Rumour 2024 Hypothetical trade and FA Thread

[Leather Poisoning]

Not sure whether to laugh or cry at comments like this…

St Kilda great Leigh Montagna agreed, adding: “I think the number would have to be whatever triggers a first-round pick for St Kilda, because they do need more high-end talent.

On instagram today I saw a video of Jon Ralph saying:

If Hawks offer 950k and St Kilda get a first round compo for Battle - who wins that deal?

IT'S NOT A ****ING DEAL BETWEEN HAWTHORN AND ST KILDA - WHAT THE **** ARE THEY ON ABOUT?

 

[VandoHawk]

On instagram today I saw a video of Jon Ralph saying:

If Hawks offer 950k and St Kilda get a first round compo for Battle - who wins that deal?

IT'S NOT A *ING DEAL BETWEEN HAWTHORN AND ST KILDA - WHAT THE * ARE THEY ON ABOUT?

It's absolute brain rot to generate clicks. Only going to get worse.

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Serious question - how does the footy media/fans decide how much a player is worth on the market? I feel like I'm in a whole different world whenever they start throwing pick values around.

For example, since Nathan Thompson

Nathan Thompson

Age

46

Ht

194cm

Wt

100kg

Pos.

Fwd

Career

Season

Last 5

D

10.5

3star

K

7.6

3star

HB

2.9

3star

M

5.4

5star

T

0.9

3star

G

1.8

5star

No current season stats available

D

5.0

1star

K

3.0

1star

HB

2.0

2star

M

2.6

3star

T

0.4

3star

G

0.6

3star

and Jon Hay left the hawks, I don't think I can recall a single example of when a hawk player was considered worthy of a first rounder or multiple firsts. Not a young Brad Hill, not Smithy, not even hypothetical discussions about Gunston and Breust all those years. Tom Mitchell conversations started at second rounder and spoken of as being too much.

Meanwhile we see a guy like Lachy Shulz on the market and I didn't think he was much chop, but every convo was "Collingwood will have to cough up a first round pick AT LEAST". And they did. And they were wrong to do that.

I know every player and every situation has a whole web of context - but does anyone feel the same? That the footy world has never rated a hawks player but we hear about multiple first rounders players within the top 10 of any given opposition club.

Am I alone on this?

 

[cryptor]

Isn’t Battle only an unrestricted free agent so early in his career because he wasn’t in the Saints top paid group?

Don’t know why he would feel he owes them anything.

 

[TheFourPillars]

Isn’t Battle only an unrestricted free agent so early in his career because he wasn’t in the Saints top paid group?

Don’t know why he would feel he owes them anything.

His contract would have been front loaded. And I guess anyone that's been at a club this long feels an affinity unless he is leaving on bad terms

 

[Noel Gallagher]

Serious question - how does the footy media/fans decide how much a player is worth on the market? I feel like I'm in a whole different world whenever they start throwing pick values around.

For example, since Nathan Thompson and Jon Hay left the hawks, I don't think I can recall a single example of when a hawk player was considered worthy of a first rounder or multiple firsts. Not a young Brad Hill, not Smithy, not even hypothetical discussions about Gunston and Breust all those years. Tom Mitchell conversations started at second rounder and spoken of as being too much.

Meanwhile we see a guy like Lachy Shulz on the market and I didn't think he was much chop, but every convo was "Collingwood will have to cough up a first round pick AT LEAST". And they did. And they were wrong to do that.

I know every player and every situation has a whole web of context - but does anyone feel the same? That the footy world has never rated a hawks player but we hear about multiple first rounders players within the top 10 of any given opposition club.

Am I alone on this?

No you are spot on. The Hill compo still burns. The Smith pick was pretty much spot on though

Hate the farcical free agency compensation system with a passion

 

[Leather Poisoning]

No you are spot on. The Hill compo still burns. The Smith pick was pretty much spot on though

Hate the farcical free agency compensation system with a passion

I'm talking more about trades - but yeh compo just scramble the value of a pick in peoples minds.

 

[The Jet From Poowong]

Serious question - how does the footy media/fans decide how much a player is worth on the market? I feel like I'm in a whole different world whenever they start throwing pick values around.

