Hannebery broken foot

[Joffa Burns]

And we let players go because we were tight in the salary cap.

$800k over 4 or 5 years or whatever the number is to a guy who we recruited and is perpetually injured.

Why is our salary cap tight?

Yeah Joff I have been saying the same thing since his recruitment but the Ted's , Taker's & Saynta 's of the world have all supported his cause no matter what he does or how many games he plays.To say he is a great pick up because he can have a positive affect on the playing group by just being there is IMO is a felicity everyone knows he's a party boy ( just ask the Swans )& there is nothing wrong with that but if your the bloke setting the example for our future playing group I would be concerned. IMO only

Dan was in our best in 4 out of 5 matches he played last year despite all the time he has had out of footy.

3 time AA.

You are obviously disappointed. Maybe you think our list of 2018 did not need change. As good as Jack Steven has been for us Dan has been better footballer over their career and Dan is 2 years younger. Dan effectively cost us an early 30's pick. I have no doubt Dan has make us sexier to join this year.

My specific recruitment issues surround 2 players.
Hannebery & Ryder due to age and diminished athletic ability.

The comments around the 2018 list not needing change, Jack Steven etc are all yours.

[samuraisaint]

He's having surgery Monday according to the article posted to have a pin inserted.
Terrible timing, but as someone at the club said - most of his time out injured will be during his holiday.
I still doubt Round 1 will be likely for him.

[takeaway]

And we let players go because we were tight in the salary cap.

$800k over 4 or 5 years or whatever the number is to a guy who we recruited and is perpetually injured.

Why is our salary cap tight?

Yeah Joff I have been saying the same thing since his recruitment but the Ted's , Taker's & Saynta 's of the world have all supported his cause no matter what he does or how many games he plays.To say he is a great pick up because he can have a positive affect on the playing group by just being there is IMO is a felicity everyone knows he's a party boy ( just ask the Swans )& there is nothing wrong with that but if your the bloke setting the example for our future playing group I would be concerned. IMO only

I assume I’m “Takers”, and if so thank you for placing me in such esteemed company.

However, you’re a bit off the mark in stating I have supported Hanner’s cause no matter what. Where did I post that? I recall querying whether his contract was actually $800k pa, and to date no-one has verified that. I would be very surprised if he was paid 800k this year. I was also bullish about the positive effect of a well credentialed premiership player arriving at the Saints, with his enthusiasm and experience. But purely on the playing aspect, I was not so sure.

However, now that the second part of the Hanners deal has been completed with the arrival of Jones, I can only say well done Saints. Two fairly low 2nd round picks for 50 games from Hannebury and 100 odd from Jones, coupled with their much needed experience and skill, is a very good deal.

Copy below of my post in Feb this year in the “Lock for Bottom 4?” thread, where posters were predicting how we would go this year and ladder position.

"Re: Lock for Bottom 4?
Post by takeaway » Tue 26 Feb 2019 9:11am

14th. Hanners will drag us out of the bottom 4 with his off field motivation and coaching. Top 5 pick next year, King fit, those drafted in 2013-17 hitting their straps, we're ready."

Bang on, don’t you think? I am happy to advise posters of the 2020 final ladder position in February (for a fee), and one of the considerations in this is whether Hanners is fit.

Anyway, this is a great thread for the forum blatherskites.

[Secret Kiel]

I'm just glad Hannebery is in the RW&B, his presence on and off the field improves our club.

Serious question, how does his presence improve the club on and off the field.

On field
- 4 games was it?
- no material on field effect on team performance
- clubs highest paid player (reported $800k)

Off field
- was such an inspiring leader he decided to remove himself from the leadership group

So far his recruitment is a major bust and his latest set back continues the pattern.

Without speculating, based on hard facts how has his presence improved the club.

If we weren’t paying him a fortune not to play do you think we could have kept Bruce and used the future 2nd rounder we swapped for him on Jones?

Major bust IMO.

Interesting, time will tell on the major bust claim as it's hard to argue against such an absolute argument. I'll correct you on the Bruce claim, he was approached by the Dogs mid season with a 4 year deal, that's a really good deal for tall big bodied contested type key forward turning 28 in June. As we know these types don't keep well past 30 and it usually is their ability to jump at the ball that drops away quickly. The fact we have CHF well and truly covered for players that can play that role why would we offer overs to Bruce?

