NOTHING HAS CHANGED
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 493
- Joined: Sat 10 Jun 2017 2:01pm
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 41 times
NOTHING HAS CHANGED
We gave up Hickey for pick #39 AND still had to give them pick #60?
Think about this last year we gave Port Adelaide pick #23 for Logan. Yep that amazing backman who took the best and fairest by storm. That's not to say he can't or won't improve but HE was worth pick #23 and he a seasoned and ready to start Ruckman reaps pick #39? They had good picks to give what about pick #22?
I will bet anyone on here if Hickey stays healthy he plays like the beast he is just like how we tossed aside so many seasoned rucks like Everitt and Mcevoy ( yes we got the brownlow medalst Dunstan at pick #18 and we are all better off not having a reliable, future captain and solid big man - one of the best, to tap to our troupe of Dunstan like slow moving mids).
Everitt he too was rubbish too rowdy trade him off so he can become all Australian elsewhere
Now Hickey hasn't achieved what either of these two did at Saints but he can now, we know Natinui cant stay fit and Hickey joins the premiers, they must be suckers! We got them good!
Think about this last year we gave Port Adelaide pick #23 for Logan. Yep that amazing backman who took the best and fairest by storm. That's not to say he can't or won't improve but HE was worth pick #23 and he a seasoned and ready to start Ruckman reaps pick #39? They had good picks to give what about pick #22?
I will bet anyone on here if Hickey stays healthy he plays like the beast he is just like how we tossed aside so many seasoned rucks like Everitt and Mcevoy ( yes we got the brownlow medalst Dunstan at pick #18 and we are all better off not having a reliable, future captain and solid big man - one of the best, to tap to our troupe of Dunstan like slow moving mids).
Everitt he too was rubbish too rowdy trade him off so he can become all Australian elsewhere
Now Hickey hasn't achieved what either of these two did at Saints but he can now, we know Natinui cant stay fit and Hickey joins the premiers, they must be suckers! We got them good!
- ausfatcat
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6524
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 4:36pm
- Has thanked: 19 times
- Been thanked: 95 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
22 years with potential 8 to 9 years of football vs 27 years with 4 years max football hence the price difference.
Agree thou I think Hickey has plenty of good football in him.
Everitt wanted to leave not our fault he's a dick
But Mcevoy was a wrong choice
Agree thou I think Hickey has plenty of good football in him.
Everitt wanted to leave not our fault he's a dick
But Mcevoy was a wrong choice
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 493
- Joined: Sat 10 Jun 2017 2:01pm
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 41 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
Everitt was a dick that why we needed him. He had attitude and he was fierce at the contest, remember him gut running the field to take a mark and kick goals? He just happened to be a gigantic packer.
- prwilkinson
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 1999
- Joined: Tue 21 Sep 2010 12:17pm
- Has thanked: 66 times
- Been thanked: 132 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
Spider’s time with St Kilda was up. Has he paid the raffle money back to Hawthorn yet?
Hickey has been an extremely inconsistent footballer. I’m sure a trip across the Nullarbor every fortnight will help fix that.
Hickey has been an extremely inconsistent footballer. I’m sure a trip across the Nullarbor every fortnight will help fix that.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1404
- Joined: Fri 26 May 2006 4:29pm
- Has thanked: 31 times
- Been thanked: 132 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
Hickey was bagged by many posters on Saintsational so interesting there is now some love he is leaving.David-Lee wrote: ↑Thu 11 Oct 2018 10:19pm We gave up Hickey for pick #39 AND still had to give them pick #60?
Think about this last year we gave Port Adelaide pick #23 for Logan. Yep that amazing backman who took the best and fairest by storm. That's not to say he can't or won't improve but HE was worth pick #23 and he a seasoned and ready to start Ruckman reaps pick #39? They had good picks to give what about pick #22?
I will bet anyone on here if Hickey stays healthy he plays like the beast he is just like how we tossed aside so many seasoned rucks like Everitt and Mcevoy ( yes we got the brownlow medalst Dunstan at pick #18 and we are all better off not having a reliable, future captain and solid big man - one of the best, to tap to our troupe of Dunstan like slow moving mids).
Everitt he too was rubbish too rowdy trade him off so he can become all Australian elsewhere
Now Hickey hasn't achieved what either of these two did at Saints but he can now, we know Natinui cant stay fit and Hickey joins the premiers, they must be suckers! We got them good!
