Did we get it horribly wrong?

[bigred]

GT was a visionary.

[markp]

Gibbo is Gibson not Gilbert lol (for MarkP).

Apologies for not knowing all the nicknames of all AFL players... or for even thinking it wouldn't be an opposition player (and may be a typo) as they weren't really relevant here...

And this would be the same top bloke Adam Simpson who produced that chicken video eh?... cool, all cleared up now, definitely a top bloke.

[rodgerfox]

Gibbo is Gibson not Gilbert lol (for MarkP).

Apologies for not knowing all the nicknames of all AFL players... or for even thinking it wouldn't be an opposition player (and may be a typo) as they weren't really relevant here...

And this would be the same top bloke Adam Simpson who produced that chicken video eh?... cool, all cleared up now, definitely a top bloke.

Jesus Markp, surely you can do better than that?

[markp]

Gibbo is Gibson not Gilbert lol (for MarkP).

Apologies for not knowing all the nicknames of all AFL players... or for even thinking it wouldn't be an opposition player (and may be a typo) as they weren't really relevant here...

And this would be the same top bloke Adam Simpson who produced that chicken video eh?... cool, all cleared up now, definitely a top bloke.

Jesus Markp, surely you can do better than that?

You need to lift your game too rodgerfox... I mean, roo getting a massage??

Must be the heat.....


(and just markp will be fine thanks)

[Darrel Baldock]

To get a thread going, I thought,you post what you believe to be an interesting and thought provoking beginning containing an element of something you would really like to know more about, throw in a smidgen of contentiousness, light the fuse and withdraw to come back in a few days to see what's in the cray pot. The first measure of success is how many responses the thread gets. This one has taken off in a small way but guess what, it's the same old arguments and name callings from the famous saintsational mega posters, who surely must spend their days with fingers poised above the keyboard.
Thread hijacked for name calling and exchanges of abuse= failed thread.
I'm going away to lick my wounds.

[matrix]

[rodgerfox]

Gibbo is Gibson not Gilbert lol (for MarkP).

Apologies for not knowing all the nicknames of all AFL players... or for even thinking it wouldn't be an opposition player (and may be a typo) as they weren't really relevant here...

And this would be the same top bloke Adam Simpson who produced that chicken video eh?... cool, all cleared up now, definitely a top bloke.

Jesus Markp, surely you can do better than that?

You need to lift your game too rodgerfox... I mean, roo getting a massage??

Must be the heat.....


(and just markp will be fine thanks)

Maybe take that up in the appropraite thread?

[Darrel Baldock]

Nice emticon matrix. Advances the debate.

[SainterK]

To get a thread going, I thought,you post what you believe to be an interesting and thought provoking beginning containing an element of something you would really like to know more about, throw in a smidgen of contentiousness, light the fuse and withdraw to come back in a few days to see what's in the cray pot. The first measure of success is how many responses the thread gets. This one has taken off in a small way but guess what, it's the same old arguments and name callings from the famous saintsational mega posters, who surely must spend their days with fingers poised above the keyboard.
Thread hijacked for name calling and exchanges of abuse= failed thread.
I'm going away to lick my wounds.

Don't let it deter you DB, it isn't fair to those of us who enjoy a discussion. I would be very annoyed if people allowed this kind of behaviour, which isn't exclusive to a saints fan site let's be honest, to give you a reason to leave. Just ignore it, and quote the posters that you would like to talk to.

[matrix]

youre welcome...

[stinger]

Don't let it deter you DB, it isn't fair to those of us who enjoy a discussion. I would be very annoyed if people allowed this kind of behaviour, which isn't exclusive to a saints fan site let's be honest, to give you a reason to leave. Just ignore it, and quote the posters that you would like to talk to.

that's actually my new years resolution....

[Milton66]

Plugger I could say the sky was Blue and you would question if it were correct......the fact is J.Smith rated himself very highly and the father/son assured his team mates he was a shoe in to go top three otherwise and that he was a walk up starter in the 22 at anytime and being Ross Smiths son was owed a spot on the list.....he was a lazy trainer, continual complainer and loved the clubs.....not denying he has talent...

I heard this from a couple of ex-players who I got to do a clinic at my school.....both coaching now.....top blokes..

they also told me Aaron Edwards is a pretty good kid, with some issues which hold him back....he cannot deal with boundaries..

and a few other things aswell...not too many kind words for Gibbo

Mate, FWIW, I wasn't happy that you commented on Lovett before he had a chance to redeem himself and his career.

