Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- hungry for a premiership
- Club Player
- Posts: 856
- Joined: Fri 08 Oct 2010 2:01am
Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
Because, looking at our draw, we are locked into a 16th place finish in 2013. Unless there are priority picks given to GWS. Are there?
"Too big, too strong, too whatever."
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
Well, one of Boyd, Aish or Scharenberg - could do worse. As long as we get games into kids then I am not bothered by losing - effort and a bit of ticker is not negotiable, but I can cop losses with an eye on the future. Man I really wish we could get a top two as Boyd/Aish are a clear top two this yearhungry for a premiership wrote:Because, looking at our draw, we are locked into a 16th place finish in 2013. Unless there are priority picks given to GWS. Are there?
Strength through Loyalty
Go those mighty Sainters!!
Go those mighty Sainters!!
- 8856brother
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4374
- Joined: Wed 14 Sep 2011 2:58pm
- Location: Twin Peaks
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
We need more than that unfortunately.
_______________________________________________________________________
"Don't argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."
"Don't argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience."
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
Melbourne pushing hard for a priority pick but unlikely to get their way IMO.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5109
- Joined: Wed 04 Aug 2004 3:18pm
- Has thanked: 12 times
- Been thanked: 30 times
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
Geez, priority pick for being incompetent. Players still playing who admit to taking banned substances. What has the AFL come to.Old Mate wrote:Melbourne pushing hard for a priority pick but unlikely to get their way IMO.
- perfectionist
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9022
- Joined: Mon 30 Jul 2007 3:06pm
- Has thanked: 60 times
- Been thanked: 347 times
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
No. We need a back-line to start with and then we start to work on other parts. The team with best back line invariably wins the flag. That's why we didn't in 2009 and 2010. To be fair, we had the equal best back-line in 2004 but were screwed by the luck god.gringo wrote:We need midfield class- trent cochin mark two would do me.
- ShanghaiSaint
- Club Player
- Posts: 1911
- Joined: Thu 24 Mar 2005 7:43pm
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
change luck god to Gavin (2004)perfectionist wrote:No. We need a back-line to start with and then we start to work on other parts. The team with best back line invariably wins the flag. That's why we didn't in 2009 and 2010. To be fair, we had the equal best back-line in 2004 but were screwed by the luck god.gringo wrote:We need midfield class- trent cochin mark two would do me.
Fortius Quo Fidelius
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 12421
- Joined: Tue 24 Mar 2009 11:05pm
- Location: St Kilda
- Has thanked: 296 times
- Been thanked: 55 times
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
Our 09 back line was very effective and won plenty of games. We actually still have plenty of solid defenders just need some tall backs.
- Con Gorozidis
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23532
- Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008 4:04pm
- Has thanked: 100 times
- Been thanked: 78 times
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
Just get Aish and best available kid at 22 and Ill be pumped.
Then get Mitch Brown on top.
Then get Mitch Brown on top.
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
noob wrote:If people want Tom Boyd.. Pick 3 and Stanley?
Why do we want to get rid of Stanley?
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
Looking at draw, Bulldogs wont win another game until possibly last rd v Melbourne.
If we beat both Port and GC (our best chances but far from pencilled in) then we would finish above them.
Strangely enough Melbourne play GWS, GC, Bris and Bulldogs, winnable games and could go past us and dogs if we fail to win any more games.
My gut feel is Pick 3, but could be 4 and strangely could be pick 2.
We need a lot more than 1 midfield gun, but it would be a start.
Gotta get 2 key backs, eg Brown and Frawley asap, but I'll take 1, spewing if 0
If we beat both Port and GC (our best chances but far from pencilled in) then we would finish above them.
Strangely enough Melbourne play GWS, GC, Bris and Bulldogs, winnable games and could go past us and dogs if we fail to win any more games.
My gut feel is Pick 3, but could be 4 and strangely could be pick 2.
We need a lot more than 1 midfield gun, but it would be a start.
Gotta get 2 key backs, eg Brown and Frawley asap, but I'll take 1, spewing if 0
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 25303
- Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
- Location: Trump Tower
- Has thanked: 142 times
- Been thanked: 284 times
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
Pick 21 is the key. Pick 3 is easy. Shouldn't stuff
Up that one!
Up that one!
i am Melbourne Skies - sometimes Blue Skies, Grey Skies, even Partly Cloudy Skies.
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
It's always incompetence. Whaddya reckon our priority pick in 2000 was for?mullet wrote:Geez, priority pick for being incompetent. Players still playing who admit to taking banned substances. What has the AFL come to.
