Fisher for Bruce Trade

[magnifisaint]

Don't want giles

He's a better ruckman than McEvoy

[Devilhead]

Fisher + 17 for Bruce + Giles

I hope not. We are setting ourselves up for the future and not next year.

We sacrificed Ben for a long terms rebuild. Basically swapping Ben for Giles would be going sideways, and not upwards in the future.

I hope not as well - basically trading McEvoy for Giles and Fisher for Bruce

Bruce is relatively unproven and realistically behind quite a few other backs at GWS - not saying he wont be good though

Whereas Fisher gives GWS much needed experience which would allow their key backs to continue their development and learn the trade without being continually exposed to hammerings every week.

And what about having 3 picks in the 1st round of the draft??

I thought this was one of our priorities??

Would prefer Fisher and our Buddy compo pick (currently 18) for Bruce and their 9 pick

I mean seriously how much talent can these farkers continually stockpile and hope to retain? I know I know sour grapes

Doubt they would go for it but its a tricky trade this one given the age difference of Fisher and Bruce

[Con Gorozidis]

I hope not as well - basically trading McEvoy for Giles and Fisher for Bruce

If we trade McEvoy for Giles + Fisher for Bruce - yes

Then that means..

....We get Savage for free + get pick 18 (up from 22) from thin air!

Im telling ya Pelchen is a genius if he pulls this off.

Im tipping he trades Rhys for pick 14.

We then end up with 3,14,18, Savage, Bruce, Giles.

Genius

[Devilhead]

I hope not as well - basically trading McEvoy for Giles and Fisher for Bruce

If we trade McEvoy for Giles + Fisher for Bruce - yes

Then that means..

....We get Savage for free + get pick 18 (up from 22) from thin air!

Im telling ya Pelchen is a genius if he pulls this off.

Im tipping he trades Rhys for pick 14.

We then end up with 3,14,18, Savage, Bruce, Giles.

Genius

Dont think we necessarily need Giles at that price given his age and that he most likely wont be around during our next tilt

Hickey and Stanley should be given their chances and we can get a back up decent ruck for a lot cheaper.

The reports are Stanley is staying anyway - though pick 14 would place him in the GENIUS FARKIN WIZARD MASTER level

I guess we will have to wait and see!

[Hurricane]

As much as I rate Sam Fisher as a person and a football player I think if we can secure a 10 year key defender by letting him go then that's a win for us.

If we can get another draft pick inside the top 20 as part of that deal then it's an epic win.

If we can somehow manage to snare a promising young ruckman in Giles as well then the pelican is an out and out genius.

BANG BANG

[plugger66]

I hope not as well - basically trading McEvoy for Giles and Fisher for Bruce

If we trade McEvoy for Giles + Fisher for Bruce - yes

Then that means..

....We get Savage for free + get pick 18 (up from 22) from thin air!

Im telling ya Pelchen is a genius if he pulls this off.

Im tipping he trades Rhys for pick 14.

We then end up with 3,14,18, Savage, Bruce, Giles.

Genius

Con we arent getting players for free. Fisher has been AA twice and Bruce hasnt proved a thing yet even though I think he will be good. Giles is an old ruckman and we lose Ben and even though not rated on here by most is rated in the media by most. And Rhys isnt getting pick 14. You really get on your hobby horse abouts thing.

[falka]

Stanley is a keep for me now. As for Gieles, they can have a can of coke and a Mars bar for him

Facts are we do need some ready made ruck support (pierce and Holmes ready) but It has to be cheap back up eg Currie / Stephenson via rookie I reckon.

Be crazy to trade 17 for Gieles effectively, where for sake of our development wouldn't get a game with Hickey and Stanley in the team.

I believeHickey and Stanleyis a brilliant combo for future, if we back them in now.

[Verdun66]

I hope not as well - basically trading McEvoy for Giles and Fisher for Bruce

If we trade McEvoy for Giles + Fisher for Bruce - yes

Then that means..

....We get Savage for free + get pick 18 (up from 22) from thin air!

Im telling ya Pelchen is a genius if he pulls this off.

Im tipping he trades Rhys for pick 14.

