Fisher for Bruce Trade

This unofficial St Kilda Saints fan forum is for people of all ages to chat Saints Footy and all posts must be respectful.

Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators

Post Reply
BigMart
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 13622
Joined: Sat 22 Mar 2008 6:06pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1402361Post BigMart »

Of course that's the case, but not a guarantee.....

However If we compared our picks 21 onwards in recent drafts we have fared much better than early picks? It's an interesting fact...
Siposs, Webster, Markworth, Stanley, Newnes, Steven, Gwilt, Fisher..... Our later picking has been relatively good...

Except for the recycled wastes like Pattison, Birss, McGough, Rix, Polo, Peake etc....


User avatar
Middo
Club Player
Posts: 1122
Joined: Thu 20 Dec 2007 6:03pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1402378Post Middo »

BigMart wrote:Of course that's the case, but not a guarantee.....

However If we compared our picks 21 onwards in recent drafts we have fared much better than early picks? It's an interesting fact...
Siposs, Webster, Markworth, Stanley, Newnes, Steven, Gwilt, Fisher..... Our later picking has been relatively good...

Except for the recycled wastes like Pattison, Birss, McGough, Rix, Polo, Peake etc....


Who recruited Ben Cousins again ..??? :lol: :lol: :lol:


Jack Newnes happy to be a Saint !!!! PS and to hit a target !!!
gringo
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 12421
Joined: Tue 24 Mar 2009 11:05pm
Location: St Kilda
Has thanked: 296 times
Been thanked: 55 times

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1402380Post gringo »

BigMart wrote:I didn't realise top 20 draft picks were certainties to become AFL guns.... Or even players

Raph Clarke, Andrew McQualter, Fergus Watts, Tom Lynch?

As I said before:

History says at least one out of two top 10 draft picks you bring in will be duds. 10 to 20 it goes to about 3 out of 4 being duds. After that it's lotto. Sometimes you arse first round stars like Hawks who got Roughy, Buddy and Lewis in the first round in the same draft but you can also get Scully and Trengrove who both failed to become anything but GOPs. Use them and use them well master Pelican.

I can't remember the stats but the likelihood of playing 100 games when taken after pick 40 is ridiculously unlikely.


bergholt
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 7356
Joined: Wed 11 Aug 2004 9:25am

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1402383Post bergholt »

BigMart wrote:Of course that's the case, but not a guarantee.....

However If we compared our picks 21 onwards in recent drafts we have fared much better than early picks? It's an interesting fact...
Siposs, Webster, Markworth, Stanley, Newnes, Steven, Gwilt, Fisher..... Our later picking has been relatively good...

Except for the recycled wastes like Pattison, Birss, McGough, Rix, Polo, Peake etc....
That post has the interesting property of being both accurate and completely useless.

Unless you're saying we should trade all our first round picks for later picks?


BigMart
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 13622
Joined: Sat 22 Mar 2008 6:06pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1402391Post BigMart »

Neither.... It's just an interesting point

People are beside themselves for getting late teen picks, the real fact is that whilst they SHOULD be more blue chip from 11-20... History suggests picks outside the top dozen are no more a guarantee than pick 21 onwards it seems?


Kickit
Club Player
Posts: 630
Joined: Wed 12 Dec 2012 8:52pm

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1402395Post Kickit »

BigMart wrote:Of course that's the case, but not a guarantee.....

However If we compared our picks 21 onwards in recent drafts we have fared much better than early picks? It's an interesting fact...
Siposs, Webster, Markworth, Stanley, Newnes, Steven, Gwilt, Fisher..... Our later picking has been relatively good...

Except for the recycled wastes like Pattison, Birss, McGough, Rix, Polo, Peake etc....
True statistically there will only be a few first round dropouts. Unfortunately History suggests the dropout will inevitably drafted by StKilda.

I'm not sure if Bevo is still at the club, but I'm pretty sure that those running the show are not the ones responsible for stuffing up all the good drafts, so I'm not overly concerned about history repeating itself.
( Don't forget all of our ripper rookies, Geary, Curran ,Simpkin , Dunell.


User avatar
ausfatcat
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 6536
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 4:36pm
Has thanked: 19 times
Been thanked: 101 times

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1402461Post ausfatcat »

[quote="Kickit"]
True statistically there will only be a few first round dropouts. Unfortunately History suggests the dropout will inevitably drafted by StKilda. [quote]

Umm not more than any other club except Melbourne

How about a dud draft from the new premiers?

