Dylan Shiel

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

Raph Goat Clarke
Club Player
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun 10 Sep 2017 5:56pm
Been thanked: 13 times

Re: Dylan Shiel

Post: # 1702189Post Raph Goat Clarke »

Raph 'The greatest of All Time' Clarke is not the whisperer.

Contracts mean stuff all these days.


Moods
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 4755
Joined: Fri 05 Jun 2009 3:05pm
Has thanked: 309 times
Been thanked: 414 times

Re: Dylan Shiel

Post: # 1702190Post Moods »

Con Gorozidis wrote:
The_President wrote:
Con Gorozidis wrote:One big issue is GWS don't have a first round pick (Deledio) and also have draft penalties (Whitfield) so I think there is a genuine possibility they will be open to negotiating.

Ironically their list profile is now at risk of getting old so I would not be surprised to see them trade a decent player out.

At the moment it looks like they should trade out Patton for a first round draft pick and retire Mummy.

Will be interesting to see what they do....

Why would they trade out Patton?
I thought Patton was very poor in the Prelim.

They already have Cameron and that Himmelberg fella looks ok as well.

How many tall fwds do you actually need these days?

When they played 3 tall fwds they were easy to beat and too predictable.

...They also have Zach Sproule - who could be anything.....

http://www.aflplayerratings.com.au/Rati ... ch-SPROULE
If they trade any of their tall fwds out it should be Cameron. Doesn't stand up in big games. Patton more versatile as can be used as a 2nd ruck. Patton was very good this year. Cameron average...again


User avatar
Con Gorozidis
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 23532
Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008 4:04pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 78 times

Re: Dylan Shiel

Post: # 1702199Post Con Gorozidis »

Moods wrote:
Con Gorozidis wrote:
The_President wrote:
Con Gorozidis wrote:One big issue is GWS don't have a first round pick (Deledio) and also have draft penalties (Whitfield) so I think there is a genuine possibility they will be open to negotiating.

Ironically their list profile is now at risk of getting old so I would not be surprised to see them trade a decent player out.

At the moment it looks like they should trade out Patton for a first round draft pick and retire Mummy.

Will be interesting to see what they do....

Why would they trade out Patton?
I thought Patton was very poor in the Prelim.

They already have Cameron and that Himmelberg fella looks ok as well.

How many tall fwds do you actually need these days?

When they played 3 tall fwds they were easy to beat and too predictable.

...They also have Zach Sproule - who could be anything.....

http://www.aflplayerratings.com.au/Rati ... ch-SPROULE
If they trade any of their tall fwds out it should be Cameron. Doesn't stand up in big games. Patton more versatile as can be used as a 2nd ruck. Patton was very good this year. Cameron average...again
Yep.
Cameron certainly not the all conquering star he looked like five years ago.


User avatar
parkeysainter
SS Life Member
Posts: 2696
Joined: Thu 20 Jul 2017 2:59am
Location: Brighton Beach Mansion
Has thanked: 84 times
Been thanked: 177 times

Re: Dylan Shiel

Post: # 1702212Post parkeysainter »

I have scoured the net as best I could and I have read nothing about the Saints chasing Shiel. It seems this trade whisperer fella is the only one that is talking about it.

Oh well, I wish it was still true.


Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud

In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death, taxes and the St Kilda FC
darylcowie
Club Player
Posts: 530
Joined: Fri 16 Sep 2011 5:20pm
Location: donvale
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 64 times
Contact:

Re: Dylan Shiel

Post: # 1702215Post darylcowie »

SaintPav wrote:
damienc wrote:
SaintPav wrote:
damienc wrote:If we are going to be talking pie in the sky stuff.

Then how about, Hickey plus 7 & 8 for Shiel?

The Giants score a ruckman they desperately need, we trade our two first rounders and in return we get a gun midfielder.

Probably will never happen in a million years but ......everyone's a winner with that trade I reckon.
Lets throw in Bllings as well.


No offence but your comment is ridiculous and quite frankly mildly insulting.

If we were to make a play for Shiel it would cost us big time.

He is a proven midfield gun and very much a required player for the Giants.

So getting him is almost impossible in my view. But if the impossible were to happen, the Giants would quite rightly want a big ticket.

So at least two first rounders and Hickey.

At the moment Hickey is surplus to our needs and can't get a game. He is hardly the class of Jack Billings and never will be.

So Hickey and two first rounders would get it done in my view. We would be paying overs but we would have no choice if we want quality.
Two first round drafts picks are enough which was my point. I don't think Hickey is surplus to our needs. What if Longer goes down on Holmes?

Interesting that you found that 'mildly' insulting but more interesting that you admitted it.

Hardly insulting compared to what's posted on here.

But I apologise for offending you.

RUOK?
What if Longer goes down on Holmes?

Did you vote no?


its time to make a name for yourself like you've never made before!
The_President
Club Player
Posts: 878
Joined: Sun 27 Mar 2016 8:05pm
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 94 times

Re: Dylan Shiel

Post: # 1702217Post The_President »

parkeysainter wrote:I have scoured the net as best I could and I have read nothing about the Saints chasing Shiel. It seems this trade whisperer fella is the only one that is talking about it.

Oh well, I wish it was still true.

I'd love it if it were true. Alas.

Quick, strong, aggressive, clean, skilled. Ticks many boxes.


User avatar
SaintPav
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 18163
Joined: Wed 16 Jun 2010 9:24pm
Location: Alma Road
Has thanked: 1457 times
Been thanked: 1829 times

Re: Dylan Shiel

Post: # 1702218Post SaintPav »

darylcowie wrote:
SaintPav wrote:
damienc wrote:
SaintPav wrote:
damienc wrote:If we are going to be talking pie in the sky stuff.

