Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- Con Gorozidis
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23532
- Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008 4:04pm
- Has thanked: 100 times
- Been thanked: 78 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
So
Current 2013 National Draft Order
Round One
1. Greater Western Sydney
2. Melbourne
3. St Kilda
4. Western Bulldogs
5. Gold Coast
6. West Coast
7. Brisbane
8. North Melbourne
9. Greater Western Sydney (compensation)
10. Collingwood
11. Richmond
12. Carlton
13. Port Adelaide
14. Sydney
15. Geelong
16. Fremantle
17. St Kilda (from Hawthorn)
18. St Kilda (from Hawks compensation (Franklin)
19. Collingwood Compensation (Thomas)
20. Gold Coast (Compensation)
21. GWS
22. Melbourne
23. Hawthorn
Current 2013 National Draft Order
Round One
1. Greater Western Sydney
2. Melbourne
3. St Kilda
4. Western Bulldogs
5. Gold Coast
6. West Coast
7. Brisbane
8. North Melbourne
9. Greater Western Sydney (compensation)
10. Collingwood
11. Richmond
12. Carlton
13. Port Adelaide
14. Sydney
15. Geelong
16. Fremantle
17. St Kilda (from Hawthorn)
18. St Kilda (from Hawks compensation (Franklin)
19. Collingwood Compensation (Thomas)
20. Gold Coast (Compensation)
21. GWS
22. Melbourne
23. Hawthorn
- Con Gorozidis
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23532
- Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008 4:04pm
- Has thanked: 100 times
- Been thanked: 78 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
yep okplugger66 wrote:The pies will get 11 for Thomas.
So something like this?
Current 2013 National Draft Order
1. Greater Western Sydney
2. Melbourne
3. St Kilda
4. Western Bulldogs
5. Gold Coast
6. West Coast
7. Brisbane
8. North Melbourne
9. Greater Western Sydney (compensation)
10. Collingwood
11. Collingwood Compensation (Thomas)
12. Richmond
13. Carlton
14. Port Adelaide
15. Sydney
16. Geelong
17. Fremantle
18. St Kilda (from Hawthorn)
19. St Kilda (from Hawks compensation (Franklin)
20. Gold Coast (Compensation)
21. GWS
22. Melbourne
23. Hawthorn (from St Kilda)
- Con Gorozidis
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 23532
- Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008 4:04pm
- Has thanked: 100 times
- Been thanked: 78 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
Sounds like you know something?Verdun66 wrote:The improvement of 3 places for our second pick is a nice bonus! Bet we use it to get Pick 9 as part of another deal with GWS.
19 + player for pick 9?
leaves us with picks 3, 9, 18?
- Verdun66
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2152
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 6:46am
- Location: Dubai, UAE
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 2 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
All over Big Footy. Can't claim it. Yeah, Fisher and the late teen pick for No. 9. Sounds too good? Wonder where Bruce fits in?Con Gorozidis wrote:Sounds like you know something?Verdun66 wrote:The improvement of 3 places for our second pick is a nice bonus! Bet we use it to get Pick 9 as part of another deal with GWS.
19 + player for pick 9?
leaves us with picks 3, 9, 18?
- Devilhead
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8375
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm
- Has thanked: 137 times
- Been thanked: 1169 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
McEvoy played 22 games this year and took 33 contested marks - 1.5 contested marks a gameBigMart wrote: He did what is the essential stat for a Ruckman .... He took contested marks
Farcical trade
and to think that is what you are hanging your hat on
![Laughing :lol:](./images/smilies/icon_lol.gif)
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5016
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:42am
- Location: Bayside
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 91 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
Don't confuse us with facts, where's the over the top emotion in that?Devilhead wrote:McEvoy played 22 games this year and took 33 contested marks - 1.5 contested marks a gameBigMart wrote: He did what is the essential stat for a Ruckman .... He took contested marks
Farcical trade
and to think that is what you are hanging your hat on
- Devilhead
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8375
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm
- Has thanked: 137 times
- Been thanked: 1169 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
A slow B-Grade dinsosaur ruckmanBigMart wrote:So
Pick 9 with 6 years development... 90 games... And in the leadership group
For
Pick 17 and a VFL sweetener
for
An outside mid with uptapped potential who at times during the year forced his way into the AFL's best midfield and ....... pick 17 and ....... 3 pick upgrade into the 1st round
Hell I really like this game!!
