-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
GVGjr
I know he lost a lot of faith with the club when some of the coaches questioned if he was legitimately injured. They must have felt bad when it was proven he was injured.
I thought he left because he wanted to play in a premiership and didnt want to play in the forward line
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Win/win list management. Im sure we'd do it again if we had the chance.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bulldog4life
I thought he left because he wanted to play in a premiership and didnt want to play in the forward line
There is a bit to that of course but he was never the same towards the club when his integrity was questioned.
I used to know his cousin and she said it didn't sit well with him.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
It should be noted the majority of the damage in that regard was done by the previous coach, not McCartney.
McCartney and his team were falling over themselves to get rid of Brian, and imploring him to play forward when he didn't want to was probably a strategy to force his hand to look elsewhere.
Something stood out for me on Ch7's Sunday show this year, when Rocket as GCS coach asked Gia what sort of team mate Brian was over the years and Gia was hamstrung by being polite rather than saying what he really wanted to say.
Letting Brian go was a win win for all parties. Sure the Hawks really benefited from it, and it's easier to fit a selfish player into a side that is on the up or on top of the game. It's pretty clear to me that he'd done his dash with us like a lot of other senior players had within the ensuing couple of years.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
I am happy with the players we have now and the coach. We now need the icing on top to fix a few postional areas like rucks, KPD as well as getting more experience into the young players. The past players, I don't care about anymore, I wish them all the best for their future.
Now bring on 2016
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
bornadog
I am happy with the players we have now and the coach. We now need the icing on top to fix a few postional areas like rucks, KPD as well as getting more experience into the young players. The past players, I don't care about anymore, I wish them all the best for their future.
Now bring on 2016
Big tick.
I think we'll never know how toxic things got with our senior playing group throughout 2011-2014. My guess it was pretty significant with the biggest tell being the admission that after the first Libba incident the club admitting its older players were not well adjusted to the new batch coming in and being able to form relationships with them.
Things seem to be on the right track now well and truly. It's great to have that feeling.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jeemak
It should be noted the majority of the damage in that regard was done by the previous coach, not McCartney.
McCartney and his team were falling over themselves to get rid of Brian, and imploring him to play forward when he didn't want to was probably a strategy to force his hand to look elsewhere.
Something stood out for me on Ch7's Sunday show this year, when Rocket as GCS coach asked Gia what sort of team mate Brian was over the years and Gia was hamstrung by being polite rather than saying what he really wanted to say.
Letting Brian go was a win win for all parties. Sure the Hawks really benefited from it, and it's easier to fit a selfish player into a side that is on the up or on top of the game. It's pretty clear to me that he'd done his dash with us like a lot of other senior players had within the ensuing couple of years.
I also read a quote from Brian in the Herald Sun today about how fairy tales don't pay the bills. He strikes me as being very money-centred, and I doubt the Boyd contract would've sat well with him. There's no doubt in my mind that if he were still at the Dogs, he'd be the highest paid player by a mile and a half and when you put it like that, I think the right call was made.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BornAScragger
I also read a quote from Brian in the Herald Sun today about how fairy tales don't pay the bills. He strikes me as being very money-centred, and I doubt the Boyd contract would've sat well with him. There's no doubt in my mind that if he were still at the Dogs, he'd be the highest paid player by a mile and a half and when you put it like that, I think the right call was made.
He certainly wouldn't be the highest paid at Hawthorn. He wouldn't have been highest with us either.
I'm happy for Lake, gave me a lot of great moments when representing our team.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Yeh I'm really happy for Brian. I would have been content if he'd just got the one, but at least he didn't let Josh Hill get a premiership today (who incidentally I actually thought played quite well for the Eagles, apart from his late interaction with Lake, in a team full of downhill skiers he stood up and made things happen).
Marty Pask, his manager, tweeted a picture of them captioned "it was just an idea...", so I think the argument that the club made him leave is a bit thin. He was quite happy to go.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
I think Josh Hill, butchering a certain goal which was touched by Lake, is enjoying the trade aspect of conversation rather than the embarrassing stuff up and adding his name to the list of missing players of GF day is Leon Davis, Jetta, Ballantyne etc.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BornAScragger
I also read a quote from Brian in the Herald Sun today about how fairy tales don't pay the bills. He strikes me as being very money-centred, and I doubt the Boyd contract would've sat well with him. There's no doubt in my mind that if he were still at the Dogs, he'd be the highest paid player by a mile and a half and when you put it like that, I think the right call was made.
