Hawx delist Thorp with a year to go under contract.

[Barnzy]

The love affair on PRE with Thorpe is amazing. Done nothing at AFL level, had injury after injury and probably is Smith-esque like fragile (heard Dunstall during the year say they didn't realise how fragile his body was when they drafted him). Now as a young KPP who's had injuries and is still developing he's been delisted with a year to run on his contract, very fishy. Do people want him because he was a high pick and highly rated as a junior or because we lack quality forwards....or possibly a mixture of both? Geez, I'd want him well away from Richmond unless DH demands it.

 

[Rod]

Not sure who feeds you those stories, but Thorp never demanded to get out. He wanted to stay and was shocked and upset at being delisted.
He'd even been at training last week( before everyone else was due to come back) and was looking very fit.
We wouldn't delist him for salary cap space. Neither his salary or cap space would be an issue.
Thorp was shopped around at trade week, but he wanted to stay at Hawthorn if he could.

Sorry Scabman, if Thorp wanted to stay at Hawthorn, he could have. He has a CONTRACT!

The only way Hawthorn could get rid of Thorp is for Thorp to agree to it.

We did the same thing with Zantuck and finger's crossed will do the same thing with McMahon.

A player will only agree to it if he has somewhere else to go otherwise it's career suicide.

 

[Col.E.Kurtz]

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't delisting a player while in contract mean you have to count his salary against the cap?

I actually think the Pelican has badly stuffed this up, but such is the aura of a Premiership winning list manger that he could trade buddy for a third round pick and some how the football community would interpret it as a crafty move.

 

[ZeroGame]

Sorry Scabman, if Thorp wanted to stay at Hawthorn, he could have. He has a CONTRACT!

The only way Hawthorn could get rid of Thorp is for Thorp to agree to it.

We did the same thing with Zantuck and finger's crossed will do the same thing with McMahon.

A player will only agree to it if he has somewhere else to go otherwise it's career suicide.

Actually the club can just delist him, they just have to pay out the next year of his contract
That being said, I don't think the Hawks can afford to do that due to TPP, so it must have been a mutual agreement

Would definitely take Thorp ahead of McDonald in the PSD.

 

[IrockZ]

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't delisting a player while in contract mean you have to count his salary against the cap?

I actually think the Pelican has badly stuffed this up, but such is the aura of a Premiership winning list manger that he could trade buddy for a third round pick and some how the football community would interpret it as a crafty move.

It's not like Thorp is on 400k next year. He'd be lucky to be getting 150k. With their retirements and Croad situation the cap space wouldnt be an issue.

 

[tigerlee]

Isn't this the same kid that has been injured all season and only got on the ground for 2 games this season? Are his injuries a concern? Do we want to risk taking him if he is always injured - even the Dawks couldn't get his injuries right so what makes you think the Tigers will have any more luck? Trading for players that are injured and injury prone makes me nervous.

 

[theScabman]

Sorry Scabman, if Thorp wanted to stay at Hawthorn, he could have. He has a CONTRACT!

Wrong.
He was told he was gone.

It's my understanding we only have to pay out his contract if someone picks him up.

 

[Tigerbob]

Not sure who feeds you those stories, but Thorp never demanded to get out. He wanted to stay and was shocked and upset at being delisted.
He'd even been at training last week( before everyone else was due to come back) and was looking very fit.
We wouldn't delist him for salary cap space. Neither his salary or cap space would be an issue.
Thorp was shopped around at trade week, but he wanted to stay at Hawthorn if he could.

Amazing then to see he actually has been delisted. That must be at some shock to what you believe as he was under contract and you guys can definitely not afford to delist a contracted player without his consent. Thorp is on around $180,000 per annum plus bonuses. Getting rid of him would have meant you would have to pay him out that figure.

Don't know who "feeds" you your stories mate but it is a known fact he asked to be put on the trade table.

“Mitch requested to be considered for a trade, but unfortunately this was not able to be achieved during trade week." from your messiah Chris Pelchin - found here - http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/86446/default.aspx

Also ask your Hawk officials who they spent locked in a room at Etihad stadium with for most of the day Friday - deadline day - trying to broker a deal with. I had a friend who is in the media right there who passed on that gossip. I told a few people on here at time once I was told.

Anyway, I know some Hawks supporters are upset, I know a couple of lads who work at your club and they are mightily disappointed with the way it has turned out. They definitely believe he will develop into a player, but they knew he simply didn't want to be at Hawthorn anymore.

Your right about one point though, he is fit and ready for a big pre season.

Carlton and North are said to be keen.

 

[Smoking Aces]

Not sure who feeds you those stories, but Thorp never demanded to get out. He wanted to stay and was shocked and upset at being delisted.
He'd even been at training last week( before everyone else was due to come back) and was looking very fit.
We wouldn't delist him for salary cap space. Neither his salary or cap space would be an issue.
Thorp was shopped around at trade week, but he wanted to stay at Hawthorn if he could.

I think you are wrong here. According to the is article in The Age, Pelchen is quoted as saying that he did want to leave Hawthorn and requested to be traded.

Thorp sent packing by the Hawks
Andrea Petrie | October 29, 2009

HAWTHORN has shown key defender Mitch Thorp the door after the sixth pick in the 2006 draft, who has been plagued by injuries since his arrival at the club, had only managed two senior games.

The 20-year-old Tasmanian - who was drafted one pick above Geelong superstar Joel Selwood - was delisted yesterday with a year left on his contract, which will be paid out after the Hawks were unable to off-load him to another club during trade week.

