The Hickey trade

[mad saint guy]

Does anyone think it wasn't a mistake?

The trade was: Hickey, pick 26 and pick 47 for pick 13, pick 37 and pick 57.

First of all, we used 47 to get TDL so that upgrade is meaningless, the trade in effect was Hickey and 26 for 13 and 37.


Now I don't think Hickey is a bad player - I think he'll be a handy ruckman in a few years time. But he's not going to form a successful partnership with McEvoy. Both players are suited to being the number one ruck and neither of them can play forward. Hickey is slightly better in the hitouts, McEvoy is a better user of the ball - overall they're about equal. Today we saw that we have an absolutely perfect ruck partner for McEvoy in Rhys Stanley - he's the best tap ruckman of all three and is ideally suited to playing 2-3 quarters in the forward line.

Now pick 26 was used to draft Spencer White, who may well turn out to be a very good player, but he's a long way off yet - can't really make a call. But if we had held onto 13, here area a few guys we could have taken:

Jesse Lonergan - 18 year old mid with an AFL ready body - has played the last four rounds for Gold Coast and is winning plenty of contested footy as well as providing a heap of outside run along with quality ball use

Aidan Corr - 194cm key defender who has played the last five games in the AFL and held his own

Nathan Hrovat - Quick, skilled midfielder who tore us apart on debut


There are 11 kids who have played senior footy who went after pick 37 as well (not including recycled players and rookie promotions), so there was no lack of talent at that stage in the draft either. Right now I'd much prefer to have Jesse Lonergan and Tanner Smith (196cm, 90kg 18 year old key defender) than Hickey and White. We'd have a gun midfielder and a monster full back for the next 12 years. I don't see Hickey, McEvoy and Stanley all being at the club in 4 years time.

[Toy Saint]

And it would be great to see tomorrow's racing results....

...I was delighted with the Hickey trade at the time......and I'm still happy with the trade.....reckon he'll be a +150 game player

[mad saint guy]

And it would be great to see tomorrow's racing results....

...I was delighted with the Hickey trade at the time......and I'm still happy with the trade.....reckon he'll be a +150 game player

Do you think he'll replace McEvoy? Or will we play with one of them on the bench for half of every game?

[joffaboy]

Does anyone think it wasn't a mistake?

Umm No

[CURLY]

Good insurance at the moment and could be used later as trade bait when where in the window again.

[noob]

Strange to recruit 2 ruckman last year (1 being a trade) instead of getting a key position player.
We've got 5 ruckman under 23 in McEvoy, Stanley, Hickey, Lever & Pierce. Seems more in that department then our lack of tall forwards or backs.

[SaintPav]

Does anyone think it wasn't a mistake?

Umm No

A negative to a double negative with rolling eyes. Can't be any more clearer than that.

[Old Mate]

Last year showed how much we needed a back up ruckman when Stanley and McEvoy both went down. We had Blake rucking full games. What I questioned was whether the investment on Hickey was too great...Should we have held onto pick 13 and gone for a back up like Currie who North got for bugger all? Not sure but it's too early to make a call on Hickey IMO. He's still young and requires a lot of development. The scopes there, but there's quite a bit of risk involved.

Lonergan was one kid I had my eye on seeing as though a lot of mock drafts had him around that pick 15 mark. A big lump of a kid who was dominating senior footy in Tassie winning lots of contested ball. Exactly what we needed. It was obvious Gold Coast had their sights set on him when they lost Caddy. He'll be a safe investment for Gold Coast over the journey IMO.

[White Winmar]

I think Hickey will provide value in the medium to long term. Way too early to make a definitive call. I'm more worried about Big Ben's future. He and we, keep getting smashed at the stoppages. Hope this turns in the next couple of years.

[Toy Saint]

And it would be great to see tomorrow's racing results....

...I was delighted with the Hickey trade at the time......and I'm still happy with the trade.....reckon he'll be a +150 game player

Do you think he'll replace McEvoy? Or will we play with one of them on the bench for half of every game?

The way the game is played, we can easily find a place for tall, fast, mobile footballers. Stanley can help in the ruck, and he can probably play as a key back or key forward. McEvoy is quite capable as a ruckman, and is probably improving, and he's very handy a kick behind the play. Hickey is young, agile, looks like a natural ruckman, and may be a decent forward target.