[terry smith rules]

The fact we have CHF well and truly covered for players that can play that role why would we offer overs to Bruce?

Fact? Really? Would love to know who all these players are

Marshall developing into a wonderful ruck

Battle. Getting groomed as a great defender

Carlisle. Please!

Who else

[Secret Kiel]

The fact we have CHF well and truly covered for players that can play that role why would we offer overs to Bruce?

Fact? Really? Would love to know who all these players are

Marshall developing into a wonderful ruck

Battle. Getting groomed as a great defender

Carlisle. Please!

Who else

So although King has a bigger chance of being a major bust than Dan H. I'd assume he is our CHF in waiting and who knows how long we have to wait before we call him a boom or bust but let's assume he's going to become #12Mk2, and while we wait we no have Ryder and Marshal who I assume would rotate through the position and that's also assuming Ratts will be playing 2 rucks.

Then as was shown later in the season, we can have either Battle and Carlisle float forward to kick the odd goal and now we also have Howard who can do the same. It is the one position on the ground where we have an oversupply of players who can sructurally imitate a CHF player, but I stress this is all while we wait for the second coming of Roo.

[Joffa Burns]

I'm just glad Hannebery is in the RW&B, his presence on and off the field improves our club.

Serious question, how does his presence improve the club on and off the field.

On field
- 4 games was it?
- no material on field effect on team performance
- clubs highest paid player (reported $800k)

Off field
- was such an inspiring leader he decided to remove himself from the leadership group

So far his recruitment is a major bust and his latest set back continues the pattern.

Without speculating, based on hard facts how has his presence improved the club.

If we weren’t paying him a fortune not to play do you think we could have kept Bruce and used the future 2nd rounder we swapped for him on Jones?

Major bust IMO.

Interesting, time will tell on the major bust claim as it's hard to argue against such an absolute argument. I'll correct you on the Bruce claim, he was approached by the Dogs mid season with a 4 year deal, that's a really good deal for tall big bodied contested type key forward turning 28 in June. As we know these types don't keep well past 30 and it usually is their ability to jump at the ball that drops away quickly. The fact we have CHF well and truly covered for players that can play that role why would we offer overs to Bruce?

Major bust to date on Hannebery is really without question.

Long term major bust is my opinion not a claim.

I asked a question re Bruce, not stated or claimed anything to be correct. Lethlean commented on salary cap so it’s fair to assume Acres, Bruce & Steven we’re as much about salary as picks to get the recruits into the club.

If talls don’t last well past 30 YO, what is your take on Ryder?

Very happy with Hill, Jones, Butler & Howard, particularly Howard who could have huge upside.

Unhappy with Kent, Hannebery & Ryder.

That’s my opinion, with Kent & Hannebery before we took them, not just retrospectively.

[Secret Kiel]

I'm just glad Hannebery is in the RW&B, his presence on and off the field improves our club.

Serious question, how does his presence improve the club on and off the field.

On field
- 4 games was it?
- no material on field effect on team performance
- clubs highest paid player (reported $800k)

Off field
- was such an inspiring leader he decided to remove himself from the leadership group

So far his recruitment is a major bust and his latest set back continues the pattern.

Without speculating, based on hard facts how has his presence improved the club.

If we weren’t paying him a fortune not to play do you think we could have kept Bruce and used the future 2nd rounder we swapped for him on Jones?

Major bust IMO.

Interesting, time will tell on the major bust claim as it's hard to argue against such an absolute argument. I'll correct you on the Bruce claim, he was approached by the Dogs mid season with a 4 year deal, that's a really good deal for tall big bodied contested type key forward turning 28 in June. As we know these types don't keep well past 30 and it usually is their ability to jump at the ball that drops away quickly. The fact we have CHF well and truly covered for players that can play that role why would we offer overs to Bruce?

Major bust to date on Hannebery is really without question.

Long term major bust is my opinion not a claim.

I asked a question re Bruce, not stated or claimed anything to be correct. Lethlean commented on salary cap so it’s fair to assume Acres, Bruce & Steven we’re as much about salary as picks to get the recruits into the club.

