![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
Official Trade Week Thread...
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- SaintWodonga
- Club Player
- Posts: 1868
- Joined: Wed 04 Jul 2007 12:01am
- Location: Wodonga
- Contact:
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1351
- Joined: Sat 06 Oct 2007 2:42pm
- Has thanked: 240 times
- Been thanked: 382 times
WOULD TAKE IT IN A HEARTBEAT! (so long as Harris was a third rounder)yipper wrote:Now that would be the dream result.hAyES wrote:If we could somehow come away with Cousins and Harris, I would be a very happy man. Harris is a good inside player that we really need, and Cousins is a gun inside and out. We are a long way behind the best teams as far as midfield depth goes so the more quality we get, the better.
realfooty.com.au wrote:■ St Kilda has informed Hawthorn of an interest in forward Tim Boyle, who has attracted some interest from the Bulldogs.
■ Port Adelaide has also shown interest in uncontracted Saint Xavier Clarke, while the Tigers lead the race for Port's uncontracted midfielder Adam Thomson.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5017
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:42am
- Location: Bayside
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 91 times
Would rather Lovett than Harris.
Would this be a great result?
Pick 14 for O'Keefe
Pick 31 for Lovett
Cousins in PSD
Yes we mortgage a bit of our future but, our very best are peaking NOW, we need to take advantage...
Everyone is talking about this being the last draft etc, it does mean half decent experienced players come cheap.....
Would this be a great result?
Pick 14 for O'Keefe
Pick 31 for Lovett
Cousins in PSD
Yes we mortgage a bit of our future but, our very best are peaking NOW, we need to take advantage...
Everyone is talking about this being the last draft etc, it does mean half decent experienced players come cheap.....
- St Fidelius
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10492
- Joined: Sun 01 Aug 2004 10:30am
Sorry, but NO WAY KNOWN!maverick wrote:Would rather Lovett than Harris.
Would this be a great result?
Pick 14 for O'Keefe
Pick 31 for Lovett
Cousins in PSD
Yes we mortgage a bit of our future but, our very best are peaking NOW, we need to take advantage...
Everyone is talking about this being the last draft etc, it does mean half decent experienced players come cheap.....
This year's draft run very deep and you want to trade our top to picks for a 28 year old forward (O'Keefe) and a lazy individual in Lovett...
Oh, I am pretty sure our pick is #13 not #14
Don't wait for the light at the end of the tunnel to appear, run down there and light the bloody thing yourself!
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2132
- Joined: Fri 22 Jul 2005 9:27am
- Location: Rockville
- Has thanked: 583 times
- Been thanked: 178 times
I honestly hope that any trade we do is designed to get us more picks not to give them away. Giving up the opportunity of getting an 18 year old potential 200 game player for a 27 or 28 year old who has probably played their best football is crazy.
Draft the kids and if whoever is out of contract ends up in the PSD we can get them for nothing then.
Draft the kids and if whoever is out of contract ends up in the PSD we can get them for nothing then.
- WayneJudson42
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon 07 Jul 2008 9:53pm
- Location: I'm a victim of circumstance
The theory doesn't hold. Even if we draft 4 kids with big futures, you eventually run into salary cap issues... depending on how quickly they develop.remboy wrote:I honestly hope that any trade we do is designed to get us more picks not to give them away. Giving up the opportunity of getting an 18 year old potential 200 game player for a 27 or 28 year old who has probably played their best football is crazy.
Draft the kids and if whoever is out of contract ends up in the PSD we can get them for nothing then.
The lid is off after Round 2! Enjoy the journey, coz you just don't know where we'll end up. Live for today and seize the moment.
I think the Saints find it all too easy to run and hide behind a youth policy. Smart trades that keep us in the the first rounds of the draft and avoid longshots, whilst obtaining more quality ready made players, is a smart policy.