For example, since Nathan Thompson and Jon Hay left the hawks, I don't think I can recall a single example of when a hawk player was considered worthy of a first rounder or multiple firsts. Not a young Brad Hill, not Smithy, not even hypothetical discussions about Gunston and Breust all those years. Tom Mitchell conversations started at second rounder and spoken of as being too much.

Meanwhile we see a guy like Lachy Shulz on the market and I didn't think he was much chop, but every convo was "Collingwood will have to cough up a first round pick AT LEAST". And they did. And they were wrong to do that.

I know every player and every situation has a whole web of context - but does anyone feel the same? That the footy world has never rated a hawks player but we hear about multiple first rounders players within the top 10 of any given opposition club.

Am I alone on this?

Has been the case as you described. No if or buts.

The same moron at the HS who was arguing that Hill was only worth a pick in the 30s when he was leaving us, was then arguing he was worth more than a first rounder when he was returning to Vic. Go figure

 

[Topiary]

I despise this system.

Is Battle good? Yes but he should not be netting St. Kilda Pick 6 under any contract offer. McKay should not have net North pick 3. It has disproportionate impact on other struggling clubs because someone overpaid for a slightly above average structural player.

Both Essendon and Hawthorn with their contract offers guaranteed North their compensation. It fell that way because the AFL wanted/agreed to it

 

[Leather Poisoning]

Has been the case as you described. No if or buts.

The same moron at the HS who was arguing that Hill was only worth a pick in the 30s when he was leaving us, was then arguing he was worth more than a first rounder when he was returning to Vic. Go figure

Yeh this kind of thing. It just leaves me wondering if they get together and decide this as a group or if one person makes up a trade value and everyone follows.

The other side of this though is that we really don't lose good players in that 23-28 year range where all the trade value is. I guess if a few of those guys were on the market we'd see some bigger trade values being discussed.

 

[hawk65]

His contract would have been front loaded. And I guess anyone that's been at a club this long feels an affinity unless he is leaving on bad terms

The thing is that Battle is almost screwing the Hawks over by trying to get more money to help the Saints out . So they in turn get a possible 1st round compo pushing our pick back. Nice sentiment by him but he also has to think about the team he's potentially going to. If he cares so much for the Saints he should just stay. (I'm happy for him to come to us btw)

 

[The Jet From Poowong]

If 800k isn’t enough to lure Battle as an UFA, then let St Kilda pay him 950k

Simples

 

[Leather Poisoning]

The thing is that Battle is almost screwing the Hawks over by trying to get more money to help the Saints out . So they in turn get a possible 1st round compo pushing our pick back. Nice sentiment by him but he also has to think about the team he's potentially going to. If he cares so much for the Saints he should just stay. (I'm happy for him to come to us btw)

Is he actually doing this though? Or is it just speculation?

 

[Hawk1986]

Both Essendon and Hawthorn with their contract offers guaranteed North their compensation. It fell that way because the AFL wanted/agreed to it

North had the threat of matching the offer last year though. Saints don’t have the same option.

So only reason we would need to pay $950k is because Battle is demanding it - either because he thinks he is worth it, or because he wants Saints to get a top 10 pick (which I doubt)

 

[Topiary]

North had the threat of matching the offer last year though. Saints don’t have the same option.

So only reason we would need to pay $950k is because Battle is demanding it - either because he thinks he is worth it, or because he wants Saints to get a top 10 pick (which I doubt)

Don’t worry I agree, but we accomodated the demands of North. If we want Battle, we accomodate his demands. Do we push the button?

 

[hawk65]

Is he actually doing this though? Or is it just speculation?

I don't know but its been mentioned here

 

[Siri]

If 800k isn’t enough to lure Battle as an UFA, then let St Kilda pay him 950k

Simples

Agreed. Up until he was touted as a potential hawk, I thought he was just an under sized KPD or third tall. Is he that much chop? Still not sure. Serious question.

 

[Topiary]

Agreed. Up until he was touted as a potential hawk, I thought he was just an under sized KPD or third tall. Is he that much chop? Still not sure. Serious question.

