HIGGINS DEAL DONE

[SaintPav]

Who will crack first?

[Joffa Burns]

We need Hanners to have an uninterrupted preseason with no set backs.

That will be like having gold in the vault come finals time if that happens.

Personally, I couldn't care less if Hanners only gets wheeled-out for important games and finals from here on in. He was instrumental in the Dogs final and the GWS final round win. He's the class cream on top. Play 1 in 3 or 4 games and I'm just fine with that.

I cannot believe you of all supporters would say that Saintmatt, you've always been reasonable in assessments. Hannerbery was shite against Richmond. It was his lack of continuity in his games that contributed to that. It was Ryder that won us the first final & he not being there against Richmond was more telling.

To say Hannerbery can play one in four is ludicrous. That makes him a $3.2 million player a year. He's not that. He's $700K a season if he plays every game. I hope he does play every game, he needs to build a season, he needs to lead St Kilda in every game.

I'd love to see Hanners announce his retirement at 9.00am tomorrow and allow us to bring in Treloar.

Hanners is a major bust as a player to date and I hope he can turn it around next year.

[Saintmatt]

We need Hanners to have an uninterrupted preseason with no set backs.

That will be like having gold in the vault come finals time if that happens.

Personally, I couldn't care less if Hanners only gets wheeled-out for important games and finals from here on in. He was instrumental in the Dogs final and the GWS final round win. He's the class cream on top. Play 1 in 3 or 4 games and I'm just fine with that.

I cannot believe you of all supporters would say that Saintmatt, you've always been reasonable in assessments. Hannerbery was shite against Richmond. It was his lack of continuity in his games that contributed to that. It was Ryder that won us the first final & he not being there against Richmond was more telling.

To say Hannerbery can play one in four is ludicrous. That makes him a $3.2 million player a year. He's not that. He's $700K a season if he plays every game. I hope he does play every game, he needs to build a season, he needs to lead St Kilda in every game.

I truly get where you’re coming from but my point is thus:

I’m not necessarily defending or advocating the recruitment of Hannebery - nor what he’s paid. I like him as a player - I love his poise and decision making in the clinches - and yes, we have an 80% version of the gun from Sydney. But - we now have what we have now. I would love Dan to play every game but, it’s not going to happen. My ‘1 game in 3 or 4’ comment was based purely on using the asset you have in the manner that best suits the asset itself. There’s no point flying Hanners to play GCS or North in Tassie in July off the back of 2 or 3 hard games on the rock at Marvel. Conserve your asset for when you need it; not just for shizzles.

I take your point about the Richmond final - he was poor .. along with 90%+ of our team. But he was excellent at the start of the GWS game when it had to be won and his stoppages in the last q under Ryder in the Dogs final were terrific. That’s what I want Hanners for ... for when it means something and a result is needed.

But here’s the clincher. A large proportion of Hanners’ contract is now paid. It was massively front ended when we were literally paying no one. It’s the opposite of Treloar. So - whilst the $ paid per game ROI looks poor for the last 2 years ... it now starts to look really good. REALLY good.

[skeptic]

Not really wanting to weigh in too much on this one... but Hanner’s game vs W.B is fast becoming the most overrated performance since Luke Ball’s first half against Geel in the 09 GF.

Look he was good. Faded at the end like most

Ryder was exceptional

Personally, I do subscribe to the give him a week off every 3-4 weeks to keep him fresh and reduce the risk of injury. All in all though... like most said at the time, was a bad trade

[Saintmatt]

Not really wanting to weigh in too much on this one... but Hanner’s game vs W.B is fast becoming the most overrated performance since Luke Ball’s first half against Geel in the 09 GF.

Look he was good. Faded at the end like most

Ryder was exceptional

Personally, I do subscribe to the give him a week off every 3-4 weeks to keep him fresh and reduce the risk of injury. All in all though... like most said at the time, was a bad trade

Umm - no - I don’t thing you could classify it as a bad trade at all. It was basically Hickey for Hannebery. What we paid him thereafter is debatable.

