Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
There have been a lot of rumours circulating here and elsewhere about all these different fanciful trades in order to secure pick 1 from GWS. Ideas such as giving up picks 3, 17, Fisher.
IMO we should not make any attempt to trade for Boyd for the following reasons:
1. Pick 3, notwithstanding a complete screw up, will land us a top notch midfielder who should be able to slot into our 22 from day one. We are not blessed with midfielders, and certainly not too many elite ones, and this should be a key focus for us. This extends to pick 17 — whilst the chances of success are less, there's still a comfortable possibility of securing a top talent.
2. Trading away all our top picks, together with important players, all on the hope of Boyd turning out to be the next Wayne Carey is playing with fire. Yes, he could turn out to be that good. But he might also not be so good. There's no guarantees, and the backfire could set us back for years, if we trade the whole house for one guy.
3. It is widely known that next year's draft includes a number (at least 4) of top end key position talent. One of them being Hugh Goddard who some have tipped as the number 1 draft pick. Seeing as we will most likely have pick 1-5 in the 2014 National Draft, it is much wiser to hedge our bets and use our own pick to draft a Riewoldt replacement.
Whilst we need to be bold, daring and aggressive, we also need to be smart and calculating.
This post is not addressed to the club, whom I trust are well on top of this and know the situation. Instead, posters and fans need to give up on securing pick 1, and not think that just because it might be up for trade it means we ought to pounce on it.
Agree. Our number one priority in the draft has to be finding our next batch of Hayes/Dal/Joey/Ball types who can become a strong midfield for the next 10 years.
He will be a gun though. But I would probably like to see us get a core midfield together and start playing them. I guess it's like get a potential Lockett but miss out on Harvey and Burke kind of conundrum. Not saying there is any guarantees either way but the more you spread your chances the higher the likelihood of getting in a Cotchin or Wingard.
Either path has the opportunity for failure. I don't think you can trade worrying about the worst case scenario. I would much rather build around Boyd than add a midfield body. I don't think we're going to get that opportunity. If we do, I hope we take it.
The question as always is the scarcity factor and where we currently sit in re build mode
Boyd is a KPP who has supposed talent to burn - like Nick Riewoldt was touted as having
Yes we need mids and won't win games without them but do we honestly think we'll win many now anyway?
Do you grab the "spine" elements and build the elite fleet around them with mids OR do you keep bringing in what mid talent you can add star mid quality later ?
Pelchen and Bains have reiterated a few times that we won't be giving up pick 3.
and we want 3 picks in the top 20. why come up with other stuff on here when they keep saying the same things.
I don't disagree with those saying we need to build the spine as well, hence my third point, that with one year of patience we could have our own pick who might be as good, or better, than Boyd.
FQF wrote:... with one year of patience we could have our own pick who might be as good, or better, than Boyd.
If there's a top notch KPF available to us in next year's draft, I'd advocate going after them whether we have Boyd or not. I'd make the decision to trade for Boyd independently of speculation about what might happen next year. There's no reason You can't have multiple gun KPFs and I'd bet Hawthorn is feeling very comfortable with Roughead right about now.
Based on Pelchen's chat I think it's highly unlikely we wind up with the pick anyway, so it's likely wasted words anyway. I don't agree that a rebuilding team should ever prioritise midfield over KPF though.
FQF wrote:... with one year of patience we could have our own pick who might be as good, or better, than Boyd.
If there's a top notch KPF available to us in next year's draft, I'd advocate going after them whether we have Boyd or not. I'd make the decision to trade for Boyd independently of speculation about what might happen next year. There's no reason You can't have multiple gun KPFs and I'd bet Hawthorn is feeling very comfortable with Roughead right about now.
Based on Pelchen's chat I think it's highly unlikely we wind up with the pick anyway, so it's likely wasted words anyway. I don't agree that a rebuilding team should ever prioritise midfield over KPF though.
A star KPP's worth is increased tenfold with a good midfield.
Both Geelong and Sydney have won flags in recent times without superstar forwards on the back of elite midfielders.
FQF wrote:There have been a lot of rumours circulating here and elsewhere about all these different fanciful trades in order to secure pick 1 from GWS. Ideas such as giving up picks 3, 17, Fisher.
IMO we should not make any attempt to trade for Boyd for the following reasons:
1. Pick 3, notwithstanding a complete screw up, will land us a top notch midfielder who should be able to slot into our 22 from day one. We are not blessed with midfielders, and certainly not too many elite ones, and this should be a key focus for us. This extends to pick 17 — whilst the chances of success are less, there's still a comfortable possibility of securing a top talent.
2. Trading away all our top picks, together with important players, all on the hope of Boyd turning out to be the next Wayne Carey is playing with fire. Yes, he could turn out to be that good. But he might also not be so good. There's no guarantees, and the backfire could set us back for years, if we trade the whole house for one guy.
3. It is widely known that next year's draft includes a number (at least 4) of top end key position talent. One of them being Hugh Goddard who some have tipped as the number 1 draft pick. Seeing as we will most likely have pick 1-5 in the 2014 National Draft, it is much wiser to hedge our bets and use our own pick to draft a Riewoldt replacement.
Whilst we need to be bold, daring and aggressive, we also need to be smart and calculating.