[Old Mate]

From what I've seen so far there's not enough room for all of Stanley, Hickey and McEvoy in the same team. Our balance is way out...Just like playing four small forwards. Stanley is that swingman - Is versatile to play ruck, forward or back. He's an automatic inclusion. Hickey has looked better than Ben at the stoppages over the past fortnight but Ben has him well and truly covered around the ground. Despite the rumours prior to Hickey's arrival, his marking ability is rather poor. Perhaps it's a confidence thing and it will come. I hope so. Personally I'd go Ben and Stanley for balance, playing Stanley forward/ruck...Then bring in Blake to cover as a back man. It can't get any worse in the back half...

[whiskers3614]

From what I've seen so far there's not enough room for all of Stanley, Hickey and McEvoy in the same team. Our balance is way out...Just like playing four small forwards. Stanley is that swingman - Is versatile to play ruck, forward or back. He's an automatic inclusion. Hickey has looked better than Ben at the stoppages over the past fortnight but Ben has him well and truly covered around the ground. Despite the rumours prior to Hickey's arrival, his marking ability is rather poor. Perhaps it's a confidence thing and it will come. I hope so. Personally I'd go Ben and Stanley for balance, playing Stanley forward/ruck...Then bring in Blake to cover as a back man. It can't get any worse in the back half...

Can Ben play as a big backman?

[Toy Saint]

What about we bring in Lee and move Roo to CHB?

[plugger66]

What about we bring in Lee and move Roo to CHB?

Are we trying to kick no goals?

[mad saint guy]

I think Hickey will provide value in the medium to long term. Way too early to make a definitive call. I'm more worried about Big Ben's future. He and we, keep getting smashed at the stoppages. Hope this turns in the next couple of years.

He hasn't played a particularly bad game all year when Hickey hasn't been in the side. These are his games without Hickey

Round 2 v Richmond (Maric and Vickery) - 19 disposals, 6 marks, 1 goal, 26 hitouts
Round 3 v GWS (Giles and Brogan) 18 disposals, 5 marks, 30 hitouts
Round 4 v Essendon (Bellchambers and Hille) 16 disposals, 7 marks, 27 hitouts
Round 5 v Sydney (Pyke and Mumford) 10 disposals, 5 tackles, 27 hitouts
Round 6 v Collingwood (Jolly, Witts and Lynch) 10 disposals, 6 marks, 23 hitouts

Average of 14.6 disposals and 26.6 hitouts. Not bad stats for a number one ruck, particularly against some real quality opposition. However get Hickey into the equation and the two of them just about equal McEvoy's usual stats but with the loss of a midfielder to the side.

I agree that we needed insurance and that a guy like Daniel Currie would have been perfect. Instead we invested a high draft pick that could have got us a gun midfielder or full back.

[Old Mate]

From what I've seen so far there's not enough room for all of Stanley, Hickey and McEvoy in the same team. Our balance is way out...Just like playing four small forwards. Stanley is that swingman - Is versatile to play ruck, forward or back. He's an automatic inclusion. Hickey has looked better than Ben at the stoppages over the past fortnight but Ben has him well and truly covered around the ground. Despite the rumours prior to Hickey's arrival, his marking ability is rather poor. Perhaps it's a confidence thing and it will come. I hope so. Personally I'd go Ben and Stanley for balance, playing Stanley forward/ruck...Then bring in Blake to cover as a back man. It can't get any worse in the back half...

Can Ben play as a big backman?

Big Ben moves about as quick as Big Ben....One on one he wouldn't get within 20 metres of his opponent. Forwards these days are not only a lot taller but also quicker and agile. Stanley is that prototype. Unfortunately Ben is neither a monster like Sandilands nor an agile freak like Nic Nat...I'm not sure if he becomes that gun ruck we are hoping for.....And certainly not that key back.

[mad saint guy]

The way the game is played, we can easily find a place for tall, fast, mobile footballers. Stanley can help in the ruck, and he can probably play as a key back or key forward. McEvoy is quite capable as a ruckman, and is probably improving, and he's very handy a kick behind the play. Hickey is young, agile, looks like a natural ruckman, and may be a decent forward target.

