Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Sobraz wrote:
We weren't the only club picking players... Personally Im happy we didnt get them, as if 17 other clubs didnt rate them in the top 80 odd players, im glad we didnt waste a 20's, 40's, or any pick on them for that matter...
Exactly some people here wanted us to take these players as early picks. How stupid does that look in retrospect. They didnt get drafted at pick 103.
Garlett didn't not get drafted because of talent, he isn't there because some saw him as trouble. Fans don't know as much the clubs in regards to background you're a an idiotic flog plugger.
Colqohoun was rated by heaps as a second round pick and somehow slipped through the cracks- probably because he was played as a loose defender and they are rare roles for short slower players. He will be rookied and be a star one day if he gets a bit of luck.
You're are an old conservative nay sayer with juvenile ideas about footy. Plenty slip through the cracks of the system, plenty could have made a career out of footy but luck wasn't on their side.
Looks like my ideas are exactly the same as 18 clubs recruiters but hey what would they know. You would know more. Pity no other club knows as much as you. I would guess you have never seen any of the players you mentioned and there was about 50, play more than once live but you at the moment have been shown to not be rated as highly by the recruiters of 18 clubs. Yes we could have got them when you suggested. Pity by pick 103 no one wanted them. That is 18 clubs and no cigar but you were happy at pick 24 and 25. Looks a fine idea in retrospect.
Idiotic flog. Now that is strange when what I said is right and what you said is wrong.
plugger66 wrote:
Looks like my ideas are exactly the same as 18 clubs recruiters but hey what would they know. You would know more. Pity no other club knows as much as you. I would guess you have never seen any of the players you mentioned and there was about 50, play more than once live but you at the moment have been shown to not be rated as highly by the recruiters of 18 clubs. Yes we could have got them when you suggested. Pity by pick 103 no one wanted them. That is 18 clubs and no cigar but you were happy at pick 24 and 25. Looks a fine idea in retrospect.
Idiotic flog. Now that is strange when what I said is right and what you said is wrong.
Im not going to argue the pros for the players our club DID pick or the cons for the players we didnt, because really it is usually nothing more than a wishful thinking guess disguised as an informed decision
but surely you must apply the same logic to the players we did pick up. ie 17 other clubs passed on the players WE picked?
plugger66 wrote:
Looks like my ideas are exactly the same as 18 clubs recruiters but hey what would they know. You would know more. Pity no other club knows as much as you. I would guess you have never seen any of the players you mentioned and there was about 50, play more than once live but you at the moment have been shown to not be rated as highly by the recruiters of 18 clubs. Yes we could have got them when you suggested. Pity by pick 103 no one wanted them. That is 18 clubs and no cigar but you were happy at pick 24 and 25. Looks a fine idea in retrospect.
Idiotic flog. Now that is strange when what I said is right and what you said is wrong.
Im not going to argue the pros for the players our club DID pick or the cons for the players we didnt, because really it is usually nothing more than a wishful thinking guess disguised as an informed decision
but surely you must apply the same logic to the players we did pick up. ie 17 other clubs passed on the players WE picked?
Thats true but my point is this guy would have taken 2 that werent taken by pick 103 at 24 and 25. Now that is huge gap. Who knows maybe Wright and White may not have been taken by any other club but we do know those 2 werent taken by any other club and then to say i am an idiot and conservative because I said what I said is strange when all other clubs thought exactly the same way tonight.
Rory Sloane went a whole draft being unselected as an underager yet he was still rated. It doesn't mean he is a dud because he was passed on. Colquhoun is almost a full year younger than Whitfield.
I understand your logic but its not without its exceptions.
Strength through Loyalty
Go those mighty Sainters!!
Hawks as good as said they'd have taken Wright just after us. No way in any event that he would have got to us at 40. I've only seen him in the flesh 3 or 4 times but he is genuinely quick and it's pleasing to see that we have enough creativity to depart from the 'pert left footer, great kick, needs three years in the weight room' paradigm.
We now have a fair few ruckmen on the list in an environment where 1 plays and 2 or 3 are plenty. Those we drafted last year would understandably be nervous.
What the recruiter said:
"Particularly with our first couple of picks we wanted to get the best available talent and part of that is waiting to see who everyone else selects. It's a bit of a waiting game, [but we're] very happy with the guys we got. In terms of overall strategy I think we got a good mix of players most importantly in terms of position, so we think that will add quite a bit of depth over the years. The profile of the list is such that we do need players in most positions at the younger end of the spectrum and we feel that we have got a good blend. A guy like Brodie Murdoch played half-back/wing, Josh Saunders is an inside-mid and Lewis Pierce is an exciting young developing ruckman as well so [he] will complement Tom Hickey." - St Kilda list manager Ameet Bains
What the recruiter said:
"Particularly with our first couple of picks we wanted to get the best available talent and part of that is waiting to see who everyone else selects. It's a bit of a waiting game, [but we're] very happy with the guys we got. In terms of overall strategy I think we got a good mix of players most importantly in terms of position, so we think that will add quite a bit of depth over the years. The profile of the list is such that we do need players in most positions at the younger end of the spectrum and we feel that we have got a good blend. A guy like Brodie Murdoch played half-back/wing, Josh Saunders is an inside-mid and Lewis Pierce is an exciting young developing ruckman as well so [he] will complement Tom Hickey." - St Kilda list manager Ameet Bains
I don't understand what he means by complimenting Tom Hickey. What about Ben? Or is Ameet Sandringhams recruiting manager, found it strange that he woyldn't mention McEvoy.
Whilst I think Clurey was a player we should have picked up I am pretty excited by this group. Saunders in particular is just like a cheap Lonergan. Elite endurance, loves a tackle, good numbers and 70% kicking efficiency. Good find. I thought Murdoch was a fwd, we are calling him a backman so looks like a Raph/Gram replacement.
White could be anything even if its speculative and as long as Naths kicking holds up he seems solid.
I think Staley is looking shaky with this Lewis kid now on board.
Strength through Loyalty
Go those mighty Sainters!!
St Ick wrote:I don't understand what he means by complimenting Tom Hickey. What about Ben? Or is Ameet Sandringhams recruiting manager, found it strange that he woyldn't mention McEvoy.
