Strapping Young Lad
Moderator
- Apr 19, 2006
- 100,983
- 253,684
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Other Teams
- Storm, Spurs, Socceroos
- Moderator
- #18,956
2024 Picks
2025 Picks
2025 Picks
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Has a squiz at the contract status threadFor those who know, how many players do we have out of contact as of right now?
is the current 2024 bunch.Josh Bennetts (B), Denver Grainger-Barras, Harry Morrison , Jack O'Sullivan (2022 ND), Ethan Phillips (SSP) (A), Cooper Stephens (A)*, Clay Tucker (A),Chad Wingard
It’s not just you but we can’t look at every trade like it sets the value of others.I dont know if i am just an idiot but I'm consistently baffled about how they value players.
I dont think it comes from a place of bias either as I thought we brought in Tom Mitchell too cheaply at the time. Pick #14 for a 23yr old ball magnet seemed ridiculously cheap and I probably would have valued him at Pick 3-7 or two late first rounders.
Scrimshaw also seemed ridiculously cheap at #52 given his age and the pick he was drafted at by Gold Coast. It made sense to me that he was worth a 1st rounder possibly #10-15, possibly more given his age.
On the flip side I thought we let go of Brad Hill much too cheaply (#23), given that he was a 23yr old 3 times premiership player, and that proved to be right given that they traded him for Blake Acres and #10 a few seasons later. I just found that insulting that they got so much more for him when he hadn't improved as a player and he was 3yrs older.
For me age is a huge factor with trades. You're rolling the dice on how a player performs at your club. You're never going to beat father time and an older player is always going to come at a reduced value. Brian Lake is a good example of that. He was a gun but because of the fact that he was 31yrs old we basically got him for peanuts (#43 and a 2nd pick slide of 6 spots).
This brings me to Barrass who we are all hoping is Brian Lake v2.0 (only 2.5 years younger than Lake at the time of trade). Lake turned out to be the missing piece of the puzzle for that team so we all see him as the messiah but this is truly a best case scenario version of Barrass's potential. I personally doubt he is going to have anywhere near the impact Lake had in his three seasons with us, even with his 2.5 extra years.
If you had asked me before the speculation had started what he was worth I would have almost put him in the Lake category of "we will take him of your books for you" with a second rounder. So this talk about two first rounders or even a concessionary 1st and future 2nd genuinely blows my mind. His age is just too big a consideration to have him anywhere near that value. By contrast we have Geelong getting charity trades like Jack Bowes and pick 7 for nothing and Bailey Smith for a pick in the 20's and it all feels just insulting. It makes the club look weak and pathetic frankly.
Something else that I feel also needs mentioning is the conciliatory trades we have previously made with West Coast for Sam Mitchell (2 x late pick slides) and Brockman (#44) where it felt like we just said "give is what you feel they're worth" and we walked away with peanuts to now being highballed seems to me to be very bad faith.
I know he's contracted but it also should be mentioned that the player wants out. There is also some unsavoury stuff about West Coast being happy for him to seek a trade which shows that they're not desperate to retain his services they just see him as a trading pawn. They know he has played the best games that he is going to play for them. All very unpleasant.
Does anyone else share my confusion and disappointment?
The WCE being a well run club is a bit of a stretch.We wouldn’t. Big difference between a coach candidate indicating a preference to keep a player and the club selecting that coach and then signing off on retaining the player.
Like Hawthorn we’re a well run club and I don’t think this deal is going to get messy at all. You can be glad you’re dealing with us and not Fremantle and I’m glad we’re dealing with the Hawks and not the c**k juggling f**kwits at Essendon or Geelong.
I kind of like the analogy, friends had to sell and move closer to a larger town due to poor health and needing to be closer to a hospital.This is a bad example unless the house is able to say "I'm done with you owning me and I want to be sold and you can only sell me to that one buyer". Barrass isn't on the open market at all. He has specifically requested to be traded to Hawthorn and West Coast have 2 options: 1. force him to stay and honour his contract or 2. trade him at the value we are willing to pay for him. It therefore boils down to what we are willing to offer vs what West Coast are willing to accept.
Are clubs knocking for Ward Tops?And Ward.
They are they will be back up the ladder soon enough and competingThe WCE being a well run club is a bit of a stretch.
The WCE being a well run club is a bit of a stretch.
This also applies for the parents with the surname Kerr or King and named there kid Wang or WayneIf your surname is Cumming, it isn't well thought out parenting to give your kid a name that often gets shortened to 'Issie'.
This is why I come to BigFootyIf your surname is Cumming, it isn't well thought out parenting to give your kid a name that often gets shortened to 'Issie'.
