Did we really knock back GWS’ picks 4 & 7?!?

[Saintmatt]

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2018/05/07/ ... -mistakes/

This is the first I’ve heard of it. King is a troglodyte but he makes a fair point that if they’re trading up to ensure they get Petracca but we still don’t take Petracca ...

So - we don’t get 4; don’t get 7; don’t get Petracca but do get Paddy!!

Holy mother of God ... it keeps getting worse on this basis ...

[SydneySainter]

From what I’ve heard, yes, it’s true...

[degruch]

The King...of hindsight?

[SydneySainter]

The King...of hindsight?

He is right though. You need to be accountable for your decisions and in what was supposed to be the defining draft of our rebuild, we could have either taken Petracca, who the Giants were prepared to give us pick 4 & 7 for. Or, we could have had picks 4 & 7.

[takeaway]

I'm sure it has previously been established that that offer was never on the table. Even David no checking facts King said he "thinks" it was the case - junk journalism.

Anyway, I would still take Paddy over Petracca, forwards are more valuable in the long term, and Petracca is nothing special. Just another midfielder.

[desertsaint]

The more interesting story on SEN is 'Stat of the Year'.

"Melbourne champion Garry Lyon said, “that could be the stat of the year,” while former Essendon captain Tim Watson was stunned about the number.
“I’m staggered,” Watson said.
“Given the pressure acts that are expected from players now and the defensive actions of players now, it’s almost impossible to believe that somebody who has played seven games has had four tackles.”

That somebody is of course one of our leaders. Take a bow Jack Newnes.

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2018/05/07/ ... -the-year/

[parkeysainter]

Hindsight and hindsight.

Who cares what decisions we made at the time. We got Paddy. Dees got Petrecca. Live and deal with it. Its not changing nor is us getting pick 4 and 7.

[degruch]

The King...of hindsight?

He is right though. You need to be accountable for your decisions and in what was supposed to be the defining draft of our rebuild, we could have either taken Petracca, who the Giants were prepared to give us pick 4 & 7 for. Or, we could have had picks 4 & 7.

I guess we'd have to laboriously pour through yet another draft and retrospectively claim picks #4 and #7 to see if it would have been worthwhile. King should have more idea than an outsider on a forum, but I'm also not trying to sell papers. Firstly, would GWS required yet another gun mid, having recruited a stack of established stars already? Secondly, would we have got the key forward we were obviously seeking with #4 or #7?

[saintspremiers]

The more interesting story on SEN is 'Stat of the Year'.

"Melbourne champion Garry Lyon said, “that could be the stat of the year,” while former Essendon captain Tim Watson was stunned about the number.
“I’m staggered,” Watson said.
“Given the pressure acts that are expected from players now and the defensive actions of players now, it’s almost impossible to believe that somebody who has played seven games has had four tackles.”

That somebody is of course one of our leaders. Take a bow Jack Newnes.

https://www.sen.com.au/news/2018/05/07/ ... -the-year/

Please read:

“Rewarding Mediocracy & My Fav Players”
by Alan Richardson

[Dr Spaceman]

The King...of hindsight?

He is right though. You need to be accountable for your decisions and in what was supposed to be the defining draft of our rebuild, we could have either taken Petracca, who the Giants were prepared to give us pick 4 & 7 for. Or, we could have had picks 4 & 7.

I guess we'd have to laboriously pour through yet another draft and retrospectively claim picks #4 and #7 to see if it would have been worthwhile. King should have more idea than an outsider on a forum, but I'm also not trying to sell papers. Firstly, would GWS required yet another gun mid, having recruited a stack of established stars already? Secondly, would we have got the key forward we were obviously seeking with #4 or #7?

Apparently Petracca is the greatest player of his era and everyone and their dog, plus their dog's dog, knows we should have taken him at pick 1.

Therefore why should it matter if we were offered 4 & 7?

Because even if we were offered 4 & 7, and there's no proof that we were, then we would've had to knock it back in order to pick Petracca. After all, Petracca is the greatest player of his era.

But I'm happy we took Paddy so it's all just noise as far as I'm concerned.

[MC Gusto]

It was pick 1 plus something (maybe a 2nd rounder) for 4 & 7

Also we were going to take Laverde with 7 is what I understood

[Toy Saint]

We could have even got Patrick Cripps with pick 7

[kosifantutti]

David King can’t understand the details of trades that did happen.

How can we expect him to be correct on trades that didn’t happen?

[degruch]

David King can’t understand the details of trades that did happen.

How can we expect him to be correct on trades that didn’t happen?

Is he trying to say we should have taken Petracca instead of Francis?

[remboy]

It was pick 1 plus something (maybe a 2nd rounder) for 4 & 7

Also we were going to take Laverde with 7 is what I understood

Yep. They wanted 1 & 21 in return for 4& 7. The feeling was that the top three were stand outs and we didn't want to pass up on one of them. Also didn't want to give up a second pick.

[Jacks Back]

It was pick 1 plus something (maybe a 2nd rounder) for 4 & 7

Also we were going to take Laverde with 7 is what I understood

Yep. They wanted 1 & 21 in return for 4& 7. The feeling was that the top three were stand outs and we didn't want to pass up on one of them. Also didn't want to give up a second pick.

Unfortunately number one is standing out - again.