If talls don’t last well past 30 YO, what is your take on Ryder?

Very happy with Hill, Jones, Butler & Howard, particularly Howard who could have huge upside.

Unhappy with Kent, Hannebery & Ryder.

That’s my opinion, with Kent & Hannebery before we took them, not just retrospectively.

Ok so it's hard to argue against such absolute opinion and a liberal amount of guess work/assumption re Lethlean and his salary cap comment and that somehow is now the reason Bruce left which is just patently not the case. Lethlean and Gaggs both on the record as saying Bruce was offered a 4 year deal by the dogs and we didn't want to match it, they wanted him to stay. But to be honest if I was Bruce I would have done the same as he could probably see the writing on the wall and possibly being pushed out of the team in under 2 years of King and Co came on quick so a 4 year deal for a guy who turns 28 in June is a massive offer from the Dogs and one he wouldn't likely get from anyone else. Dog's supporters feel they paid overs but felt their team could have really suffered or even gone backwards with out a key big tall forward to help with the development of their young forwards.

Ryder came cheaply and is seen as a backup to Marshal and also someone that can play a tall forward role.

Hannebery will be/is unbelievable for our club and team unless of coarse your dooms day prediction comes to pass then I agree, major bust. I live in hope you are embarrassingly wrong.

[saynta]

I'm happy with Hanners, Kent, Hill, Jones (although Jones for Bruce was a s*** deal for us), Howard and Ryder.

Very unhappy with drafting Butler. We could have kept the pick used and also kept Young and in the process save us a packet as we are paying Young out in full for his 2020 contract anyway.

Hope that Butler is on a basic wage .

[Scollop]

If Hannas has changed his partying habits then he can be a contributor on field. If he doesn't he risks muscle atrophy. It doesn't matter how much rest he gets if his muscles are wasting away.

I hope he can be an asset to the club and that means he'll be a creditable leader both on field and off

[Spinner]

This has been nothing short of a disaster at this current stage.

Missed 17 games this season, now a broken foot over pre season.

Holidays or not, a lot of fitness work goes in over the break. Especially when missing most of the season already.

I hope it takes a turn in 2020.

[axcellence]

Also, moon boots are horrible for calf muscles.

Takes a lot of times for calves/hamstrings to get back to where they were before.

Not a good injury to have.

[SaintPav]

Atrophy/Atrophication as Scoop suggested.

Not good.

[skeptic]

Not that it can’t get better but the signs aren’t good as things just keep popping up for Hanners, but any objective look at the deal so far suggests it’s an abject failure.

Hard to see cause for optimism there

[Shaggy]

And we let players go because we were tight in the salary cap.

$800k over 4 or 5 years or whatever the number is to a guy who we recruited and is perpetually injured.

Why is our salary cap tight?

Yeah Joff I have been saying the same thing since his recruitment but the Ted's , Taker's & Saynta 's of the world have all supported his cause no matter what he does or how many games he plays.To say he is a great pick up because he can have a positive affect on the playing group by just being there is IMO is a felicity everyone knows he's a party boy ( just ask the Swans )& there is nothing wrong with that but if your the bloke setting the example for our future playing group I would be concerned. IMO only

Dan was in our best in 4 out of 5 matches he played last year despite all the time he has had out of footy.

3 time AA.

You are obviously disappointed. Maybe you think our list of 2018 did not need change. As good as Jack Steven has been for us Dan has been better footballer over their career and Dan is 2 years younger. Dan effectively cost us an early 30's pick. I have no doubt Dan has make us sexier to join this year.

My specific recruitment issues surround 2 players.
Hannebery & Ryder due to age and diminished athletic ability.

The comments around the 2018 list not needing change, Jack Steven etc are all yours.

That is fair sort of.

Dan is 4 times in best out of 5 games for the Saints. If you want to add the final for swans he has been in best 5 of 6 last games despite big absences. Compare that to Stuv, Lonie & Carlisle when they came back from long absences. Saintsational turned against them because they expect players to simply pick up to be the players they were.

Dan may break down again but I still love the risk. IMO Dan proved how good he was in 2019. No-one knows if he will or will not break down. But at roughly pick 33 he has already enticed alot of talent to the club IMO.