However, what ppl need to understand is that the AFL is basically enforced socialism - the 18th ranked team pays the same amount to their players (five or take a little banking here and there) as the 1st ranked team so therefore - you have to pay someone. I don’t care what we paid to whom where we were shite ... just so long as it doesn’t cost us when it comes time to lock in someone we want to keep or attract.

[skeptic]

Not really wanting to weigh in too much on this one... but Hanner’s game vs W.B is fast becoming the most overrated performance since Luke Ball’s first half against Geel in the 09 GF.

Look he was good. Faded at the end like most

Ryder was exceptional

Personally, I do subscribe to the give him a week off every 3-4 weeks to keep him fresh and reduce the risk of injury. All in all though... like most said at the time, was a bad trade

Umm - no - I don’t thing you could classify it as a bad trade at all. It was basically Hickey for Hannebery. What we paid him thereafter is debatable.

However, what ppl need to understand is that the AFL is basically enforced socialism - the 18th ranked team pays the same amount to their players (five or take a little banking here and there) as the 1st ranked team so therefore - you have to pay someone. I don’t care what we paid to whom where we were shite ... just so long as it doesn’t cost us when it comes time to lock in someone we want to keep or attract.

Fair enough.

I would argue we’d have gotten more value out of Hickey which is really saying something.

For me, i guess it’s more the length of the contract as opposed to the cost... My worry is that we end up losing a guy like Ross to keep Hannebery on the list to play out his 6 games a year. Or possibly are unable to make a move on someone like Treloar (if we were ever interested)

[Saintmike65]

We need Hanners to have an uninterrupted preseason with no set backs.

You nailed it...he is a crucial cog for next season, love to see him somewhat protected playing mostly wing and rotating in the middle with Hunter Clark.

[ace]

The deal can be agreed before hand to but paperwork can not be submitted until 3PM but must be in before 7:30PM.
Given St Kilda's insistence that they must use a first rounder this year and next the the trabe assets are
2020 first round pick swap 17 to 21
2020 pick 64
2020 pick 77
2021 second round pick
2021 third round pick
2021 fourth round pick

[Saintmatt]

Not really wanting to weigh in too much on this one... but Hanner’s game vs W.B is fast becoming the most overrated performance since Luke Ball’s first half against Geel in the 09 GF.

Look he was good. Faded at the end like most

Ryder was exceptional

Personally, I do subscribe to the give him a week off every 3-4 weeks to keep him fresh and reduce the risk of injury. All in all though... like most said at the time, was a bad trade

Umm - no - I don’t thing you could classify it as a bad trade at all. It was basically Hickey for Hannebery. What we paid him thereafter is debatable.

However, what ppl need to understand is that the AFL is basically enforced socialism - the 18th ranked team pays the same amount to their players (five or take a little banking here and there) as the 1st ranked team so therefore - you have to pay someone. I don’t care what we paid to whom where we were shite ... just so long as it doesn’t cost us when it comes time to lock in someone we want to keep or attract.

Fair enough.

I would argue we’d have gotten more value out of Hickey which is really saying something.

For me, i guess it’s more the length of the contract as opposed to the cost... My worry is that we end up losing a guy like Ross to keep Hannebery on the list to play out his 6 games a year. Or possibly are unable to make a move on someone like Treloar (if we were ever interested)

There's not a hope in hell that Hickey would've played a single game last season, let alone this past one so, by definition - we'd have not got more value out of Hickey than Hannebery. Ross is already on decent coin and there's no way that his next contract will be as high as this present one so, the only way Ross goes is if he wants to play full-time midfield and needs to move clubs to do so.

The potential Treloar recruitment is interesting and I've thought the same - you could argue that Hannebery's contract precluded that although, a lot of Hannebery's contract was front ended into the first 2 years (i.e. funnily enough ... unlike Treloar!). In all reality - it's Hill's sizeable contract that precludes Treloar's recruitment.

[kosifantutti]

There's not a hope in hell that Hickey would've played a single game last season, let alone this past one so, by definition - we'd have not got more value out of Hickey than Hannebery.

Abbott played a game, so I reckon Hickey would have definitely played one.