Hawthorn's player personnel and strategy general manager, Chris Pelchen, said: ''Unfortunately, Mitch has been limited by injury in the first three years and as a consequence, has had little opportunity to play senior footy at Hawthorn.

''Mitch requested to be considered for a trade but, unfortunately, this was not able to be achieved during trade week. After further consultation with Mitch and his management, we felt it was best for Mitch's interests to seek a fresh start at another club.''
Rookies Tim Walsh and Haydn Kiel were also delisted, while third-year rookie Matthew Suckling has been elevated to the senior list.

Thorp, Walsh and Kiel have all indicated their desire to continue their AFL careers, and will nominate for the November draft.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/rfnews/thorp-sent-packing/2009/10/28/1256405426013.html

 

[Smoking Aces]

Carlton and North are said to be keen.

Bob, I assume nothing has changed during trade week and we are keen as well???

 

[Tigerbob]

Bob, I assume nothing has changed during trade week and we are keen as well???

We are.

 

[Tiger74]

You have to be wrong TB - no-one wants to leave Hawthorn:

I doubt we'll be delisting anyone.

And who's going to want to leave, especially when trade week is dead and gone.
Leaving a club now to put yourself in the PSD when there are so many others in their already would be stupid.

Oh, and if you did want a uncontracted player you'd have to choose out of Muston, Murphy or Dowler. hehe

 

[Smoking Aces]

We are.

Thanks mate. I guess with North and Carlton also interested our best chance of draftig him will be via the PSD. I assume if he is still keen on joining up with Hardwick then it shouldnt be too hard to convince him and his management to forget about the National Draft and just nominate for the PSD.

 

[Rosy]

The articles also say Hawthorn showed Thorp the door. I wouldn't take anything in articles as gospel, and am sure we could find heaps of examples why. Clubs say what they want people to read and believe. It's the nature of the propaganda machines they need to be. Who ever knows the facts or if they're black and white rather than somewhere between. All I know is I hope we don't take any players who will have long term injury concerns. They're not much good to us if they can't get on the park. At least we have a coach who knows the player well and what the medicos should test thoroughly in a check up.

 

[Tambling Man]

As I read it, Thorp was sacked. He didn't resign.

Why would Hawthorn sack a bloke with a year to go on his contract?

It isn't money the club have to pay him out, even if they have an agreement where they don't have to pay him if he was drafted, his salary still counts toward the cap.

I doubt it about medical issues, Hawks have kept on Croad, Bailey and Young who have far more serious injury concerns.

It can't be about talent, Hawks have said this is a very thin draft, the bloke they will be replacing Thorp with will be around pick 90. The chances of a player of Thorp's talent being available at pick 90 is very slim.

To my way of thinking that means that he was sacked because of attitude issues, Injunction, or he has stuffed up and it is yet to hit the media. Generally I am against taking other teams rejects, but I don't really care about off field issues and DH can make an assessment of his attitude.

Thorp is of the right age, type and apparently has great skills, anything after the 3rd rd ND would be a bargain for him imho.

 

[theScabman]

Amazing then to see he actually has been delisted. That must be at some shock to what you believe as he was under contract and you guys can definitely not afford to delist a contracted player without his consent. Thorp is on around $180,000 per annum plus bonuses. Getting rid of him would have meant you would have to pay him out that figure.

Don't know who "feeds" you your stories mate but it is a known fact he asked to be put on the trade table.

“Mitch requested to be considered for a trade, but unfortunately this was not able to be achieved during trade week." from your messiah Chris Pelchin - found here - http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/86446/default.aspx

Also ask your Hawk officials who they spent locked in a room at Etihad stadium with for most of the day Friday - deadline day - trying to broker a deal with. I had a friend who is in the media right there who passed on that gossip. I told a few people on here at time once I was told.

Anyway, I know some Hawks supporters are upset, I know a couple of lads who work at your club and they are mightily disappointed with the way it has turned out. They definitely believe he will develop into a player, but they knew he simply didn't want to be at Hawthorn anymore.

Your right about one point though, he is fit and ready for a big pre season.

Carlton and North are said to be keen.

As Rosy has said, don't believe all that you read as fact.

Sure we shopped him around at trade week and he would've had to agree had we found a suitable trade, but the fact is he was shocked at being dumped, didn't want to leave and is upset that it had turned out this way.
The decision was not his.

 

[Spanish Prisoner]

Drafting a reject is like running on a misfield. Silly silly move. Let this rubbish go through to the keeper, or another club.

I actually think the Pelican has badly stuffed this up, but such is the aura of a Premiership winning list manger that he could trade buddy for a third round pick and some how the football community would interpret it as a crafty move.

There is a good reason for that. Premiership list mgrs/coaches have achieved what others set out to achieve. They have DONE what others dream of doing. They have evidence of their own success and not just cheap talk....

 

[Tigerbob]

You have to be wrong TB - no-one wants to leave Hawthorn:

:hihi

They are a happy team.......

Don't believe anything I read though mate, particularly direct quotes from the Football Manager.

My sources confirmed most of what I thought late last night.

 

[Rod]

the fact is he was shocked at being dumped, didn't want to leave and is upset that it had turned out this way.
The decision was not his.

Heresay.........

I guess if Thorp ends up at Richmond and Pattison at Hawthorn, it will just be a coincidence?

 

[Rod]

My sources confirmed most of what I thought late last night.

Did they confirm any interest in picking Thorp up?