We then end up with 3,14,18, Savage, Bruce, Giles.

Genius

Con we arent getting players for free. Fisher has been AA twice and Bruce hasnt proved a thing yet even though I think he will be good. Giles is an old ruckman and we lose Ben and even though not rated on here by most is rated in the media by most. And Rhys isnt getting pick 14. You really get on your hobby horse abouts thing.

Giles is 25, one year older than Ben. Not that old.

[plugger66]

If we trade McEvoy for Giles + Fisher for Bruce - yes

Then that means..

....We get Savage for free + get pick 18 (up from 22) from thin air!

Im telling ya Pelchen is a genius if he pulls this off.

Im tipping he trades Rhys for pick 14.

We then end up with 3,14,18, Savage, Bruce, Giles.

Genius

Con we arent getting players for free. Fisher has been AA twice and Bruce hasnt proved a thing yet even though I think he will be good. Giles is an old ruckman and we lose Ben and even though not rated on here by most is rated in the media by most. And Rhys isnt getting pick 14. You really get on your hobby horse abouts thing.

Giles is 25, one year older than Ben. Not that old.

Yes he isnt much older but I dont see the point of getting rid of Ben because we want Hickey to ruck and then we go out and get a guy similar to ben. Its a waste of time. If we need a back up then get a guy who only plays when Hickey needs a rest or is injured. Giles will want a game every week.

[spert]

I think I've seen too many games over the last couple of seasons, where our losses have been influenced by winning opposition rucks, so probably best for Ben to move on..good luck to him. I am not at all convinced about Stanley being anything other than a useful tall forward. Hickey has talent and will be an important player for us as he develops. Fisher's best is probably behind him- it would be good to retain him, but rebuilding a team to reach the finals and challenge for a flag in the next few years is the most important thing.

[Richter]

What about Fisher, #18 <--------> Bruce, Giles, #36
(GWS surely won't use their 3rd round pick)

Another scenario... the likelihood is that GWS will pick up #11 for Taylor Adams to Collingwood and so will have #1, #9, #11, #21. Surely they'll be looking to package up some players and picks for another top 10 pick? Would we have the cojones to involve #3 in what could become a megatrade?

Fisher, #3 <-------> #9, #11, Bruce, Giles, #37

Would leave us with 4 picks between #9 and #19, #37, #38 as well as a replacement ruckman for Ben, defender for Chips and extra mid in Savage.

[PJ]

Suggestions that we should trade the pick we got for Ben for Giles are just completely brain dead. The whole point is to improve our midfield for 2016 onwards not get someone that is potentially ready now. We need mids like Dumont and I'm pretty sure the Pelch said we need 3 to 4 picks in the top 20.

Hickey and Stanley will be coming into their peak in a few years and that is the preferred combination. Giles....pfft. Get a cheap option in the rookie draft with the potential to upgrade if our 1st option goes down. If not pinch hit with Maister.

[gringo]

No more rucks - use all high picks on mids of quality. History says at least one out of two top 10 draft picks you bring in will be duds. 10 to 20 it goes to about 3 out of 4 being duds. After that it's lotto. Sometimes you arse first round stars like Hawks who got Roughy, Buddy and Lewis in the first round in the same draft but you can also get Scully and Trengrove who both failed to become anything but GOPs. Use them and use them well master Pelican.

[falka]

Christ, Elshaugh drafts them, not Pelchen

[gringo]

Christ, Elshaugh drafts them, not Pelchen

Pelchen was the head of list management and drafting direction or something at the Hawks. Bains and Elshaugh are his foot soldiers at the Saints more than likely but fair point. I believe he is over seeing the direction of the trading and drafting strategy. The way we are going about it looks like a Pelchen job.

[duckduckduckgoose]

Brisbane wanted pick 17 for Longer (and probably would have got it if we didn't trade Ben), so certainly Giles for anything near that is off the mark.

Giles and Bruce for Fisher and 37? (add Ray or someone if required)

[Con Gorozidis]

Brisbane wanted pick 17 for Longer (and probably would have got it if we didn't trade Ben), so certainly Giles for anything near that is off the mark.

