Changes for Crows game

[loris]

I suspect Saunders might be rested this week - possibly for Billings. He looked tired and without his usual zip and dash. He plays a very taxing game style which is hard to maintain as a youngster.

Looking at the interview with him on the Saints AFL site (I realise it is just after the game),however, he looked so tired in his facial expressions. Also note the dark shading under his eyes, usually the indication of an extremely exhausted individual. Unless you're Jon English and just liverish

[BigMart]

Not sure well need Bruce against crows? Who are their tall targets?

In Billings, Lee
Out Maister, Gilbert

[Dave McNamara]

In: Billings, Bruce
Out: Saunders, Gilbert (Inj)

I like your first thought (as above) sax. (Assuming Saunders, who btw is a great upgrade on Cripps, regardless of the draft convolutions, and regardless of how Murdock pans out... is tiring.)

Bruce (as does Delaney) frees up blokes like Gwilt to play their proper role.

We can beat the Crones without the dud or Schnieds, so I reckon why not give them a bit more time? Besides, some of the newbies will probably be needing breather soonish, so I'd hold the aforementioned duo off for a couple of weeks. Wellington would be the game IMHO to aim for.

Similarly, don't rush back either of the Sams from their injuries.


PS: I have no idea who should be the sub. (When will the AFL ditch that annoying rule!?! ) I would suggest one of the newbies who may benefit from a (potential partial) breather.

PPPS: Unlike some, I have love for seeing the Beau in our team. (I strongly suspect that Roo does too.)

[stinger]

official afl publication sets it out as i stated.......give it up mate ...you are wrong.......anyway...saunders may not have been there at pick 45......

You actually haven't made any sense yet…
This happened…
Cripps and 45 (from Lee deal) for 40 (murdoch) & 43 (Saunders)

I doesn't matter what you are reading, if you use some common sense you might get it.

We weren't happy with pick 40 for Cripps who we took at #24, 2 years earlier.

The only consolation we got was a measly swap of 45 with their 43.

I'm wasting my time with you aren't I? You read it, must be true.

i have the f****** book in front of me....

[stinger]

as i was saying, before being timed out....i have the book in front of me.... ..its title is RECORD....SEASONS GUIDE 2014....


it's the afl's own publication....sets it all out in detail for each club...i have checked the entries this year and last year for the saints, eagles and west coast...you are wrong......

SAINTS
the two entries for murdoch and saunders read....


40... brodie murdock
draft selection 40 traded by west coast for jamie cripps , draft selection 45(brant colledge)
43... josh saunders
draft selection 43 traded by west coast for jamie cripps , draft selection 45 (brant colledge)


EAGLES


45... brant colledge
draft selection 45 traded by st kilda for draft selection 43 (josh saunders)


GWS GIANTS

12... kristian jaksch
draft selection 12 traded by st kilda for tom lee, draft selection 24(nathan wright), draft selection 45 (brant colledge)



.....as i said before you are wrong...give it up or grow up.....

[dragit]

I see what's happening, you can't get your little brain to count past one trade.

Where did the 45 come from that we used in the Cripps deal?

[stinger]

I see what's happening, you can't get your little brain to count past one trade.

Where did the 45 come from that we used in the Cripps deal?

as i said above

"GWS GIANTS

12... kristian jaksch
draft selection 12 traded by st kilda for tom lee, draft selection 24(nathan wright), draft selection 45 (brant colledge)



i have stated that all along...how old are you again????????


no need for the insults....

[dragit]

12... kristian jaksch
draft selection 12 traded by st kilda for tom lee, draft selection 24(nathan wright), draft selection


how old are you again???????? - no need for the insults....

All along you are correcting people who suggest…
12 got us Lee, Wright & Saunders
When it's the most logical explanation of that deal.
The fact that we swapped 45 with 43 to end up with Saunders is pretty irrelevant. It's not that hard.