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
- Verdun66
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2152
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 6:46am
- Location: Dubai, UAE
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 2 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
Devilhead wrote:A slow B-Grade dinsosaur ruckmanBigMart wrote:So
Pick 9 with 6 years development... 90 games... And in the leadership group
For
Pick 17 and a VFL sweetener
for
An outside mid with uptapped potential who at times during the year forced his way into the AFL's best midfield and ....... pick 17 and ....... 3 pick upgrade into the 1st round
Hell I really like this game!!
I think we did well.
- Wayne42
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4911
- Joined: Mon 24 Jun 2013 10:27pm
- Has thanked: 619 times
- Been thanked: 558 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
I can't find anywhere on the web that says we have Savage, pick 17 AND pick 18 for Ben and pick 21.
Did someone get that info from SEN
![Shocked :shock:](./images/smilies/icon_eek.gif)
Did someone get that info from SEN
![Shocked :shock:](./images/smilies/icon_eek.gif)
![Shocked :shock:](./images/smilies/icon_eek.gif)
The Saints are under review, will it make any difference to the underachievers ?
- saintkid
- Club Player
- Posts: 1781
- Joined: Tue 16 Sep 2008 12:30am
- Has thanked: 141 times
- Been thanked: 306 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
The concern I have is Hickey has poor physical presence and will never be a strong overhead mark like McEvoy is. Personally I believe Ben is a much better player than Hickey and we will now be worse off in our ruck regardless of how much opportunity Hickey will now get.
- MC Gusto
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6068
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 8:29am
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 369 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
was on channel 7Wayne42 wrote:I can't find anywhere on the web that says we have Savage, pick 17 AND pick 18 for Ben and pick 21.
Did someone get that info from SEN![]()
#1 Ryder fan
- Wayne42
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4911
- Joined: Mon 24 Jun 2013 10:27pm
- Has thanked: 619 times
- Been thanked: 558 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
The Saints web site has a graphic illustration of the trade and it doesn't mention pick 18, you'd think the club would know the details of it's own deal..MC Gusto wrote:was on channel 7Wayne42 wrote:I can't find anywhere on the web that says we have Savage, pick 17 AND pick 18 for Ben and pick 21.
Did someone get that info from SEN![]()
http://www.saints.com.au/news/2013-10-1 ... for-mcevoy
The Saints are under review, will it make any difference to the underachievers ?
- Devilhead
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8375
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm
- Has thanked: 137 times
- Been thanked: 1169 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
As mentioned elsewhere it might be due to the fact that this part of trade cannot be confrimed until Hawthor'ns Buddy compensation pick is confirmedWayne42 wrote:I can't find anywhere on the web that says we have Savage, pick 17 AND pick 18 for Ben and pick 21.
Did someone get that info from SEN![]()
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
- Wayne42
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4911
- Joined: Mon 24 Jun 2013 10:27pm
- Has thanked: 619 times
- Been thanked: 558 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
OK thanks..i'll wait and see how it pans outDevilhead wrote:As mentioned elsewhere it might be due to the fact that this part of trade cannot be confrimed until Hawthor'ns Buddy compensation pick is confirmedWayne42 wrote:I can't find anywhere on the web that says we have Savage, pick 17 AND pick 18 for Ben and pick 21.
Did someone get that info from SEN![]()
The Saints are under review, will it make any difference to the underachievers ?
- Wrote for Luck
- Club Player
- Posts: 1519
- Joined: Thu 07 Jan 2010 8:33am
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
agree. I wouldn't have guessed this would happen.
Savage seems a good type to go into the midfield at 22, and pick 17 not to be sneezed at.
Ben wasn't so good this year. Can see him fitting into a strong Hawks team.
Savage seems a good type to go into the midfield at 22, and pick 17 not to be sneezed at.
Ben wasn't so good this year. Can see him fitting into a strong Hawks team.
Pills 'n' Thrills and Heartaches
- Greg T
- Club Player
- Posts: 664
- Joined: Sun 07 Apr 2013 4:12pm
- Location: Gold Coast
- Has thanked: 825 times
- Been thanked: 15 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
Disappointed that Big boy is going.
More disappointed we didn't get the best out of the lad.
