NOTHING HAS CHANGED

[David-Lee]

We gave up Hickey for pick #39 AND still had to give them pick #60?

Think about this last year we gave Port Adelaide pick #23 for Logan. Yep that amazing backman who took the best and fairest by storm. That's not to say he can't or won't improve but HE was worth pick #23 and he a seasoned and ready to start Ruckman reaps pick #39? They had good picks to give what about pick #22?

I will bet anyone on here if Hickey stays healthy he plays like the beast he is just like how we tossed aside so many seasoned rucks like Everitt and Mcevoy ( yes we got the brownlow medalst Dunstan at pick #18 and we are all better off not having a reliable, future captain and solid big man - one of the best, to tap to our troupe of Dunstan like slow moving mids).

Everitt he too was rubbish too rowdy trade him off so he can become all Australian elsewhere

Now Hickey hasn't achieved what either of these two did at Saints but he can now, we know Natinui cant stay fit and Hickey joins the premiers, they must be suckers! We got them good!

[ausfatcat]

22 years with potential 8 to 9 years of football vs 27 years with 4 years max football hence the price difference.


Agree thou I think Hickey has plenty of good football in him.

Everitt wanted to leave not our fault he's a dick

But Mcevoy was a wrong choice

[David-Lee]

22 years with potential 8 to 9 years of football vs 27 years with 4 years max football hence the price difference.


Agree thou I think Hickey has plenty of good football in him.

Everitt wanted to leave not our fault he's a dick

But Mcevoy was a wrong choice

Everitt was a dick that why we needed him. He had attitude and he was fierce at the contest, remember him gut running the field to take a mark and kick goals? He just happened to be a gigantic packer.

[ausfatcat]

He chose to leave we didn't ship him off

[prwilkinson]

Spider’s time with St Kilda was up. Has he paid the raffle money back to Hawthorn yet?
Hickey has been an extremely inconsistent footballer. I’m sure a trip across the Nullarbor every fortnight will help fix that.

[Shaggy]

We gave up Hickey for pick #39 AND still had to give them pick #60?

Think about this last year we gave Port Adelaide pick #23 for Logan. Yep that amazing backman who took the best and fairest by storm. That's not to say he can't or won't improve but HE was worth pick #23 and he a seasoned and ready to start Ruckman reaps pick #39? They had good picks to give what about pick #22?

I will bet anyone on here if Hickey stays healthy he plays like the beast he is just like how we tossed aside so many seasoned rucks like Everitt and Mcevoy ( yes we got the brownlow medalst Dunstan at pick #18 and we are all better off not having a reliable, future captain and solid big man - one of the best, to tap to our troupe of Dunstan like slow moving mids).

Everitt he too was rubbish too rowdy trade him off so he can become all Australian elsewhere

Now Hickey hasn't achieved what either of these two did at Saints but he can now, we know Natinui cant stay fit and Hickey joins the premiers, they must be suckers! We got them good!

Hickey was bagged by many posters on Saintsational so interesting there is now some love he is leaving.

At 27 years old he is not Everitt who had been all australian for us or McEvoy who was touted as future captain and was superior around the ground but struggled with tap-outs.

I like Hickey but he is only worth pick 39. He is nowhere near either Everitt's or McEvoy's league which is why he is only worth a later pick.

[Crossy66]

We gave up Hickey for pick #39 AND still had to give them pick #60?

Think about this last year we gave Port Adelaide pick #23 for Logan. Yep that amazing backman who took the best and fairest by storm. That's not to say he can't or won't improve but HE was worth pick #23 and he a seasoned and ready to start Ruckman reaps pick #39? They had good picks to give what about pick #22?

I will bet anyone on here if Hickey stays healthy he plays like the beast he is just like how we tossed aside so many seasoned rucks like Everitt and Mcevoy ( yes we got the brownlow medalst Dunstan at pick #18 and we are all better off not having a reliable, future captain and solid big man - one of the best, to tap to our troupe of Dunstan like slow moving mids).