[lefty]

Out: Gilbert
In: Simpkin (otherwise Bruce or Roberton)

Roberton is very similar to Gilbert, so I wouldn't be surprised if he's in, although not sure if he's earned it, and not sure Bruce has either.
I think Lee still needs to play another few consistent games, you can't play one good game and come straight in.

I think Shenton has earned a go playing good football consistently, problem is he's stuck on the rookie list, I thought if Gilbert was out for 8+ weeks, he'd go onto the LTI list and he'd get a crack this week.

[stinger]

12... kristian jaksch
draft selection 12 traded by st kilda for tom lee, draft selection 24(nathan wright), draft selection


how old are you again???????? - no need for the insults....

All along you are correcting people who suggest…
12 got us Lee, Wright & Saunders
When it's the most logical explanation of that deal.
The fact that we swapped 45 with 43 to end up with Saunders is pretty irrelevant. It's not that hard.

no...we got a late pick (45)which we swapped to the eagles for pick 43 ...which we used to draft saunders......


pick 43 didn't come to us in the lee swap.....pick 45 did......would we have got saunders with pick 45???...who knows...not i...i'm correct...have been all along....and yes...it's not hard.....you could just as easily argue that we got murdoch in the lee deal...as pointed out to you by other posters....

[dragit]

You're getting there slowly, at least you now seem to be conscious of the fact we wouldn't have had the Saunders pick without the Lee deal. Next step... a fraction of common sense, like a dot-to-dot. Do you like those?

[Old Mate]

You guys are going around in circles. As I said in my last post, you may as well combine both the GWS and WC deal as the picks overlap.

Picks 12 (Jaksch) and 45 (Colledge) for Lee, Wright, Murdoch and Saunders.

[stinger]

You guys are going around in circles. As I said in my last post, you may as well combine both the GWS and WC deal as the picks overlap.

Picks 12 (Jaksch) and 45 (Colledge) for Lee, Wright, Murdoch and Saunders.

yeah, i'd go along with that....

[stinger]

You're getting there slowly, at least you now seem to be conscious of the fact we wouldn't have had the Saunders pick without the Lee deal. Next step... a fraction of common sense, like a dot-to-dot. Do you like those?

you can forget the insults...water of a ducks back.......posters who claimed ....and i'm not going back wasting my time to see if you were one.....that we got pick 43 off gws which we then used on saunders are WRONG...WRONG WRONG......that clear enough for you.....???/

[dragit]

You guys are going around in circles. As I said in my last post, you may as well combine both the GWS and WC deal as the picks overlap.

Picks 12 (Jaksch) and 45 (Colledge) for Lee, Wright, Murdoch and Saunders.

yeah, i'd go along with that....

Wrong!
12 & Cripps got us Lee, Wright, Murdoch & Saunders

[stinger]

You guys are going around in circles. As I said in my last post, you may as well combine both the GWS and WC deal as the picks overlap.

Picks 12 (Jaksch) and 45 (Colledge) for Lee, Wright, Murdoch and Saunders.

yeah, i'd go along with that....

Wrong!
12 & Cripps got us Lee, Wright, Murdoch & Saunders

have it your way....it's like talking to a three year old.....but that's more like it...i can live with that......

[Old Mate]

You guys are going around in circles. As I said in my last post, you may as well combine both the GWS and WC deal as the picks overlap.

Picks 12 (Jaksch) and 45 (Colledge) and Cripps for Lee, Wright, Murdoch and Saunders.

yeah, i'd go along with that....

Wrong!
12 & Cripps got us Lee, Wright, Murdoch & Saunders

Yeah that's what I meant. Fixed

[stinger]

Wrong!
12 & Cripps got us Lee, Wright, Murdoch & Saunders

Yeah that's what I meant. Fixed

...at last....agreement......

[Dave McNamara]

Yeah that's what I meant. Fixed

...at last....agreement......

Whoo Hoo!

Right, that's the biggie done. Now for the loose ends... it's Sting, Dragstar and Old Mate off to Crimea, and then the Middle East. Should only take 'em a coupla' days in each place to sort those ones out too.

