Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
samoht wrote: ↑Thu 31 Oct 2019 10:53am
What made Paddy a number 1?
Did he dominate and kick regular bags of goals vs his draft-year peers?
DeGoey was the standout - he had size, pace, evasiveness, skills - he ticked all the boxes.
All 4 of them!
I'm surprised we overlooked him.
What boxes did Paddy tick that made him a number 1 - was it his evasiveness, his pace, his size as a key position player? - he certainly didn't kick regular bags of goals.
It's been stated a thousand times before but Paddy was always in the top 2 by the vast majority of experts, who I regard much higher than any so called experts here. Cal Twomey, imo one of the best in the media, had Paddy at 1 and Brayshaw at 2. Emma Quayle had Paddy at one.
Do Goey was in the top 6, and Saints, Melbourne & GWS overlooked him, and Melb had 2 picks.
In my view, Paddy has the attributes to be a very good player, but has been stopped in his tracks, and has not had a lengthy stint on the field. However, I have a feeling that we have not reached the end of his on field story.
poatina wrote: ↑Wed 30 Oct 2019 7:34pm
“No doubt the opinion of McCartin is framed on the excellent pack mark he took in Tasmania against a then rampant Hawthorn then missing his shot on goal when a goal would have won that match for us”- To the Top
Actually he took a better mark than that in that game, in my humble opinion. A high ball , a swirling wind, he took up a position and as several players tried to budge him or get their own position , he held his and took it absolutely rock solid. It was one of the more memorable marks I have seen. I think he kicked the goal after that, not sure,
The posts which suggest we shouldn’t have drafted him are disrespectful and juvenile, I think. The young man has been injured , badly and possibly permanently, in the honest service of the club these posters claim to support . He deserves nothing but our support and loyalty , as per the Club motto. Denigrating his selection in the draft (over which he had no control) is diminishing the sacrifice he has made or which has been imposed on him in St Kilda’s service. He ought to be welcomed unreservedly to any future association in any capacity he chooses to have with the Club, without further grizzling about the supposed “ waste “ of a number one draft pick ( and by the way , there really is no cause for pride in having a number 1 draft pick).
No pride in having a number one draft pick, but an absolute travesty to waste it.
No poster here, that I can see, has been disrespectful of Paddy.
On the contrary.
Nor have they based any opinion on an individual effort in any particular game.
Only you.
Not sure where that one came from in your production line of logic.
Everybody is pretty much supportive of Paddy and his current health struggles.
But in my opinion he was damaged goods quite apart from his concussion issues.
I think his number one selection was based on wishful thinking rather than objectivity.
As I said previously, the people responsible for selecting Paddy are no longer at St Kilda. A very good thing.
Refering to someone as "damaged goods" for having diabetes could be considered disrespectful. You have previously alluded in one of your opinion's earlier in this thread that diabetes makes you vulnerable to concussion. I think diabetes and how you become concussed are two separate issues but I'd be happy to be corrected or learn more about why you think they are linked. I asked this previously but I'm keen to learn if it is scientifically proven that diabetes makes you vulnerable to concussion? or, asked another way, has it been proven Paddy's diabetes caused him to get concussion on a footy field? As I said earlier I'm really interested to know what you know about diabetes and concussion as you seem convinced the people who selected Paddy should have known there is a link between diabetes and concussion.
Always interesting how the successful clubs seem to back their own judgement rather than go with the 'majority' expert opinion. I don't think Wells or Wright would have gone with the popular or majority thinking
Just like the experts who tell us what to think and how to think...if you rely on others you'll soon totally lose any skills or the ability to think or be rational
Remember when all the experts told us in the 70's that betamax was going to dominate...the businesses that believed that bs lost a lot of money and those who stayed open minded to the possibility of VHS being the more popular option were the businesses that profited
Last edited by Scollop on Thu 31 Oct 2019 1:32pm, edited 1 time in total.
Did you even read that article or check out the website and who wrote it? Or do you even understand anything that is written on that page? It seems to drift all over the place with its subject matter, it just seems very dodgy information prepared by some pseudoscience Astrologer.
Can you keep Googling and let us know if there is any scientific evidence available, and specifically if it was available at the time of recruiting Paddy.
Scollop wrote: ↑Thu 31 Oct 2019 1:28pm
Always interesting how the successful clubs seem to back their own judgement rather than go with the 'majority' expert opinion. I don't think Wells or Wright would have gone with the popular or majority thinking
Just like the experts who tell us what to think and how to think...if you rely on others you'll soon totally lose any skills or the ability to think or be rational
Remember when all the experts told us in the 70's that betamax was going to dominate...the businesses that believed that bs lost a lot of money and those who stayed open minded to the possibility of VHS being the more popular option were the businesses that profited
I reckon Hawks/Cats would have gone Betamax - better quality system, more durable, but didn't run for as long. Suited them - they were in finals each year anyway. Betamax should have won, but again the cheapie option, which cornered the rental market and cost less took over.
Strange comparison anyway. Wells and Wright certainly rely on others before they make decisions.
Maybe if Paddy went on a vegan diet it might help him. Have a look at The Game Changers.
In Springfield, they're eating the dogs. The people that came in, they're eating the cats. They’re eating – they are eating the pets of the people that live there.
The reality is, that regardless of the reason, and prior to injuries, Paddy lacked athleticism
His endurance, speed, agility were alarmingly poor, as were his skin folds.
He had good hands (although weirdly, he dropped a lot of marks?), good field kick and decision maker (but an inconsistent and unreliable kick at goal) hands of the deck were very good for a big man, but his technique going for a ground ball was very poor. He didn’t know how to protect himself and turn his body, and led with his head. As spud would say, never put your head, where your arse can fit!