Giles and Bruce for Fisher and 37? (add Ray or someone if required)

IF we want Giles (and i dont know why we do - id rather keep rhys) - then I agree fisher + 37 for bruce and giles hopefully gets it done.

then we get 3, 14, 18, 19 (if we did 14 for Rhys).

4 inside top 20 would be amazing.

[ace]

The article states that "Saints are willing to take Delaney through the PSD if necessary" which personally I think is the right move. Fish will get to the Giants in exchange for Bruce and their second rounder. I think we still have another trade up our sleeve that will get the "3 picks in the top 20" that Pelch and co are persuing.

I have heard they didn't want Fisher for Bruce because Fisher is old already so wanted us to flesh it out a bit. I think they will ask for one of our picks and downgrade one to us. I think they like to play tough.

It is time to stop being Mr Nice Guy who gets srewed over by everybody else.
Delaney is out of contract.
If he wants to come to St Kilda, he can come via the Pre Season Draft where we have pick 3 behind GWS and Melbourne.
Screw North Melbourne.

If North want Dal Santo they will have trade someone to upgrade their second round pick.
I remember Collingwood committing their first round pick to get Darren Jolly and then saying "sorry all we have is a compromised second round pick" to offer for Luke Ball.
They chose Jolly but then wanted Ball as well.
The failure of the AFL to enforce the draft tampering rules for fear of restraint of trade claims resulted in St Kilda getting no compensation.

North have already committed their first round draft pick to a father-son pick, now they say "sorry all we have is a second round pick" to give for Dal Santo.
Screw North Melbourne again.
Go get a better draft pick!

[Dr Spaceman]

It is time to stop being Mr Nice Guy who gets srewed over by everybody else.
Delaney is out of contract.
If he wants to come to St Kilda, he can come via the Pre Season Draft where we have pick 3 behind GWS and Melbourne.
Screw North Melbourne.

If North want Dal Santo they will have trade someone to upgrade their second round pick.
I remember Collingwood committing their first round pick to get Darren Jolly and then saying "sorry all we have is a compromised second round pick" to offer for Luke Ball.
They chose Jolly but then wanted Ball as well.
The failure of the AFL to enforce the draft tampering rules for fear of restraint of trade claims resulted in St Kilda getting no compensation.

North have already committed their first round draft pick to a father-son pick, now they say "sorry all we have is a second round pick" to give for Dal Santo.
Screw North Melbourne again.
Go get a better draft pick!

Exactamondo!!!!!

[kosifantutti]

North have already committed their first round draft pick to a father-son pick, now they say "sorry all we have is a second round pick" to give for Dal Santo.
Screw North Melbourne again.
Go get a better draft pick!

Did you think we would get pick 7 for Dal Santo?

[Con Gorozidis]

Chris Pelchen: Hi James, we're still in discussions with GWS on Josh Bruce but are confident that a deal will be done.

[BigMart]

I didn't realise top 20 draft picks were certainties to become AFL guns.... Or even players

Raph Clarke, Andrew McQualter, Fergus Watts, Tom Lynch?

[slider]

I didn't realise top 20 draft picks were certainties to become AFL guns.... Or even players

Raph Clarke, Andrew McQualter, Fergus Watts, Tom Lynch?

I didnt realise you had no idea until i read a few of your posts

[Dis Believer]

I didn't realise top 20 draft picks were certainties to become AFL guns.... Or even players

Raph Clarke, Andrew McQualter, Fergus Watts, Tom Lynch?

They are not, but I think the success rate is significantly higher than for players drafted after pick 40.

Are you deliberately obtuse or unintentionally thick ??

[bergholt]

I didn't realise top 20 draft picks were certainties to become AFL guns.... Or even players

Raph Clarke, Andrew McQualter, Fergus Watts, Tom Lynch?

Tom Lynch finished top 10 in the Crows B&F this year. Plenty of time still for him.

I assume your theory is that because draft picks aren't guaranteed then we should just trade all our picks away for GOPs, because at least they're guaranteed?

If you understood probability then you'd know that the right strategy is to use a few first round picks each year, if possible, and that way you have a better chance of hitting a good or great player. Still not guaranteed but nothing is in this caper.