The biggest problem we had this year was lack of depth. People have a go about Jones being in the side and Fiora, its because we had no one better. The time for youth policy is past, its time to fix the depth and have a real crack.
The biggest problem we had this year was lack of depth. People have a go about Jones being in the side and Fiora, its because we had no one better. The time for youth policy is past, its time to fix the depth and have a real crack.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5017
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:42am
- Location: Bayside
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 91 times
I agree, we have the core of our list peaking, the time is not right for youth policiesbob__71 wrote:I think the Saints find it all too easy to run and hide behind a youth policy. Smart trades that keep us in the the first rounds of the draft and avoid longshots, whilst obtaining more quality ready made players, is a smart policy.
The biggest problem we had this year was lack of depth. People have a go about Jones being in the side and Fiora, its because we had no one better. The time for youth policy is past, its time to fix the depth and have a real crack.
- WayneJudson42
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon 07 Jul 2008 9:53pm
- Location: I'm a victim of circumstance
Speechlessbob__71 wrote:I think the Saints find it all too easy to run and hide behind a youth policy. Smart trades that keep us in the the first rounds of the draft and avoid longshots, whilst obtaining more quality ready made players, is a smart policy.
The biggest problem we had this year was lack of depth. People have a go about Jones being in the side and Fiora, its because we had no one better. The time for youth policy is past, its time to fix the depth and have a real crack.
![Shocked :shock:](./images/smilies/icon_eek.gif)
Well said.
The lid is off after Round 2! Enjoy the journey, coz you just don't know where we'll end up. Live for today and seize the moment.
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2132
- Joined: Fri 22 Jul 2005 9:27am
- Location: Rockville
- Has thanked: 583 times
- Been thanked: 178 times
So rather than draft 4 kids with big futures you'd rather get 4 players with no future? At least with the kids they'll still be around in 4 or 5 years. And not everyone ends up getting paid a million bucks a year. If we can't afford to keep them at least we'll have some tradeable commodities. Not sure what we'll get for Schultz or Boyle or O'Keefe in 4 years.WayneJudson42 wrote:The theory doesn't hold. Even if we draft 4 kids with big futures, you eventually run into salary cap issues... depending on how quickly they develop.remboy wrote:I honestly hope that any trade we do is designed to get us more picks not to give them away. Giving up the opportunity of getting an 18 year old potential 200 game player for a 27 or 28 year old who has probably played their best football is crazy.
Draft the kids and if whoever is out of contract ends up in the PSD we can get them for nothing then.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5017
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:42am
- Location: Bayside
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 91 times
Fair enough, your opinion.St Fidelius wrote:Sorry, but NO WAY KNOWN!maverick wrote:Would rather Lovett than Harris.
Would this be a great result?
Pick 14 for O'Keefe
Pick 31 for Lovett
Cousins in PSD
Yes we mortgage a bit of our future but, our very best are peaking NOW, we need to take advantage...
Everyone is talking about this being the last draft etc, it does mean half decent experienced players come cheap.....
This year's draft run very deep and you want to trade our top to picks for a 28 year old forward (O'Keefe) and a lazy individual in Lovett...
Oh, I am pretty sure our pick is #13 not #14
I have heard this draft runs deep thing far too many times....
O'Keefe is quality, would be good at the Dome as well....
- WayneJudson42
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon 07 Jul 2008 9:53pm
- Location: I'm a victim of circumstance
What guarantees do we have that kids work out and will be around in 4 or 5 years time?remboy wrote:So rather than draft 4 kids with big futures you'd rather get 4 players with no future? At least with the kids they'll still be around in 4 or 5 years. And not everyone ends up getting paid a million bucks a year. If we can't afford to keep them at least we'll have some tradeable commodities. Not sure what we'll get for Schultz or Boyle or O'Keefe in 4 years.WayneJudson42 wrote:The theory doesn't hold. Even if we draft 4 kids with big futures, you eventually run into salary cap issues... depending on how quickly they develop.remboy wrote:I honestly hope that any trade we do is designed to get us more picks not to give them away. Giving up the opportunity of getting an 18 year old potential 200 game player for a 27 or 28 year old who has probably played their best football is crazy.