I totally agree that we can find spots for tall fast, mobile footballers. But Hickey isn't fast and he's not much of a footballer. He is totally useless as a forward because he's not a great mark, isn't quick enough to get space on a lead and can't kick to save himself. He's a tap ruckman and that is all.

It's Hickey or McEvoy, not Hickey and McEvoy.

[Sainternist]

No regrets on picking up Hickey. We needed a second ruckman, as simple as that.

Would have been great if we got Josh Caddy as well. With the state our midfield is in these days, that is what I'm feeling most sore about.

[dragit]

Does anyone think it wasn't a mistake?

The trade was: Hickey, pick 26 and pick 47 for pick 13, pick 37 and pick 57.

First of all, we used 47 to get TDL so that upgrade is meaningless, the trade in effect was Hickey and 26 for 13 and 37.

A lot of water to go under the bridge yet…

Maybe if we'd used 47 on Membrey the deal would look a lot better, nothing against the hyphen personally, but he doesn't seem to be what we need at all.

[gringo]

I would still think seriously about letting fish finish his career forward. he can't punch above his weight like he used to. Get someone else in there for him- persist with Ferg whatever. Let the old guy go out with some glory- he can actually lead up mark the ball. we don't have many that can it seems. hickey is developing and around the ground looks ok but gets a bit lost on where to run to it seems. his marking and stuff are good but he seems to be unsure of some of the positional stuff.

[gringo]

I would still think seriously about letting fish finish his career forward. he can't punch above his weight like he used to. Get someone else in there for him- persist with Ferg whatever. Let the old guy go out with some glory- he can actually lead up mark the ball. we don't have many that can it seems. hickey is developing and around the ground looks ok but gets a bit lost on where to run to it seems. his marking and stuff are good but he seems to be unsure of some of the positional stuff.

that would be Fisher without autocorrect.

[cwrcyn]

Hickey is a talented tap ruck man who's played less than 20 games and is 21 years old. How many superstar ruckmen at that age????? Form what I've seen, he has enough going for him to indicate a bright future. In 2015, he'll be physically ready for the full responsibilities of a number one ruck man. Until then, he'll be inconsistent and a bit part player

McEvoy started the season well and to me looks injured, but is battling on with declining form.

Stanley is not a ruckman, but a versatile forward.

[mad saint guy]

Does anyone think it wasn't a mistake?

The trade was: Hickey, pick 26 and pick 47 for pick 13, pick 37 and pick 57.

First of all, we used 47 to get TDL so that upgrade is meaningless, the trade in effect was Hickey and 26 for 13 and 37.

A lot of water to go under the bridge yet…

Maybe if we'd used 47 on Membrey the deal would look a lot better, nothing against the hyphen personally, but he doesn't seem to be what we need at all.

I don't see where TDL could possibly fit into any AFL side. He wasn't able to get a gig at a top side as a finisher and he's not able to get into a bottom side with underperforming small forwards. I think he's an excellent state footballer who had a good past relationship with our coach, which is the only reason why he's still on an AFL list.

[mad saint guy]

Hickey is a talented tap ruck man who's played less than 20 games and is 21 years old. How many superstar ruckmen at that age????? Form what I've seen, he has enough going for him to indicate a bright future. In 2015, he'll be physically ready for the full responsibilities of a number one ruck man. Until then, he'll be inconsistent and a bit part player

McEvoy started the season well and to me looks injured, but is battling on with declining form.

Stanley is not a ruckman, but a versatile forward.

I agree on Hickey, he looks like he'll be a quality tap ruckman when he's in his mid-20s. McEvoy started the season well without Hickey in the team, and his declining form has coincided with Hickey's inclusion. If any of our senior players were legitimately injured they wouldn't be playing - we have nothing to play for except development. Between Hickey, Stanley, Kosi and Blake we could cover Ben if he needed a spell. His game just isn't suited to having a second specialist ruckman in the side.

[Toy Saint]

What about we bring in Lee and move Roo to CHB?

Are we trying to kick no goals?

Our finals chances are shot, so why not experiment?

Lee was recurited as a Full Forward.

And we seriously need a key backman. From memory Roo won the Rising Star award at CHB. He would give great drive from the backline.

If it fails and we can't kick goals, we will lose games and get an early draft pick......tanking..?

What's to lose, we've already droped points against the Dogs & the Suns.....we could even lose against the Deamons