Ok, so now your words are prophetic and he mucked up.

Doesn't mean you should come on here with an "I told you so" attitude and seeking revenge against those who disagreed with you.

Sadly, you have been proven correct, and I'd hope that no one is sadder than you in this instance. This isn't how anyone wanted it to work out.

What are you talking about? There is no reference to Lovett above.

I assume BigMart is referring to Adam Simpson and some-one else from North who is now coaching. So they think Smith is talented but lazy and up himself. That’s interesting and I appreciate BigMart sharing it. I will still make up my own mind depending on what he does with the Saints.

The gang mentality on Saintsational really needs to f*** off. You guys are seriously posting hard on this site but it doesn’t mean the site is about you.

Go figure … some of us are interested in what Simpson thinks rather than the gang … lol.

Gibbo is Gibson not Gilbert lol (for MarkP).

Funny, I was thinking that when I quoted him. I just grabbed a random post to refer it back to him. Couldn't be bothered going through old threads.

How was your Christmas Shaggy?

[barks4eva]

You are one of the top 3 posters on here Marto please don't be put off by some of the keyboard warriors on here.

Who's the other one?

[asiu]

your funny

[GrumpyOne]

You are one of the top 3 posters on here Marto please don't be put off by some of the keyboard warriors on here.

Who's the other one?

Me of course Barks.

Together we raise the combined IQ of this site by at least three percentage points.

The insightful comments, the rapier-like wit, the stunning repartee....... it gets so tedious being brilliant all the time.

[Milton66]

GT was a visionary.

All be it a myopic one.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Not really.

Drain said that the reason we weren't overly concerned with trading pick 16 for Lovett was that we knew we were getting Walsh. A player who the club felt was better than anyone we could have got at pick 16.

...

...

...

i cant follow this argument from drain. tommy walsh and pick 16 were not related in any shape or form. entirely separate deals. ok we got walsh. good job on that. but surely drain is bound to do the best with pick 16 as well? not to mention 25 for ball that we never got to use...

I believe the comment from Drain is largely that the recruitment of Walsh allowed them to be more lateral with pick 16 rather than pick 16 not having been a significant assett.

i.e. it was considered a priority to get a high-caliber kid with the potential to be a star, where Lovett was considered highly desirable but secondary.

Walsh filled the primary need, allowing them to consider a wider array of options with pick 16 - Drain would have felt that Walsh + Lovett better served the list than Walsh + kid picked at 16... but barring Walsh, they would have needed the kid to prevent a future slide more than they would have needed Lovett to put them over the top now.

Hindsight makes the Lovett part stink, but the deals were related. They didn't have to be, but St Kilda decided to take a holistic approach.

[joffaboy]

I love this

I assume BigMart is referring to Adam Simpson

So an assumption is made that suddenly again turns into FACT

Go figure … some of us are interested in what Simpson thinks rather than the gang … lol.

lol - GOLD

absolute GOLD.

A bloke makes an assumption, then howls down the "bullys"and "mob" because his assumption is now reality.

lol.

[Con Gorozidis]

Not really.

Drain said that the reason we weren't overly concerned with trading pick 16 for Lovett was that we knew we were getting Walsh. A player who the club felt was better than anyone we could have got at pick 16.

...

...

...

i cant follow this argument from drain. tommy walsh and pick 16 were not related in any shape or form. entirely separate deals. ok we got walsh. good job on that. but surely drain is bound to do the best with pick 16 as well? not to mention 25 for ball that we never got to use...

I believe the comment from Drain is largely that the recruitment of Walsh allowed them to be more lateral with pick 16 rather than pick 16 not having been a significant assett.

i.e. it was considered a priority to get a high-caliber kid with the potential to be a star, where Lovett was considered highly desirable but secondary.

Walsh filled the primary need, allowing them to consider a wider array of options with pick 16 - Drain would have felt that Walsh + Lovett better served the list than Walsh + kid picked at 16... but barring Walsh, they would have needed the kid to prevent a future slide more than they would have needed Lovett to put them over the top now.

Hindsight makes the Lovett part stink, but the deals were related. They didn't have to be, but St Kilda decided to take a holistic approach.

so being lateral with tommy walsh (cant be more lateral than a bloke who has never played ) allowed them to be more lateral with 16 AND not even care about 25! ha who needs 25 !!!

seeing we have spent the last 5 years stockpiling young talent?
we are screwde in 5 years. if we win a flag in 2010 i wont give a toss - will keep me happy for 20 years... but im in not doubt we will be whipping boys in 5 years.