Draft the kids and if whoever is out of contract ends up in the PSD we can get them for nothing then.
Have stated this numerous times...
If an opportunity comes along that can build on what we have, then you take it.
Look at this way...
Kids may take 2 to 3 years before we see some good footy from them.
By that stage, our core will be past it's prime, and there's no guarantees that Armo, Geary and co will develop into anything special, IMO.
You don't trade for the sake of a trade. Likewise, you don't draft for the sake of some misguided youth policy in the belief that eventually all kids develop accordingly.
Even the Hawks did some topping up, and are keen on O'Keefe.
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
The lid is off after Round 2! Enjoy the journey, coz you just don't know where we'll end up. Live for today and seize the moment.
I think you raise a good point, and balance is the key.WayneJudson42 wrote:What guarantees do we have that kids work out and will be around in 4 or 5 years time?remboy wrote:So rather than draft 4 kids with big futures you'd rather get 4 players with no future? At least with the kids they'll still be around in 4 or 5 years. And not everyone ends up getting paid a million bucks a year. If we can't afford to keep them at least we'll have some tradeable commodities. Not sure what we'll get for Schultz or Boyle or O'Keefe in 4 years.WayneJudson42 wrote:The theory doesn't hold. Even if we draft 4 kids with big futures, you eventually run into salary cap issues... depending on how quickly they develop.remboy wrote:I honestly hope that any trade we do is designed to get us more picks not to give them away. Giving up the opportunity of getting an 18 year old potential 200 game player for a 27 or 28 year old who has probably played their best football is crazy.
Draft the kids and if whoever is out of contract ends up in the PSD we can get them for nothing then.
Have stated this numerous times...
If an opportunity comes along that can build on what we have, then you take it.
Look at this way...
Kids may take 2 to 3 years before we see some good footy from them.
By that stage, our core will be past it's prime, and there's no guarantees that Armo, Geary and co will develop into anything special, IMO.
You don't trade for the sake of a trade. Likewise, you don't draft for the sake of some misguided youth policy in the belief that eventually all kids develop accordingly.
Even the Hawks did some topping up, and are keen on O'Keefe.
As we have seen in recent weeks, some coaches who feel the pressure of an unperforming senior list resort to the "kids" policy to prolong their contract (ahem Dean Laidley) and guarantee themselves another couple of years using the "but we have a very young side" excuse.
We'll see after the draft period if RL has shown this kind of panic, or continued to show confidence in his plan for the list. I think you will find it is the latter, and he will draft accordingly.
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2132
- Joined: Fri 22 Jul 2005 9:27am
- Location: Rockville
- Has thanked: 583 times
- Been thanked: 178 times
I take your point. And I agree that if the right player becomes available at the right price we'd be mad not to at least look at a deal. I just don't think that too many of the players who have been mentioned in the last few days are worth trading for ( I think I may have lost it when I heard Jay Schulz and X mentioned in the same sentence).WayneJudson42 wrote:[You don't trade for the sake of a trade. Likewise, you don't draft for the sake of some misguided youth policy in the belief that eventually all kids develop accordingly.
Even the Hawks did some topping up, and are keen on O'Keefe.
You can't directly compare us with the Hawks. They are in a better position than us (possibly where we were 4 years ago). They have a younger list, talent in their VFL side that other clubs would love to have (Dowler, Thorpe, Muston) and they have room in their salary cap.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5212
- Joined: Mon 07 Aug 2006 9:50pm
- Location: Queensland - Beautiful one day ... you know the rest
- Has thanked: 65 times
- Been thanked: 318 times
I'll tell you what we get.. a flagremboy wrote: So rather than draft 4 kids with big futures you'd rather get 4 players with no future? At least with the kids they'll still be around in 4 or 5 years. And not everyone ends up getting paid a million bucks a year. If we can't afford to keep them at least we'll have some tradeable commodities. Not sure what we'll get for Schultz or Boyle or O'Keefe in 4 years.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
you go for the best players available that will add to the side, it's simple, two years of Cousins is better than none at all, how many goals will O'keefe kick in 4 years, Harris will take a load off Hayes and Ball. This is the time to jockey position to get the best you can get. Rolling the dice with rookies comes later.
