Pick 14

[kosifantutti]

If we get either

Oliver, Tucker, Matheson, Gresham, Balic

We will have another seriously good player to complement the current group

Along with Rice

My hope is that we luck out in the 60's and snare a roughie

Yes I've had the same 5 for quite a while - that might be around at Saints first DP

Mathieson, Balic, Oliver, Gresham, Tucker.

Like Bailey Rice - then maybe they find a hidden gem with the last DP

We may not get another pick in the main draft if we have to use a bit on Rice but them we will just use the PSD for the extra pick we need.

I thought that if we have three spots on the list, we can pick 3 players in the National Draft regardless of what we give up for Rice.

[BigMart]

Haha...

Joffa, a little cheapie...

I know there is one or two that made a deal about the 'photo' and are still doing it after 4 years... Talk about something to hang your hat on??

I call it photogate nowadays... And like everything, overtime it gets exaggerated and blown out of proportion, and definitely not in context.

The real commentary was far less entertaining .... I think it was along the lines of...
"No photo, there's a surprise"

A stab at our history of taking unknowns or unexpected players (Howard, Gwilt, Raymond, Sweeney)
It wasn't a go at whether Cripps could play... But at the recruiters for springing yet another surprise .... A reach.

But carry on pal, you tell the story how you want to buddy, you've done it so well for years... And it's not the only thing you lie about though is it?!

At least all that drafting and development criticism at the time has turned out to be unwarranted... Oh, hang on... We are allowed to bag it now, aren't we??



Btw
Joke would work so much better if Cripps actually represented any value for the club
He cost pick 24
Three years development
About 20 or 30 underwhelming games
And we got pick 43 in return because he pissed off home.

[Scoop]

I thought that if we have three spots on the list, we can pick 3 players in the National Draft regardless of what we give up for Rice.

Correct.

[ripplug66]

Haha...

Joffa, a little cheapie...

I know there is one or two that made a deal about the 'photo' and are still doing it after 4 years... Talk about something to hang your hat on??

I call it photogate nowadays... And like everything, overtime it gets exaggerated and blown out of proportion, and definitely not in context.

The real commentary was far less entertaining .... I think it was along the lines of...
"No photo, there's a surprise"

A stab at our history of taking unknowns or unexpected players (Howard, Gwilt, Raymond, Sweeney)
It wasn't a go at whether Cripps could play... But at the recruiters for springing yet another surprise .... A reach.

But carry on pal, you tell the story how you want to buddy, you've done it so well for years... And it's not the only thing you lie about though is it?!

At least all that drafting and development criticism at the time has turned out to be unwarranted... Oh, hang on... We are allowed to bag it now, aren't we??



Btw
Joke would work so much better if Cripps actually represented any value for the club
He cost pick 24
Three years development
About 20 or 30 underwhelming games
And we got pick 43 in return because he pissed off home.

Ive always wondered why you have a go of our recruiting of Cripps but not a guy like Winmar but lets face it. it because you made a silly statement at the time of his recruiting and no matter what proof shows you were wrong you will keep going. Its funny that of the 4 coaches Cripps has had 3 seemed keen to play him and the only one who didn't was SW. And the only one not coaching now is SW. Even with your ego surely you cant say you know more than Lyon, Worsfold and Simpson? And didn't Cripps cost us 24 in a completely compromised draft and was then traded in a completely uncompromised draft. Surely that effected his draft position by about 12 spots which makes him about a pick 36. Also fancy having in 20 to 30 underwhelming games in your first 3 years. I hope for Paddy's sake he comes good in the next 2 years otherwise you will be on to him as well.

[Bunk_Moreland]

Well we all know a poster on here called McCartin a fat diabetic so don't hold your breath on that one

[suss]

This could make things interesting:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-draft- ... l3qbp.html

[magnifisaint]

This could make things interesting:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-draft- ... l3qbp.html

What an absolute drop kick

[markp]

This could make things interesting:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-draft- ... l3qbp.html

What an absolute drop kick

Curnow, from Bellbrae, was widely expected to be within the top 10 picks in this year's draft, with Melbourne and Essendon showing interest in the 18-year-old

Perfect fit for the bombers... evade and deny when busted.

Leadership material.

