Stick With Petracca

[ShanghaiSaint]

Also watched his highlights kicking was a bit of a let down. I am happy to trade puck 1 as long as its worth it

[citywest]

Thankfully the Pelican does not agree with the OP. Why would St Kilda take Petracca if GWS are willing to give pick 4, 18 Jacksch and O'Rourke. I would do this in a heart beat.

[plugger66]

Thankfully the Pelican does not agree with the OP. Why would St Kilda take Petracca if GWS are willing to give pick 4, 18 Jacksch and O'Rourke. I would do this in a heart beat.

Im unsure Pelchen has said they will do that. matter of fact I think they said they wont. CW can you tell us a bit more of these 2 GWS players career so far in the AFL? I haven't seen them much and you seem keen so give us a rundown.

[Bunk_Moreland]

Thankfully the Pelican does not agree with the OP. Why would St Kilda take Petracca if GWS are willing to give pick 4, 18 Jacksch and O'Rourke. I would do this in a heart beat.

Im unsure Pelchen has said they will do that. matter of fact I think they said they wont. CW can you tell us a bit more of these 2 GWS players career so far in the AFL? I haven't seen them much and you seem keen so give us a rundown.

One has played 8 games in 2 years and has done nothing special. The other has chronic hamstring problems.

One is out of contract and the other wants to be traded.

The word is that both have been offered more than Carlton can offer and 20% more than GWS offered.

Saints are cooling their heels. May well pick up one or both. Jaksch may get traded to Carlton but they wont trade pick 6 for him. We have offered our second rounder so we may get him for that.

JOR - we have a chance to pick him up in the PSD if no trade can be done.

So we may get both, one or neither.

Whatever way Saints will not trade #1 for #4 and the two players. The club has already said this.

I dont know why people keep banging on about these two players and #1, the club has said it just isn't going to happen.

[plugger66]

Thankfully the Pelican does not agree with the OP. Why would St Kilda take Petracca if GWS are willing to give pick 4, 18 Jacksch and O'Rourke. I would do this in a heart beat.

Im unsure Pelchen has said they will do that. matter of fact I think they said they wont. CW can you tell us a bit more of these 2 GWS players career so far in the AFL? I haven't seen them much and you seem keen so give us a rundown.

One has played 8 games in 2 years and has done nothing special. The other has chronic hamstring problems.

One is out of contract and the other wants to be traded.

The word is that both have been offered more than Carlton can offer and 20% more than GWS offered.

Saints are cooling their heels. May well pick up one or both. Jaksch may get traded to Carlton but they wont trade pick 6 for him. We have offered our second rounder so we may get him for that.

JOR - we have a chance to pick him up in the PSD if no trade can be done.

So we may get both, one or neither.

Whatever way Saints will not trade #1 for #4 and the two players. The club has already said this.

I dont know why people keep banging on about these two players and #1, the club has said it just isn't going to happen.

As I suspected. I have no idea where CW gets these ideas from.

[citywest]

Once again Plugger66 and Bunk_Moreland you have not read my post properly. It's not pick 1 for pick 4 and the 2 players. It is pick 1 in return for 4 and 18 and the 2 players!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[plugger66]

Once again Plugger66 and Bunk_Moreland you have not read my post properly. It's not pick 1 for pick 4 and the 2 players. It is pick 1 in return for 4 and 18 and the 2 players!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I read it and it is wrong. Pelchen never agreed to that. Anyway tell us about these GWS players you want so badly.

[Bunk_Moreland]

Once again Plugger66 and Bunk_Moreland you have not read my post properly. It's not pick 1 for pick 4 and the 2 players. It is pick 1 in return for 4 and 18 and the 2 players!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Did not read it wrong at all.

Why give up #1 when we may get one or botth by other means?

Bains and Pelchan both said this trade would not happen.

Can only go from what they say and the evidence of the offers we have put to these two players.

Not hard to comprehend

[citywest]

As far as I'm concerned, if we gave them Petracca (pick 1), and in return we got pick 4, pick 18, Jacksch and O'Rourke it would be a massive win for us. Let me put it to you this way. Going by last years draft, pick 4 was Marcus Bontempelli and pick 18 was Luke Dunstan.