At 27 years old he is not Everitt who had been all australian for us or McEvoy who was touted as future captain and was superior around the ground but struggled with tap-outs.
I like Hickey but he is only worth pick 39. He is nowhere near either Everitt's or McEvoy's league which is why he is only worth a later pick.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1096
- Joined: Fri 28 Nov 2014 5:33pm
- Has thanked: 331 times
- Been thanked: 268 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
No comparison, Everitt left we didnt get rid of himDavid-Lee wrote: ↑Thu 11 Oct 2018 10:19pm We gave up Hickey for pick #39 AND still had to give them pick #60?
Think about this last year we gave Port Adelaide pick #23 for Logan. Yep that amazing backman who took the best and fairest by storm. That's not to say he can't or won't improve but HE was worth pick #23 and he a seasoned and ready to start Ruckman reaps pick #39? They had good picks to give what about pick #22?
I will bet anyone on here if Hickey stays healthy he plays like the beast he is just like how we tossed aside so many seasoned rucks like Everitt and Mcevoy ( yes we got the brownlow medalst Dunstan at pick #18 and we are all better off not having a reliable, future captain and solid big man - one of the best, to tap to our troupe of Dunstan like slow moving mids).
Everitt he too was rubbish too rowdy trade him off so he can become all Australian elsewhere
Now Hickey hasn't achieved what either of these two did at Saints but he can now, we know Natinui cant stay fit and Hickey joins the premiers, they must be suckers! We got them good!
Hickeys 27, Austin 23. Hickey has played more games in the VFL than the AFL in the last two years. What should they pay for a player that cant hold down a senior spot in a bottom 3 club?
- kosifantutti
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8581
- Joined: Fri 21 Jan 2005 9:06am
- Location: Back in town
- Has thanked: 526 times
- Been thanked: 1527 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
Another whining thread. And you’re not even close on the Logan Austin deal. Where did you pluck pick 23 from?David-Lee wrote: ↑Thu 11 Oct 2018 10:19pm We gave up Hickey for pick #39 AND still had to give them pick #60?
Think about this last year we gave Port Adelaide pick #23 for Logan. Yep that amazing backman who took the best and fairest by storm. That's not to say he can't or won't improve but HE was worth pick #23 and he a seasoned and ready to start Ruckman reaps pick #39? They had good picks to give what about pick #22?
I will bet anyone on here if Hickey stays healthy he plays like the beast he is just like how we tossed aside so many seasoned rucks like Everitt and Mcevoy ( yes we got the brownlow medalst Dunstan at pick #18 and we are all better off not having a reliable, future captain and solid big man - one of the best, to tap to our troupe of Dunstan like slow moving mids).
Everitt he too was rubbish too rowdy trade him off so he can become all Australian elsewhere
Now Hickey hasn't achieved what either of these two did at Saints but he can now, we know Natinui cant stay fit and Hickey joins the premiers, they must be suckers! We got them good!
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
- ausfatcat
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6524
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 4:36pm
- Has thanked: 19 times
- Been thanked: 95 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
Also no he wasn't worth pick 23 he was trade for this years third round and we also received ports 4th rnd pick, which ended up being pick 42 for Austin and pick 67
so using the AFLs point system 42 is worth 395 and 67 is worth 69 so effectively it was a trade for pick 47
- barneyboyz
- Club Player
- Posts: 1133
- Joined: Thu 08 Mar 2007 10:13pm
- Has thanked: 177 times
- Been thanked: 123 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
The fact that we weren't winning the ball through the middle much over the last two years, wasn't simply a roving issue. Neither of our 1st. two ruckmen could get enough of it to them.David-Lee wrote: ↑Thu 11 Oct 2018 10:19pm We gave up Hickey for pick #39 AND still had to give them pick #60?
Think about this last year we gave Port Adelaide pick #23 for Logan. Yep that amazing backman who took the best and fairest by storm. That's not to say he can't or won't improve but HE was worth pick #23 and he a seasoned and ready to start Ruckman reaps pick #39? They had good picks to give what about pick #22?