[saintbob]

Bruce and Billings

I remember seeing a Bruce playing forward in his highlights reel, so that could be an option.

[mightysainters]

In: billings and Roberton
Out: savage and Gilbert

Maister stays.. Gets to contests etc.. Lee certainly is less agile and slower IMO.. Which is saying something.. He also just totally goes missing (Lee)

[stinger]

Yeah that's what I meant. Fixed

...at last....agreement......

Whoo Hoo!

Right, that's the biggie done. Now for the loose ends... it's Sting, Dragstar and Old Mate off to Crimea, and then the Middle East. Should only take 'em a coupla' days in each place to sort those ones out too.

very funny dave

[The OtherThommo]

Out: Gilbert
In: Simpkin (otherwise Bruce or Roberton)

Roberton is very similar to Gilbert, so I wouldn't be surprised if he's in, although not sure if he's earned it, and not sure Bruce has either.
I think Lee still needs to play another few consistent games, you can't play one good game and come straight in.

I think Shenton has earned a go playing good football consistently, problem is he's stuck on the rookie list, I thought if Gilbert was out for 8+ weeks, he'd go onto the LTI list and he'd get a crack this week.

Bratty posted this link to Hudson's assessments from the Sandy game (in the Sandy game thread).

http://www.saints.com.au/news/2014-04-0 ... -breakdown

Interpreting what he said, it looks like Simpkin's ahead of Bruce (who seems to be pleasing them, based on Hudson's assessment), who's ahead of Roberton.

Lee also seems to be impressing as he gets in some work after a delayed pre-season.

On possible rookie upgrades (if any), Weller might be ahead of Shenton (I know it's early). If a rookie is upgraded, at some stage, it might come down to who they're upgraded for (e.g. position, type).

Speaking of who impressed, Blake Acres certainly seems to have had Hudson reaching for the superlatives. 1st hit out since July last year. I also liked his comment about the Billings kiddie being 'very coachable'. Throw in Dunstan, and Monsieur Elshaug might just have latched us on to 3 really good kids with ticks in lots of boxes, 'solid citizens' being one of those boxes.

[Old Mate]

Out: Gilbert
In: Simpkin (otherwise Bruce or Roberton)

Roberton is very similar to Gilbert, so I wouldn't be surprised if he's in, although not sure if he's earned it, and not sure Bruce has either.
I think Lee still needs to play another few consistent games, you can't play one good game and come straight in.

I think Shenton has earned a go playing good football consistently, problem is he's stuck on the rookie list, I thought if Gilbert was out for 8+ weeks, he'd go onto the LTI list and he'd get a crack this week.

Bratty posted this link to Hudson's assessments from the Sandy game (in the Sandy game thread).

http://www.saints.com.au/news/2014-04-0 ... -breakdown

Interpreting what he said, it looks like Simpkin's ahead of Bruce (who seems to be pleasing them, based on Hudson's assessment), who's ahead of Roberton.

Lee also seems to be impressing as he gets in some work after a delayed pre-season.

On possible rookie upgrades (if any), Weller might be ahead of Shenton (I know it's early). If a rookie is upgraded, at some stage, it might come down to who they're upgraded for (e.g. position, type).

Speaking of who impressed, Blake Acres certainly seems to have had Hudson reaching for the superlatives. 1st hit out since July last year. I also liked his comment about the Billings kiddie being 'very coachable'. Throw in Dunstan, and Monsieur Elshaug might just have latched us on to 3 really good kids with ticks in lots of boxes, 'solid citizens' being one of those boxes.

Apparently Acres was eased through the game and only played about 50% game time.....And still managed 24 disposals, 10 clearances and 10 tackles

[samoht]

I notice a couple of "outs", re: Saunders.

Saunders and Curren have been given run-with roles, maybe this role suits Curren more?

I'd like to see Saunders freed from this role, as he can provide plenty of damaging run and carry - maybe more than the Crows can handle?

Gilbert "out" for Bruce in.