Foresight and hindsight
It was a huge mistake BY TROUT to select him with the number 1 pick, because we thought we needed a KP player and he came from a good family...and the obvious selection was Petracca. He is not a world beater at this stage, but at least he wouldn’t have been a bust.
AR asked Trout directly when discussing the selection “Are you sure? Because we need this pick to be a ripper,”
Trout was adamant!
Reported that CPs interview was poor, he came across as immature and a bit self indulgent.
magnifisaint wrote: ↑Thu 31 Oct 2019 4:24pm
Maybe if Paddy went on a vegan diet it might help him. Have a look at The Game Changers.
That's a really interesting documentary isn't it.
Yep considering some of the best athletes on the planet are vegan.
Food for thought?
In Springfield, they're eating the dogs. The people that came in, they're eating the cats. They’re eating – they are eating the pets of the people that live there.
magnifisaint wrote: ↑Thu 31 Oct 2019 4:24pm
Maybe if Paddy went on a vegan diet it might help him. Have a look at The Game Changers.
That's a really interesting documentary isn't it.
Yep considering some of the best athletes on the planet are vegan.
Food for thought?
In Springfield, they're eating the dogs. The people that came in, they're eating the cats. They’re eating – they are eating the pets of the people that live there.
stevie wrote: ↑Thu 31 Oct 2019 6:31pm
Swallow, Patton and Weitering haven’t set the world on fire as number ones
I think they too were no.1's in the "footy experts' " phantom drafts - and all the recruiters seem to do is "copy and paste", by the sound of it - and buy into what these "experts" think?
It just emphasises that the recruiters need to use their own judgement.
I wouldn't be surprised if Collingwood would have gone for De Goey - regardless of what the experts were saying - if they had the number 1 pick in 2014.
Did you even read that article or check out the website and who wrote it? Or do you even understand anything that is written on that page? It seems to drift all over the place with its subject matter, it just seems very dodgy information prepared by some pseudoscience Astrologer.
Can you keep Googling and let us know if there is any scientific evidence available, and specifically if it was available at the time of recruiting Paddy.
i think i'll leave it up to you if it really interests you that much to have your assumptions broken. quite readable to most people with more than one eye and half a brain.
"The starting point of all achievement is desire. "
stevie wrote: ↑Thu 31 Oct 2019 6:31pm
Swallow, Patton and Weitering haven’t set the world on fire as number ones
I think they too were no.1's in the "footy experts' " phantom drafts - and all the recruiters seem to do is "copy and paste", by the sound of it - and buy into what these "experts" think?
It just emphasises that the recruiters need to use their own judgement.
I wouldn't be surprised if Collingwood would have gone for De Goey - regardless of what the experts were saying - if they had the number 1 pick in 2014.
The "footy experts" get the vast bulk of their info by talking to the various recruiting teams, who have a much wider & deeper knowledge of the players around the country. If there is any "copy and paste" it would be the "footy experts" summarising what they have gathered from the recruiters. Of course the recruiters use their own judgement, they have to as each club may have different priorities.
So why did St Kilda take Ball and not Judd or Hodge noting Ball missed his first season, then developed OP which restricted his career?
No doubt the resident “experts” will jump all over this question appropriating blame
Recruiting is what it is, gathering and auditing opinions then arriving at decisions, decisions impacted by the player still being available
And the process is not particular to the AFL because all footy Clubs look to recruit
By way of example, SANFL Clubs are in talks with players currently not having an AFL Contract but commitment remains as there are still avenues onto an AFL List
Once the avenues are exhausted the player commits
And you cannot put all your eggs in the one basket which adds complexity
Did you even read that article or check out the website and who wrote it? Or do you even understand anything that is written on that page? It seems to drift all over the place with its subject matter, it just seems very dodgy information prepared by some pseudoscience Astrologer.
Can you keep Googling and let us know if there is any scientific evidence available, and specifically if it was available at the time of recruiting Paddy.
I can't speak to the veracity of the article DS posted but a quick search will lead you to a whole bunch of articles/papers discussing the impact of concussions on the management of diabetes due to the cognitive impairment. The one DS cited is making a different claim to that but I found 10 or so making the same claim about management for diabetics after head trauma.
This was my father's belief
And this is also mine:
Let the corn be all one sheaf--
And the grapes be all one vine,
Ere our children's teeth are set on edge
By bitter bread and wine.
Remember your history class? Late 19th century and the "Scramble for Africa". Long after we are gone, kids will study the "Scramble for Moral Credentialism and the Decline of Religion". I know it sounds like a load of tosh, as the poms would say, but I just wanna say, every discussion, every exchange of opinion is now laced with this dioxin of moralistic hedging...eh..ment. and technological/scientifico gobbledegook... . So we don't wanna say anything contagious. Fair enough. I think footy is a great way to see it at work. As footy fans we want our team to win, so we wanna take advantage of vulnerabilitied in our opponents. And we wanna make the team that can do precisely that. Heaven forbid we talk about it.
To the top wrote: ↑Thu 31 Oct 2019 8:35pm
So why did St Kilda take Ball and not Judd or Hodge noting Ball missed his first season, then developed OP which restricted his career?
No doubt the resident “experts” will jump all over this question appropriating blame
Recruiting is what it is, gathering and auditing opinions then arriving at decisions, decisions impacted by the player still being available
And the process is not particular to the AFL because all footy Clubs look to recruit
By way of example, SANFL Clubs are in talks with players currently not having an AFL Contract but commitment remains as there are still avenues onto an AFL List
Once the avenues are exhausted the player commits
And you cannot put all your eggs in the one basket which adds complexity