2005 draft of Hawthorns


3 Xavier Ellis (injury prone maybe delisted this year)
6 Beau Dowler (dud)
14 Grant Birchall (gop)
18 Max Bailey (injury prone never did much anyway)
22 Beau Muston (dud)
38 Travis Tuck (druggo dud)

One decent player and one decent injury plagued pplayer from all thse top draft picks

Every team has bad drafts, st Kilda had a bad period under rossy but we had some good drafts as wel at other times

Melbourne seems to be the only consistently crap drafterl


User avatar
groupie1
Club Player
Posts: 1275
Joined: Sun 18 Jun 2006 4:21am
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 52 times

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1402609Post groupie1 »

plugger66 wrote:
Hallalj#3 wrote:No not at all everyone has an opinion. I just think you've been wrong lately and I'm only calling you on it, because I don't rate your opinions and obviously the club think Hickey can take that mantle and I agree with them.. Time to let go of the past and look forward we have a plan and it's starting to take shape.
How have I been wrong lately? How can opinion even be wrong? And I am really upset you dont rate my opinions. I wont be able to sleep tonight. And I have no idea what time to let go of the past even means in the context you said it. it makes no sense. And I reckon captain obvious would know the club thinks Hickey can take the mantle.

f*** sake, give it up.... stop arguing and parsing words to create an argument


Gordon Fode couldda been Plugga
Hallalj#3
Club Player
Posts: 283
Joined: Sat 11 Jun 2011 2:38pm

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1402655Post Hallalj#3 »

groupie1 wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
Hallalj#3 wrote:No not at all everyone has an opinion. I just think you've been wrong lately and I'm only calling you on it, because I don't rate your opinions and obviously the club think Hickey can take that mantle and I agree with them.. Time to let go of the past and look forward we have a plan and it's starting to take shape.
How have I been wrong lately? How can opinion even be wrong? And I am really upset you dont rate my opinions. I wont be able to sleep tonight. And I have no idea what time to let go of the past even means in the context you said it. it makes no sense. And I reckon captain obvious would know the club thinks Hickey can take the mantle.

f*** sake, give it up.... stop arguing and parsing words to create an argument

Stopped arguing 2 days ago dude..


User avatar
groupie1
Club Player
Posts: 1275
Joined: Sun 18 Jun 2006 4:21am
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 52 times

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1403018Post groupie1 »

right on... it's a time zone thing, man.


Gordon Fode couldda been Plugga
User avatar
Little Dozer
Club Player
Posts: 855
Joined: Tue 11 Jul 2006 4:44pm
Location: Forward Pocket, Outer side, Linton Street end or bay 38 Waverley

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1405523Post Little Dozer »

Any update on the Bruce situatation?


Are we waiting for a saviour?
I'm so sick of waiting!
I've been waiting my whole life!
This is a new day!
plugger66
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 50626
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007 8:15pm
Location: oakleigh

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1405529Post plugger66 »

Little Dozer wrote:Any update on the Bruce situatation?

Still doing the commentary next season.


Old Mate
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 5624
Joined: Wed 15 Jun 2011 7:06pm

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1405544Post Old Mate »

plugger66 wrote:
Little Dozer wrote:Any update on the Bruce situatation?

Still doing the commentary next season.
Delicious


falka
Club Player
Posts: 455
Joined: Sat 25 Oct 2008 6:03pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1405803Post falka »

Need Bruce from age and size profile more then longer.

Would love straight swap for fish now and keep early 20's pick


LTN16
SS Hall of Fame
Posts: 2494
Joined: Sun 11 Jun 2006 9:50pm

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1406230Post LTN16 »

ausfatcat wrote:
Kickit wrote: True statistically there will only be a few first round dropouts. Unfortunately History suggests the dropout will inevitably drafted by StKilda.

Umm not more than any other club except Melbourne

How about a dud draft from the new premiers?

2005 draft of Hawthorns


3 Xavier Ellis (injury prone maybe delisted this year)
6 Beau Dowler (dud)
14 Grant Birchall (gop)
18 Max Bailey (injury prone never did much anyway)
22 Beau Muston (dud)
38 Travis Tuck (druggo dud)

One decent player and one decent injury plagued pplayer from all thse top draft picks

Every team has bad drafts, st Kilda had a bad period under rossy but we had some good drafts as wel at other times

Melbourne seems to be the only consistently crap drafterl
Birchall is not a "GOP"! Hasn't he been all australian? He's highly underrated IMO.


gringo
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 12421
Joined: Tue 24 Mar 2009 11:05pm
Location: St Kilda
Has thanked: 296 times
Been thanked: 55 times

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1406233Post gringo »

LTN16 wrote:
ausfatcat wrote: Umm not more than any other club except Melbourne

How about a dud draft from the new premiers?

2005 draft of Hawthorns


3 Xavier Ellis (injury prone maybe delisted this year)
6 Beau Dowler (dud)
14 Grant Birchall (gop)
18 Max Bailey (injury prone never did much anyway)
22 Beau Muston (dud)
38 Travis Tuck (druggo dud)

One decent player and one decent injury plagued pplayer from all thse top draft picks

Every team has bad drafts, st Kilda had a bad period under rossy but we had some good drafts as wel at other times

Melbourne seems to be the only consistently crap drafterl
[/quote]
Birchall is not a "GOP"! Hasn't he been all australian? He's highly underrated IMO.[/quote]


Ellis was a very good player too. Birchall has been a gun and is athletic and quick. Bailey was a good ruckman when he did get on the park. The fact that they created such an even team with their worst not that far from their best was what made them excel not that they got one superstar doing all their work any way. I would prefer that that than getting Sam Gibert as our only decent player from 2005.