This post is not addressed to the club, whom I trust are well on top of this and know the situation. Instead, posters and fans need to give up on securing pick 1, and not think that just because it might be up for trade it means we ought to pounce on it.
It's almost a cliche, but gun big key forwards come along seldomly, we were lucky with Riewoldt and Carlton will rue the day they gave up Kennedy. Gun midfielders come up every year (and there does not appear to be any Abletts or O'Mearas in this draft), we can build the midfield over time. If you can get a gun key forward, such as Boyd or Paton, you do all you can to make it happen.
FQF wrote:There have been a lot of rumours circulating here and elsewhere about all these different fanciful trades in order to secure pick 1 from GWS. Ideas such as giving up picks 3, 17, Fisher.
IMO we should not make any attempt to trade for Boyd for the following reasons:
1. Pick 3, notwithstanding a complete screw up, will land us a top notch midfielder who should be able to slot into our 22 from day one. We are not blessed with midfielders, and certainly not too many elite ones, and this should be a key focus for us. This extends to pick 17 — whilst the chances of success are less, there's still a comfortable possibility of securing a top talent.
2. Trading away all our top picks, together with important players, all on the hope of Boyd turning out to be the next Wayne Carey is playing with fire. Yes, he could turn out to be that good. But he might also not be so good. There's no guarantees, and the backfire could set us back for years, if we trade the whole house for one guy.
3. It is widely known that next year's draft includes a number (at least 4) of top end key position talent. One of them being Hugh Goddard who some have tipped as the number 1 draft pick. Seeing as we will most likely have pick 1-5 in the 2014 National Draft, it is much wiser to hedge our bets and use our own pick to draft a Riewoldt replacement.
Whilst we need to be bold, daring and aggressive, we also need to be smart and calculating.
This post is not addressed to the club, whom I trust are well on top of this and know the situation. Instead, posters and fans need to give up on securing pick 1, and not think that just because it might be up for trade it means we ought to pounce on it.
It's almost a cliche, but gun big key forwards come along seldomly, we were lucky with Riewoldt and Carlton will rue the day they gave up Kennedy. Gun midfielders come up every year (notwithstanding that there does not appear to be any Abletts or O'Mearas in this draft), we can build the midfield over time. If you can get a gun key forward, such as Boyd or Paton, you do all you can to make it happen.
Pelchin certainly doesn't lose any praise for enquiring about Boyd.
This also broadcasts to the rest of the clubs that St.Kilda is dead serious and ambitous enough to aim for the top available players.
GWS not keen today but there are more days to think about it before the Nat. Draft!
At last we have more fronts operating than simply the Dal to norf front. I think building a great midfield will hold the club in better stead than landing one stand out fwd and aiming to build the team around him. Plugger arriving @ Moorabbin absolutely electrified the place but having Harvey arrive had a massive influence on getting back to finals after was it a 20 year absence?
I think the likes of GWS and even individual players everywhere will take us a bit more seriously and perhaps consider relocating to St.Kilda a bit more than before. Maybe this was part of the pelchin/ Watters strategy - if so great to see St.Kilda using some brain power to bring us back into contention.
Reg: Jolly yes it sounds like a good idea for short term support 4 Hickey.
GO SAINTS!
The boy can play and we can build a defence around him that will have respect.
I think our success in the last 10 years has been in the most part due to the quality of Riewoldt.
Boyd looks as good as any for his age and could be the same base for the next ten years.
You can't put a value on a marquee player like that. It brings members,respect and self confidence in the club and players.
I think it'd be a great to get Boyd. The old saying goes "take the best available player"
I'm pretty foggy after nightshift so don't crucify me but what about this for a deal ?\
GWS pick 1,Bruce and Bugg for our pick 3, Fisher, our Buddy compo and another player or pick 21 ?
We got Savage for some much needed speed and goal kicking from the midfield.
We will be down for more than just this year and can grab more quality mids next year.
We still have Lenny,Dal,Monty,Armo,Ross,Wright,Curren and others that can go through the midfield.
Doesn't look too bad to me.
Robert Harvey's last home game. 24 Aug 2008
StKilda 13.17 def Adelaide 6.11
borderbarry wrote:I still think we may have a chance at PATON with pick 3. And he would be better immediate value than Boyd after two years in the system.
Barry.. I think we would definitely be looking at Patton as well.
I can't see GWS holding on to Cameron,Patton and possibly Boyd long term. That'd be a big forward line.
We might be able to snare Patton at a much lower cost than Boyd would take due to the injuries and game time he has had.
If there is one plus through these times is that we have a shrewd operator in Pelchen working for us. I'd hate to think where we'd be if he were working for another club and we were dealing with him.
Robert Harvey's last home game. 24 Aug 2008
StKilda 13.17 def Adelaide 6.11
FQF wrote:A star KPP's worth is increased tenfold with a good midfield.
Roo kicked 50 in a 5-win team and 78 in a 22-win team. I think a dominant KPF has huge value in any team as they can make something out of nothing. Assembling a dominant midfield is better than having a dominant key forward, but it's much harder to do. Dominant midfields tend to have at least four AA level mids. Picking a mid with a top-5 pick doesn't guarantee that any more than picking a KPF does. Watts may not be dominating, but neither is Scully. I think the highest impact you can have adding a player to your club is adding a KPP.