So if GWS were prepared to offer Bontempelli, Dunstan, Jacksch and O'Rourke, and all I had to give in return was Petracca it would be a no brainer. It wouldn't matter how good Petracca is. You can't honestly think 1 player could be worth more than the above 4. Even if Petracca is a Chris Judd clone I would still do the trade.

As far as Jacksch and O'Rourke are concerned, the only thing I know about them is that they were high draft picks who have not had a chance to play regularly. This is not because they are no good, it is because of the embarrassment of riches that GWS have been handed on a platter.

IMHO, IF GWS agreed to this it would be the steal of the century and it would be the making of our next tilt at a flag.

[plugger66]

As far as I'm concerned, if we gave them Petracca (pick 1), and in return we got pick 4, pick 18, Jacksch and O'Rourke it would be a massive win for us. Let me put it to you this way. Going by last years draft, pick 4 was Marcus Bontempelli and pick 18 was Luke Dunstan.

So if GWS were prepared to offer Bontempelli, Dunstan, Jacksch and O'Rourke, and all I had to give in return was Petracca it would be a no brainer. It wouldn't matter how good Petracca is. You can't honestly think 1 player could be worth more than the above 4. Even if Petracca is a Chris Judd clone I would still do the trade.

As far as Jacksch and O'Rourke are concerned, the only thing I know about them is that they were high draft picks who have not had a chance to play regularly. This is not because they are no good, it is because of the embarrassment of riches that GWS have been handed on a platter.

IMHO, IF GWS agreed to this it would be the steal of the century and it would be the making of our next tilt at a flag.

Is that the embarrassment of riches that have allowed them to win 7 games in 2 years. And I didn't realise you get last years players. Now I totally agree with it.

[skeptic]

As far as I'm concerned, if we gave them Petracca (pick 1), and in return we got pick 4, pick 18, Jacksch and O'Rourke it would be a massive win for us. Let me put it to you this way. Going by last years draft, pick 4 was Marcus Bontempelli and pick 18 was Luke Dunstan.

So if GWS were prepared to offer Bontempelli, Dunstan, Jacksch and O'Rourke, and all I had to give in return was Petracca it would be a no brainer. It wouldn't matter how good Petracca is. You can't honestly think 1 player could be worth more than the above 4. Even if Petracca is a Chris Judd clone I would still do the trade.

As far as Jacksch and O'Rourke are concerned, the only thing I know about them is that they were high draft picks who have not had a chance to play regularly. This is not because they are no good, it is because of the embarrassment of riches that GWS have been handed on a platter.

IMHO, IF GWS agreed to this it would be the steal of the century and it would be the making of our next tilt at a flag.

But that's last year...

What ur're doing is trading #1 the safest bet for a good young player, for 2 questionable players and 2 later picks.

I don't u/s the logic here when CP is (I'm led to believe) a clear stand out

The point of 3 picks in the top 20 is to maximise ur chances of drafting a good player as drafting is still an inexact science.
But if u've got the best pick... U've got the best chance at getting the next best player... Ur plan is to trade that best pick/potential for less good chances and unproven players tat have at best stagnated to this point.

Far be it from me to be the chairman of the BM and Plugger cheersquad... But respectfully, as a plan what they're saying seems more logical to me. i feel like ur swapping a really good chance for more not as likely chances... What's the expression... Forrest from the trees... The point is to get a really good player... If we have a really bad draft but CP is the best player.... That's still a good gain for us.

Its one thing to trade for a proven young gun and mix up the picks, but Why trade pick 1 for more speculation?

[6621104]

maybe _ "bird in the hand"????

[crippsy]

I'd take 3 picks in the top 20 any day of the week over the number 1 pick much higher probability of gaining a quality player

no guarantee number 1 pick will be a star or not a star

[SideshowMilne]

Anyone that thinks GWS would add 18 to the 4, jor, kj trade is smoking wacky weed.

