Picks 12 & 13

[Zed]

Effectively we got Hickey, Lee , Wright and White for picks 12 & 13.

Time will tell if the gamble pays off. Will watch this one with interest particularly as Grundy was still around at 12.

Seems a certainty that 2013 will be Kosi's last season given the new batch of talls and looks like they are planning for Reiwoldt to be not too far behind him.

[St Ick]

On that. I remember when news first game out about the Hickey trade I thought great, we give up 12 & our 3rd rounder and we get Hickey, 26, 46 in return, good trade. Then it came out that we had to also give up pick 37. Which IMO tipped it toward paying overs, from what we can gather we needed to do this to trump Collingwoods offer.

Fast forward a few days in trade week and that 37 turns into Broughton, who we could have been able to afford his front ended contract with BJ gawn - hindsight would tell you Gram getting axed would mean Broughton was even more important. OK, moving on...

Who did Freo pick up with pick 37 (36)? Tanner Smith, the kid who many people said we could get with 25 prior to Clurey sliding.

Smith might be a one trick pony, but he was the last of that group of 7-8 good KPPs to go in that second round. Initially I wasn't over the moon with giving up 37, but now it seems pretty ironic who went at the pick.

[Saintersss]

I reckon if we knew Grundy was going to slide, we wouldn't have given up Pick 12/13 for Hickey. Grundy is also ready made, so he would be able to play as a back-up in 2013. Unfortunately a couple of weeks ago know one was too know that Grundy would last till Pick 18.

[kosifantutti]

On that. I remember when news first game out about the Hickey trade I thought great, we give up 12 & our 3rd rounder and we get Hickey, 26, 46 in return, good trade. Then it came out that we had to also give up pick 37. Which IMO tipped it toward paying overs, from what we can gather we needed to do this to trump Collingwoods offer.

Fast forward a few days in trade week and that 37 turns into Broughton, who we could have been able to afford his front ended contract with BJ gawn - hindsight would tell you Gram getting axed would mean Broughton was even more important. OK, moving on...

Who did Freo pick up with pick 37 (36)? Tanner Smith, the kid who many people said we could get with 25 prior to Clurey sliding.

Smith might be a one trick pony, but he was the last of that group of 7-8 good KPPs to go in that second round. Initially I wasn't over the moon with giving up 37, but now it seems pretty ironic who went at the pick.

This thread:
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/t ... ad.978751/
on bigfooty is worth reading.
This guy assigns a point value to each pick and looks at trades with multiple picks and sees what they are really worth.

On his calculations we gave away the equivalent of pick 23 to get Hickey.

The interesting one is Lee. He says that GWS effectively paid us to take him. That is, the picks we received in total were worth more than the picks we gave away AND we got Tom Lee.

Too bad he didn't do the Cripps trade.

He also says that Saad and Milera effectively cost us pick 83 last year.

[SainterK]

We really needed to stock up on talls.

Gaertner, Lynch, Walsh, Cahill...

[8856brother]

I reckon if we knew Grundy was going to slide, we wouldn't have given up Pick 12/13 for Hickey. Grundy is also ready made, so he would be able to play as a back-up in 2013. Unfortunately a couple of weeks ago know one was too know that Grundy would last till Pick 18.

Agree. If you had to choose between the two now for your future. I would choose Grundy. When we decided to use 12 for Hickey we would have assumed Grundy would have been top 10. Who knows with ruckman. We may get lucky.

[St Ick]

I find it interesting that the filth delisted a handful of developing ruckmen so that Witts could play as thlone ruck in the twos, then they get a readymade ruck in Grundy. Doesn't make sense but Grundy and Witts in the future sounds scary.

[RW&B]

This thread:
http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/t ... ad.978751/
on bigfooty is worth reading.
This guy assigns a point value to each pick and looks at trades with multiple picks and sees what they are really worth.

On his calculations we gave away the equivalent of pick 23 to get Hickey.

The interesting one is Lee. He says that GWS effectively paid us to take him. That is, the picks we received in total were worth more than the picks we gave away AND we got Tom Lee.

Too bad he didn't do the Cripps trade.

He also says that Saad and Milera effectively cost us pick 83 last year.

And with Adelaide pulling its first two picks the deal is further in St Kilda's favour (according to the equation) as #25 and #46 go up one spot while #12 doesn't.

[saintjake]

I reckon if we knew Grundy was going to slide, we wouldn't have given up Pick 12/13 for Hickey. Grundy is also ready made, so he would be able to play as a back-up in 2013. Unfortunately a couple of weeks ago know one was too know that Grundy would last till Pick 18.

Agree. If you had to choose between the two now for your future. I would choose Grundy. When we decided to use 12 for Hickey we would have assumed Grundy would have been top 10. Who knows with ruckman. We may get lucky.