Everitt he too was rubbish too rowdy trade him off so he can become all Australian elsewhere

Now Hickey hasn't achieved what either of these two did at Saints but he can now, we know Natinui cant stay fit and Hickey joins the premiers, they must be suckers! We got them good!

No comparison, Everitt left we didnt get rid of him
Hickeys 27, Austin 23. Hickey has played more games in the VFL than the AFL in the last two years. What should they pay for a player that cant hold down a senior spot in a bottom 3 club?

[kosifantutti]

We gave up Hickey for pick #39 AND still had to give them pick #60?

Think about this last year we gave Port Adelaide pick #23 for Logan. Yep that amazing backman who took the best and fairest by storm. That's not to say he can't or won't improve but HE was worth pick #23 and he a seasoned and ready to start Ruckman reaps pick #39? They had good picks to give what about pick #22?

I will bet anyone on here if Hickey stays healthy he plays like the beast he is just like how we tossed aside so many seasoned rucks like Everitt and Mcevoy ( yes we got the brownlow medalst Dunstan at pick #18 and we are all better off not having a reliable, future captain and solid big man - one of the best, to tap to our troupe of Dunstan like slow moving mids).

Everitt he too was rubbish too rowdy trade him off so he can become all Australian elsewhere

Now Hickey hasn't achieved what either of these two did at Saints but he can now, we know Natinui cant stay fit and Hickey joins the premiers, they must be suckers! We got them good!

Another whining thread. And you’re not even close on the Logan Austin deal. Where did you pluck pick 23 from?

[ausfatcat]

Think about this last year we gave Port Adelaide pick #23 for Logan. Yep that amazing backman who took the best and fairest by storm. That's not to say he can't or won't improve but HE was worth pick #23

Also no he wasn't worth pick 23 he was trade for this years third round and we also received ports 4th rnd pick, which ended up being pick 42 for Austin and pick 67

so using the AFLs point system 42 is worth 395 and 67 is worth 69 so effectively it was a trade for pick 47

[barneyboyz]

We gave up Hickey for pick #39 AND still had to give them pick #60?

Think about this last year we gave Port Adelaide pick #23 for Logan. Yep that amazing backman who took the best and fairest by storm. That's not to say he can't or won't improve but HE was worth pick #23 and he a seasoned and ready to start Ruckman reaps pick #39? They had good picks to give what about pick #22?

I will bet anyone on here if Hickey stays healthy he plays like the beast he is just like how we tossed aside so many seasoned rucks like Everitt and Mcevoy ( yes we got the brownlow medalst Dunstan at pick #18 and we are all better off not having a reliable, future captain and solid big man - one of the best, to tap to our troupe of Dunstan like slow moving mids).

Everitt he too was rubbish too rowdy trade him off so he can become all Australian elsewhere

Now Hickey hasn't achieved what either of these two did at Saints but he can now, we know Natinui cant stay fit and Hickey joins the premiers, they must be suckers! We got them good!

The fact that we weren't winning the ball through the middle much over the last two years, wasn't simply a roving issue. Neither of our 1st. two ruckmen could get enough of it to them.

I do agree with you on Benny Mc. though, and I was satisfied when he left, but it appears that we needed a good ruck to best develop our mids

[groupie1]

We gave up Hickey for pick #39 AND still had to give them pick #60?

Think about this last year we gave Port Adelaide pick #23 for Logan. Yep that amazing backman who took the best and fairest by storm. That's not to say he can't or won't improve but HE was worth pick #23 and he a seasoned and ready to start Ruckman reaps pick #39? They had good picks to give what about pick #22?

I will bet anyone on here if Hickey stays healthy he plays like the beast he is just like how we tossed aside so many seasoned rucks like Everitt and Mcevoy ( yes we got the brownlow medalst Dunstan at pick #18 and we are all better off not having a reliable, future captain and solid big man - one of the best, to tap to our troupe of Dunstan like slow moving mids).

Everitt he too was rubbish too rowdy trade him off so he can become all Australian elsewhere

Now Hickey hasn't achieved what either of these two did at Saints but he can now, we know Natinui cant stay fit and Hickey joins the premiers, they must be suckers! We got them good!

