Radical Trade Option

[Sanctorum]

I know this suggestion will attract a lot of critical feedback, but hey, we need to consider all possible options in order to improve our list, and this includes thinking outside the square so to speak....

My proposal is to trade Jack Stevens....

The reasons are straight-forward - of all of the midfielders in the St Kilda line-up, Jack Stevens is by far the most wasteful in terms of disposal, not unlike Clint Jones. When he gets the ball, and sure he gets plenty of them, he makes far too many skill errors and there were at least 2 instances in the last game against Geelong where his poor decision making resulted in turnovers that cost us goals. If the Saints are going to continue to improve and be in contention in the next couple of years, they can't afford to do that.

At the start of season 2016 Stevens will be 26 and arguably will be close to his peak in terms of fitness and skills. His currency on the trade table will be as high as it will ever get. In the meantime, St Kilda have a very good crop of young up and coming midfielders who have greater talent than Stevens - Armitage, Billings, Lonie, Sinclair, Ross, Minchington, Templeton, all possessing better disposal skills.

OK, so the club has signed him up to a 5 year contract, but we all know that is never an impediment to player transfers.

Now, I would like more talented observers than me to look at the possibilities of a likely trade for Stevens....taking into account improvements to our list and the clubs that are short of onballers.

[plugger66]

Got to be taking the piss. Don't even know his name and comparing him to CJ just shows a real lack of knowledge. You never trade away your best player when building. Even if we got pick on for him the chances of getting someone as good as Jack are probably lower than 50%. It doesn't improve your list but it certainly makes it weaker.

[Toy Saint]

I'm pretty sure his name is Steven without the 's'.

Saints desperately need quality mids, it would be good to have at least 5 or 6 of them. As it is, I reckon we need to get or develop another 3 or 4 quality mids.

I consider Jack a quality mid, so if you trade him you will need to get an extra mid.

In my world, everything is for sale, but if you trade Jack I'd want serious 'overs', like we lose Jack but in return we get 2 really good players.

[Goose is king]

Well I'll make up a trade then.
Steven (who we want to keep and he wants to stay) and pick 6 for
Bennel (who may want to leave and who they may want to move on) and pick 3
That deal goes our way. Would you take it

[Toy Saint]

Well I'll make up a trade then.
Steven (who we want to keep and he wants to stay) and pick 6 for
Bennel (who may want to leave and who they may want to move on) and pick 3
That deal goes our way. Would you take it

You've got me thinking....not sure GC would go for it though......

[#gosaintas]

Well I'll make up a trade then.
Steven (who we want to keep and he wants to stay) and pick 6 for
Bennel (who may want to leave and who they may want to move on) and pick 3
That deal goes our way. Would you take it

do that deal
Stevens is such a poor kick

[#gosaintas]

We could give them geary too

[Die Hard 7]

Not a chance unless a club payed MASSIVE overs eg O'Meara + Bennell + 3 + 21 for Steven + 6 +24
Would highly doubt it happening

[plugger66]

We could give them geary too

What a supporter you are.

[#gosaintas]

We could give them geary too

What a supporter you are.

We need players that can kick. Geary can't.

[plugger66]

We could give them geary too

What a supporter you are.

We need players that can kick. Geary can't.

LJ Conners was a very nice kick. Tom Lee kicks very well.

[#gosaintas]

Lee will be playing seniors for us next year. By the end of next season, Geary won't. We should trade him.

[plugger66]

Lee will be playing seniors for us next year. By the end of next season, Geary won't. We should trade him.

Well form and logic says both those predictions could easily be wrong. Murdoch is also a nice kick. Brent Cowell kicked the ball very well.

[skeptic]

I'm not against trading most anyone but the deal has to be mostly in our favour.

IMO Jack is another one that is more ideally suited to midfielder #4 or #5 rather than #1 or #2

The lack of quality in our midfield tends to make his flaws stand out.

Personally, i think before you can make a call, we need more mids

[Goose is king]

[quote="skeptic"]I'm not against trading most anyone but the deal has to be mostly in our favour.

IMO Jack is another one that is more ideally suited to midfielder #4 or #5 rather than #1 or #2

The lack of quality in our midfield tends to make his flaws stand out.

Personally, i think before you can make a call, we need more mids[/quote]



But if a deal included a midfield gun like Bennel then it isn't necessarily a backwards move for the midfield

[WellardSaint]

interesting...I remember watching Harves when I lived in Melbourne.
In all of our games where we got towelled up, he was getting huge numbers, but half of his kicks went over a team-mate's head, or to an opponent.
I remember a game against Carlscum at Arctic Park; we lost by at least 10 goals. Harves got 38 kicks or something. At least half were wasted and did not go to advantage; it was incredibly depressing.

