dal was a huge loss

[Bunk_Moreland]

[fair comment..

...i hate winning wooden spoons......and saw first hand dal turn roos losers into roos winners...and wished it was us he was turning around.....can't put a money value on that...

Yes I agree, the only tiny solace from coming last (cant even bring myself to refer to it as a wooden spoon) is the leverage in the ND, PSD, and Rookie Draft.

Apart from that it was a terrible, terrible year.

And we will have another similar year next season

[Con Gorozidis]

[fair comment..

...i hate winning wooden spoons......and saw first hand dal turn roos losers into roos winners...and wished it was us he was turning around.....can't put a money value on that...

Oh dear.

[dragit]

Do you have a spare teddy Con?

[stinger]

Do you have a spare teddy Con?

i'm sure both of you would have one or two to spare....

[bergholt]

we got sfa for plugger and he probably would have made the difference in 97...

SFA? We got Joel Smith and Aussie Jones with those picks. Decent players, though obviously it's impossible to replace one of the greatest of all time.

[stinger]

we got sfa for plugger and he probably would have made the difference in 97...

SFA? We got Joel Smith and Aussie Jones with those picks. Decent players, though obviously it's impossible to replace one of the greatest of all time.

that's part of the myth purpetuated by journos like mike sheahen....yep we got joel smith..he was one of the players...the others wee basically all crap.....one of them, hemley played one game for us with no stats......nugent, kitchen and robbie neill were the others......hardly proper compensation for the greatest full forward of all time..smith never played again for us after 97.......aussie was our pick anyway......helps to get your facts right if you want o contradict me....

[Enrico_Misso]

Deal was "WIN - WIN"

[dragit]

trading has never been our strong point.....

So basically, you are moaning about trading a player who we only got via a trade, saying that we never get trades right… yeah?

Solid.

[bergholt]

that's part of the myth purpetuated by journos like mike sheahen....yep we got joel smith..he was one of the players...the others wee basically all crap.....one of them, hemley played one game for us with no stats......nugent, kitchen and robbie neill were the others......hardly proper compensation for the greatest full forward of all time..smith never played again for us after 97.......aussie was our pick anyway......helps to get your facts right if you want o contradict me....

Gee sting, you're a fighter aren't you? Just a little disagreement and you come out swinging!

I don't know why I'm bothering to argue because you've never admitted fault in your life, but let's do it anyway. Unfortunately in this case, you're wrong. Here's the trade:

https://www.draftguru.com.au/years/1994#trade-period

It's pretty obvious when you look at the draft order. Pick 48 comes right after Essendon, Richmond and Collingwood in the draft order. Look at the ladder - that would have been and was Hawthorn's pick.

Hawthorn jumped into the trade so they could end up with Simon Minton-Connell. So it wasn't our pick to start with, it was theirs.

I'm not sure why you think that's not the case?

[Con Gorozidis]

I dont want to put words in stingers mouth but based on his comments I am fairly certain his philosophy his 'we havent had much success with trading or drafting recently so lets just stick with the same squad that almost got us success in 09/10 and hope they can turn it around and have a resurgence.'

Comical stuff.

Where is the Deloran or Benjamin Button when you need them. I bet you liked that film Sting

[stinger]

Deal was "WIN - WIN"

what deal was win win.?????hope you are not referring to the plugger trade...there was only one winner there...

[stinger]

that's part of the myth purpetuated by journos like mike sheahen....yep we got joel smith..he was one of the players...the others wee basically all crap.....one of them, hemley played one game for us with no stats......nugent, kitchen and robbie neill were the others......hardly proper compensation for the greatest full forward of all time..smith never played again for us after 97.......aussie was our pick anyway......helps to get your facts right if you want o contradict me....

Gee sting, you're a fighter aren't you? Just a little disagreement and you come out swinging!

I don't know why I'm bothering to argue because you've never admitted fault in your life, but let's do it anyway. Unfortunately in this case, you're wrong. Here's the trade:

https://www.draftguru.com.au/years/1994#trade-period

It's pretty obvious when you look at the draft order. Pick 48 comes right after Essendon, Richmond and Collingwood in the draft order. Look at the ladder - that would have been and was Hawthorn's pick.

Hawthorn jumped into the trade so they could end up with Simon Minton-Connell. So it wasn't our pick to start with, it was theirs.

I'm not sure why you think that's not the case?

48 was always our pick...nowhere in the official afl records that i have in front of me does it say hawthorn traded pick 48 to us......


your quoted source is simply wrong...

[dragit]

Look out when stinger opens up his book…

Not sure why we are talking about Lockett, no amount of picks could compensate losing that bloke. Trading 20 years ago was pretty ordinary all round.

The fact is we got Dal originally from trading out a good player, and we let him go at 30 years of age for another decent pick… but keep sooking if it gets you through the re-build.

[stinger]

Look out when stinger opens up his book…

Not sure why we are talking about Lockett, no amount of picks could compensate losing that bloke. Trading 20 years ago was pretty ordinary all round.