Hickey was bagged by many posters on Saintsational so interesting there is now some love he is leaving.

At 27 years old he is not Everitt who had been all australian for us or McEvoy who was touted as future captain and was superior around the ground but struggled with tap-outs.

I like Hickey but he is only worth pick 39. He is nowhere near either Everitt's or McEvoy's league which is why he is only worth a later pick.

You didn't broach the central questionL
Hickey for 39
Logan for 23

[MC Gusto]

In answering the central question

We traded a future 3rd for Austin and a future 4th back

Where did 23 come from???

[shrodes]

In answering the central question

We traded a future 3rd for Austin and a future 4th back

Where did 23 come from???

Never let the facts get in the way of a good rant

[David-Lee]

PORT ADELAIDE has capped off the 2017 Trade Period by completing two separate draft pick swaps with St Kilda and Melbourne.

The swaps result in the following;

Port receives picks 59 and 63 in this year's Draft plus a future second round selection from St Kilda, in exchange for pick 34 (Oscar Clavarino) and a future fourth round selection.

The Saints snared 13-gamer Austin and the Power's 2018 fourth-round pick in exchange for their own 2018 third-round selection.


This was for Logan, we gave 2018 3rd round pick and to sweeten it traded the said above, that 2nd round pick is #23 this year.

Do you get it? What fecking club gives away pick 59, 63 and a future 2nd rounder in exchange for pick 34 and pick #69? No one because it included our pick #23 to get Logan.

Those are called facts.

[kosifantutti]

PORT ADELAIDE has capped off the 2017 Trade Period by completing two separate draft pick swaps with St Kilda and Melbourne.

The swaps result in the following;

Port receives picks 59 and 63 in this year's Draft plus a future second round selection from St Kilda, in exchange for pick 34 (Oscar Clavarino) and a future fourth round selection.

The Saints snared 13-gamer Austin and the Power's 2018 fourth-round pick in exchange for their own 2018 third-round selection.


This was for Logan, we gave 2018 3rd round pick and to sweeten it traded the said above, that 2nd round pick is #23 this year.

Do you get it? What fecking club gives away pick 59, 63 and a future 2nd rounder in exchange for pick 34 and pick #69? No one because it included our pick #23 to get Logan.

Those are called facts.

So you're just ignoring Port's second rounder from last year and saying it's our second round pick for Austin.

This would look better if we'd had a better year.

[Devilhead]

PORT ADELAIDE has capped off the 2017 Trade Period by completing two separate draft pick swaps with St Kilda and Melbourne.

The swaps result in the following;

Port receives picks 59 and 63 in this year's Draft plus a future second round selection from St Kilda, in exchange for pick 34 (Oscar Clavarino) and a future fourth round selection.

The Saints snared 13-gamer Austin and the Power's 2018 fourth-round pick in exchange for their own 2018 third-round selection.


This was for Logan, we gave 2018 3rd round pick and to sweeten it traded the said above, that 2nd round pick is #23 this year.

Do you get it? What fecking club gives away pick 59, 63 and a future 2nd rounder in exchange for pick 34 and pick #69? No one because it included our pick #23 to get Logan.

Those are called facts.

We wanted to get back in the 2nd round last year (pick 34) because we gave way last year's original 2nd rounder for Steele the year before so to do that we had to give away this year's 2nd rounder which we obviously thought would be a number closer to 30

Now of course we didn't have a 2nd rounder this year but now we do through the Hickey and Hanneberry trades but we don't have next year ...... and so on and so on

We might do the same again next year - it's our standard move

[David-Lee]

PORT ADELAIDE has capped off the 2017 Trade Period by completing two separate draft pick swaps with St Kilda and Melbourne.

The swaps result in the following;

Port receives picks 59 and 63 in this year's Draft plus a future second round selection from St Kilda, in exchange for pick 34 (Oscar Clavarino) and a future fourth round selection.

The Saints snared 13-gamer Austin and the Power's 2018 fourth-round pick in exchange for their own 2018 third-round selection.


This was for Logan, we gave 2018 3rd round pick and to sweeten it traded the said above, that 2nd round pick is #23 this year.