I will bet anyone on here if Hickey stays healthy he plays like the beast he is just like how we tossed aside so many seasoned rucks like Everitt and Mcevoy ( yes we got the brownlow medalst Dunstan at pick #18 and we are all better off not having a reliable, future captain and solid big man - one of the best, to tap to our troupe of Dunstan like slow moving mids).
Everitt he too was rubbish too rowdy trade him off so he can become all Australian elsewhere
Now Hickey hasn't achieved what either of these two did at Saints but he can now, we know Natinui cant stay fit and Hickey joins the premiers, they must be suckers! We got them good!
I do agree with you on Benny Mc. though, and I was satisfied when he left, but it appears that we needed a good ruck to best develop our mids
St. Kilda Football Club. Going strong, since 1960 ![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
- groupie1
- Club Player
- Posts: 1271
- Joined: Sun 18 Jun 2006 4:21am
- Has thanked: 16 times
- Been thanked: 52 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
You didn't broach the central questionLShaggy wrote: ↑Thu 11 Oct 2018 10:51pmHickey was bagged by many posters on Saintsational so interesting there is now some love he is leaving.David-Lee wrote: ↑Thu 11 Oct 2018 10:19pm We gave up Hickey for pick #39 AND still had to give them pick #60?
Think about this last year we gave Port Adelaide pick #23 for Logan. Yep that amazing backman who took the best and fairest by storm. That's not to say he can't or won't improve but HE was worth pick #23 and he a seasoned and ready to start Ruckman reaps pick #39? They had good picks to give what about pick #22?
I will bet anyone on here if Hickey stays healthy he plays like the beast he is just like how we tossed aside so many seasoned rucks like Everitt and Mcevoy ( yes we got the brownlow medalst Dunstan at pick #18 and we are all better off not having a reliable, future captain and solid big man - one of the best, to tap to our troupe of Dunstan like slow moving mids).
Everitt he too was rubbish too rowdy trade him off so he can become all Australian elsewhere
Now Hickey hasn't achieved what either of these two did at Saints but he can now, we know Natinui cant stay fit and Hickey joins the premiers, they must be suckers! We got them good!
At 27 years old he is not Everitt who had been all australian for us or McEvoy who was touted as future captain and was superior around the ground but struggled with tap-outs.
I like Hickey but he is only worth pick 39. He is nowhere near either Everitt's or McEvoy's league which is why he is only worth a later pick.
Hickey for 39
Logan for 23
Gordon Fode couldda been Plugga
- shrodes
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3061
- Joined: Tue 12 Aug 2014 2:34pm
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 781 times
- Been thanked: 420 times
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 493
- Joined: Sat 10 Jun 2017 2:01pm
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 41 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
PORT ADELAIDE has capped off the 2017 Trade Period by completing two separate draft pick swaps with St Kilda and Melbourne.
The swaps result in the following;
Port receives picks 59 and 63 in this year's Draft plus a future second round selection from St Kilda, in exchange for pick 34 (Oscar Clavarino) and a future fourth round selection.
The Saints snared 13-gamer Austin and the Power's 2018 fourth-round pick in exchange for their own 2018 third-round selection.
This was for Logan, we gave 2018 3rd round pick and to sweeten it traded the said above, that 2nd round pick is #23 this year.
Do you get it? What fecking club gives away pick 59, 63 and a future 2nd rounder in exchange for pick 34 and pick #69? No one because it included our pick #23 to get Logan.
Those are called facts.
The swaps result in the following;
Port receives picks 59 and 63 in this year's Draft plus a future second round selection from St Kilda, in exchange for pick 34 (Oscar Clavarino) and a future fourth round selection.
The Saints snared 13-gamer Austin and the Power's 2018 fourth-round pick in exchange for their own 2018 third-round selection.
This was for Logan, we gave 2018 3rd round pick and to sweeten it traded the said above, that 2nd round pick is #23 this year.
Do you get it? What fecking club gives away pick 59, 63 and a future 2nd rounder in exchange for pick 34 and pick #69? No one because it included our pick #23 to get Logan.
Those are called facts.
- kosifantutti
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8581
- Joined: Fri 21 Jan 2005 9:06am
- Location: Back in town
- Has thanked: 526 times
- Been thanked: 1527 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
So you're just ignoring Port's second rounder from last year and saying it's our second round pick for Austin.David-Lee wrote: ↑Fri 12 Oct 2018 8:59am PORT ADELAIDE has capped off the 2017 Trade Period by completing two separate draft pick swaps with St Kilda and Melbourne.