[stinger]

Thankfully the Pelican does not agree with the OP. Why would St Kilda take Petracca if GWS are willing to give pick 4, 18 Jacksch and O'Rourke. I would do this in a heart beat.

which two players on our list do you want to delist to accommodate that?????

[LTN16]

Also watched his highlights kicking was a bit of a let down. I am happy to trade puck 1 as long as its worth it

I take it everyone is watching the same YouTube clip of the highlights of him playing 1 game where he misses targets.

[stinger]

maybe _ "bird in the hand"????

more like "pig in a poke"....

[Wayne42]

The history of pick 1 is not good, meaning there are no guarantees you will get a quality AFL player with pick 1.

Clubs do their homework , the actual trade scenario the Saints are working on is probably NOT being mentioned on here. Tony74 would have to spill the beans
for us to have a heads up and i doubt he'd do that.

[skeptic]

The history of pick 1 is not good, meaning there are no guarantees you will get a quality AFL player with pick 1.

Clubs do their homework , the actual trade scenario the Saints are working on is probably NOT being mentioned on here. Tony74 would have to spill the beans
for us to have a heads up and i doubt he'd do that.

Hey Wayne... Why do you say the history is not good?

I did a list 1 page back and my conclusion is that ur highly likely to get a starting 22 player... And likely to get amongst the better players in the draft

[skeptic]

I'd take 3 picks in the top 20 any day of the week over the number 1 pick much higher probability of gaining a quality player

no guarantee number 1 pick will be a star or not a star

Mmm we're not trading it for 3 picks... Only 2 + 2 players that can't break into GWSs best 22

[Wayne42]

The history of pick 1 is not good, meaning there are no guarantees you will get a quality AFL player with pick 1.

Clubs do their homework , the actual trade scenario the Saints are working on is probably NOT being mentioned on here. Tony74 would have to spill the beans
for us to have a heads up and i doubt he'd do that.

Hey Wayne... Why do you say the history is not good?

I did a list 1 page back and my conclusion is that ur highly likely to get a starting 22 player... And likely to get amongst the better players in the draft

I looked at the list on this linked web page and came to that conclusion..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian ... ague_draft

[gringo]

The history of pick 1 is not good, meaning there are no guarantees you will get a quality AFL player with pick 1.

Clubs do their homework , the actual trade scenario the Saints are working on is probably NOT being mentioned on here. Tony74 would have to spill the beans
for us to have a heads up and i doubt he'd do that.

Someone put up a history of round 1 since 2000. Pretty much a safe bet if melbourne don't touch it. To early to tell on the GWS guys yet. Most are at least very good exceptions are Watts and Scully and only Watts is in the waste of space category. Kruezer isn't the player he could have been but that's probably due to his injuries.

[skeptic]

The history of pick 1 is not good, meaning there are no guarantees you will get a quality AFL player with pick 1.

Clubs do their homework , the actual trade scenario the Saints are working on is probably NOT being mentioned on here. Tony74 would have to spill the beans
for us to have a heads up and i doubt he'd do that.

Hey Wayne... Why do you say the history is not good?

I did a list 1 page back and my conclusion is that ur highly likely to get a starting 22 player... And likely to get amongst the better players in the draft

I looked at the list on this linked web page and came to that conclusion..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian ... ague_draft

Yeah but how?

I looked at the same link and thought that since 2000, it's a pretty safe bet

[Wayne42]

The history of pick 1 is not good, meaning there are no guarantees you will get a quality AFL player with pick 1.

Clubs do their homework , the actual trade scenario the Saints are working on is probably NOT being mentioned on here. Tony74 would have to spill the beans
for us to have a heads up and i doubt he'd do that.

Someone put up a history of round 1 since 2000. Pretty much a safe bet if melbourne don't touch it. To early to tell on the GWS guys yet. Most are at least very good exceptions are Watts and Scully and only Watts is in the waste of space category. Kruezer isn't the player he could have been but that's probably due to his injuries.

There you go gringo, making excuses for No. 1 draft picks

My comment is based on the full history of No.1 draft picks, not a selected section of them..

[Con Gorozidis]

I hope Petracca's injury and poor performance at the draft combine doesn't reduce our negotiation power with GWS.