Happy for him.
I'll be more disappointed if Hawthorn turn him into a real gun
All the best big boy....
More disappointed we didn't get the best out of the lad.
Happy for him.
I'll be more disappointed if Hawthorn turn him into a real gun
All the best big boy....
100 goals in 14 games...Lockett is the key
- Ghost Like
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6562
- Joined: Wed 19 Sep 2007 10:04pm
- Has thanked: 5788 times
- Been thanked: 1909 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
Agree
Good trading. Big Ben, unfortunately, was too slow, too small & rarely won a centre / boundary hit to any kind of advantage. The epitome of a modern day dinosaur. That's too big of a disadvantage to what will be essentially a developing midfield group. Best of luck at the Hawks.
Good trading. Big Ben, unfortunately, was too slow, too small & rarely won a centre / boundary hit to any kind of advantage. The epitome of a modern day dinosaur. That's too big of a disadvantage to what will be essentially a developing midfield group. Best of luck at the Hawks.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 4881
- Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
- Has thanked: 327 times
- Been thanked: 465 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
Gotta laugh at those ppl who reckon tap outs mean nothing. Of course they mean nothing if they go no where. Someone compared Sandilands and claimed this was the case - (because a few years ago Sandi tapped the ball to no-one)
Did anyone actually watch the finals? Sandilands almost single handedly gave his mids an arm chair ride in the qualifying final against two sub standard rucks. THAT'S why they're important. We need a ruck who not only can give the mids some chance to win the taps, but to also COMPETE and NEGATE the tap outs so that the opposition doesn't just walk away from the ball from every stoppage. The reason there's very few taps to advantage to ANY ruck is because coaches are so adept at setting up and preventing clear decisive clearances. All we need is a chance to break even.
Ben's work around the ground can be first rate. It dropped right off this year, to the point where I think he was going backwards. If he continued to take pack marks around the ground on a consistent basis then I would be arguing to keep him - but he wasn't. In fact, by the end of the year he was starting to fumble marks he would normally swallow. I reckon he needed a fresh start as well.
Did anyone actually watch the finals? Sandilands almost single handedly gave his mids an arm chair ride in the qualifying final against two sub standard rucks. THAT'S why they're important. We need a ruck who not only can give the mids some chance to win the taps, but to also COMPETE and NEGATE the tap outs so that the opposition doesn't just walk away from the ball from every stoppage. The reason there's very few taps to advantage to ANY ruck is because coaches are so adept at setting up and preventing clear decisive clearances. All we need is a chance to break even.
Ben's work around the ground can be first rate. It dropped right off this year, to the point where I think he was going backwards. If he continued to take pack marks around the ground on a consistent basis then I would be arguing to keep him - but he wasn't. In fact, by the end of the year he was starting to fumble marks he would normally swallow. I reckon he needed a fresh start as well.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 121
- Joined: Sat 14 Mar 2009 3:05pm
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
Someone mentioned earlier in this thread or another the possibility of North trading their pick 8 for our 17 in the Dal trade as they could use the 17 as a first rounder to still secure the father son pick. Have we clarified if this is possible?
Say something once why say it again?
- Enrico_Misso
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 11662
- Joined: Tue 13 Jun 2006 12:11am
- Location: Moorabbin Chapter of The Royal Society of Hagiographers
- Has thanked: 315 times
- Been thanked: 720 times
Re: Agree or disagree on McEvoy trade
Good deal.
Macca isn't top shelf.
I think his very first touch at AFL level was when he put his arms out for a mark in front of his eyes, misjudged it, and it hit him on the head.
Having said that I admired his efforts.
Always gave 100%.
Consistently put himself in the hole and took solid marks.
He'll never be Dean Cox.
But Hickey and Pierce might.
Macca isn't top shelf.
I think his very first touch at AFL level was when he put his arms out for a mark in front of his eyes, misjudged it, and it hit him on the head.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
Having said that I admired his efforts.
Always gave 100%.
Consistently put himself in the hole and took solid marks.
He'll never be Dean Cox.
But Hickey and Pierce might.
The rest of Australia can wander mask-free, socialise, eat out, no curfews, no zoning, no police rings of steel, no illogical inconsistent rules.
They can even WATCH LIVE FOOTY!
They can even WATCH LIVE FOOTY!