Welcome to the St Kilda FC Tom Hickey

[Dr Spaceman]

If we truly are in a rebuilding phase then there's plenty of time to pick up 17-18 year olds.

For the moment this is a chance to make up for recent Draft failures by picking up a couple of 21 year olds. Helps fill a few gaps.

Those List Management people know what they're doing. We like to think we know.

[Con Gorozidis]

gee whiz- hed want to be a gun.
what does it say about macca?
we use 12 on macca and a few years later chuck 13 at hickey.
I am NEVER comfortable spending a high pick on a ruckman. risky with a capital R

[st.dave]

Heard the strength in this years draft was its depth. Some very good kids in the top 10 or so and then a drop in talent till about pick 25 or so...
There were strong rumours GWS even offered picks 12 and 13 (before compensation) to the Tigers for their pick 9 and they knocked it back.

Given this, our recruiters may have looked at it like our picks 12 and 13 were outside the top tier of picks and backed themselves to still get good picks with 25 and 26 before the next drop in talent. So maybe it's better to think of it as if instead of getting 2 picks in this second tier of talent range we have 4. Not so bad if you look at it like that!

Also a plus that these two talls have already had a couple of extra years to develop.

Welcome to the team fellas!

[ace]

The loss of Goddard and recepit of a compensation pick has caused all but St Kilda draft picks to slip one place more than they would if he had stayed.
So we really started with Goddard and picks 12, 36, 56, 76, 94, 112, 130.

Now we have lost Goddard and picks 12, 36, 56, 76, 94, 112, 130
and gained Tom Lee, Tom Hickey, and picks 25, 26, 47, 48, 77, 95, 113, 131

But if you assume that picks 25, 26, 47, 48 would be used in the draft and maybe then 77 on a mature age player then the equation becomes
Goddard + pick 12 + pick 36 + pick 56 = Lee + Hickey + pick 25 + pick 26 + pick 47 + pick 48

[magnifisaint]

gee whiz- hed want to be a gun.
what does it say about macca?
we use 12 on macca and a few years later chuck 13 at hickey.
I am NEVER comfortable spending a high pick on a ruckman. risky with a capital R

Mate, the reward is proportional to the risk.

No risk, no reward. You're never gonna compound your money leaving it in the bank.

Plenty of high draft picks have amounted to nothing more than a brass razoo

[ace]

Now that we no longer have pick 13 available maybe West Coast will take a look at Cripps.
They don't seem to have been interested in a trade that included Cripps.
A case of Cripps wanting to go to West coast more than West Coast wanting Cripps.

They were keen on our pick 13 and more for Mitchell Brown, now that we don't have that pick they will have to come to reason.
If not we can always try to get Ben Jacobs before he goes to North Melbourne, maybe by a three way deal with Cripps going to Fremantle.

[ace]

gee whiz- hed want to be a gun.
what does it say about macca?
we use 12 on macca and a few years later chuck 13 at hickey.
I am NEVER comfortable spending a high pick on a ruckman. risky with a capital R

It says that Macca can't ruck, can't run, can't jump but he can take marks.
When the ball is bounced or thrown in, he can only wrestle.
And that is to be outlawed next year.
It also says that the club is very good at squandering first round draft picks if used in the national draft.
This way they have a better knowledge of the calibre of player received.

[evo]

Cox, Jolly and Macca are going to be compromised by the ruck rule changes. They are tailor made for athletic rucks who can leap. Looks good for NicNat and Hickey..

[saint3d]

Got to say out of our first round picks over the last decade or so only roo and armo have really been worthy.

That Goddard kid could play a bit.


Seemingly a lot of people haven't considered that fact that our current recruiters have demonstrated considerable success so far, at St Kilda and elsewhere.

There's not a lot of sense in claiming they don't know what they're doing. The available evidence suggests otherwise.

There's even less sense in judging them with past recruiters, i.e. 'our poor track record at the draft/trade table'.

And less sense still in suggesting the current recruiters base their strategy on simply avoiding the mistakes of past recruiters.

My money is on them continuing to be competent in their roles.


This is how I've observed proceedings.

- They picked up Tom Lee on the first day of the trading period. The first day of a three week trading period. That can only mean they really rate him. There's mention of Carlton possibly grabbing him with pick 11 in the draft, so for pick 12 we get him and a couple of extra picks? One of which is the first pick in round two? Sold. This kid could win the Coleman if things go well.

- An interminable wait for pick 13.

- Two days after getting pick 13, they've snared another target. I can only imagine the two days was spent exploring every option. A couple have said Hickey is better than any ruck prospects in the draft. With a couple of pick upgrades as well? So now we have the first two picks in round two? Sold.