The swaps result in the following;
Port receives picks 59 and 63 in this year's Draft plus a future second round selection from St Kilda, in exchange for pick 34 (Oscar Clavarino) and a future fourth round selection.
The Saints snared 13-gamer Austin and the Power's 2018 fourth-round pick in exchange for their own 2018 third-round selection.
This was for Logan, we gave 2018 3rd round pick and to sweeten it traded the said above, that 2nd round pick is #23 this year.
Do you get it? What fecking club gives away pick 59, 63 and a future 2nd rounder in exchange for pick 34 and pick #69? No one because it included our pick #23 to get Logan.
Those are called facts.
This would look better if we'd had a better year.
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
- Devilhead
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8376
- Joined: Mon 08 Mar 2004 11:56pm
- Has thanked: 137 times
- Been thanked: 1169 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
We wanted to get back in the 2nd round last year (pick 34) because we gave way last year's original 2nd rounder for Steele the year before so to do that we had to give away this year's 2nd rounder which we obviously thought would be a number closer to 30David-Lee wrote: ↑Fri 12 Oct 2018 8:59am PORT ADELAIDE has capped off the 2017 Trade Period by completing two separate draft pick swaps with St Kilda and Melbourne.
The swaps result in the following;
Port receives picks 59 and 63 in this year's Draft plus a future second round selection from St Kilda, in exchange for pick 34 (Oscar Clavarino) and a future fourth round selection.
The Saints snared 13-gamer Austin and the Power's 2018 fourth-round pick in exchange for their own 2018 third-round selection.
This was for Logan, we gave 2018 3rd round pick and to sweeten it traded the said above, that 2nd round pick is #23 this year.
Do you get it? What fecking club gives away pick 59, 63 and a future 2nd rounder in exchange for pick 34 and pick #69? No one because it included our pick #23 to get Logan.
Those are called facts.
Now of course we didn't have a 2nd rounder this year but now we do through the Hickey and Hanneberry trades but we don't have next year ...... and so on and so on
We might do the same again next year - it's our standard move
The Devil makes work for idle hands!!!
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 493
- Joined: Sat 10 Jun 2017 2:01pm
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 41 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
kosifantutti wrote: ↑Fri 12 Oct 2018 9:35amSo you're just ignoring Port's second rounder from last year and saying it's our second round pick for Austin.David-Lee wrote: ↑Fri 12 Oct 2018 8:59am PORT ADELAIDE has capped off the 2017 Trade Period by completing two separate draft pick swaps with St Kilda and Melbourne.
The swaps result in the following;
Port receives picks 59 and 63 in this year's Draft plus a future second round selection from St Kilda, in exchange for pick 34 (Oscar Clavarino) and a future fourth round selection.
The Saints snared 13-gamer Austin and the Power's 2018 fourth-round pick in exchange for their own 2018 third-round selection.
This was for Logan, we gave 2018 3rd round pick and to sweeten it traded the said above, that 2nd round pick is #23 this year.
Do you get it? What fecking club gives away pick 59, 63 and a future 2nd rounder in exchange for pick 34 and pick #69? No one because it included our pick #23 to get Logan.
Those are called facts.
This would look better if we'd had a better year.
Yes, I'm ignoring it completely it makes me seem far superior and basically I tire of this insessent querying of my genius!
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 843 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
Who was the klutz that traded Hickey - our only decent ruckman - days before the new ruck rules were revealed?
Rules that most likely will mean a return to two ruckmen.
My betting is on Richo. He never rated Hickey and puts his trust in a player who, while “strong at the contest”, struggles to get a kick. One’s an actual footballer, the other is just a big log.
Classic St Kilda balls up.
Rules that most likely will mean a return to two ruckmen.
My betting is on Richo. He never rated Hickey and puts his trust in a player who, while “strong at the contest”, struggles to get a kick. One’s an actual footballer, the other is just a big log.
Classic St Kilda balls up.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1096
- Joined: Fri 28 Nov 2014 5:33pm
- Has thanked: 331 times
- Been thanked: 268 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
Marshall a better version of Hickey - he was surplus.bigcarl wrote: ↑Fri 12 Oct 2018 11:41am Who was the klutz that traded Hickey - our only decent ruckman - days before the new ruck rules were revealed?