[footynut]

This could make things interesting:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-draft- ... l3qbp.html

Just imagine he slipped through to us, I'd pick him in a heart beat, not even a second thought. Never going to happen.

[magnifisaint]

This could make things interesting:

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-draft- ... l3qbp.html

Just imagine he slipped through to us, I'd pick him in a heart beat, not even a second thought. Never going to happen.

Would make good mates with Carlisle

[BigMart]

Joffa

You realise you need to reference statements like that when you make them... Or a skeptical person would think they are typically untrue. I thought at the time (and still do) that Christian Petracca is a better prospect, just has more talent. You did too, and I seem to recall someone throwing a hissy fit on bigfooty and coming back a couple of days later and admitting they had come around to the selection of Paddy.
Yes, paddy is Diebetic... And that ain't ideal when trying to get to elite levels of fitness. Yes, he wasn't in great shape, still isn't ... He lacks definition and struggles to run out quarters in the VFL. And sorry to say, but his first season was a bit underwhelming at VFL level, for an elite talent... Possibly on par with Tom Lynchs first season.

But I can see why they selected Paddy... He is a sure thing to be a solid AFL key fwd... And that isn't easy to come by
Petracca could be either a Dustin Martin/Danger/Stevie J level HF/Mid
Or a Caydn Beetham/Colin Sylvia type
He's a cocky/arrogant, lazy yet a freakish talent

Winmar was a pick 32
Was a poor selection in hindsight.... I didn't read too much into the draft in 2009 ... And to be honest same goes 2010-11-12 I was very busy with work and cricket in those years and the drafts were heavily compromised and therefore boring.
I knew a lot about Luke Parker and Arryn Siposs due to knowing them or seeing them play. And then only what I read online

Fact is
Cripps was not spoken about online as a potential Saint ... So in essence a surprise.

I listened to the draft live... And was a bit incensed that we did not take Jack Darling at 24 as I knew of him from his underage year.

[BigMart]

Btw

Interesting to hear from all recruiters that they'll take the best available regardless at Pick 14

But, the legends on here know better.

[ripplug66]

Joffa

You realise you need to reference statements like that when you make them... Or a skeptical person would think they are typically untrue. I thought at the time (and still do) that Christian Petracca is a better prospect, just has more talent. You did too, and I seem to recall someone throwing a hissy fit on bigfooty and coming back a couple of days later and admitting they had come around to the selection of Paddy.
Yes, paddy is Diebetic... And that ain't ideal when trying to get to elite levels of fitness. Yes, he wasn't in great shape, still isn't ... He lacks definition and struggles to run out quarters in the VFL. And sorry to say, but his first season was a bit underwhelming at VFL level, for an elite talent... Possibly on par with Tom Lynchs first season.

But I can see why they selected Paddy... He is a sure thing to be a solid AFL key fwd... And that isn't easy to come by
Petracca could be either a Dustin Martin/Danger/Stevie J level HF/Mid
Or a Caydn Beetham/Colin Sylvia type
He's a cocky/arrogant, lazy yet a freakish talent

Winmar was a pick 32
Was a poor selection in hindsight.... I didn't read too much into the draft in 2009 ... And to be honest same goes 2010-11-12 I was very busy with work and cricket in those years and the drafts were heavily compromised and therefore boring.
I knew a lot about Luke Parker and Arryn Siposs due to knowing them or seeing them play. And then only what I read online

Fact is
Cripps was not spoken about online as a potential Saint ... So in essence a surprise.

I listened to the draft live... And was a bit incensed that we did not take Jack Darling at 24 as I knew of him from his underage year.

Darling. Yes very good in the GF if I recall. Funny that you remember him but bugger all else. And who cares if they are a surprise. As for being a diabetic I believe that would have no issues on his fitness. Weightman seemed to be pretty fit and Cripps seems fine. And at least you have given him a year before bagging McCartin now after giving him and hour last November. As I have said previously there are people who say they are true saints supporters but would rather be proved right and fail for us than succeed and be proved wrong. That I have no doubt based on the history of some posters.

