns on the games he has played are Chris Judd like. He’s more on the level of say a Seb Ross which don’t get me wrong, isn’t bad but it’s not what we were wanting.

Anyway… the facts here are set in stone. No amount on tangling changes the outcome which is that he has been a really really poor investment and that we’re hoping against the odds that he has his best year in 5 or 6 so that we can get at least some value out of it.
If his body holds up
If he can recapture past form
If the Saints stay injury free and step up
If they make it to the finals
Then if Hannebery has a strong finals campaign… perhaps we can find value there after all

[Vortex]

No amount on tangling changes the outcome which is that he has been a really really poor investment and that we’re hoping against the odds that he has his best year in 5 or 6 so that we can get at least some value out of it.
If his body holds up
If he can recapture past form
If the Saints stay injury free and step up
If they make it to the finals
Then if Hannebery has a strong finals campaign… perhaps we can find value there after all

That's a juicy sub plot right there. It's like you got inside my dreams.

[Impatient Sainter]

We did have trouble attracting players at that time in the main because Richardson was still at the helm. That same year we had a red hot go at Dylan Sheil who would have cost a 1st round pick. He hasnt set the world on fire but at least he has played 45 games for Essendon. Then there was the Lachie Neal trade to the Lions, surely he was much better option than both Hannebery & Sheil. There were other players traded like Travis Colyer, Steven May, Jordan Roughead, Chad Wingard, Gary Rohan & Taylor Duryea all who have contributed more than Hannebery.

[saynta]

Give the guy a break FFS. No one tries harder than Dan to get on the field. His injuries are not his fault. The club values his imput, even if some of you guys don't. He sets a good training example to the younger players to whom he is only too willing to pass on his knowledge.

The club has repeatedly stated that we are a better side with Dan in it than when he is not playing.

Anyone reading all the disparaging remarks would think it was the supporters money he was being paid and not the AFL's.

On that question, nobody, I repeat nobody on here would have a f****** clue just what he was being paid anyway and how much his initial salary has been reduced.

The media outlets had his salary at 800k per year and I think they would have a much better read on it than yourself. So you think he has been a good value recruit because he shares his experience - what a load of bollocks. Frawley had played a similiar amount of games to Hannebery and they both provided zip to the club because their bodies were cooked. Yet Frawley's minimum salary for one year is a lot more palatable than Hanners.

Yes he took a pay cut and thats a credit too him, but it doesn't relinquish the $$$ wasted on him prior to that. Yes it may well be AFL money, but wouldn't the club have been much better served paying it to someone who can at least get out on the track?

I didn't say I had a read on it at all. To the contrary, what I said, and I will repeat it for the slow witted among us, was" On that question, nobody, I repeat nobody on here would have a f****** clue just what he was being paid anyway and how much his initial salary has been reduced" Anyway the press are full of crap.

Interesting to note that you think that what the club has expressly stated several times as part pf the value of Hanners to the club is "pure bollocks".

I stand by my post and just wish certain posters on here would get off his back and give the guy a f****** go.

You seem to get a certain joy out of knocking guys. A constant thread in your posts.

Here is what one of the saints leaders said about Dan

"St Kilda defender Callum Wilkie has provided an update on key pair Dan Hannebery and Jade Gresham.

Hannebery has played 15 games in three years at the Saints, dealing with ongoing calf and groin injuries.

Wilkie said the veteran midfielder was getting through sessions this summer, but was on a restricted workload for his own benefit.

“(Hannebery’s) going pretty well. He’s on a different program to a lot of other people, the injuries that he’s had in the past, it’s not viable to have him on the track every session carrying the same loads as the young players are doing,” the defender told SEN’s The Run Home.

“It’s all about managing his load and just making sure he’s getting through each session and getting through unscathed.

“He’s massive for us and not just his football ability, but his leadership on-field and off-field, setting people up, he provides so much to the club.”

Gresham suffered a season-ending Achilles injury in April of last season and Wilkie said the club is playing it safe with the talented midfielder.

“He’s tracking good. Just coming into training at the moment and from all reports his fitness is going well and he’s been looking good, they’re probably just not taking any risks with him,” he said.

“I can’t wait for him to come back out on the field with us, he’s such a pivotal piece in our team and he provides so much.”

I think I will take in Wilkie's opinion over your .

[Saintmatt]

Give the guy a break FFS. No one tries harder than Dan to get on the field. His injuries are not his fault. The club values his imput, even if some of you guys don't. He sets a good training example to the younger players to whom he is only too willing to pass on his knowledge.

The club has repeatedly stated that we are a better side with Dan in it than when he is not playing.

Anyone reading all the disparaging remarks would think it was the supporters money he was being paid and not the AFL's.

