Jayden Laverde

This unofficial St Kilda Saints fan forum is for people of all ages to chat Saints Footy and all posts must be respectful.

Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators

Post Reply
MadSaintFan
Club Player
Posts: 176
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008 6:35pm

Jayden Laverde

Post: # 1515973Post MadSaintFan »

Has anyone seen this kids highlights? (see below)
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-11-10/1 ... en-laverde

To me, he looks like an absolute star - 190cm, strong build, beautiful kick left and right foot, solid mark overhead. He reminds me of Pendlebury/Fyfe in many ways. Personally his highlights look as good, if not more impressive than Petracca's. Understand highlights only show a very small snapshot.

I'm in no position to question the club over trading, given I have no idea of the exact details, however if they were offered picks 4 + 7 for pick 1 as reported, I cant see why they wouldn't accept it unless rated one kid alot higher than the others. I assume that kid is Petracca, however if we could've turned 4 + 7 into Laverde + Wright/Pickett/Lever, I really wouldve taken this.


User avatar
Con Gorozidis
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 23532
Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008 4:04pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 78 times

Re: Jayden Laverde

Post: # 1515983Post Con Gorozidis »

MadSaintFan wrote:Has anyone seen this kids highlights? (see below)
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2014-11-10/1 ... en-laverde

To me, he looks like an absolute star - 190cm, strong build, beautiful kick left and right foot, solid mark overhead. He reminds me of Pendlebury/Fyfe in many ways. Personally his highlights look as good, if not more impressive than Petracca's. Understand highlights only show a very small snapshot.

I'm in no position to question the club over trading, given I have no idea of the exact details, however if they were offered picks 4 + 7 for pick 1 as reported, I cant see why they wouldn't accept it unless rated one kid alot higher than the others. I assume that kid is Petracca, however if we could've turned 4 + 7 into Laverde + Wright/Pickett/Lever, I really wouldve taken this.
I dont disagree. People get all romatic about the number 1. But i think it must have been a very close decision between 4 & 7 v 1. I think according to Tony or Jaxons (i cant remember which) if it was 4&7 v 1 we would have taken it but GWS wanted 21 thrown in .

So it was 1 + 21 v 4 & 7 which we baulked at.


Post Reply