I dont really see an issue with anything he has said here.
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-10-0...roline-springs
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
BornAScragger
I also read a quote from Brian in the Herald Sun today about how fairy tales don't pay the bills. He strikes me as being very money-centred, and I doubt the Boyd contract would've sat well with him. There's no doubt in my mind that if he were still at the Dogs, he'd be the highest paid player by a mile and a half and when you put it like that, I think the right call was made.
He took a pay cut to play at Hawthorn, so to say he's money-centred is a bit harsh. I doubt he'd be on the biggest money if he were still a Dog.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
He took a pay cut and openly admitted he wouldn't be at the dogs the next year thus giving us the chance to get something back for him as he still had a year on his contract to run, the hawks desperately needed him and him them. He left and looked after us and them.
A very good amicable trade done the right way.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ledge
He took a pay cut and openly admitted he wouldn't be at the dogs the next year thus giving us the chance to get something back for him as he still had a year on his contract to run, the hawks desperately needed him and him them. He left and looked after us and them.
A very good amicable trade done the right way.
Spot on. Based on the compensation rules around FA, we were likely to receive much less than Pick 26 (or thereabouts, please correct me if I'm wrong) which we received in the trade, as a result of the contract Hawthorn were prepared to offer Brian. The only disappointing part of the trade is that Hrovat hasn't cemented his spot in our best 22 yet.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Don't want to be the master of hindsight, but with the prospect of Hrovat leaving the kennel we are looking at a situation whereby Lake ends up playing more games for Hawthorn than Hrovat did for us - oh, and the small matter of 3 flags and a Norm Smith as well.
I am a huge advocate of list regeneration to ensure that new talent continues to come through, but if you are going to trade out established senior players you'd want to make sure you are getting true market value (my thoughts on the poor value we received on the Lake trade has been aired numerous times). Furthermore, I would resist trading out genuine elite talent (of which Lake most certainly is) unless they are out of contract and are adamant they want to leave (eg: Griff, Higgins, Cooney), and there is more than adequate talent coming through to replace that player (Markovic and Austin don't qualify as adequate replacements, and they did the bulk of our FB heavy lifting in the years immediately after trading out Lake).
We haven't made many poor list management decisions in the last few years but we read the Lake situation terribly at the time IMO. We even hastened the decision by deciding to play one of the finest FB's this century as a key forward to give opportunities to plodders now no longer on our list, which means we still have a glaring weakness in the area that Lake brilliantly filled for us. Sure we might get more value out of whoever we bring to the club from the Hrovat trade (pick or player) but that is not really the point.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sedat
Don't want to be the master of hindsight, but with the prospect of Hrovat leaving the kennel we are looking at a situation whereby Lake ends up playing more games for Hawthorn than Hrovat did for us - oh, and the small matter of 3 flags and a Norm Smith as well.
I am a huge advocate of list regeneration to ensure that new talent continues to come through, but if you are going to trade out established senior players you'd want to make sure you are getting true market value (my thoughts on the poor value we received on the Lake trade has been aired numerous times). Furthermore, I would resist trading out genuine elite talent (of which Lake most certainly is) unless they are out of contract and are adamant they want to leave (eg: Griff, Higgins, Cooney), and there is more than adequate talent coming through to replace that player (Markovic and Austin don't qualify as adequate replacements, and they did the bulk of our FB heavy lifting in the years immediately after trading out Lake).
We haven't made many poor list management decisions in the last few years but we read the Lake situation terribly at the time IMO. We even hastened the decision by deciding to play one of the finest FB's this century as a key forward to give opportunities to plodders now no longer on our list, which means we still have a glaring weakness in the area that Lake brilliantly filled for us. Sure we might get more value out of whoever we bring to the club from the Hrovat trade (pick or player) but that is not really the point.
It was pretty clear that Lake wanted out and was disgruntled with the club. We certainly didn't help that situation. I'm still ok with getting Hrovat but there's no question we under-estimated Lake's longevity and in hindsight considering what Hawthorn got out of him he was worth more.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
1eyedog
It was pretty clear that Lake wanted out and was disgruntled with the club. We certainly didn't help that situation. I'm still ok with getting Hrovat but there's no question we under-estimated Lake's longevity and in hindsight considering what Hawthorn got out of him he was worth more.