Rules that most likely will mean a return to two ruckmen.
My betting is on Richo. He never rated Hickey and puts his trust in a player who, while “strong at the contest”, struggles to get a kick. One’s an actual footballer, the other is just a big log.
Classic St Kilda balls up.
-
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 2523
- Joined: Mon 27 Jun 2005 1:27pm
- Location: Abiding
- Has thanked: 171 times
- Been thanked: 375 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
Explain how you get a theory for two ruckman required with the new rules?bigcarl wrote: ↑Fri 12 Oct 2018 11:41am Who was the klutz that traded Hickey - our only decent ruckman - days before the new ruck rules were revealed?
Rules that most likely will mean a return to two ruckmen.
My betting is on Richo. He never rated Hickey and puts his trust in a player who, while “strong at the contest”, struggles to get a kick. One’s an actual footballer, the other is just a big log.
Classic St Kilda balls up.
" A few will never give up on you. When you go back out on the field, those are the people I want in your minds. Those are the people I want in your hearts."
— Coach Eric Taylor - Friday Night Lights
— Coach Eric Taylor - Friday Night Lights
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 843 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
If Hickey was surplus what does that make Longer? Also, Marshall I reckon is going to be a gun key forward. You don’t want to use a thoroughbred for hack ruck work.Crossy66 wrote: ↑Fri 12 Oct 2018 11:49amMarshall a better version of Hickey - he was surplus.bigcarl wrote: ↑Fri 12 Oct 2018 11:41am Who was the klutz that traded Hickey - our only decent ruckman - days before the new ruck rules were revealed?
Rules that most likely will mean a return to two ruckmen.
My betting is on Richo. He never rated Hickey and puts his trust in a player who, while “strong at the contest”, struggles to get a kick. One’s an actual footballer, the other is just a big log.
Classic St Kilda balls up.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1096
- Joined: Fri 28 Nov 2014 5:33pm
- Has thanked: 331 times
- Been thanked: 268 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
Marshall is a ruckman, not a forward. and not a thoroughbred, Not to say that he cant develop, I agree that he will, but he wont be holding down a key position any time soon imhobigcarl wrote: ↑Fri 12 Oct 2018 12:08pmIf Hickey was surplus what does that make Longer? Also, Marshall I reckon is going to be a gun key forward. You don’t want to use a thoroughbred for hack ruck work.Crossy66 wrote: ↑Fri 12 Oct 2018 11:49amMarshall a better version of Hickey - he was surplus.bigcarl wrote: ↑Fri 12 Oct 2018 11:41am Who was the klutz that traded Hickey - our only decent ruckman - days before the new ruck rules were revealed?
Rules that most likely will mean a return to two ruckmen.
My betting is on Richo. He never rated Hickey and puts his trust in a player who, while “strong at the contest”, struggles to get a kick. One’s an actual footballer, the other is just a big log.
Classic St Kilda balls up.
The thing with Hickey, is that he and Marshall offer the same thing. Both are OK at the ruck contest and both do better work around the ground. I think marshall shades him for hardness and the ability to go forward. Longer is a very different proposition in that he is the better at the ruck and bullocking work but is not as good as the others around the ground. Therefore inho, either Marshall or Hickey were surplace and they have stuck with the younger bloke and sold the older one who has a bit of currency
- kosifantutti
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8581
- Joined: Fri 21 Jan 2005 9:06am
- Location: Back in town
- Has thanked: 526 times
- Been thanked: 1527 times
Re: NOTHING HAS CHANGED
Because they don't have to kick to themselves when playing on from full back. It's pretty obvious when you think about it.terry smith rules wrote: ↑Fri 12 Oct 2018 11:51amExplain how you get a theory for two ruckman required with the new rules?bigcarl wrote: ↑Fri 12 Oct 2018 11:41am Who was the klutz that traded Hickey - our only decent ruckman - days before the new ruck rules were revealed?
Rules that most likely will mean a return to two ruckmen.
My betting is on Richo. He never rated Hickey and puts his trust in a player who, while “strong at the contest”, struggles to get a kick. One’s an actual footballer, the other is just a big log.
Classic St Kilda balls up.
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 18579
- Joined: Thu 11 Mar 2004 1:36am
- Has thanked: 1905 times
- Been thanked: 843 times