- One target left. I'd love to hear about it tomorrow but I'll be happy enough to hear it any time until about 1:30pm on Friday. From which time I will start to get anxious as I reload sites constantly.


To my mind, if Brown has turned red white and black by the end of the week, St Kilda's recruiters have managed to get exactly what they wanted from the trade period. I am firmly of the belief that that is a good thing.

I suspect those at the club are not as pessimistic as some on this forum. St Kilda missed the top four by only a handful of goals last season. It's not unreasonable to think that a ruck, a full back, and a full forward that actually kicks goals might have made the difference in a few close games.

Sure, the older players aren't getting younger, but that doesn't mean they aren't contributing. Replacing them is the concern, but they're all still around for next year. If they manage to fill the gaps, you won't be able to convince me that the Saints aren't in with a shot. Not until next year, at least, but I'll believe what I see.

Regardless, the evidence I've seen so far suggests the recruiters are doing their jobs effectively.

[The Jeff]

One question, would these two guys have been picked up for 12 and 13, or even earlier.

RE Hickey:

Emma Quayle who is one of the most respected spotters of junior talent in the land, who wrote "The Draft: inside the AFL's search for talent" and has won numerous media awards in regards to her draft articles and knowledge has stated that Hickey would be the first big-guy taken in this years draft. She also said that Hickey is better or at least on par with Brodie Grundy (likely top 3 pick) and a better investment than Josh Caddy (Gee gave up more for his services). I think most fans upset with this trade are biased because Hickey is 21 with 2 years development (which is a benefit) and not an 18-19 year old from this years draft.

RE Lee:

TAC Cup Future Stars lead by Kevin Sheehan, the most highly respected talent scout in the land, has Lee as the 11th selection in the 2012 Mock Draft - Ahead of other key forward prospects such as Jake Stringer and Mason Shaw.

Of course there are plenty of contradicting opinions out there however it's good to know that two of the most respected opinions in this field suggest that we have done very well with both trades.

Quayle / Sheehan > timid and old fashioned SS posters IMO.

We have approached this trade period with a clear agenda and are positioning ourselves to be able to execute. I think we will only be able to judge our performance during the Trade period COB Friday. We'll need to look at the sum of our ins/outs. It is also important to note that our key needs are KPPs and a Ruckman. Both positions do come with an inflated price compared to run-of-the-mill midfielders and flankers. At this stage, I'm pleased and can see where they're heading.

[evo]

Got to say out of our first round picks over the last decade or so only roo and armo have really been worthy.

That Goddard kid could play a bit.


Seemingly a lot of people haven't considered that fact that our current recruiters have demonstrated considerable success so far, at St Kilda and elsewhere.

There's not a lot of sense in claiming they don't know what they're doing. The available evidence suggests otherwise.

There's even less sense in judging them with past recruiters, i.e. 'our poor track record at the draft/trade table'.

And less sense still in suggesting the current recruiters base their strategy on simply avoiding the mistakes of past recruiters.

My money is on them continuing to be competent in their roles.


This is how I've observed proceedings.

- They picked up Tom Lee on the first day of the trading period. The first day of a three week trading period. That can only mean they really rate him. There's mention of Carlton possibly grabbing him with pick 11 in the draft, so for pick 12 we get him and a couple of extra picks? One of which is the first pick in round two? Sold. This kid could win the Coleman if things go well.

- An interminable wait for pick 13.

- Two days after getting pick 13, they've snared another target. I can only imagine the two days was spent exploring every option. A couple have said Hickey is better than any ruck prospects in the draft. With a couple of pick upgrades as well? So now we have the first two picks in round two? Sold.

- One target left. I'd love to hear about it tomorrow but I'll be happy enough to hear it any time until about 1:30pm on Friday. From which time I will start to get anxious as I reload sites constantly.


To my mind, if Brown has turned red white and black by the end of the week, St Kilda's recruiters have managed to get exactly what they wanted from the trade period. I am firmly of the belief that that is a good thing.

I suspect those at the club are not as pessimistic as some on this forum. St Kilda missed the top four by only a handful of goals last season. It's not unreasonable to think that a ruck, a full back, and a full forward that actually kicks goals might have made the difference in a few close games.

Sure, the older players aren't getting younger, but that doesn't mean they aren't contributing. Replacing them is the concern, but they're all still around for next year. If they manage to fill the gaps, you won't be able to convince me that the Saints aren't in with a shot. Not until next year, at least, but I'll believe what I see.

Regardless, the evidence I've seen so far suggests the recruiters are doing their jobs effectively.

