Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Thanks for pointing out the move of pick 76 to Sydney. The AFL site for some reason show pick 76 against Sydney in the "indicative draft order" but still show it as our pick in their "club by club draft picks" list.....Reckon they at least could get their own web site correct!
Ok moving feast it seems......it looks like the AFL has today adjusted the draft order (So the other one they had changed the picks but not the draft order!) Now they have revised everything. Evidently they have removed picks that clubs will not use and some previous years points adjustments to clubs like GWs which has shuffled things around somewhat.
So 76 has moved to 71.
So today it now reads as:
71. Sydney (received from St Kilda as part of Zak Jones trade; originally received from Greater Western Sydney in 2018)
And our pick that was 82 is now 76, and pick 100 is now 82.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
Spinner wrote: ↑Tue 26 Nov 2019 4:27am
Where’s the outrage that followed the addition of Ryder?
It is chalk and cheese.
Ryder has been taken to play first 22 and is older (though better). There is also the argument of whether it is better to play a ruck and true KF or two rucks (who are handy forward). ie Marshal/Bruce or Marshall/Ryder
Abbott has been taken as a back-up and will most likely play at Sandi, and for a ruckman is now at peak-age.
Ryder had a trade cost (part of a bundle and so anyone's guess as to what that was. Most likely cheap), whereas Aboot was free. Abott will most likely be a on a very low wage, whereas Paddy is on a lowish deal.
One could argue that both are stop-gaps though. Ryder due to his age, and Abbott due to his so far demonstrated limited ability.
For what we want him to do I think Abott is a good value fit for purpose pick up. If Marshall does a hammy just before a game Abott is then a true option to play. A kid in the draft would be a big disadvantage in 2020.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
Spinner wrote: ↑Tue 26 Nov 2019 4:27am
Where’s the outrage that followed the addition of Ryder?
It is chalk and cheese.
Ryder has been taken to play first 22 and is older (though better). There is also the argument of whether it is better to play a ruck and true KF or two rucks (who are handy forward). ie Marshal/Bruce or Marshall/Ryder
Abbott has been taken as a back-up and will most likely play at Sandi, and for a ruckman is now at peak-age.
Ryder had a trade cost (part of a bundle and so anyone's guess as to what that was. Most likely cheap), whereas Aboot was free. Abott will most likely be a on a very low wage, whereas Paddy is on a lowish deal.
One could argue that both are stop-gaps though. Ryder due to his age, and Abbott due to his so far demonstrated limited ability.
For what we want him to do I think Abott is a good value fit for purpose pick up. If Marshall does a hammy just before a game Abott is then a true option to play. A kid in the draft would be a big disadvantage in 2020.
As someone else posted Pierce would have been a better option that Abbott.
Spinner wrote: ↑Tue 26 Nov 2019 4:27am
Where’s the outrage that followed the addition of Ryder?
It is chalk and cheese.
Ryder has been taken to play first 22 and is older (though better). There is also the argument of whether it is better to play a ruck and true KF or two rucks (who are handy forward). ie Marshal/Bruce or Marshall/Ryder
Abbott has been taken as a back-up and will most likely play at Sandi, and for a ruckman is now at peak-age.
Ryder had a trade cost (part of a bundle and so anyone's guess as to what that was. Most likely cheap), whereas Aboot was free. Abott will most likely be a on a very low wage, whereas Paddy is on a lowish deal.
One could argue that both are stop-gaps though. Ryder due to his age, and Abbott due to his so far demonstrated limited ability.
For what we want him to do I think Abott is a good value fit for purpose pick up. If Marshall does a hammy just before a game Abott is then a true option to play. A kid in the draft would be a big disadvantage in 2020.
What a load of s*** this is.
Should have stopped where you stated Ryder was the better player trying to justified the outrage.
As someone else posted Pierce would have been a better option that Abbott.
Is this the same Pierce that missed most of this year due to concussion? If so why would you believe that such a player would be suitable as a back up?
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
As someone else posted Pierce would have been a better option that Abbott.
Is this the same Pierce that missed most of this year due to concussion? If so why would you believe that such a player would be suitable as a back up?
Pierce had way more upside than Abbott, but that concussion issue is major factor.