Do you get it? What fecking club gives away pick 59, 63 and a future 2nd rounder in exchange for pick 34 and pick #69? No one because it included our pick #23 to get Logan.

Those are called facts.

So you're just ignoring Port's second rounder from last year and saying it's our second round pick for Austin.

This would look better if we'd had a better year.


Yes, I'm ignoring it completely it makes me seem far superior and basically I tire of this insessent querying of my genius!

[bigcarl]

Who was the klutz that traded Hickey - our only decent ruckman - days before the new ruck rules were revealed?

Rules that most likely will mean a return to two ruckmen.

My betting is on Richo. He never rated Hickey and puts his trust in a player who, while “strong at the contest”, struggles to get a kick. One’s an actual footballer, the other is just a big log.

Classic St Kilda balls up.

[Crossy66]

Who was the klutz that traded Hickey - our only decent ruckman - days before the new ruck rules were revealed?

Rules that most likely will mean a return to two ruckmen.

My betting is on Richo. He never rated Hickey and puts his trust in a player who, while “strong at the contest”, struggles to get a kick. One’s an actual footballer, the other is just a big log.

Classic St Kilda balls up.

Marshall a better version of Hickey - he was surplus.

[terry smith rules]

Who was the klutz that traded Hickey - our only decent ruckman - days before the new ruck rules were revealed?

Rules that most likely will mean a return to two ruckmen.

My betting is on Richo. He never rated Hickey and puts his trust in a player who, while “strong at the contest”, struggles to get a kick. One’s an actual footballer, the other is just a big log.

Classic St Kilda balls up.

Explain how you get a theory for two ruckman required with the new rules?

[bigcarl]

Who was the klutz that traded Hickey - our only decent ruckman - days before the new ruck rules were revealed?

Rules that most likely will mean a return to two ruckmen.

My betting is on Richo. He never rated Hickey and puts his trust in a player who, while “strong at the contest”, struggles to get a kick. One’s an actual footballer, the other is just a big log.

Classic St Kilda balls up.

Marshall a better version of Hickey - he was surplus.

If Hickey was surplus what does that make Longer? Also, Marshall I reckon is going to be a gun key forward. You don’t want to use a thoroughbred for hack ruck work.

[Crossy66]

Who was the klutz that traded Hickey - our only decent ruckman - days before the new ruck rules were revealed?

Rules that most likely will mean a return to two ruckmen.

My betting is on Richo. He never rated Hickey and puts his trust in a player who, while “strong at the contest”, struggles to get a kick. One’s an actual footballer, the other is just a big log.

Classic St Kilda balls up.

Marshall a better version of Hickey - he was surplus.

If Hickey was surplus what does that make Longer? Also, Marshall I reckon is going to be a gun key forward. You don’t want to use a thoroughbred for hack ruck work.

Marshall is a ruckman, not a forward. and not a thoroughbred, Not to say that he cant develop, I agree that he will, but he wont be holding down a key position any time soon imho
The thing with Hickey, is that he and Marshall offer the same thing. Both are OK at the ruck contest and both do better work around the ground. I think marshall shades him for hardness and the ability to go forward. Longer is a very different proposition in that he is the better at the ruck and bullocking work but is not as good as the others around the ground. Therefore inho, either Marshall or Hickey were surplace and they have stuck with the younger bloke and sold the older one who has a bit of currency

[kosifantutti]

Who was the klutz that traded Hickey - our only decent ruckman - days before the new ruck rules were revealed?

Rules that most likely will mean a return to two ruckmen.

My betting is on Richo. He never rated Hickey and puts his trust in a player who, while “strong at the contest”, struggles to get a kick. One’s an actual footballer, the other is just a big log.

Classic St Kilda balls up.

Explain how you get a theory for two ruckman required with the new rules?

Because they don't have to kick to themselves when playing on from full back. It's pretty obvious when you think about it.

[chico2001]

Marshall will be a forward first and back up ruckman in my view.

[bigcarl]

Marshall will be a forward first and back up ruckman in my view.

Yes, I agree. I’ve got him ahead of McCaetin at this stage on exposed form.