BigMart wrote:Joffaboy
Why not ask some Hawthorn supporters if they are happy with the trade? Or any NEUTRAL supporter that is...
In there mind, they traded a second round pick for a 100 game Ruckman who was a top 10 pick? They lost 5 places on another pick and still got the player they were going to select in Billy Hartung... Who they see as a successor to Mitchell who is 31yo
And sweetened the deal by getting rid of a player not in their best 22
They were certainties to get Longer, but baulked on him... Believing he is not ready to take the #1 mantle at 20 and they wanted a Ruckman ready to go straight away. They are rapt with McEvoy.
It WAS also a win for us.... As soon as we got LONGER. there was a gap between both trades.
Basically we lost a high FRP in the draft for a second rounder.... A net loss
But then gained a FRP in the draft for a second rounder.... A net Gain
We drafted extremely well in getting Dunstan.... But we did not know we were going to get him at trade time. We knew we got pick 18 which bears no guarantees, only potential
There is always TWO sides to every draft story.
On Tom... Is tracking OK. At the end of the year... We'll reassess his performance.
If he is better performed than Ben, I'd be surprised, if he's better performed than Billy, again I'll be surprised
That's my opinion... I'm entitled to it? A couple of goals and good games doesn't make a player. Cain Ackland was excellent early 2005.
Round 1 Spencer statistically out performed him
2 Mumford did the same and was listed GWS best
3 Cox was named WCE best player
Go figure
Dont know what you are on about. Never said it was a bad deal for Hawthorn.
You were the one who said it was a bad deal for the Saints and other clubs were laughing at us.
Which clubs were laughing at the trade BigMart???
And I will assess Tom Hickeys performance when I like, maybe at year end, maybe in two years. All I know is that he has ability and is developing well.
Lies damn lies and statistics. Hickey was given in the top two on the ground by numerous experts and clearly outpointed Mumford. Only you cant see it and only you want to belittle and downplay any of Hickeys performances for some perverse reason, probably because you bagged the crap out of him.
As you say we did no know what we would get with 18 and 19, but still it was ludicrious to say other clubs were laughing at us when the deal had not even come to fruition, absolutely farcicial.
And yes we traded very well, but to trade well you need to have the picks. To get picks you need to trade players with currency.
Considering Mac had currency, we needed top picks, and we had a developing ruckman in Hickey, and then picked up a 20 y.o. in the trade period in Longer, it was a very canny strategic trade.
It will be in all probability win/win. they get a very good ruckman in Mac, we have already seen Dunstan, and we hear very good things about Acres, Savage is a capable player.
On top of this Hickey is getting better and played better against Natinui and Cox than Macevoy ever did for the Saints.
Look we know you made some very premature and silly calls. Calling Hickey a gumby, getting a bit hysterical saying clubs were lauging at us about the MacEvoy trade, the fact that the Cripps goals and assists were the difference between the teams on Saturday even though you continuie to tell us that Cripps is no good.
i am seriously getting a bit concerned with you being in such denial. Its OK BM, you are allowed to be completely and utterly wrong. Even moreso, you can actually support the Saints instead of the constant critisism, especially when everyone can see how far off the mark you are on these things.
