Confirmed Josh Battle [to Hawthorn as UFA]

Remove this Banner Ad

Is there a limit to this though?
If Tigers as spooners had lost a player like Battle who let's face it solid and not an elite - would they really be getting pick 2 as compo?
Nope, been that way pretty much since the beginning in 2012. A year later Hawthorn lost Lance Franklin and as premiers received pick 19, a year after that Melbourne lost James Frawley and as the penultimate club got pick 3.
 
Nope, been that way pretty much since the beginning in 2012. A year later Hawthorn lost Lance Franklin and as premiers received pick 19, a year after that Melbourne lost James Frawley and as the penultimate club got pick 3.
Jeezus Franklin generational player # 19

Battle, hard-working trier # 8
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Not gonna lie pick 8 for Battle is highway robbery. Tying band level to salary and tenure is being manipulated by clubs far too easily. Use champion data or something similar instead. Values players and subsequent compensation on output rather than salary and as long as it’s a consistent metric it’ll work and improve the outcome.
 
Not gonna lie pick 8 for Battle is highway robbery. Tying band level to salary and tenure is being manipulated by clubs far too easily. Use champion data or something similar instead. Values players and subsequent compensation on output rather than salary and as long as it’s a consistent metric it’ll work and improve the outcome.
There isn’t a metric that everyone will unanimously agree with to measure the value of players.

Ultimately if a club like Hawthorn want to spend the best part of $1m on Battle - good not great player. He isn’t a match winner.

So be it.

It will eventually start biting clubs in the ass and start slowing down in a few years when the caps start tightening up for each club
 
So you think it’s ok that Brisbane is getting a future star that you should have had access to?
Bassat is far from a fool.
The inequities of F/S and academies in a so called professional comp are an absolute joke.
Every club has access to father sons, some teams get more lucky than others but I like the notion of sons playing at their father’s club. My clubs last decent father son was 30 years ago and our nga has produced nothing so we haven’t benefited here. Academies are a rort but we know they are trying to help the suns and giants, I don’t believe brisbane and the swans should have them though.
 
There isn’t a metric that everyone will unanimously agree with to measure the value of players.

Ultimately if a club like Hawthorn want to spend the best part of $1m on Battle - good not great player. He isn’t a match winner.

So be it.

It will eventually start biting clubs in the ass and start slowing down in a few years when the caps start tightening up for each club

Yet, st kilda were prepared to offer Battle a more lucrative contract to stay.
 
Not gonna lie pick 8 for Battle is highway robbery. Tying band level to salary and tenure is being manipulated by clubs far too easily. Use champion data or something similar instead. Values players and subsequent compensation on output rather than salary and as long as it’s a consistent metric it’ll work and improve the outcome.

Disagree.
Champion Data is what they've done.
Salary is what people think they'll do.

Salary is a direct measure of how bad someone wants them.
 
Every club has access to father sons, some teams get more lucky than others but I like the notion of sons playing at their father’s club. My clubs last decent father son was 30 years ago and our nga has produced nothing so we haven’t benefited here. Academies are a rort but we know they are trying to help the suns and giants, I don’t believe brisbane and the swans should have them though.
The issue isn’t the access. For either benefit.

It’s the cost to access.

If Brisbane had to stump up a pick within say 5 for Ashcroft they would need to part with a gun player to attain it.

It all of a sudden balances out the cycle of the poor sides losing their best players to contenders for picks
 
Every club has access to father sons, some teams get more lucky than others but I like the notion of sons playing at their father’s club. My clubs last decent father son was 30 years ago and our nga has produced nothing so we haven’t benefited here. Academies are a rort but we know they are trying to help the suns and giants, I don’t believe brisbane and the swans should have them though.
Nothing wrong with F/S but the cost needs to be more appropriate than basically getting them for a few rubbish picks and still being able to retain a first rounder. Clubs get first access but less of a discount.

Lions getting another Ashcroft for literally nothing this year is absolutely absurd in a professional competition.

Absolutely Swans and Brisbane are no longer in a position where they need to get the benefits they do for the academies any longer.

And that’s all Bassat was saying. The inequities of a so called professional competition is ridiculous.
 
Nothing wrong with F/S but the cost needs to be more appropriate than basically getting them for a few rubbish picks and still being able to retain a first rounder. Clubs get first access but less of a discount.

Lions getting another Ashcroft for literally nothing this year is absolutely absurd in a professional competition.

Absolutely Swans and Brisbane are no longer in a position where they need to get the benefits they do for the academies any longer.

And that’s all Bassat was saying. The inequities of a so called professional competition is ridiculous.
Fair enough when some things favour only some clubs like the academies however every club operates under the same rules for father sons. I think they should pay more as well however that’s what every club operate under at the moment.
 
Fair enough when some things favour only some clubs like the academies however every club operates under the same rules for father sons. I think they should pay more as well however that’s what every club operate under at the moment.
Yes they do. No reason it can’t be changed to become more equitable.
And Bassat is trying to make it fairer for all. If you have not been the beneficiary of F/S much you should be cheering him on.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Yes they do. No reason it can’t be changed to become more equitable.
And Bassat is trying to make it fairer for all. If you have not been the beneficiary of F/S much you should be cheering him on.
I’m still holding hope that in 20 years I’ll be cheering on Trent and Jacks boy while hoping Dusty and Ash Barty have a love child.
 
I’m still holding hope that in 20 years I’ll be cheering on Trent and Jacks boy while hoping Dusty and Ash Barty have a love child.
Well good for you, but I’m not sure I’ll live long enough to see one of Roo’s three coming up, should they even want to or be good enough to play!
But if they did, and the system has changed, I’d be happy to pay for them if they were good enough.
 
What’s “nice try” about it, I didn’t say it had to be during the trade period. It could indeed be live trading on the night.


Perhaps, but it all depends on why the club is moving up. If they’re desperate to move up ahead of a bid for instance, they’ll pay what they have to. And again, I spoke about ending up with 3 picks in the 12-30 range (one of which we already have), so I don’t know why two of you now have said we wouldn’t get two firsts for 8.

Pick 30 is not in the first round!


Thanks kindly good sir.
Nice try again! If Laura Kane has her way pick 30 will definitely be a first round pick…😉
Now I am tapping out!
 
I could care less what St Kilda get as compensation for Battle, because it will be a lot more than Hawthorn got for Buddy.

Life's a bitch. Suck it up.
If you are a hawks fan since 1980, you have seen flags in 1983 , 1986, 1988, 1989, 1991, 2008, 2013, 2014 and 2015.

9 flags in 40 years. I would be happy to see one dockers glad in my life time!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Confirmed Josh Battle [to Hawthorn as UFA]

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top