Seeya
*************
*************
- WayneJudson42
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon 07 Jul 2008 9:53pm
- Location: I'm a victim of circumstance
Amen to that.sunsaint wrote:I'll tell you what we get.. a flagremboy wrote: So rather than draft 4 kids with big futures you'd rather get 4 players with no future? At least with the kids they'll still be around in 4 or 5 years. And not everyone ends up getting paid a million bucks a year. If we can't afford to keep them at least we'll have some tradeable commodities. Not sure what we'll get for Schultz or Boyle or O'Keefe in 4 years.![]()
you go for the best players available that will add to the side, it's simple, two years of Cousins is better than none at all, how many goals will O'keefe kick in 4 years, Harris will take a load off Hayes and Ball. This is the time to jockey position to get the best you can get. Rolling the dice with rookies comes later.
What Remboy was upset about is fair enough. Mind you we have 6 pages of "official" trade crap on this thread.
The lid is off after Round 2! Enjoy the journey, coz you just don't know where we'll end up. Live for today and seize the moment.
- n1ck
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9871
- Joined: Sun 08 Aug 2004 2:28am
- Location: Clarinda
- Has thanked: 78 times
- Been thanked: 91 times
LOL!St Fidelius wrote:n1ck wrote:Im not mistaking him for anyone.St Fidelius wrote:Hamish is an average kick IMO and less than average kick for goal...
24 goals 17 points, in lets say 3 seasons, is not a lovely kick for goal
How is that less than average
just explain your comment on how he is a lovely kick for goal when he has booted 24 goals 17 points in 3 seasonsa lovely kick for goal.![]()
and don't bother rolling your eyes at me you ungrateful pr1ck, it's the last time I will offer you a reserved seat....
Not even a thankyou![]()
![]()
![]()
Yep 24 goals 17 points is a lovely kick for goal
Didnt even see this. Sorry to all those who were waiting on my response...
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
Fid, relax mate. You roll your eyes at many people.
Anyway, I DID say thankyou. Im a very appreciative person, anyone who knows me would know that - you either didnt hear me, or are now just lying to spite me.
Ok, maybe i 'overstated' his goalkicking - pehaps i saw a few games where he excelled in that ability, but for a ruckman I would think those stats are not less than average, that goal tally would infact be about average - if not MORE than average.
Most ruckmen dont get in the position to have that many shots at goal, let alone kick that many, and the fact that he has more goals than behinds in 40 or 50 shots is a good sign IMO.
Abit of an overreaction there, mate.
- WayneJudson42
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3380
- Joined: Mon 07 Jul 2008 9:53pm
- Location: I'm a victim of circumstance
How does his accuracy compare to Roo's?n1ck wrote:LOL!St Fidelius wrote:n1ck wrote:Im not mistaking him for anyone.St Fidelius wrote:Hamish is an average kick IMO and less than average kick for goal...
24 goals 17 points, in lets say 3 seasons, is not a lovely kick for goal
How is that less than average
just explain your comment on how he is a lovely kick for goal when he has booted 24 goals 17 points in 3 seasonsa lovely kick for goal.![]()
and don't bother rolling your eyes at me you ungrateful pr1ck, it's the last time I will offer you a reserved seat....
Not even a thankyou![]()
![]()
![]()
Yep 24 goals 17 points is a lovely kick for goal
Didnt even see this. Sorry to all those who were waiting on my response...![]()
![]()
![]()
Fid, relax mate. You roll your eyes at many people.