[Con Gorozidis]

For those asking the question - yes Wayne is distantly related to Terry ("our grandmas are cousins or something") but is actually the nephew of Micky O (not sure if by blood or marriage). I cant see him lasting through to 14 though. More like a top 10er.

http://www.saints.com.au/video/2015-11- ... ra-draft15

[desertsaint]

Joffa
I thought at the time (and still do) that Christian Petracca is a better prospect, just has more talent.

But I can see why they selected Paddy... He is a sure thing to be a solid AFL key fwd... And that isn't easy to come by

So are you suggesting after all that clubs don't necessarily draft the best player available, but instead draft the type best for them?
hmm.

[Bunk_Moreland]

Joffa
I thought at the time (and still do) that Christian Petracca is a better prospect, just has more talent.

But I can see why they selected Paddy... He is a sure thing to be a solid AFL key fwd... And that isn't easy to come by

So are you suggesting after all that clubs don't necessarily draft the best player available, but instead draft the type best for them?
hmm.

A poster called McCartin a fat diabetic, I think this is appalling, and if that poster denies that, they are a liar as well as a fool.

Appalling behaviour from a supposed adult. I hope he still doesn't call people with mental disabilities as retards or physical handicaps as spastics, but wouldn't be sure about that.

Anyways, enough of a inrantile egotist, seems like talk has cooled on Mathieson, and also very interesting to read that the Saints will go best available.

This draft period is much more interesting that last year.

So if for example Francis slid (wont happen but lets assume) we would select him. Fair enough, cant have enough good positional players.

Would be interesting if Curnow is still available after the Carlisle issues. What criteria is "best available", football ability alone, or also othere subjective veriables like "character"?

[ripplug66]

Joffa
I thought at the time (and still do) that Christian Petracca is a better prospect, just has more talent.

But I can see why they selected Paddy... He is a sure thing to be a solid AFL key fwd... And that isn't easy to come by

So are you suggesting after all that clubs don't necessarily draft the best player available, but instead draft the type best for them?
hmm.

A poster called McCartin a fat diabetic, I think this is appalling, and if that poster denies that, they are a liar as well as a fool.

Appalling behaviour from a supposed adult. I hope he still doesn't call people with mental disabilities as retards or physical handicaps as spastics, but wouldn't be sure about that.

Anyways, enough of a inrantile egotist, seems like talk has cooled on Mathieson, and also very interesting to read that the Saints will go best available.

This draft period is much more interesting that last year.

So if for example Francis slid (wont happen but lets assume) we would select him. Fair enough, cant have enough good positional players.

Would be interesting if Curnow is still available after the Carlisle issues. What criteria is "best available", football ability alone, or also othere subjective veriables like "character"?

I still don't buy this best available. I'm not even sure we did it with pick one last year. it seems we were spooked by the cost of Boyd and even though Paddy was in the top 2 he suddenly became number one. If we had the Goldstein and Gawn in our side and the best available was another ruckman surely we wouldn't pick him. Pick 14 which will be pick 18 allows you to take a player that suits your needs as well as being close to the best available.

[BigMart]

Haha joffa

You keep posting stuff, some nuff nuffs might believe you?...

I think Trout took paddy m because he believed he was the best potential player in the draft in that whilst Christian was better performed, more talented and is a freak, paddy plays a KP and is seen as close to a sure thing as you can get... Add those two sentiments together and he was hard to go past. You don't take a risk with a top 5 pick.

To say we got 'spooked' about Boyd is hilarious. If we did and that's the reason for the decision .... Would suggest we need a new recruiting staff! But that is obviously not the case...
Our recruiting and development has gone gangbusters since the appt of
AR, Elshaug to head of recruiting, Bains to LM, finally a fully resourced recruiting staff, Paul Hudson and his team Gilbee, Searle
These guys are amongst the best operators in the caper
Expect Liberatoe to either be promoted or poached aswell... We are very unlucky we didn't get Beverage last year too...


Today's article confirms a pretty simple process of taking in the best talent. Which for some reason, silly posters can't accept.
The harder thing is identifying and ordering the talent.

[ripplug66]

Haha joffa

You keep posting stuff, some nuff nuffs might believe you?...

I think Trout took paddy m because he believed he was the best potential player in the draft in that whilst Christian was better performed, more talented and is a freak, paddy plays a KP and is seen as close to a sure thing as you can get... Add those two sentiments together and he was hard to go past. You don't take a risk with a top 5 pick.

