Brian Lake to Hawthorn

[stefoid]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

I think thats the nature of his knee though, it goes through cycles of being OK and then not OK. Which means he cant train consistently.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

Until the medicos and Cooney say enough is enough, and he is finished, we should try to move heaven and earth to get this bloke on the park because he is a champion and no number of Jong's or Johannisens etc will ever reach his level.

Any thought of delisting him before that time is arrant nonsense.

[Bornadog]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

Until the medicos and Cooney say enough is enough, and he is finished, we should try to move heaven and earth to get this bloke on the park because he is a champion and no number of Jong's or Johannisens etc will ever reach his level.

Any thought of delisting him before that time is arrant noinsense.

This ^^^

[EasternWest]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

I reckon there has been some very harsh comments on Lake. He gave us incredible service for the vast majority of his time at the club, and in many of those seasons he was being paid way under the odds for the high quality output he was giving us. I understand the rationale in trading him (although I am unhappy with the compensation we've received and the rash haste in finalising the deal) but I think there has been some quite scathing and vitriolic comments aimed at his attitude and general demeanour. I remember a brilliant key defender who marshalled our back 6 during the exciting contending years of 2008-2010, and I also remember several brilliant performances in finals, some of which he had no right to be playing in (the 2010 finals series springs too mind).

Thanks for the memories Brian, and I genuinely appreciate the wholehearted effort you gave out on the field for the majority of your time at the club. You will not be easily replaced.

Good one Sedat. I agree with you, as usual.

Brian has always been a bit different, maybe Brian centric, but I can live with that. He was a huge part of our push for a flag and gave us everything he could. Perhaps my favourite memory will be how much he dominate Franklin after Franklin killed us in the 08 QF.

He was a wonderful player for us, and I'll miss watching him clunk marks in our backline.

But our club is bigger than one man. It's a risky, bold trade, and as much as I can't say I love it, I applaud the club for being on the front foot.

The other view is that the club is doing Brian a favor and being respectful in cutting him lose as he simply wants a change.
If he truly wanted to chase a premiership, I think he has given enough service to honor that.
He was one of my favorites and I will never forget the booming goal from 60m out earler in the year, and many other bits of class. I was always banging on about how we should play him forward. My dream cut too short!

Also a good point GD. I disagree about the playing forward part, but that's been done to death. As we're unlikely to be in the mix for the next two years, good luck to him, dammit.

[Guido]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

Allowed a couple of days to settle myself down, but still can't believe it.

THEY were desperate for this trade, not us. We held all of the cards - our contracted player could not go to them unless we gave him clearance. And yet read all of the articles from within the club, and this "poor us" defeatist bullshit runs ragged. "We had to trade him", "there was only one suitor", "Big Bad Free Agency is coming, what else could we do?".

"We only had one club interested" Jason McCartney says. Who gives a shit how many suitors there are? What that one suitor is prepared to pay - for a premiership- is all that matters. THEY were the party that were desperate for OUR asset, we weren't the party desperate for a pick swap and a pick in the 40s. They wanted it done THIS trade period, not next. Brian Lake wanted the security of a two year contract, this season, not next. They didn't want to wait another year and think "what if we had have been prepared to trade that little bit more for Lake?" after another Grand Final loss.

We held all of the cards, and somehow walked away the loser.

I personally only know two people directly involved at AFL clubs, one at the Pies and one at the Hawks. I can tell you for a fact that they are laughing at us at Hawthorn. They cannot believe how quick, easy and painless this was. They expected to, and were prepared to pay more.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

Allowed a couple of days to settle myself down, but still can't believe it.

THEY were desperate for this trade, not us. We held all of the cards - our contracted player could not go to them unless we gave him clearance. And yet read all of the articles from within the club, and this "poor us" defeatist bullshit runs ragged. "We had to trade him", "there was only one suitor", "Big Bad Free Agency is coming, what else could we do?".

"We only had one club interested" Jason McCartney says. Who gives a shit how many suitors there are? What that one suitor is prepared to pay - for a premiership- is all that matters. THEY were the party that were desperate for OUR asset, we weren't the party desperate for a pick swap and a pick in the 40s. They wanted it done THIS trade period, not next. Brian Lake wanted the security of a two year contract, this season, not next. They didn't want to wait another year and think "what if we had have been prepared to trade that little bit more for Lake?" after another Grand Final loss.

