Dees got a great deal for Petracca.
But I keep seeing people reference the Curnow deal as a reason we didn’t get offered enough. That Curnow deal is fairly on par with the Hawks offer, and you could easily argue it was worse. And Curnow should definitely be commanding the higher price tag of the 3.
It just wasn’t a good enough deal with too little time allowed to move it around.
if we had lost merrett and not got a better pick for any draft - that’s not good enough.
with time we may have been able to offer and get a deal on a higher pick but a later pick rebuild is not exactly what we need right now and more of the same
I think we did the right thing.
They tried to low ball us, thinking they had caused enough drama that we would roll over.
Who knows if those picks would have worked out for us or not?
I’m sure we agree though, playing in 2026 with our best player on the field is better than playing without him.
I very much doubt Zach will lower his training and on field standards because of this.
Having a number of draft options in the right draft, sure. This is not that draft. There is no doubt this played into the decision not to trade him.
Excellent point. ■■■■ him.
I don’t agree with the last part. Curnow has been average for 2 years now. Petracca and Merrett have been far more consistent.
Sorry where is the VFL player in the Curnow deal and how is pick 22 (to later become 27-28) equivalent to anything the Blues received?
I blame all parties. But most of it should fall on Petroro and Hawthorn. The deal was fine, gave us some flexibility in an upcoming draft, but wasn’t nearly as good as the Curnow deal and they should have known trying to get a captain out was going to cost more. Personally I would have taken it and moved forward. I think this becomes a distraction when the season goes to ■■■■ let’s hope this is late.
If the conversations started earlier there would have been more of a chance best 22 Hawk could have been included / convinced to come along. The delay made that part impractical. I reckon it was deliberate by the Hawks and fairness to them, they are trying to win a flag. It will be interesting if Sydney overtake them next year.
He also said he was going to be a one club player, and success wasnt about wining a premiership, it was about leaving the club in a better place than he found it…… so I wouldn’t believe a thing he says Nino. Im worried he’ll sook up now (insert Kleenex sponsorship), play the violin and request a break from the game. His moral compass has done a 180 of late, and unless that gets sorted, Im not convinced he will man up and get on with it. He has truly farked things up next level. His manager and inner circle have clearly pumped his head up instead of giving him a mirror to look into, and now hes truly up ■■■■ Creek. Fark I hope he does the right thing and gets on with it.
Swans also gave FC a salary dump in Florent for a F3, it was just put through separately but was essentially tied to the Curnow deal.
I reckon you’re probably right.
It still wouldn’t have been an easy political call to make. We committed very early to hold him to his contract and then Welsh’s basically first act as the boss was to reiterate it. Going back on those statements would have affected his credibility and the club’s for a long time. And there’s the perception aspect. We lost Draper who was a huge draw among the kids, we only hung on to Ridley by the skin of our teeth, and the wounds of watching Daniher fk off to Brissy and win a flag there are still pretty raw. The admin wanted to fend off any risk of us being perceived to be becoming whatever the opposite of a destination club is - like GWS and GC in their early years, a helpless source of players that other teams can pillage at their will.
Having said all that, player mobility is a real thing, contracts don’t last forever, and keeping a bloke who wanted to leave has plenty of downside. The pick package Hawthorn offered was pretty pathetic for a player if Merrett’s calibre, but even fairly pathetic picks are better than none.
I think 10 was probably the magic number. If the hawks had cobbled together an offer that included a top 10 pick in the draft (ie, a pick early enough to give us a top 10 pick AFTER bidding shenanigans were taken into account) then that would have been an easier sell. Gold Coast knew that to get a club over the psychological barrier of trading out a fan-favourite player you need single figure draft picks to ease the load, and they made petracca happen with minimal fuss.
Having said all that though, it sounds like we were after quality players, not just picks. And if youre a quality player, are you choosing to go to Essendon from Hawthorn right now? Always a tough sell. But the final offer we made (asking for the 2027 1st) sounds like we were willing to bend on that at least.
The unsung victim here is poor Hustwaite. We’ve been linked to him all year so we must have been interested, he was clearly willing to come across, but with both sides arm wrestling over the Merrett offers and counteroffers right up to the deadline there was no real possibility of getting a deal done for him independently, so now he’s just as stuck as Merrett. Still, maybe he’ll score more ones time for them now Worpel has gone…
How many list spots do we have?
If we took the hawthorn deal we would’ve had 7 picks inside 30, plus 2 nga bids coming.
Presumably we couldn’t have fit 9 draftees in and it looks like no one is particularly interested in sliding back to acquire multiple picks inside the 20s?
So how are GC looking from a points outlook?
Have Patterson and Uwland covered. Few later NGA’s just short on
Yeah, the “rounds” are irrelevant. There’s a monster difference between pick 7 and pick 22.
If Hawthorn had got 10 from Carlton and offered 9 & 10 plus a 2026 1st rounder the deal would have got done. We could have then sold it as similar to Petracca. Instead they tried to screw us over like they did with WCE last year.
Can’t believe there were people on here saying that Hawthorn were reasonable and would do the right thing. Clearly they were wrong.
GC currently have 3773 points.
If Uwland gets bid on at 2 and Patterson at 5 that 4276 - minus 10% = 3848 points. So slightly short, but it depends when they’re bid on.
If the Hawks were serious they could’ve, early in the trade period before Flanders went, shipped Mackenzie to the Saints in a deal where they got 7 back.
Picks 7 and 9 could’ve then formed the basis of a compelling offer for us.
At the moment I think we only have 2 but delisting Setterfield, Hobbs & Lual will give us 5