- Dis Believer
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5088
- Joined: Sun 28 Mar 2004 1:42pm
- Location: The terraces at Moorabbin, in the pouring rain.......
- Has thanked: 255 times
- Been thanked: 272 times
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
Interesting comment from Watters at last night's presser. Apparently we have had the least number of top 20 picks of any club over the past decade. It'd funny but I've never thought of it in those terms, but it's certainly a disadvantage when trying to maintain a strong list from on top of the ladder.
The heavy metal artist formerly known as True Believer!
IF you look around the room and can't identify who the sucker is, then it's probably you!
IF you look around the room and can't identify who the sucker is, then it's probably you!
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Mon 04 Aug 2008 7:46pm
- Been thanked: 7 times
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
If Melbourne go past us, then maybe we should ask for a priority pick?falka wrote:Looking at draw, Bulldogs wont win another game until possibly last rd v Melbourne.
If we beat both Port and GC (our best chances but far from pencilled in) then we would finish above them.
Strangely enough Melbourne play GWS, GC, Bris and Bulldogs, winnable games and could go past us and dogs if we fail to win any more games.
My gut feel is Pick 3, but could be 4 and strangely could be pick 2.
We need a lot more than 1 midfield gun, but it would be a start.
Gotta get 2 key backs, eg Brown and Frawley asap, but I'll take 1, spewing if 0
When Harvey played his first game in 1988, I was a 12yo wearing short pants and struggling with my readin', writin' and 'rithmetic in grade eight. Now, I'm a father of three and a retired AFL player. And he's still going. Amazing! - Michael Voss
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
Is Farren still keen to move to Melbourne? If so, I'd be keen to do a Ray and pick 3/4 for their pick 2. Whilst I like Scharenberg after seeing him a couple of times, I am just so keen on Aish.Old Mate wrote:Melbourne pushing hard for a priority pick but unlikely to get their way IMO.
Then again, lets deal with GWS and give them our 23 and Stanley/Fisher for pick 10, then have a gentlemans agreement to let them allow Boyd to slip to #2 for us.
Pie in the sky stuff, but we there are ways of making these things look more attractive. Dees did it last year with GWS so that the Giants didnt bid for Viney.
Strength through Loyalty
Go those mighty Sainters!!
Go those mighty Sainters!!
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
St Ick wrote:Is Farren still keen to move to Melbourne? If so, I'd be keen to do a Ray and pick 3/4 for their pick 2. Whilst I like Scharenberg after seeing him a couple of times, I am just so keen on Aish.Old Mate wrote:Melbourne pushing hard for a priority pick but unlikely to get their way IMO.
Then again, lets deal with GWS and give them our 23 and Stanley/Fisher for pick 10, then have a gentlemans agreement to let them allow Boyd to slip to #2 for us.
Pie in the sky stuff, but we there are ways of making these things look more attractive. Dees did it last year with GWS so that the Giants didnt bid for Viney.
So they lose twice. We give them a poor trade and they also lose boyd. Very pie in the sky stuff. i still say we need mids more than we need forwards.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9367
- Joined: Wed 03 Aug 2005 10:01pm
- Has thanked: 655 times
- Been thanked: 498 times
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
Hey Bergholt, fair comment re: our "incompetence" in 2000, but I have to agree with Mullet on this one. Our "incompetence" gained us one priority pick, and we did then start to make some progress (albeit slowly) and by 2003 were showing massive improvements. The Demons on the other hand have simply wasted every handout received from the AFL, I'm with Mullet on this one
St Kilda forever ![🔴](//cdn.jsdelivr.net/gh/twitter/twemoji@latest/assets/svg/1f534.svg)
![⚪️](//cdn.jsdelivr.net/gh/twitter/twemoji@latest/assets/svg/26aa.svg)
( God help me)
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
Why do you want to keep him?plugger66 wrote:noob wrote:If people want Tom Boyd.. Pick 3 and Stanley?
Why do we want to get rid of Stanley?
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
noob wrote:Why do you want to keep him?plugger66 wrote:noob wrote:If people want Tom Boyd.. Pick 3 and Stanley?
Why do we want to get rid of Stanley?
Who said I did? Why do you want to get rid of him?
Re: Pick 3 in next years draft: locked in
Also heard a comment earlier in the day, Geelong haven't had a pick higher than 7 in the past 10 years was it?True Believer wrote:Interesting comment from Watters at last night's presser. Apparently we have had the least number of top 20 picks of any club over the past decade. It'd funny but I've never thought of it in those terms, but it's certainly a disadvantage when trying to maintain a strong list from on top of the ladder.