If your possessions go to an opponent, it's effectively an extra player for them. Numbers don't mean much unless you look at context.
Our guys are running off their men, expecting our team to retain possession, but then Jackie kicks straight into the arms of Cotchin, Jordan Lewis, or Nat Fyfe. Goal to the enemy guaranteed in each case.
Say 20 kicks and 18 handballs; and of the 20 kicks, only 7 are any good, the rest are turnovers.
I would rather have someone who can get 25 touches at 80%, than Jackie getting 35 at 40%.
Ask yourself how we can get stitched up in games when Jackie and Armo collect 60 touches between them.

Jack Steven (NO "S") is wasteful and if he hasn't learnt to deliver by now, he never will.

[dragit]

I remember watching Harves… half of his kicks went over a team-mate's head, or to an opponent.

I think you have dementia, cause this is a ridiculous thing to suggest.

[Bunk_Moreland]

I think the OP was too soft. We need to trade Billings, Armo, Sinclair, Lonie, Goddard and McCartin.

Haven't won a flag with this group so time to completely rebuild.

Yup you know its the truth

[Bunk_Moreland]

I remember watching Harves… half of his kicks went over a team-mate's head, or to an opponent.

I think you have dementia, cause this is a ridiculous thing to suggest.

Harvs was not the greatest kick in the League but the best at the time was Leon Cameron and I doubt anyone would ahve swapped Harvs for Cameron

[WellardSaint]

I remember watching Harves… half of his kicks went over a team-mate's head, or to an opponent.

I think you have dementia, cause this is a ridiculous thing to suggest.

I was sitting on the wing for that Carlton game, and one in particular, Loewe was 30 metres up from Harves, and 10 m in front of his opponent. Ball went 40m to Loewe's opponent.
That sort of thing happened 6 times out of 10.
You are deluded and biased. I am being realistic.

[darylcowie]

Anything more than a third round pick would be a bonus for us for Jack Steven, after all, that is where we got him in the draft in 2006!

[plugger66]

I'm not against trading most anyone but the deal has to be mostly in our favour.

IMO Jack is another one that is more ideally suited to midfielder #4 or #5 rather than #1 or #2

The lack of quality in our midfield tends to make his flaws stand out.

Personally, i think before you can make a call, we need more mids

But if a deal included a midfield gun like Bennel then it isn't necessarily a backwards move for the midfield

True. Its a deal that does nothing to hurt or help except we are trading a guy who just signed for another 5 years. It is fanciful. May as well start a thread saying we are getting Fyffe and giving Freo Simpkin.

[plugger66]

I remember watching Harves… half of his kicks went over a team-mate's head, or to an opponent.

I think you have dementia, cause this is a ridiculous thing to suggest.

I was sitting on the wing for that Carlton game, and one in particular, Loewe was 30 metres up from Harves, and 10 m in front of his opponent. Ball went 40m to Loewe's opponent.
That sort of thing happened 6 times out of 10.
You are deluded and biased. I am being realistic.

He was a very good kick. Him and Winmar were the best kicks to Plugger on a lead. Steven takes players on and takes rsiks with his kicks. My guess is he is told to do that. Last week people said he kicked terribly and on here many didn't give him votes. Both coaches had him in the best 3 on the ground. Maybe when we have a better side he wont take the risks he does now.

[Goose is king]

[quote="plugger66"][quote="Goose is king"][quote="skeptic"]I'm not against trading most anyone but the deal has to be mostly in our favour.

IMO Jack is another one that is more ideally suited to midfielder #4 or #5 rather than #1 or #2

The lack of quality in our midfield tends to make his flaws stand out.

Personally, i think before you can make a call, we need more mids[/quote]



But if a deal included a midfield gun like Bennel then it isn't necessarily a backwards move for the midfield[/quote]

True. Its a deal that does nothing to hurt or help except we are trading a guy who just signed for another 5 years. It is fanciful. May as well start a thread saying we are getting Fyffe and giving Freo Simpkin.[/quote]


Of course it's fanciful. It's just a trade I made up. We stand for nothing if we get rid of good committed players.
Bennel for our first pick would be great IMO. Then a free agent the next year. Midfield problem solved if another one of our young group emerge as elite

[dragit]

I remember watching Harves… half of his kicks went over a team-mate's head, or to an opponent.

I think you have dementia, cause this is a ridiculous thing to suggest.

I was sitting on the wing for that Carlton game, and one in particular, Loewe was 30 metres up from Harves, and 10 m in front of his opponent. Ball went 40m to Loewe's opponent.
That sort of thing happened 6 times out of 10.
You are deluded and biased. I am being realistic.

You are not being realistic, but you are making a complete arse of yourself.

Seriously, plucking out one kick in his 100,000 and then saying that this happened 6 out of 10 times?

Quit while you are behind.