Agree with the bolded bit, and I'm also ok with getting a draft slider like Hrovat with the pick (instead of reaching for a Spencer White type for example). But I suspect that Lake was disgruntled due to our ambivalence about him at the time - and the PR spin at the time about "getting something for him now instead of losing him for nothing a year later" insults the intelligence of the fans. Reality is that we didn't rate his future contributions at the time and were more than happy to offload him - we read that assessment as incorrectly as you could get. That's not to mention that we dropped our pants on day 1 of a 3 week trade period with Hawthorn's first offer for a player type they desperately needed - Hawthorn lost the 2011 PF and 2012 GF almost purely because of the lack of a quality gorilla key defender. And that's also not to mention that we didn't have anyone of note coming through to replace Lake at FB - when Scarlett retired, Lonergan and Taylor were already established in the senior team and ready to assume the added responsibilities.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
No doubt we should have kept our powder dry until they coughed up a better deal. We could have also nabbed a reasonable player to compliment the second rounder we got. There must have been more internal strife at our club than what we were aware of. I'm struggling to believe that Dalrymple would have simply buckled like he did. He may have had pressure from elsewhere within the club to accept the trade in order to move Brian as quickly as possible. It was obvious Monty wanted him out and there was no doubt that Rocket was voicing his displeasure about Lake to his assistants.
I can't remember if any other clubs inquired after Lake at that time. Perhaps we thought it was Hawthorn or bust, needed him gone pretty badly, under-estimated his market value (and that's the real issue here as you state), and just took whatever we could get.
Interestingly Lake just retired from the AFL.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
1eyedog
No doubt we should have kept our powder dry until they coughed up a better deal. We could have also nabbed a reasonable player to compliment the second rounder we got. There must have been more internal strife at our club than what we were aware of. I'm struggling to believe that Dalrymple would have simply buckled like he did. He may have had pressure from elsewhere within the club to accept the trade in order to move Brian as quickly as possible. It was obvious Monty wanted him out and there was no doubt that Rocket was voicing his displeasure about Lake to his assistants.
I can't remember if any other clubs inquired after Lake at that time. Perhaps we thought it was Hawthorn or bust, needed him gone pretty badly, under-estimated his market value (and that's the real issue here as you state), and just took whatever we could get.
Interestingly Lake just retired from the AFL.
BMac had already coached for a season when the decision was made to trade Lake out.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sedat
BMac had already coached for a season when the decision was made to trade Lake out.
The seed was well and truly sewn by the time BMac took over. Lake knew he had to have a good season in 2012 so he could get to the club of his choice, he couldn't do that after an injury ruined 2011, plus his reputation had taken a battering after the way he was handled and publicly questioned by his own club, but make no mistake he was counting down the days until he could leave.
2012 was only about convincing the external market he could still play.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Greystache
The seed was well and truly sewn by the time BMac took over. Lake knew he had to have a good season in 2012 so he could get to the club of his choice, he couldn't do that after an injury ruined 2011, plus his reputation had taken a battering after the way he was handled and publicly questioned by his own club, but make no mistake he was counting down the days until he could leave.
2012 was only about convincing the external market he could still play.
That's how I remember it too.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Didn't Pask opening the conversation with "trade him now, or risk free agency in 12 months time"
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Pretty sure a LOT of posters on here called this in 2012.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Pretty happy with Stevens and Hrovat (hope we don't trade him) for Lake and Obrien. Win/win trade
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
We got unders in the Lake & Griffen trades because we were in weak negotiating positions. Not because of poor negotiation or list management
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
boydogs
We got unders in the Lake & Griffen trades because we were in weak negotiating positions. Not because of poor negotiation or list management
Absolutely correct in the Griffen scenario but how on earth can you conclude we were in a weak position on day 1 of a 3 week trade period with the Lake scenario? There was no negotiation - we simply accepted the first ambit claim offered to us. We had the commodity that the other party was desperate for - Clarko just lost the 2011 PF by a kick and the 2012 GF by a kick and was not prepared to wait around for another 12 months to fix up his defence. Lake was now or never for them - we knew this and yet we made it awfully easy for them to get him.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sedat
Absolutely correct in the Griffen scenario but how on earth can you conclude we were in a weak position on day 1 of a 3 week trade period with the Lake scenario? There was no negotiation - we simply accepted the first ambit claim offered to us. We had the commodity that the other party was desperate for - Clarko just lost the 2011 PF by a kick and the 2012 GF by a kick and was not prepared to wait around for another 12 months to fix up his defence. Lake was now or never for them - we knew this and yet we made it awfully easy for them to get him.