We held all of the cards, and somehow walked away the loser.

I personally only know two people directly involved at AFL clubs, one at the Pies and one at the Hawks. I can tell you for a fact that they are laughing at us at Hawthorn. They cannot believe how quick, easy and painless this was. They expected to, and were prepared to pay more.

Spot on. This is why I'm against the Bulldogs trading. Because we pit our amateur negotiaters against the best in the business. We are too easily bluffed and manipulated. We need to recognise our weaknesses and not play a game others are better at. I'm not saying don't trade becaue we invariably need to but work out the value yourself and don't put yourself in a position to be smooth talked and manipulated by these higher payed and more experienced operaters.

[Remi Moses]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

Disagree entirely. Players who are 30 , F/a pending, team not in flag mode are going to be traded. Would have got a pittance and paid him big coin when he doesn't want to be there!
Pro active move and should be applauded

[Sedat]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

Allowed a couple of days to settle myself down, but still can't believe it.

THEY were desperate for this trade, not us. We held all of the cards - our contracted player could not go to them unless we gave him clearance. And yet read all of the articles from within the club, and this "poor us" defeatist bullshit runs ragged. "We had to trade him", "there was only one suitor", "Big Bad Free Agency is coming, what else could we do?".

"We only had one club interested" Jason McCartney says. Who gives a shit how many suitors there are? What that one suitor is prepared to pay - for a premiership- is all that matters. THEY were the party that were desperate for OUR asset, we weren't the party desperate for a pick swap and a pick in the 40s. They wanted it done THIS trade period, not next. Brian Lake wanted the security of a two year contract, this season, not next. They didn't want to wait another year and think "what if we had have been prepared to trade that little bit more for Lake?" after another Grand Final loss.

We held all of the cards, and somehow walked away the loser.

I personally only know two people directly involved at AFL clubs, one at the Pies and one at the Hawks. I can tell you for a fact that they are laughing at us at Hawthorn. They cannot believe how quick, easy and painless this was. They expected to, and were prepared to pay more.

Well said Guido. And well spotted on the language used to explain the decision. It was not assertive and it did reek of the 'downtrodden' mantra that we have been spending years trying to extricate ourselves away from.

[Missing-Dog]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

Brian has always been a bit different, maybe Brian centric, but I can live with that. He was a huge part of our push for a flag and gave us everything he could. Perhaps my favourite memory will be how much he dominate Franklin after Franklin killed us in the 08 QF.

Maybe that's why Hawthorn targeted him. Along the same lines of the jokes circulating in the mid 90's when Gary Ablett Snr was rumoured to be coming out of retirement. The Tigers were going to draft him just to stop him from kicking 14 goals from a wing each time he played against them.

[Bornadog]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

Maybe that's why Hawthorn targeted him. Along the same lines of the jokes circulating in the mid 90's when Gary Ablett Snr was rumoured to be coming out of retirement. The Tigers were going to draft him just to stop him from kicking 14 goals from a wing each time he played against them.

I read somewhere that the Hawks have enquired about Lake for the past three seasons.

[LostDoggy]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

Spot on. This is why I'm against the Bulldogs trading. Because we pit our amateur negotiaters against the best in the business. We are too easily bluffed and manipulated. We need to recognise our weaknesses and not play a game others are better at. I'm not saying don't trade becaue we invariably need to but work out the value yourself and don't put yourself in a position to be smooth talked and manipulated by these higher payed and more experienced operaters.

Now there's a bit of two bob each way.

The isue here is not whether to trade, it is recogmising the need to put qualified negotiators in there to look after our interests.

[Desipura]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

I read somewhere that the Hawks have enquired about Lake for the past three seasons.

Thats true, not many on here wanted to believe it though.

[Mantis]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

I read somewhere that the Hawks have enquired about Lake for the past three seasons.

Our standard response should have been on each instance - *!*!*!*! off he is a required player.

[Maddog37]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

AM I wrong in suggesting it was Pasks idea?

I thought I read he reckoned it would be good to tell the club Brian wants out and we get something this year or nothing next year.

I would be very hesitant in dealing with him in the future.

[LongWait]

Re: Brian Lake to Hawthorn

If you want to know why Lake is gone listen again to McCartney's speech at the Sutton Medal night and put that alongside what we suspect about Lake being unhappy to play anywhere but full-back and Pask initiating the trade. Boom - there it is. Both player and club had had enough.