Following our exes...................

[Bulldog4life]

Re: Following our ex's...................

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

[chef]

Re: Following our ex's...................

Win/win list management. Im sure we'd do it again if we had the chance.

[GVGjr]

Re: Following our ex's...................

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.

[jeemak]

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.

[Bornadog]

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

[jeemak]

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

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.

[LostDoggy]

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.

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.

[Topdog]

Re: Following our ex's...................

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.

[jazzadogs]

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.

[bulldogtragic]

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.

[Topdog]

Re: Following our ex's...................

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/2015-10-03/clarko-wheres-my-contract-lake-says-its-hawks-or-caroline-springs

[AndrewP6]

Re: Following our ex's...................

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.

[ledge]

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.

[Sedat]

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.

[1eyedog]

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.

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.