Yep, we folded bloody quickly. Unfortunately we didn't have the team we have now in List management.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sedat
Absolutely correct in the Griffen scenario but how on earth can you conclude we were in a weak position on day 1 of a 3 week trade period with the Lake scenario? There was no negotiation - we simply accepted the first ambit claim offered to us.
GOTTA CALL BURNS! Maybe I can still get that drink!
The Lake trade was unbelievable man-mismanagement then, now and forever. Given who was at the club at the time it's absolutely no surprise, too.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sedat
Absolutely correct in the Griffen scenario but how on earth can you conclude we were in a weak position on day 1 of a 3 week trade period with the Lake scenario?
He was gone for nothing the year after. Day 1 of the trade period means little, think how much trade talk there has been this year already and trade period hasn't started yet
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
I don't think we botched the trade as badly as some of you.
We were never going to secure the Hawks first round pick, and they were never going to trade out a player worthy of a first round pick in order to use it in the Lake trade.
Sure, we could have postured for higher ground and seen a significant portion of the trade period move on by but that could have resulted in us missing Stevens and securing a dud in the eventual deal.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jeemak
I don't think we botched the trade as badly as some of you.
We were never going to secure the Hawks first round pick, and they were never going to trade out a player worthy of a first round pick in order to use it in the Lake trade.
Sure, we could have postured for higher ground and seen a significant portion of the trade period move on by but that could have resulted in us missing Stevens and securing a dud in the eventual deal.
We actually got their first and second round pick in exchange for Lake and our second round pick.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Greystache
We actually got their first and second round pick in exchange for Lake and our second round pick.
Whoops, I should have double checked before I tried to make that point I botched!
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Respectfully agree to disagree. The swapping of 2nd round picks was unnecessarily generous - we could have got pick 21 for Lake on its own, kept pick 27 and then got Stevens for our 3rd round pick which was only a few spots after Hawthorn's 2nd round pick.
All academic.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Yeh the addition of pick 27 definitely weighted the trade in Hawthorn's favour.
We can say that we underestimated Lake's ability to contribute in the last three years, but I would argue his best games were finals each year. Mid-season he just scraped along, and if he had stayed with us that would be the consistent output we could have expected.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
I guess the problem is if you try and 'win' every trade no ones going to want to deal with you. Sometimes you get a bargain and sometimes you pay overs, it's the nature of the beast.
Lake was a cracking trade(if Hrovat hangs around on goes onto being a long term doggie)
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
chef
I guess the problem is if you try and 'win' every trade no ones going to want to deal with you. Sometimes you get a bargain and sometimes you pay overs, it's the nature of the beast.
Lake was a cracking trade(if Hrovat hangs around on goes onto being a long term doggie)
Agree with comments on trade. Best ones are where everyone walks away a little stronger, by trading players/picks that are a better fit.
If Lake comes back to us for a successful year and Hrovat gives us another 100+ games (or we trade him for someone who does), the Lake/Hrovat trade will have to go down as a success.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
chef
I guess the problem is if you try and 'win' every trade no ones going to want to deal with you. Sometimes you get a bargain and sometimes you pay overs, it's the nature of the beast.
Lake was a cracking trade(if Hrovat hangs around on goes onto being a long term doggie)
Yep. It's the price of doing business.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Jason Tutt is in my office as we type. I could literally follow him if you guys want.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Happy Days
Jason Tutt is in my office as we type. I could literally follow him if you guys want.
Ask him if he regrets wanting out at the club.
-
Re: Following our ex's...................
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Happy Days
Jason Tutt is in my office as we type. I could literally follow him if you guys want.
Can you ask him why he left? Inside scoop on Macca and Shocktober would be good too?