I fail to see your point of view. We still got another ruckman with those picks + other players.
I think we won out and by quite a distance

[BigMart]

Who were actually picks 12 & 13

We might need to consider that

Just like the fact that the pick we traded for Gehrig was Daniel Kerr

[gringo]

Who were actually picks 12 & 13

We might need to consider that

Just like the fact that the pick we traded for Gehrig was Daniel Kerr

Except no one knows how we would go. We May not have wanted grundy either. I would still have taken g train anyway.

[kos]

Wits and Grundy scary? What about McEvoy, hickey, Stanley and pierce!

[Dis Believer]

Who were actually picks 12 & 13

We might need to consider that

Just like the fact that the pick we traded for Gehrig was Daniel Kerr

Except no one knows how we would go. We May not have wanted grundy either. I would still have taken g train anyway.

Agreed. A 100 goal full forward is worth way more than an injury prone, ok-to-good midfielder. Kerr's good, but he ain't great.

[SainterK]

Who were actually picks 12 & 13

We might need to consider that

Just like the fact that the pick we traded for Gehrig was Daniel Kerr

12 GWS
Kristian Jaksch

13 Gold Coast
Jesse Lonergan

[BigMart]

Come again about Kerr??

[SaintPav]

G train wasn't exactly a bad trade for us even if it was Kerr.

[kosifantutti]

Who were actually picks 12 & 13

We might need to consider that

Just like the fact that the pick we traded for Gehrig was Daniel Kerr

12 GWS
Kristian Jaksch

13 Gold Coast
Jesse Lonergan

Hacks

[plugger66]

Who were actually picks 12 & 13

We might need to consider that

Just like the fact that the pick we traded for Gehrig was Daniel Kerr

Dont get the Gehrig Kerr thing and certainly dont get why we are comparing who was taken at 12 and 13 unless you know our club wanted the same players.

[gringo]

Jaksche was one guy I liked as a KPP and should be a player but big guys take time. Grundy won't exactly be an instant star and will more than likely be similar to most other ruckmen who take around 4 years to show form. Hickey is already partially developed and has shown he can play against AFL listed players. Lauchie Henderson was pretty similar to Jaksche- big solid boy with good tac form and looked to me like a better option than Mc Evoy who we got with the next pick. He is still developing now after leaving the Lions to go to the Blues in the Fev trade.

We will never know who we would have taken if we had the two picks but the law of averages says a good percentage won't make it so having taken 4 players has spread the gamble out and increased the likelihood of replacing Goddard with an a grade player.

[Dave McNamara]

Jaksche was one guy I liked as a KPP and should be a player but big guys take time. Grundy won't exactly be an instant star and will more than likely be similar to most other ruckmen who take around 4 years to show form. Hickey is already partially developed and has shown he can play against AFL listed players. Lauchie Henderson was pretty similar to Jaksche- big solid boy with good tac form and looked to me like a better option than Mc Evoy who we got with the next pick. He is still developing now after leaving the Lions to go to the Blues in the Fev trade.

We will never know who we would have taken if we had the two picks but...

... the law of averages says a good percentage won't make it so having taken 4 players has spread the gamble out and increased the likelihood of replacing Goddard with an a grade player.

Beautifully assessed Gringo!


BTW..., I didn't realise Lachie Hendreson went the pick before Owl...?
I rate the latter (and unlike some, ain't worried about the new ruckn' rules)... I do not rate the former.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

Very, very happy with what we ended up getting out of picks 12 and 13.

We rated Lee higher than Jacksch (who went at 12), so to get picks 24 (who we got Wright with) and 46 (which I think we ended up getting TDL with) as well, was a tremendous result. We would have happily taken Lee with pick 12 or 13 on their own, if it came down to that. SOS did us another nice favour on that one, like he did the previous year with giving us Saad and Milera for a packet of chips.

Pick 13 for Hickey and an upgrade on picks 37 and 57 also looks like being a potentially very good result, especially considering we got Spencer White with pick 25 (which is the pick that was upgraded from 37) as he has the potential to have been worth pick 13 on his own (from what I've been told we rated White's prospects higher than Jacksch's as well, due to him having a likely higher "ceiling"/greater likelihood of becoming "elite"/dominant).

As for Grundy, the word is that we didn't rate him anywhere near as highly as some, partly because we didn't think he was necessarily going to be athletic enough to be able to dominate under the future ruck rules like he has in the U18's and SANFL and I would suggest we also didn't like how he interviewed (probably a major reason he ended up sliding so much- apparently came across pretty to very arrogant in interviews, which would have turned some clubs off and conversely probably highly attracted him to Bucks).

If Hickey had gone into the draft and we'd still wanted someone for the ruck and both Hickey and Grundy had been there, my understanding is that we still would have taken Hickey and I was told this before we got Hickey. I've got to say my gut feeling is that Grundy is going to be better long term though, so I don't necessarily agree with that myself, although I hope they are right, because it will probably mean that Hickey ends up being outstanding, because the wraps on Grundy are pretty big from most. His alleged FIGJAMness may grate on some in a team environment though.