The fact is we got Dal originally from trading out a good player, and we let him go at 30 years of age for another decent pick… but keep sooking if it gets you through the re-build.

why the need for "keep sooking" comnent


hall would probably have won us a flag...dal didn't...end of what i was trying to say...

[dragit]

why the need for "keep sooking" comnent

Maybe because you are coming across as a massive sook?

what a flowering joke....

no long term gain imho...longer will be gone before dal quits the roos...

doesn't matter to me how anyone tries to justify the clubs shitty actions in selling off our stars for peanuts....

pelican has poo fior brains afaic...

him and his spreadsheets...ffs....

something you can't flowering show on the spreadsheet...

i wouldn't rip the heart and soul out of the club and trade /give away our stars for chook poo....and a used condom....

sure we got dal for hall...but hall could have won us a premiership ...dal didn't...

all the pelican has won for us so far is another wooden spoon....unforgivable .....

hall would probably have won us a flag...dal didn't...end of what i was trying to say...

So basically you are suggesting that we never should have traded Hall (who asked to be traded) and then we wouldn't have got Dal Santo at all?

You are complaining about losing a guy that never would have got to the club if you had your way?

The logic here hurts…

[Con Gorozidis]

Based on Stinger's logic we would send out the same side week in week out for eternity and it would be:

B: Rodger Head, Bob Murray, Brian Sierakowski.

HB: Verdun Howell, Ian Synman, John Bingley.

C: Jeff Moran, Ian Stewart, Jim Read.

HF: Ian Cooper, Darrel Baldock (c), Barry Breen.

F: Allan Morrow, Kevin Neale, Allan Davis.

FOLL: Brian Mynott, Daryl Griffiths, Ross Smith.

RESERVES: Travis Payze, Kevin Billing.

[stinger]

Based on Stinger's logic we would send out the same side week in week out for eternity and it would be:

B: Rodger Head, Bob Murray, Brian Sierakowski.

HB: Verdun Howell, Ian Synman, John Bingley.

C: Jeff Moran, Ian Stewart, Jim Read.

HF: Ian Cooper, Darrel Baldock (c), Barry Breen.

F: Allan Morrow, Kevin Neale, Allan Davis.

FOLL: Brian Mynott, Daryl Griffiths, Ross Smith.

RESERVES: Travis Payze, Kevin Billing.

f****** good side

[stinger]

duplicated post..

[gringo]

The reality is we dumped nearly everyone but Harves and Peckett by the time Tim watson and Blight had had their way with our list. We rebuilt as a unit and it saw sustained finals appearances. Hawks did the same keeping Crawford and a couple of others. It is taking a hard hit now for a cruise later. We don't have flexible salary caps like Sydney and Collingwood so this is a good way to rebuild. Pelchen won't have any know quantity to present until the bulk of his list is in their mid 20s so you will have to be patient to see how bad or good he is at his job.

[bergholt]

48 was always our pick...nowhere in the official afl records that i have in front of me does it say hawthorn traded pick 48 to us......

your quoted source is simply wrong...

The "official" AFL records have been wrong before and will be wrong again. Those yearbooks are put together by the AFL media people, they're not known for their accuracy.

Let's try using some logic. In every round of the draft the picks are allocated in reverse finishing order. That order in 94 was Essendon and Richmond outside the 8, then Collingwood and Hawthorn out in the first round of the finals. So here's how the picks were allocated and what happened to them:

Round 1:
pick 10 Essendon
pick 11 Richmond
pick 12 Collingwood (traded to West Coast for Lee Walker)
pick 13 Hawthorn (traded to St Kilda for Simon Minton-Connell)

Round 2:
pick 28 Essendon
pick 29 Richmond
pick 30 Collingwood
pick 31 Hawthorn (traded to Adelaide for Randall Bone)

Round 3:
pick 45 Essendon
pick 46 Richmond
pick 47 Collingwood
pick 48 Hawthorn (traded to St Kilda for Simon Minton-Connell)

Round 4:
pick 62 Essendon
pick 63 Richmond
pick 64 Collingwood
pick 65 Hawthorn


Pretty obvious. Pick 48, just like picks 12, 13 and 31, was traded to the team that finally used it. If that's not the case, can you explain why pick 48 was allocated to St Kilda rather than to Hawthorn, as ladder position would have suggested?

[dragit]

Let's try using some logic.

You'll have to stop right there.

[SainterK]

Dal?

I've moved onto to Del.

Go saints!

[matrix]

I've got a headache....

[kosifantutti]

When we lost Barry Hall pick 13 turned into Dal, hopefully the pick that keeps giving eg Longer will develop into a huge reliable Ruck who will attract another high draft pick or become our main man so we can trade out Hickey for a high pick. Otherwise Pierce and Holmes become guns and one of them become trade bait. Either way the two new franchises might need rucks once their mids develop and want to swap their fourth best mid for one. I would say there is some kind of logical unemotional strategy behind it. There is currently four potential high level rucks on our list. In the past we have struggled to get one.

Don't forget we got the Barry Hall pick by sending Craig Devonport to Carlton where he played a total of one game. Maybe we should have held on to Devonport.

[SainterK]

I've got a headache....

I'm hungry...