On that question, nobody, I repeat nobody on here would have a f****** clue just what he was being paid anyway and how much his initial salary has been reduced.

Why do you continue to be a Class A, aggressive, ill-informed knob at times? Serious question ....

As to your contention that "nobody, I repeat nobody on here would have a f****** clue just what he was being paid anyway and how much his initial salary has been reduced" - what a load of absolute rubbish.

I'll put this to you ... how do you know that any and/or all of : -

(1) Dan's accountant (or someone that works in that firm with access to his returns); or
(2) His solicitor (or someone that works in that firm with access to his contract); or
(3) his Manager (or someone that works in that business with access to minuted dealings with James Gallagher); or
(4) an employee of the ATO who has visibility over his lodgment history; or
(5) or an employee of the AFL who has access to all player contracts? or
(6) someone close to Dan's family; or
(7) a close, trusted personal confident

aren't members of this forum? Because if they are, then each and every one of those 7 people above will absolutely know Dan's contractual and financial situation - thereby neutering your ill-conceived contention.

The short answer is that you don't know who's on here that would actually know. You wouldn't have a clue as to the real identity of those persons behind the nom-de-plumes on here. So, stop being a self-aggrandising know-it-all. Rest easy knowing that just because they don't out themselves publicly - there might just be someone on here that does know the truth.

For the record - I'm a Dan man and I'd kill for him to succeed at the Saints. And I'm not that fussed what he gets paid because the AFL Is enforced socialism - pay scales don't reflect excellence, output and outcomes. You have to pay someone and Melbourne FC have the same sized pot of cash to pay their players as the basket case on the GC (not incl. 'marketing money').

[shanegrambeau]

I think Saynta was just making a point that we are venting without inside knowledge. When he says he’ll take Callum Wilkie’s opinion over say the greatest St Kilda ruck man impersonator , Shane Grambeau, I think he also knows that what Wilkie says for a piece of media dribble isn’t worth a pinch.

I heard Cameron Green say Justin Langer is a real beaut on SEN this morning. I mean, as if he’s gonna say squat!

Ditto, the players. They are trained and careful. Imagine if Justin Alermanis played for the Saints? Or Jacko(again). They don’t mind squirting a bit of napalm on the camp fire! But the average trooper is all squared up. Matter of fact, the great Shane thinks that it might be written in their contracts these days. ‘No baggin on other players or officials in pressers’

[saynta]

Give the guy a break FFS. No one tries harder than Dan to get on the field. His injuries are not his fault. The club values his imput, even if some of you guys don't. He sets a good training example to the younger players to whom he is only too willing to pass on his knowledge.

The club has repeatedly stated that we are a better side with Dan in it than when he is not playing.

Anyone reading all the disparaging remarks would think it was the supporters money he was being paid and not the AFL's.

On that question, nobody, I repeat nobody on here would have a f****** clue just what he was being paid anyway and how much his initial salary has been reduced.

Why do you continue to be a Class A, aggressive, ill-informed knob at times? Serious question ....

As to your contention that "nobody, I repeat nobody on here would have a f****** clue just what he was being paid anyway and how much his initial salary has been reduced" - what a load of absolute rubbish.

I'll put this to you ... how do you know that any and/or all of : -

(1) Dan's accountant (or someone that works in that firm with access to his returns); or
(2) His solicitor (or someone that works in that firm with access to his contract); or
(3) his Manager (or someone that works in that business with access to minuted dealings with James Gallagher); or
(4) an employee of the ATO who has visibility over his lodgment history; or
(5) or an employee of the AFL who has access to all player contracts? or
(6) someone close to Dan's family; or
(7) a close, trusted personal confident

aren't members of this forum? Because if they are, then each and every one of those 7 people above will absolutely know Dan's contractual and financial situation - thereby neutering your ill-conceived contention.

The short answer is that you don't know who's on here that would actually know. You wouldn't have a clue as to the real identity of those persons behind the nom-de-plumes on here. So, stop being a self-aggrandising know-it-all. Rest easy knowing that just because they don't out themselves publicly - there might just be someone on here that does know the truth.

For the record - I'm a Dan man and I'd kill for him to succeed at the Saints. And I'm not that fussed what he gets paid because the AFL Is enforced socialism - pay scales don't reflect excellence, output and outcomes. You have to pay someone and Melbourne FC have the same sized pot of cash to pay their players as the basket case on the GC (not incl. 'marketing money').

I will stick with the thoughts contained in my earlier post and have not had to resort to name calling and bulls*** to do so.

I certainly don't think that any of the class of persons that you have referred to be be in your words as"absolute knobs' would betray Dan's confidential details. even in the unlikely event that they were members of this forum.