[Yorkeys]

Thread heading does this Forum's cred no favours, some considerable time on from original posting. This might be one trade that just does not get done. However if Richmond are not reasonable it will reflect poorly on their real " affection" for Jack and compassion in regard to the illness he has gone through. It would also be poor form if Richmond is trying to get retrospective compo for Dan Butler. I hope Richmond see a pick in the 30s as fair for all concerned, but if not we walk away. Caving on a fair price doesn't help future negotiations.

[magnifisaint]

Thread heading does this Forum's cred no favours, some considerable time on from original posting. This might be one trade that just does not get done. However if Richmond are not reasonable it will reflect poorly on their real " affection" for Jack and compassion in regard to the illness he has gone through. It would also be poor form if Richmond is trying to get retrospective compo for Dan Butler. I hope Richmond see a pick in the 30s as fair for all concerned, but if not we walk away. Caving on a fair price doesn't help future negotiations.

I thought there was an opposition forum for this?

[skeptic]

Not really wanting to weigh in too much on this one... but Hanner’s game vs W.B is fast becoming the most overrated performance since Luke Ball’s first half against Geel in the 09 GF.

Look he was good. Faded at the end like most

Ryder was exceptional

Personally, I do subscribe to the give him a week off every 3-4 weeks to keep him fresh and reduce the risk of injury. All in all though... like most said at the time, was a bad trade

Umm - no - I don’t thing you could classify it as a bad trade at all. It was basically Hickey for Hannebery. What we paid him thereafter is debatable.

However, what ppl need to understand is that the AFL is basically enforced socialism - the 18th ranked team pays the same amount to their players (five or take a little banking here and there) as the 1st ranked team so therefore - you have to pay someone. I don’t care what we paid to whom where we were shite ... just so long as it doesn’t cost us when it comes time to lock in someone we want to keep or attract.

Fair enough.

I would argue we’d have gotten more value out of Hickey which is really saying something.

For me, i guess it’s more the length of the contract as opposed to the cost... My worry is that we end up losing a guy like Ross to keep Hannebery on the list to play out his 6 games a year. Or possibly are unable to make a move on someone like Treloar (if we were ever interested)

There's not a hope in hell that Hickey would've played a single game last season, let alone this past one so, by definition - we'd have not got more value out of Hickey than Hannebery. Ross is already on decent coin and there's no way that his next contract will be as high as this present one so, the only way Ross goes is if he wants to play full-time midfield and needs to move clubs to do so.

The potential Treloar recruitment is interesting and I've thought the same - you could argue that Hannebery's contract precluded that although, a lot of Hannebery's contract was front ended into the first 2 years (i.e. funnily enough ... unlike Treloar!). In all reality - it's Hill's sizeable contract that precludes Treloar's recruitment.

I’m just saying he would have been fit to play at least

[Mr Magic]

Thread heading does this Forum's cred no favours, some considerable time on from original posting. This might be one trade that just does not get done. However if Richmond are not reasonable it will reflect poorly on their real " affection" for Jack and compassion in regard to the illness he has gone through. It would also be poor form if Richmond is trying to get retrospective compo for Dan Butler. I hope Richmond see a pick in the 30s as fair for all concerned, but if not we walk away. Caving on a fair price doesn't help future negotiations.

OK
I’ll accept the blame for the thread given I started it.
In future I won’t post what I hear on the radio

[cwrcyn]

Will probably get done. We swap our first with Richmond and then we give them next year's second rounder?

[skeptic]

Thread heading does this Forum's cred no favours, some considerable time on from original posting. This might be one trade that just does not get done. However if Richmond are not reasonable it will reflect poorly on their real " affection" for Jack and compassion in regard to the illness he has gone through. It would also be poor form if Richmond is trying to get retrospective compo for Dan Butler. I hope Richmond see a pick in the 30s as fair for all concerned, but if not we walk away. Caving on a fair price doesn't help future negotiations.

OK
I’ll accept the blame for the thread given I started it.
In future I won’t post what I hear on the radio

Just wait and see...

Given the complete lack of news... I pay a lot of credence to the theory that’s it done and the AFL are holding on to a number of trades in so that the last hour will be dramatic

[SaintPelican66]

Not really wanting to weigh in too much on this one... but Hanner’s game vs W.B is fast becoming the most overrated performance since Luke Ball’s first half against Geel in the 09 GF.