Dan is very different to Ryder and Kent. I do not expect them to be in our best.

[BarryGrogan]

I don't think it really matters, does it?

I always felt that the Hannebury recruitment was more symbolic than anything else.

We needed experience and class yes, but more than anything we needed someone to actually accept an offer!!! We needed to start rejuvenating the list.

Having him on our list cost nothing really in terms of the draft pick was swapped.

His contract would almost certainly be back ended, so even if he was on the reported 800k (which I doubt and the club denies) that wouldn't have squeezed anyone out anyway.

If he actually plays, it's a bonus.


These things always need to be looked at holistically.

Our list is far better than it was 2 years ago, in part due to Hannebury being on it.

Apparently Jones was always part of the deal too. So with Hannebury's recruitment included, we can say we've added 6 best 22 players over the past 2 seasons.


Overall, it's part of an excellent period for the club off-field.

[SaintPav]

Christ, what an overreach.

Give me a break!!!

[BarryGrogan]

Christ, what an overreach.

Give me a break!!!

So what has it cost us?



I think sometimes people just like being outraged. The net gain of the past 2 years has been enormous for the club.

Hannebury is absolutely part of that forward trajectory.

[takeaway]

Christ, what an overreach.

Give me a break!!!

So what has it cost us?



I think sometimes people just like being outraged. The net gain of the past 2 years has been enormous for the club.

Hannebury is absolutely part of that forward trajectory.

I agree. Added to that, the pick traded in as part of the Hannebury deal ended up gaining us Bytel & Parker.

[Secret Kiel]

Christ, what an overreach.

Give me a break!!!

So what has it cost us?



I think sometimes people just like being outraged. The net gain of the past 2 years has been enormous for the club.

Hannebury is absolutely part of that forward trajectory.

Are the outraged the ones that mention 800k in their every comment about Dan Hannebery. It's like they've forked out his salary from their own pockets.

[skeptic]

Christ, what an overreach.

Give me a break!!!

So what has it cost us?



I think sometimes people just like being outraged. The net gain of the past 2 years has been enormous for the club.

Hannebury is absolutely part of that forward trajectory.

Are the outraged the ones that mention 800k in their every comment about Dan Hannebery. It's like they've forked out his salary from their own pockets.

Not that I want to weigh in further but the club does get my membership money

[Secret Kiel]

Christ, what an overreach.

Give me a break!!!

So what has it cost us?



I think sometimes people just like being outraged. The net gain of the past 2 years has been enormous for the club.

Hannebury is absolutely part of that forward trajectory.

Are the outraged the ones that mention 800k in their every comment about Dan Hannebery. It's like they've forked out his salary from their own pockets.

Not that I want to weigh in further but the club does get my membership money

Do you get the package with full outrage entitlements?

[SaintPav]

Christ, what an overreach.

Give me a break!!!

So what has it cost us?



I think sometimes people just like being outraged. The net gain of the past 2 years has been enormous for the club.

Hannebury is absolutely part of that forward trajectory.

I agree. Added to that, the pick traded in as part of the Hannebury deal ended up gaining us Bytel & Parker.

So you still can’t tell me what the secret informal deal was.

[SaintPav]

Christ, what an overreach.

Give me a break!!!

So what has it cost us?



I think sometimes people just like being outraged. The net gain of the past 2 years has been enormous for the club.

Hannebury is absolutely part of that forward trajectory.

Are the outraged the ones that mention 800k in their every comment about Dan Hannebery. It's like they've forked out his salary from their own pockets.

Not that I want to weigh in further but the club does get my membership money

I think this is a relevant point. Members are also supposed to have a say in how the club is run.

[SaintPav]

Christ, what an overreach.

Give me a break!!!

So what has it cost us?



I think sometimes people just like being outraged. The net gain of the past 2 years has been enormous for the club.

Hannebury is absolutely part of that forward trajectory.

Now you’re implying that Hanners hasn’t cost the club much but that was not the crux of your argument.

You’re also making quite a few assumptions on the benefits of recruiting Hanners. It sounds like your just making it up.

Your second sentence is just a strawman.