[meher baba]

Together we raise the combined IQ of this site by at least three percentage points.

Are we talking in average terms, or in aggregate.........................?

[Milton66]

seeing we have spent the last 5 years stockpiling young talent?
we are screwde in 5 years. if we win a flag in 2010 i wont give a toss - will keep me happy for 20 years... but im in not doubt we will be whipping boys in 5 years.

I think that...

1. we have done a reasonable job of keeping one eye on the future, and one on the current opportunity with this senior core. Or should we be constantly rebuilding forever and a day?

2. You, like the rest of us have no idea as to whom we'll recruit or trade for over the next ferw years. So you prediciton is bogus.

Respectfully.

[Moods]

seeing we have spent the last 5 years stockpiling young talent?
we are screwde in 5 years. if we win a flag in 2010 i wont give a toss - will keep me happy for 20 years... but im in not doubt we will be whipping boys in 5 years.

I think that...

1. we have done a reasonable job of keeping one eye on the future, and one on the current opportunity with this senior core. Or should we be constantly rebuilding forever and a day?

2. You, like the rest of us have no idea as to whom we'll recruit or trade for over the next ferw years. So you prediciton is bogus.

Respectfully.

Despite the fact we disagree re the Lovett trade fiasco (which I reckon we can fairly call it now) I agree that our recruiting in the past 3 years especially has been very good and that whilst we have recruited mature players - they have generally been recruited with minimal risk or loss to our other trades. WE also appear to have recruited some good kids, which won't be known for sure until roughly 2 years time. I will be disappointed if the saints ever become whipping boys again, however a flag will temper that disappointment. I'm not sure that in 5 years time that will be the case though, and I expect through the current recruiting process, AL not withstanding, that we will continue to be a force in the AFL next year and in 5 years time.

Not sure anyone's prediction though can be called bogus until they are proven bogus, regardless of the premise behind them.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

i cant follow this argument from drain. tommy walsh and pick 16 were not related in any shape or form. entirely separate deals. ok we got walsh. good job on that. but surely drain is bound to do the best with pick 16 as well? not to mention 25 for ball that we never got to use...

I believe the comment from Drain is largely that the recruitment of Walsh allowed them to be more lateral with pick 16 rather than pick 16 not having been a significant assett.

i.e. it was considered a priority to get a high-caliber kid with the potential to be a star, where Lovett was considered highly desirable but secondary.

Walsh filled the primary need, allowing them to consider a wider array of options with pick 16 - Drain would have felt that Walsh + Lovett better served the list than Walsh + kid picked at 16... but barring Walsh, they would have needed the kid to prevent a future slide more than they would have needed Lovett to put them over the top now.

Hindsight makes the Lovett part stink, but the deals were related. They didn't have to be, but St Kilda decided to take a holistic approach.

so being lateral with tommy walsh (cant be more lateral than a bloke who has never played ) allowed them to be more lateral with 16 AND not even care about 25! ha who needs 25 !!!

seeing we have spent the last 5 years stockpiling young talent?
we are screwde in 5 years. if we win a flag in 2010 i wont give a toss - will keep me happy for 20 years... but im in not doubt we will be whipping boys in 5 years.

If criticising for making a holistic decision regarding 16 as a result of signing Walsh, I'd suggest that then lumping a speculative return on Luke Ball into the equation is a bit backwards. Given the approach we took to pick 25, I suspect we would have done the same regardless of Walsh.

Me, I didn't think much about 25 until the 16/Lovett combo came to = bupkus. Would have been nice to have been able to pull off the Everitt deal, but I'm still more annoyed at the 29 picks ahead which bent over and allowed Free Agency to effectively occur - and I'm really not that annoyed about that at all (since part of the sum effect is likely that the AFLPA's ill advised quest for Free Agency within a closed financial system remains sidelined for a bit longer).

Sometimes your off-season goes well, sometimes it goes badly, you try to play the odds. While there's no question that the Saints have found themselves on the wrong end of a couple of shockers, and it's certainly easy to disagree with the decisions (i.e. can't say I was nearly as excited about Lovett as some, though I'd managed to convince myself just in time to have him turn into dust), I don't think it's that hard to fathom.

I also really don't think we're screwed in 5 years. There's a short list of irreplaceables who probably retire around then... but while that definately suggests a step backward, it doesn't ensure bottom feeding status.

[stinger]

good post.......gives me something to ponder

[santazzi]

Great read from you B4E.........and you Stinger I hold you fully responsible for getting B4E going again..........!!