It is the flexibility that Sam wants. Do we pay for it? Is Battle saying you pay me what gets StKilda the best outcome? I think the Battle camp is saying this. I am not sure we will push the appropriate button. But, we do know what is required. Very interesting. The negotiation is intriguing. What Battle needs to remember, if he wants to come to a new club as someone has said, how far does he take it?

 

[danielG]

If 800k isn’t enough to lure Battle as an UFA, then let St Kilda pay him 950k

Simples

Amazing how these players are so concerned about what compo their soon to be Ex clubs get, just happens to also add zeros to their pay packet. It’s just a way of maxim their own contract …


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[danielG]

Agreed. Up until he was touted as a potential hawk, I thought he was just an under sized KPD or third tall. Is he that much chop? Still not sure. Serious question.

For mine he’s a Scrimshaw level player.. Battle has had a good year and come out of contract at a good time with TPPs going up.. $900K is clearly the new $700K.. think we’ll see a lot of overpaying for the next few seasons.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Nugett]

On instagram today I saw a video of Jon Ralph saying:

If Hawks offer 950k and St Kilda get a first round compo for Battle - who wins that deal?

IT'S NOT A *ING DEAL BETWEEN HAWTHORN AND ST KILDA - WHAT THE * ARE THEY ON ABOUT?

He just wants his 85% for brokering a non trade…

 

[TylerDurden]

It is the flexibility that Sam wants. Do we pay for it? Is Battle saying you pay me what gets StKilda the best outcome? I think the Battle camp is saying this. I am not sure we will push the appropriate button. But, we do know what is required. Very interesting. The negotiation is intriguing. What Battle needs to remember, if he wants to come to a new club as someone has said, how far does he take it?

At some point, he needs to shit or get off the potty.
Do you want Hawthorn or not mate? Where gonna pay you flipping well to get out of that shit dump.
Will it trigger band 1? Who knows? Who cares?

What matters or not, is do you wanna flipping play for Hawthorn??!!!

 

[Mr Meeseeks]

On instagram today I saw a video of Jon Ralph saying:

If Hawks offer 950k and St Kilda get a first round compo for Battle - who wins that deal?

IT'S NOT A *ING DEAL BETWEEN HAWTHORN AND ST KILDA - WHAT THE * ARE THEY ON ABOUT?

Hawthorn and SK win, the other 16 clubs lose.

Sent from my SM-G990E using Tapatalk

 

[KermitJagger]

Serious question - how does the footy media/fans decide how much a player is worth on the market? I feel like I'm in a whole different world whenever they start throwing pick values around.

For example, since Nathan Thompson and Jon Hay left the hawks, I don't think I can recall a single example of when a hawk player was considered worthy of a first rounder or multiple firsts. Not a young Brad Hill, not Smithy, not even hypothetical discussions about Gunston and Breust all those years. Tom Mitchell conversations started at second rounder and spoken of as being too much.

Meanwhile we see a guy like Lachy Shulz on the market and I didn't think he was much chop, but every convo was "Collingwood will have to cough up a first round pick AT LEAST". And they did. And they were wrong to do that.

I know every player and every situation has a whole web of context - but does anyone feel the same? That the footy world has never rated a hawks player but we hear about multiple first rounders players within the top 10 of any given opposition club.

Am I alone on this?

Certainly in recent years, yes, but I think through the patch of time where we were actually good and had a lot of good players there just weren't that many players who wanted to leave. There was definitely talk of Breust and GWS where we were going to receive high picks in return, but we didn't see much of it because Breust didn't want to go.

Other teams seem to have more players leave regularly, and that means you hear more about their value. We also didn't do ourselves any favours in our dealings at the end of the threepeat era, irrespective of their age we should have received more than we did for Lewis and Mitch. Lewis particularly.

 

[ShoveYourCOLA]

The same moron at the HS who was arguing that Hill was only worth a pick in the 30s when he was leaving us, was then arguing he was worth more than a first rounder when he was returning to Vic. Go figure

I feel like “moron at the Herald Sun” is a tautology along the lines of “cash money” or “ATM machine”.