Anyway, I DID say thankyou. Im a very appreciative person, anyone who knows me would know that - you either didnt hear me, or are now just lying to spite me.
Ok, maybe i 'overstated' his goalkicking - pehaps i saw a few games where he excelled in that ability, but for a ruckman I would think those stats are not less than average, that goal tally would infact be about average - if not MORE than average.
Most ruckmen dont get in the position to have that many shots at goal, let alone kick that many, and the fact that he has more goals than behinds in 40 or 50 shots is a good sign IMO.
Abit of an overreaction there, mate.
58.5% coversion.
The lid is off after Round 2! Enjoy the journey, coz you just don't know where we'll end up. Live for today and seize the moment.
- BAM! (shhhh)
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2134
- Joined: Thu 24 May 2007 5:23pm
- Location: The little voice inside your head
Love what you're seeing, but I think you're viewing through rose coloured glasses.GrumpyOne wrote:Nah.... This is our window of opportunity.fingers wrote:Now you're just making a spectacle of yourself.GrumpyOne wrote:Agreed, we should not be adopting a myopic view of the trading process. There may come into view several trading options that were not envisioned at first sight, and deserve more than a passing glance. It is important that we are not blinkered to opportunities, nor have the shades pulled over our eyes. We must have a clear vision of where we want to end up, or we could be left on the outside looking in.fingers wrote:I'm not sure trades should be the focal point.GrumpyOne wrote:Several of our past trades require viewing through rose coloured glasses.fingers wrote:Sometimes trades need to be seen through a different lens.GrumpyOne wrote:If there was I reckon you could see straight through them.Spinner wrote:As long as there aren't any long term injury issues with Hamish (which im spectacle about)
"Everything comes to he who hustles while he waits"
- Henry Ford
- Henry Ford
- cowboy18
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5795
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 1:05pm
- Location: in my duffle coat
- Has thanked: 3 times
- Been thanked: 5 times
Your contacts giving any further insights into our trades?BAM! (shhhh) wrote:Love what you're seeing, but I think you're viewing through rose coloured glasses.GrumpyOne wrote:Nah.... This is our window of opportunity.fingers wrote:Now you're just making a spectacle of yourself.GrumpyOne wrote:Agreed, we should not be adopting a myopic view of the trading process. There may come into view several trading options that were not envisioned at first sight, and deserve more than a passing glance. It is important that we are not blinkered to opportunities, nor have the shades pulled over our eyes. We must have a clear vision of where we want to end up, or we could be left on the outside looking in.fingers wrote:I'm not sure trades should be the focal point.GrumpyOne wrote:Several of our past trades require viewing through rose coloured glasses.fingers wrote:Sometimes trades need to be seen through a different lens.GrumpyOne wrote:If there was I reckon you could see straight through them.Spinner wrote:As long as there aren't any long term injury issues with Hamish (which im spectacle about)
CHOO CHOOcowboy18 wrote:Your contacts giving any further insights into our trades?BAM! (shhhh) wrote:Love what you're seeing, but I think you're viewing through rose coloured glasses.GrumpyOne wrote:Nah.... This is our window of opportunity.fingers wrote:Now you're just making a spectacle of yourself.GrumpyOne wrote:Agreed, we should not be adopting a myopic view of the trading process. There may come into view several trading options that were not envisioned at first sight, and deserve more than a passing glance. It is important that we are not blinkered to opportunities, nor have the shades pulled over our eyes. We must have a clear vision of where we want to end up, or we could be left on the outside looking in.fingers wrote:I'm not sure trades should be the focal point.GrumpyOne wrote:Several of our past trades require viewing through rose coloured glasses.fingers wrote:Sometimes trades need to be seen through a different lens.GrumpyOne wrote:If there was I reckon you could see straight through them.Spinner wrote:As long as there aren't any long term injury issues with Hamish (which im spectacle about)