Look he was good. Faded at the end like most

Ryder was exceptional

Personally, I do subscribe to the give him a week off every 3-4 weeks to keep him fresh and reduce the risk of injury. All in all though... like most said at the time, was a bad trade

Umm - no - I don’t thing you could classify it as a bad trade at all. It was basically Hickey for Hannebery. What we paid him thereafter is debatable.

However, what ppl need to understand is that the AFL is basically enforced socialism - the 18th ranked team pays the same amount to their players (five or take a little banking here and there) as the 1st ranked team so therefore - you have to pay someone. I don’t care what we paid to whom where we were shite ... just so long as it doesn’t cost us when it comes time to lock in someone we want to keep or attract.

Fair enough.

I would argue we’d have gotten more value out of Hickey which is really saying something.

For me, i guess it’s more the length of the contract as opposed to the cost... My worry is that we end up losing a guy like Ross to keep Hannebery on the list to play out his 6 games a year. Or possibly are unable to make a move on someone like Treloar (if we were ever interested)

This is a moot point now. They have found the issue with Hanners hamstring and fixed it. He will play 20+ games for us next year. Including 4 finals. As long as we "rest" him every 5 weeks, especially when playing in WA and QLD. Avooid those long trips and he will have a cracking 2021.

[saintsRrising]

Thread heading does this Forum's cred no favours, some considerable time on from original posting. This might be one trade that just does not get done. However if Richmond are not reasonable it will reflect poorly on their real " affection" for Jack and compassion in regard to the illness he has gone through. It would also be poor form if Richmond is trying to get retrospective compo for Dan Butler. I hope Richmond see a pick in the 30s as fair for all concerned, but if not we walk away. Caving on a fair price doesn't help future negotiations.

OK
I’ll accept the blame for the thread given I started it.
In future I won’t post what I hear on the radio

Just wait and see...

Given the complete lack of news... I pay a lot of credence to the theory that’s it done and the AFL are holding on to a number of trades in so that the last hour will be dramatic

There is a ban till 3pm. So deals will start coming after then.

[Saintmatt]

Thread heading does this Forum's cred no favours, some considerable time on from original posting. This might be one trade that just does not get done. However if Richmond are not reasonable it will reflect poorly on their real " affection" for Jack and compassion in regard to the illness he has gone through. It would also be poor form if Richmond is trying to get retrospective compo for Dan Butler. I hope Richmond see a pick in the 30s as fair for all concerned, but if not we walk away. Caving on a fair price doesn't help future negotiations.

OK
I’ll accept the blame for the thread given I started it.
In future I won’t post what I hear on the radio

Just wait and see...

Given the complete lack of news... I pay a lot of credence to the theory that’s it done and the AFL are holding on to a number of trades in so that the last hour will be dramatic

There is a ban till 3pm. So deals will start coming after then.

Please stop posting factually correct information. It's unbefitting a forum of such standing.

Do better.

[SaintPav]

Maybe the fax machine broke down again?

[silverhalo]

Jack Higgins deal is done.

St Kilda receives: Higgins, Pick 21 and a future fourth rounder.

Richmond receives: Pick 17 and future 2nd rounder.

[Russman]

yippee

[ace]

So first round pick swap, our 2021 second round but a 2021 4th rounder coming back.

[silverhalo]

So first round pick swap, our 2021 second round but a 2021 4th rounder coming back.

I personally don't think we've paid overs there, I honestly think that's a fair deal - wasn't expecting that future 4th rounder coming back. Trust me, we haven't seen the best of Jack yet, he's a ripper, fantastic get Saints.....welcome to the Saints Jack!

[ace]

So first round pick swap, our 2021 second round but a 2021 4th rounder coming back.

I personally don't think we've paid overs there, I honestly think that's a fair deal - wasn't expecting that future 4th rounder coming back. Trust me, we haven't seen the best of Jack yet, he's a ripper, fantastic get Saints.....welcome to the Saints Jack!

Richmond's fourth rounder probably in the 70s but could be mid 60s on the night.
Not sharp enough to cut a sausage let alone a steak.