Getting Scrimmers for pick 52 still makes me shake my head. Honestly WTF were Gold Coast thinking?I dont know if i am just an idiot but I'm consistently baffled about how they value players.
I dont think it comes from a place of bias either as I thought we brought in Tom Mitchell too cheaply at the time. Pick #14 for a 23yr old ball magnet seemed ridiculously cheap and I probably would have valued him at Pick 3-7 or two late first rounders.
Scrimshaw also seemed ridiculously cheap at #52 given his age and the pick he was drafted at by Gold Coast. It made sense to me that he was worth a 1st rounder possibly #10-15, possibly more given his age.
On the flip side I thought we let go of Brad Hill much too cheaply (#23), given that he was a 23yr old 3 times premiership player, and that proved to be right given that they traded him for Blake Acres and #10 a few seasons later. I just found that insulting that they got so much more for him when he hadn't improved as a player and he was 3yrs older.
For me age is a huge factor with trades. You're rolling the dice on how a player performs at your club. You're never going to beat father time and an older player is always going to come at a reduced value. Brian Lake is a good example of that. He was a gun but because of the fact that he was 31yrs old we basically got him for peanuts (#43 and a 2nd pick slide of 6 spots).
This brings me to Barrass who we are all hoping is Brian Lake v2.0 (only 2.5 years younger than Lake at the time of trade). Lake turned out to be the missing piece of the puzzle for that team so we all see him as the messiah but this is truly a best case scenario version of Barrass's potential. I personally doubt he is going to have anywhere near the impact Lake had in his three seasons with us, even with his 2.5 extra years.
If you had asked me before the speculation had started what he was worth I would have almost put him in the Lake category of "we will take him of your books for you" with a second rounder. So this talk about two first rounders or even a concessionary 1st and future 2nd genuinely blows my mind. His age is just too big a consideration to have him anywhere near that value. By contrast we have Geelong getting charity trades like Jack Bowes and pick 7 for nothing and Bailey Smith for a pick in the 20's and it all feels just insulting. It makes the club look weak and pathetic frankly.
Something else that I feel also needs mentioning is the conciliatory trades we have previously made with West Coast for Sam Mitchell (2 x late pick slides) and Brockman (#44) where it felt like we just said "give is what you feel they're worth" and we walked away with peanuts to now being highballed seems to me to be very bad faith.
I know he's contracted but it also should be mentioned that the player wants out. There is also some unsavoury stuff about West Coast being happy for him to seek a trade which shows that they're not desperate to retain his services they just see him as a trading pawn. They know he has played the best games that he is going to play for them. All very unpleasant.
Does anyone else share my confusion and disappointment?
To be fair Scrim's value was so low at the time we traded for him because he had only played 4 games in the seniors in his 2 years at GC. It's impossible to build any value when you're hardly playing and when you do in the ressies you look disinterested and homesick.Getting Scrimmers for pick 52 still makes me shake my head. Honestly WTF were Gold Coast thinking?
That's the kind of price we would get for DGB now after four years of underperformance in the system. Scrimmers had only been in the system for two years and one of those years he was injured.
Still who are we to complain, he's arguably the best CHB in the league right at this very moment, will play 200+ games for the club, is a Hawks fanatic and we got him for a pick in the 50's, lol
Hindsight is always 20/20 but I remember Scrimmers first year for the Hawks back in 2019 when he played 10 games and even then you could see this guy had talent. You could see he was an AFL standard player right from the start.To be fair Scrim's value was so low at the time we traded for him because he had only played 4 games in the seniors in his 2 years at GC. It's impossible to build any value when you're hardly playing and when you do in the ressies you look disinterested and homesick.
View attachment 2113080
One thing I do recall in here though is that we were keeping tabs on him almost from the moment he arrived there (thoughts Topiary TylerDurden?). There was a lot of talk going on but once again it's easy to sit here and pretend like we knew we all knew we were going to get such a good player with what we know now.
You called him a near “generational defender”!
He’s not even been the best KPD at his current club. Clearly that’s been McGovern.
As I said, he’d be very handy but with Battle already locked in, we shouldn’t be grasping a second KPD with both hands unless the deal is in our favour and we can’t get a KPF in.
At present we have Chol and Dear and minimal decent back up because Lewis won’t play and Gunston is on the decline.
Are you tell me our quality tall forwards stocks don’t need bolstering?
Has felt like Port for most of the season if we are honestHas to be Port then.
Blues are certainties for Houston.If Port get Cumming and Perryman, you'd think Houston is off to the highest bidder
HFC involvement wold only happen if we wanted to play Jars (Amon) forward?If Port get Cumming and Perryman, you'd think Houston is off to the highest bidder