Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
satchmo wrote:I think that the main issue was that the Hawks were chasing Longer. The Saints obviously considered Longer a better option in the long term, and McEvoy was the carrot the Hawks couldn't resist.
Win/win.
longer wasn't on the table as an option to us at the time...but the hawks were certainly interested in longer...they could have had them both.....maybe aq win /win in the future...too early to call.......pelchen certainly had a conflict of interest afaic......and i'm yet to be convinced we couldn't get more for ben......
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
We're definitely ahead from the last trade/FA period...
In
2 first round draft picks
A highly regarded, top 10 DP ruckmen,
A mature monster handling full back we were desperate for
A young unproven CHB
A mature mid in savage
Out
A second round pick
A good ruckmen with leadership potential, but didn't win many hitouts
An excellent mid who is well past his best
I'm still rapt with this outcome. Each to their own if you don't think we've done well here.
I only watched the last 1/4, Mac certainly didn't do much when the game was on the line I thought. Largely unsighted, one big fumble, and Hale in the centre when they turned it around
dragit wrote:We're definitely ahead from the last trade/FA period...
In
2 first round draft picks
A highly regarded, top 10 DP ruckmen,
A mature monster handling full back we were desperate for
A young unproven CHB
A mature mid in savage
Out
A second round pick
A good ruckmen with leadership potential, but didn't win many hitouts
An excellent mid who is well past his best
I'm still rapt with this outcome. Each to their own if you don't think we've done well here.
i think we could have done better when trading ben........was he ever offered to any other club??????....would anyone have given us better than pick 18.......????....did the pelican just rollover to the hawks......???
i think so......ben was overseas and didn't know about it...the only info he had was that he was being traded to the premiers........
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
White Winmar wrote:Didn't take Cyril because they wouldn't take advice about his "average" psychological profile. Should've taken him, but like most of the others, didn't listen to the advice at the time. Cost us a beauty, although all the others bar Hawthorn were in the same boat.
all the experts at the time were picking him going to us.......as was i ...terrible decision.......like darling a couple of years ago.......
Stinger - you raise an interesting point.
Pelican was fixated with his plan to get 3 picks inside 20 but would Macca and Nds got us Boyd ?
It's possible. Which would have left us with Boyd, Billings + pick 23 - pretty interesting proposition .
All speculative I guess.
On another note - the title to this thread sounds like a great Children's Book.
if you want to make it look bad for us you can (e.g. Savage is dud, Mac gonna be gun etc)
Or positive (well we got Dunstan Acres and you could even imagine if we kept pick 24 we would have got Eli Templetron as we rated him in top 30 in draft, not Hartung as the Port intelligence was he was a dick)
Seriously did people think Mac would become a dud at Hawks overnight? H is a good player.
I'm happy with Hickey and Longer and the aforementioned players.
(Watch this space if Savage plays a blinder or has a s*** one)
Con Gorozidis wrote:Stinger - you raise an interesting point.
Pelican was fixated with his plan to get 3 picks inside 20 but would Macca and Nds got us Boyd ?
It's possible. Which would have left us with Boyd, Billings + pick 23 - pretty interesting proposition .
All speculative I guess.
On another note - the title to this thread sounds like a great Children's Book.
No chance in hell GWS would have given us Boyd for Mac & Dal, they got Mumford for free who is a better ruckmen than McEvoy and they could have also taken Dal for free if they were interested enough.
This thread is completely vacuous, which other club was going to offer us more than 2 first round picks and a decent midfielder for McEvoy?
BigMart wrote:McEvoy will be a huge loss... And great get by the Hawks
Savage is just loose change... But I really hope Acres and Longer work long term
Really? ?
How's Hickey looking on your at TV?
Miles better than Macca will ever be IMO
Not sure how you could say that yet. Hickey is showing promise and thats it at this stage. Like many have said since the trade happened, hopefully both clubs can win out of this. We probably know hawthorn will because of where they are at in the premiership window, we will know if its a win for us in about 2 to 3 years time. It certainly isnt yet but it very well could be.
Con Gorozidis wrote:Stinger - you raise an interesting point.
Pelican was fixated with his plan to get 3 picks inside 20 but would Macca and Nds got us Boyd ?
It's possible. Which would have left us with Boyd, Billings + pick 23 - pretty interesting proposition .
All speculative I guess.
On another note - the title to this thread sounds like a great Children's Book.
No chance in hell GWS would have given us Boyd for Mac & Dal, they got Mumford for free who is a better ruckmen than McEvoy and they could have also taken Dal for free if they were interested enough.
This thread is completely vacuous, which other club was going to offer us more than 2 first round picks and a decent midfielder for McEvoy?
NONE.
Dude, chill out with the logic.
Shame we didn't inquire about Dangerfield when Tom Lynch requested a move to the Crows.
dragit wrote:We're definitely ahead from the last trade/FA period...
In
2 first round draft picks
A highly regarded, top 10 DP ruckmen,
A mature monster handling full back we were desperate for
A young unproven CHB
A mature mid in savage
Out
A second round pick
A good ruckmen with leadership potential, but didn't win many hitouts
An excellent mid who is well past his best
I'm still rapt with this outcome. Each to their own if you don't think we've done well here.
i think we could have done better when trading ben........was he ever offered to any other club??????....would anyone have given us better than pick 18.......????....did the pelican just rollover to the hawks......???
i think so......ben was overseas and didn't know about it...the only info he had was that he was being traded to the premiers........
Pelchen has stated in a public forum that they contacted Ben overseas & that he was agreeable to the trade.
In my opinion it was part of the short term pain/long term gain strategy the club seem to be currently undertaking. McEvoy won't be there when we next challenge for the flag, but the group of young ruckmen & mid fielders we have will all learn & develop their craft together. Stick fat Sainters.
What did GWS have to give up for Mumford?
IIRC it was nowhere near what Hawthorn gave us for Big Ben.
And I rate Mumford today as a much better ruckman than Big Ben is today