Could not have put it better myself. I am really looking forward now to next season.

[SMS]

another stanley agility and speed wise! if the two of them can go well look out!!!

[plugger66]

Well debated thread, my take, 13 seems like overs but if he plays 100 games its probably better than average? I'm not a 2 genuine ruck men in my best side type of a guy but its working for WC, Sydney and at times Essendon and Carlton plus I'm not a coach! Goddard is a massive loss and an elite player but after 10 years he left, glad we got compensation at all as I'm not sure if offering compensation is really in the spirit of free agency at all! HOpe we recruit a FB and have at least 3 kids come into the system some how!

If he plays 100 games it is a fail unless they are very good games and injury wrecks his career. The reason I say this is pick 13 may have got a 5 gamer a 100 gamer or a 300 game champion. You need champions to improve. GOPS dont do a thin especially when you are on your way down. I said it earlier. If it comes off then it will help us move up the ladder earlier than expected. If he is a gop it wont help us at all and will set us back a year or two. Its a punt that hopefully comes off.

[matrix]

well i aint going to read the last nine pages of prob plugger arguing with bigmart

but seriously?
we gave up pick 13????
to get back something in the late 20's
not a bad deal
if the kid is any good
cant even remember seeing him play

mehh

[matrix]

good ordinary players nearly won us a flag numpty...twice

[CURLY]

Have to laugh at people thinking its a massive risk to use pick 13 on a 21 year old ruck. Would those same people have been wrapt if we picked the best 18 year old ruckman in the draft with 13?

With McEvoy, Hickey and Stanley we have set our ruck division up for ten years.

[bergholt]

Have to laugh at people thinking its a massive risk to use pick 13 on a 21 year old ruck. Would those same people have been wrapt if we picked the best 18 year old ruckman in the draft with 13?

Fair point.

[Quixote]

I've died and gone to new whipping boy heaven.

[AP Erebus]

At first glance it seems a high price but then I think of how much we have struggled without a second ruckman. Kosi and Joe Blake try but it's not the same as having a second high-class ruckman.

The kids only 21 so it's not like we've given up pick 13 for a 25 year old, he's got plenty of time to grow and become an excellent part of a dominant ruck duo with Big Mac.

Now if we can just land Mitch Brown then I'll be very happy (knowing that's almost impossible at this stage).

[MC Gusto]

started playing footy late. massive upside. both pendles and tippet played b-ball and only converted to footy at 17.

he comes from good sporting blood lines...a thoroughbred in the making

[matrix]

can remember speaking to reece carter when he played for the 36ers, said he knew pendles as a kid and the guy was just talented at most sport, didnt really take footy seriously till later on but said he was a great basketballer.

hopefully this turns out the same

[philtee]

saint3d...many thanks for a measured well-thunk positive argument.
Are you sure you're on the right forum?

[Legendary]

One question, would these two guys have been picked up for 12 and 13, or even earlier.

RE Hickey:

Emma Quayle who is one of the most respected spotters of junior talent in the land, who wrote "The Draft: inside the AFL's search for talent" and has won numerous media awards in regards to her draft articles and knowledge has stated that Hickey would be the first big-guy taken in this years draft. She also said that Hickey is better or at least on par with Brodie Grundy (likely top 3 pick) and a better investment than Josh Caddy (Gee gave up more for his services). I think most fans upset with this trade are biased because Hickey is 21 with 2 years development (which is a benefit) and not an 18-19 year old from this years draft.

RE Lee:

TAC Cup Future Stars lead by Kevin Sheehan, the most highly respected talent scout in the land, has Lee as the 11th selection in the 2012 Mock Draft - Ahead of other key forward prospects such as Jake Stringer and Mason Shaw.

Of course there are plenty of contradicting opinions out there however it's good to know that two of the most respected opinions in this field suggest that we have done very well with both trades.

Let's maybe listen to Quayle and Sheehan?!?

People who actually know what they are talking about?

[joffaboy]

Let's maybe listen to Quayle and Sheehan?!?

People who actually know what they are talking about?

Speaking of, where is our resident expert on all things draft BigMart?

Surely he will be fearless in his predictions as he is always is in foresight?

Maybe he is a bit coy as both Lee and Hickey had pictures on them on the AFL website

[Wrote for Luck]

In context the Hickey trade seems fair enough.

Pick 12 for Lee.... Far out he must be good.

Massive overs IMO.

We get two pick in the top fifteen and we trade them like this? It just doesn't sit right.

Just my opinion and what do I know......

I can say this much....I will be on their backs like a true internet hero all year.

tend to agree