To say we got 'spooked' about Boyd is hilarious. If we did and that's the reason for the decision .... Would suggest we need a new recruiting staff! But that is obviously not the case...
Our recruiting and development has gone gangbusters since the appt of
AR, Elshaug to head of recruiting, Bains to LM, finally a fully resourced recruiting staff, Paul Hudson and his team Gilbee, Searle
These guys are amongst the best operators in the caper
Expect Liberatoe to either be promoted or poached aswell... We are very unlucky we didn't get Beverage last year too...


Today's article confirms a pretty simple process of taking in the best talent. Which for some reason, silly posters can't accept.
The harder thing is identifying and ordering the talent.

Firstly you have no idea if we didn't get spooked as as they were both one two any they may have swapped them around. Certainly no reason to sack the recruiting staff. You say best available but what if the best available at 14 which is 18 was a ruckman and our rucks were Goldstein and Gawn. yep and I know they aren't but this is a hypothetical. Still waiting for an answer to about why I don't get trading or drafting or whatever you accused me of previously but we all know your MO so not surprised.

[samoht]

re:pick 14 (and any pick, really).
Best available = after the fact. Who knows, for sure, who that will turn out to be.

Subjectively judged best available prospect = the best you can do right now, at the draft, before the fact.
Every club has their own opinion and preferences and notional order.

No-one agrees on the order - it's not an absolute. It might come down to 5 or 6 players that look the most likely prospects at AFL level.

So why not recruit to your team's needs - in our instance a run and carry midfielder - out of these 5 or 6 most likely prospects, if one happens to fit the bill.
I still maintain we are well served with Armitage and Dunstan (and Ross, etc..) as our inside midfielders.

I note that Fyfe went from an outside player to both an inside and outside midfielder. It is easier for an outside player to add the inside aspect of the game - than vice versa.

We had to leave a talented inside midfielder in Armitage out of the 2009 GF - we couldn't fit him in, as we went with Ball as the inside midfielder! That should tell us something.

[saintbrat]

according to today's H-S we have pick 17-- did I miss us finishing in the top 8?

[ripplug66]

according to today's H-S we have pick 17-- did I miss us finishing in the top 8?

Seems about right even though I thought it may end up being 18.

[Bunk_Moreland]

ripplug66 wouldn't read too much into the best available stuff.

Club will choose whom they like and just say "in our opinion so and so is the best available"

After all it is all about opinions isn't it?

My concern is that some so called Saints supporters value their ego over supporting who we select.

I want Gresham but will support and hope that id we chose another player he is successful.

Last year I felt Petracca was the best. We chose Paddy, and I hope like hell he is successful for the team. Unlike some I would never insult him in such as disgusting manner to call him a fat diabetic, just to try and score some type of point for their fragile ego.

Lets hope real Saints fans support our choice @ 14 whomever he is. Hope he doesn't get abused by some internet hero, but I am sure he will

[Viking3]

I'd like Mathieson or Oliver (from the minimal videos I've seen), but I will be happy with whoever the recruiters choose because they know a damn sight more than I do!!

[Bluthy]

I'd like Mathieson or Oliver (from the minimal videos I've seen), but I will be happy with whoever the recruiters choose because they know a damn sight more than I do!!

Everyone knows that Viking. But the fun is to deceive yourself that you have some sort of genius, gut level talent spotting instinct based on a minute and half highlights on utube and a paragraph write up in the Age. And if you get it right you can crow about it for a couple of years (your wrong calls of course are conveniently never to be mentioned again)

It's funny how its seems to have neatly divided into two schools of thought on our pick 14 based on what the experts perceive as our current weaknesses:

a) We need outside pace/class - we have enough slow inside players - armo, dunstan, ross, acres but don't much real class and pace in the midfield
b) We need inside ball winning - the stats show we just don't win enough contested footy which is still the basis of all the good teams

I think we still need both more inside and class players so either would be ok. But with pick 14 a lot of the cream could be gone so I tend to see us getting a blue ribbon ball winner with pick 14. Then with Rice and the later pick, get some run and good disposal. If we end up with pick 5 o 6 next year then that will be a great chance to get a real classy, speedy onballer to go with Freeman, Steven and Billings.