Then how about, Hickey plus 7 & 8 for Shiel?

The Giants score a ruckman they desperately need, we trade our two first rounders and in return we get a gun midfielder.

Probably will never happen in a million years but ......everyone's a winner with that trade I reckon.
Lets throw in Bllings as well.


No offence but your comment is ridiculous and quite frankly mildly insulting.

If we were to make a play for Shiel it would cost us big time.

He is a proven midfield gun and very much a required player for the Giants.

So getting him is almost impossible in my view. But if the impossible were to happen, the Giants would quite rightly want a big ticket.

So at least two first rounders and Hickey.

At the moment Hickey is surplus to our needs and can't get a game. He is hardly the class of Jack Billings and never will be.

So Hickey and two first rounders would get it done in my view. We would be paying overs but we would have no choice if we want quality.
Two first round drafts picks are enough which was my point. I don't think Hickey is surplus to our needs. What if Longer goes down on Holmes?

Interesting that you found that 'mildly' insulting but more interesting that you admitted it.

Hardly insulting compared to what's posted on here.

But I apologise for offending you.

RUOK?
What if Longer goes down on Holmes?

Did you vote no?
Jaw dislocation means he would miss weeks and we'd be down a ruckman.


Holder of unacceptable views and other thought crimes.
damienc
Club Player
Posts: 1290
Joined: Mon 17 Oct 2011 7:19pm
Has thanked: 611 times
Been thanked: 398 times

Re: Dylan Shiel

Post: # 1702222Post damienc »

SaintPav wrote:
damienc wrote:
SaintPav wrote:
damienc wrote:If we are going to be talking pie in the sky stuff.

Then how about, Hickey plus 7 & 8 for Shiel?

The Giants score a ruckman they desperately need, we trade our two first rounders and in return we get a gun midfielder.

Probably will never happen in a million years but ......everyone's a winner with that trade I reckon.
Lets throw in Bllings as well.


No offence but your comment is ridiculous and quite frankly mildly insulting.

If we were to make a play for Shiel it would cost us big time.

He is a proven midfield gun and very much a required player for the Giants.

So getting him is almost impossible in my view. But if the impossible were to happen, the Giants would quite rightly want a big ticket.

So at least two first rounders and Hickey.

At the moment Hickey is surplus to our needs and can't get a game. He is hardly the class of Jack Billings and never will be.

So Hickey and two first rounders would get it done in my view. We would be paying overs but we would have no choice if we want quality.
Two first round drafts picks are enough which was my point. I don't think Hickey is surplus to our needs. What if Longer goes down on Holmes?

Interesting that you found that 'mildly' insulting but more interesting that you admitted it.

Hardly insulting compared to what's posted on here.

But I apologise for offending you.

RUOK?


Very funny.


saintbob
SS Life Member
Posts: 3435
Joined: Wed 21 May 2008 8:51pm
Location: Tassie
Has thanked: 421 times
Been thanked: 282 times

Re: Dylan Shiel

Post: # 1702262Post saintbob »

Pick 7 - Lever

Pick 8 - Shiel


BadRossco
Club Player
Posts: 472
Joined: Tue 13 Sep 2011 7:14pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 71 times

Re: Dylan Shiel

Post: # 1702266Post BadRossco »

Only certainty is that our recruiters will not have the nerve to go to the draft so will trade our picks for anyone that can draw breath


User avatar
Con Gorozidis
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 23532
Joined: Thu 19 Jun 2008 4:04pm
Has thanked: 100 times
Been thanked: 78 times

Re: Dylan Shiel

Post: # 1702267Post Con Gorozidis »

SaintPav wrote:
darylcowie wrote:
SaintPav wrote:
damienc wrote:
SaintPav wrote:
damienc wrote:If we are going to be talking pie in the sky stuff.

Then how about, Hickey plus 7 & 8 for Shiel?

The Giants score a ruckman they desperately need, we trade our two first rounders and in return we get a gun midfielder.

Probably will never happen in a million years but ......everyone's a winner with that trade I reckon.
Lets throw in Bllings as well.


No offence but your comment is ridiculous and quite frankly mildly insulting.

If we were to make a play for Shiel it would cost us big time.

He is a proven midfield gun and very much a required player for the Giants.

So getting him is almost impossible in my view. But if the impossible were to happen, the Giants would quite rightly want a big ticket.

So at least two first rounders and Hickey.

At the moment Hickey is surplus to our needs and can't get a game. He is hardly the class of Jack Billings and never will be.

So Hickey and two first rounders would get it done in my view. We would be paying overs but we would have no choice if we want quality.
Two first round drafts picks are enough which was my point. I don't think Hickey is surplus to our needs. What if Longer goes down on Holmes?

Interesting that you found that 'mildly' insulting but more interesting that you admitted it.

Hardly insulting compared to what's posted on here.

But I apologise for offending you.

RUOK?
What if Longer goes down on Holmes?

Did you vote no?
Jaw dislocation means he would miss weeks and we'd be down a ruckman.
:D
Made me laugh on the train...


User avatar
Francis Urquhart
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed 19 Oct 2016 10:15pm
Location: I couldn't possibly comment
Contact:

Re: Dylan Shiel

Post: # 1702323Post Francis Urquhart »

SaintPav wrote: What if Longer goes down on Holmes?
You might well think that, Pav. I couldn't possibly comment.

F.U.


Sorry Kevin Spacey, but for me, there’s only one, magnificently Machiavellian F.U.

Image
Post Reply