Saintmatt
SS Life Member
Posts: 2594
Joined: Fri 20 Jan 2012 4:57pm
Has thanked: 2043 times
Been thanked: 1167 times

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1406244Post Saintmatt »

gringo wrote:
BigMart wrote:I didn't realise top 20 draft picks were certainties to become AFL guns.... Or even players

Raph Clarke, Andrew McQualter, Fergus Watts, Tom Lynch?

As I said before:

History says at least one out of two top 10 draft picks you bring in will be duds. 10 to 20 it goes to about 3 out of 4 being duds. After that it's lotto. Sometimes you arse first round stars like Hawks who got Roughy, Buddy and Lewis in the first round in the same draft but you can also get Scully and Trengrove who both failed to become anything but GOPs. Use them and use them well master Pelican.

I can't remember the stats but the likelihood of playing 100 games when taken after pick 40 is ridiculously unlikely.
..... BARRY BROOKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Go you red, black & white warriors
fugazi
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 4243
Joined: Thu 25 Mar 2004 2:47pm
Location: incarnate
Has thanked: 286 times
Been thanked: 694 times

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1406247Post fugazi »

Back to the OP...no mention of Bruce recently...every club seems to hardball us.

Probably we have to see what Longer and Delaney will cost first.


Nee!
User avatar
karnaby
Club Player
Posts: 1376
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 2:41am

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1406254Post karnaby »

Funny, but I would have thought, given our needs, that Bruce would be the most important. Personally I'm still unconvinced about the need for an extra young ruckman and if we somehow don't end up with Delaney then afaic we can look for a stop gap solution and go looking again next year


It's a shame ignorance isn't painful
gringo
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 12421
Joined: Tue 24 Mar 2009 11:05pm
Location: St Kilda
Has thanked: 296 times
Been thanked: 55 times

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1406258Post gringo »

karnaby wrote:Funny, but I would have thought, given our needs, that Bruce would be the most important. Personally I'm still unconvinced about the need for an extra young ruckman and if we somehow don't end up with Delaney then afaic we can look for a stop gap solution and go looking again next year

I have a feeling we will get Tippett if those guys don't happen. I don't want Longer unless they are so sure he is a bargain that he is worth training up and on selling for some midfield talent later.


User avatar
karnaby
Club Player
Posts: 1376
Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 2:41am

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1406260Post karnaby »

I agree re Tippett or someone of that ilk. I really don't know anything about Longer, but if we do end up getting him there is a good chance it will create some selection issues. Anything after that is too subjective for me.


It's a shame ignorance isn't painful
User avatar
Hurricane
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 4038
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:24pm
Location: The isle of Besaid, Spira

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1406312Post Hurricane »

I feel the Bruce deal was on the back burner last week for both clubs. GWS was wheeling and dealing with everyone it seems and we were trying our damnedest to not get bent over by North.

Monday will be interesting. If we get the Delaney deal done early, which we should unless North choose to be dicks and try and get overs out of us (which it's been reported they will), We could come out of trade week in a decent position. We've got a number of picks now that we can't possibly use. What we have to give up for Bruce is anyones guess. I just hope it isn't too much

BANG BANG


Mitsuharu Misawa 1962 - 2009.

I am vengeance....I am the night...I....AM.....BATMAN

I have come here to chew bubblegum and kick ass and im all out of bubblegum
Stillwaiting
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 4432
Joined: Sun 25 May 2008 5:39pm

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1406332Post Stillwaiting »

I thought Norf had agreed to let Delaney come to us for a very late pick if we let Dalsanto go as a free agent


I love this club
User avatar
Cairnsman
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 7377
Joined: Thu 16 Jun 2005 10:38pm
Location: Everywhere
Has thanked: 189 times
Been thanked: 276 times

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1406339Post Cairnsman »

Stillwaiting wrote:I thought Norf had agreed to let Delaney come to us for a very late pick if we let Dalsanto go as a free agent
That's correct I believe...pick 91 isn't it? Or am I hearing things?


gringo
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 12421
Joined: Tue 24 Mar 2009 11:05pm
Location: St Kilda
Has thanked: 296 times
Been thanked: 55 times

Re: Fisher for Bruce Trade

Post: # 1406344Post gringo »

Cairnsman wrote:
Stillwaiting wrote:I thought Norf had agreed to let Delaney come to us for a very late pick if we let Dalsanto go as a free agent
That's correct I believe...pick 91 isn't it? Or am I hearing things?

I don't think anyone can say because it isn't exactly legal. Both are playing dumb and when it goes through it will be suggested by the Roos and Saints that it will be a separate transaction.


Post Reply