Abbot sat behind zach smith and stanley. Nuff said. Hopefully grabs the opportunity though
Should have stopped where you stated Ryder was the better player trying to justified the outrage.
So you believe that Abbott is a better player than Ryder. Interesting view. IMO Ryder is yes a better player than Abbott.
Spinner wrote: ↑Thu 28 Nov 2019 1:30pm
+ Ryders trade cost was next to nothing.
Ryder was cheap as I stated and so you are really just agreeing with myself on this.
While very cheap he still had a trade cost. Abbott was free as was DFA.
No I believe Ryder is better obviously. You stated Ryder was better too but seemed upset with recruiting the better player, and happy we recruited a player not 22 (Abbott).
Spinner wrote: ↑Fri 29 Nov 2019 2:07am
No I believe Ryder is better obviously. You stated Ryder was better too but seemed upset with recruiting the better player,
Where did I say that?
Spinner wrote: ↑Fri 29 Nov 2019 2:07am
and happy we recruited a player not 22 (Abbott).
This is the very weird view.
Abbott is for depth. Ruck is a specialised position and you need three on your list. The depth ruck can be a GOP and that is ok.
Having three Gawn's or Grundies might sound wonderful, but 1/ you could not afford to pay them and 2/ two of them would get pissed off and leave.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
As someone else posted Pierce would have been a better option that Abbott.
Is this the same Pierce that missed most of this year due to concussion? If so why would you believe that such a player would be suitable as a back up?
He nominated for this years draft so must be over the concussion.
As someone else posted Pierce would have been a better option that Abbott.
Is this the same Pierce that missed most of this year due to concussion? If so why would you believe that such a player would be suitable as a back up?
He nominated for this years draft so must be over the concussion.
He's a better footballer than Abbott.
Paddy says he wants to play again too.
So which AFL club picked up Pierce then?
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
As someone else posted Pierce would have been a better option that Abbott.
Is this the same Pierce that missed most of this year due to concussion? If so why would you believe that such a player would be suitable as a back up?
He nominated for this years draft so must be over the concussion.
He's a better footballer than Abbott.
Paddy says he wants to play again too.
So which AFL club picked up Pierce then?
No one of course. Doesn't mean he isn't a better footballer than Abbott though 'cause he is. Streets ahead. Concussion issue a problem.
As someone else posted Pierce would have been a better option that Abbott.
Is this the same Pierce that missed most of this year due to concussion? If so why would you believe that such a player would be suitable as a back up?
He nominated for this years draft so must be over the concussion.
He's a better footballer than Abbott.
Paddy says he wants to play again too.
So which AFL club picked up Pierce then?
No one of course. Doesn't mean he isn't a better footballer than Abbott though 'cause he is. Streets ahead. Concussion issue a problem.
Wasn’t much of a problem the four years before 2019
B.M wrote: ↑Sat 30 Nov 2019 11:14am
Pierce was tracking ok for a 3rd ruckman until 2019
He was a giraffe when drafted, never a short term pick, ruckmen rarel are... don’t expect to see either Bell or Alabakis for a long while, if at all.
I think Alabakis will make it. For such a huge guy he is great below the knees. He just needs to build his tank a lot more to play AFL. Once he does that he will be our number 1 ruck allowing Marshall to play permanent CHF and King permanent FF.
B.M wrote: ↑Sat 30 Nov 2019 11:14am
Pierce was tracking ok for a 3rd ruckman until 2019
He was a giraffe when drafted, never a short term pick, ruckmen rarel are... don’t expect to see either Bell or Alabakis for a long while, if at all.
Pierce was very good in the preseason game and round one this year before he was struck down with concussion.
Some posters either have very short memories or are very poor judges of football talent.
I liked Pierce... would have and did advocate he play/ed way more games over 2017/18. Reality is that he didn’t. The coach preferred Hickey and Longer by a long shot.
You’re all high and mighty about White not being picked and not being played as a sign of his potential... well he played more than Pierce is. By your own logic you should rate him as not good enough
Wasnt Pierce sent to Frankston because he was 3rd string at Sandy? He nearly became a good VFL ruckman at Frankston apparently. Never saw him play until the practice match he went down in.