If we had kept 12 and 13 I expect we would have taken Lee (if he hadn't been pre-listed by GWS for anyone else) and probably Corr, who was the only "KPD" that we really rated and who ended up going at 14. If someone else had nabbed Lee prior to the draft then we may have grabbed Jacksch, if we were still keen to add to our forward line, but it also wouldn't have surprised me if we'd taken White that high, based on how highly we rated him. If we thought we could still get him later we may not have gotten him that early though. Lonergan may have been another strong chance, as someone who could potentially play Lenny's role long term. Grundy may have been a chance if we hadn't managed to get someone like Hickey in the trade period, or didn't have someone else mature-aged in mind for later in the draft, but from what I've been told (and by what Watters said on the night) we really rate Pierce, so we may have also been happy to wait till later in the draft to get him, especially if we had someone else mature-aged in mind as well, to fill in while Pierce develops.

So Lee, Hickey, Wright, TDL and the upgraded picks that got us White and Saunders (all of which we got from trading picks 12 and 13 ) is looking a hell of a lot better to me than just Lee and Corr, or Lee and Lonergan, or Corr and Lonergan, or Jacksch and Corr, or probably even Grundy and Corr, or any combinations like that.

Time will tell, but if things go remotely well with those we got as a result of those 12 and 13 trades, then it will be highly likely that we will consider them very worthwhile trades indeed. They actually have the genuine potential to be at least as good as the trade/draft period Sydney had in 2009, which turned their fortunes around and stopped their slide down the ladder. I imagine that would have been the aim in the lead up to the trade period, anyway.

[jimmy_slats]

We have got 7 players that have very good upsides in terms of skill not amazing but very good but the one thing that has been harped on about by the coaches and board is there every one of those player has extremely good character which with the type of culture we are building is very important.

In the next few years we can afford to take on a few 'risk' options because of the culture that will have been built at the club will be outstanding and those 'risk' type players will benefit from this and hopefully flourish.

There is no point bringing in 'risk' players at such an early stage of what Watters is trying to develop until he get what he thinks this club needs right and that puts alot of faith in me to see that we are not just getting player because they have massive upside at the expense of building a strong culture.

[Dave McNamara]

... In the next few years we can afford to take on a few 'risk' options because of the culture that will have been built at the club will be outstanding and those 'risk' type players will benefit from this and hopefully flourish...

Cue the L'enfant terrible for season 2014...

Besides, I'm sure Cuddles has 'cuddled' more wayward one's than this bloke before...

[BigMart]

You don't get much, if its football related

[Dave McNamara]

Very, very happy with what we ended up getting out of picks 12 and 13...

... Time will tell, but if things go remotely well with those we got as a result of those 12 and 13 trades, then it will be highly likely that we will consider them very worthwhile trades indeed. They actually have the genuine potential to be at least as good as the trade/draft period Sydney had in 2009, which turned their fortunes around and stopped their slide down the ladder...

Thanks again APS for yet another detailed and comprehensive insight into some of our club's current thinking. Please keep 'em coming.
(Note to self... and others: long posts can be worth da read. )

I really like the Pelican tactic of getting two (or more) blokes whom we rate highly for the price of the one draft pick. Certainly speeds up the list rebuild. Very, very smart.

Really interesting to hear their ratings of players. Lee and Buddy White = very exciting. Agree with you... hope they're right re Hickey/Grungey(!) I have high hopes for our boy. If nothing else, he presents really, really well to the camera... though I hope those yeah/nahs go soon. (Where's the 'groan' emoticon Clarky?)

I did laugh though re Ted Bundy going to the Skunks. Who knows if he & FIGJAM will hit it off, but regardless, seems they will at least 'understand' each other... I would soooooo like Undies to turn out 'talent-wise' like their last two young high draft pick dud would-be ruckmen...

I also really like the idea of not getting a key defender this time around if they don't rate the available bloke/s highly enough.

Two question topics:
How highly do they rate/how keen are they on getting Brown from the Egirls?
Were they really looking at one of those 12 or 13 picks as part of a deal? Also, was the reported/rumoured $400/450++K offer accurate?
I don't know a lot about Brown, but I would have thought those sorta' figures could land us the likes of Chip Frawley... and I know who I'd prefer...

Second question topic:
APS, you mentioned in another post that our recruiters only 'rated' 45 blokes out of the whole draft.
How many blokes nominate... 600, 1000, 2000???
How many of those blokes (approx number is fine ) would our recruiters have had the resources to have been able to assess to find their 45?
What about other clubs' recruiters?
Would other clubs also only 'rate' a similar number, or are we being more discerning?
If the latter... then I really, really like that(!)

Ta APS.

(And ta also to the other Sainsationalists with a bit of inside running.) Please keep sharing what you can... I'm sure that the rest of us really, really appreciate this, but we also understand that you are sometimes limited by the bounds of confidences given.