Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
BarryGrogan wrote: ↑Tue 15 Oct 2019 6:56pm
You missed the point.
It was zilch, or pick 58.
We took 58. Good deal.
Precisely, there's no point in agonising over this trade, Jack was most unlikely to return to anywhere near his best form when at his peak a few years ago. Winning 4 B&Fs at St Kilda has to be seen in context because not once did he make the AFL All Australian team of 22, and as far as I know he managed a nomination in the 40 man squad just once.
The other point to consider is that many players who once were stars achieve a late pick when they transfer to another club in their twilight years - players are valued exclusively on their most recent form. Pick 58 is about as much can be expected for Jack Steven based on 2019.
"I am an old man and have known a great many troubles, but most of them never happened."
"Life would be infinitely happier if we could only be born at the age of eighty and gradually approach eighteen."
Mark Twain (1835 - 1910) American writer and humorist
This would be a terrible trade for our club. The smug Geelong FC get everything for nothing. I woud rather keep him and hope for the best. Pick 58 is insulating and if we need to pay part of his salary it's embarrassing after such a good trade period . Dont do it Saints.
Is it possible we have underpaid Jack Steven. Last year he almost certainly only got paid his base contract. Next year he was reportedly back loaded. Are we just paying out what was shorted from his first years of the contract? I'm gonna tell myself that that would be fair. It's probably close to half the 400k he may get at Geelong. Time to move on.
B.M wrote: ↑Tue 15 Oct 2019 2:04pm
Why should we have to ‘cop it’?
He’s a contracted player
58 for a four time b&f is a disgrace!
Geelongs question might be Why should we have to cop it. If Geelong rate Jack in terms of risk factors like consequence and frequency of issues, they may think all the potential value of Jack on the park after a great preseason, still wont cut it. I would think the downside to Jacks entry to the club might be higher to them than we think. They wouldn't be looking at past history of Jack as a leading factor as he recent condition could overrun the benefit.
Not my opinion, but if I was Geelong I would be very wary of this. Factors include; reputation, contract value and payment, games played, team cohesion and length of stay at AFL. In terms of average cost of Jack per game versus his ability to influence games would not match our view, thus the low pick.
Midfield clearances and clear winners are needed to make an effective forward line.
You need to protect the ball handler to increase posession efficiency
magnifisaint wrote: ↑Tue 15 Oct 2019 8:42pm
Saints should tell the Pussies to shove their pick up their clacker. Steven then can make a decision to play or give it up.
If they did this I don't think Geelong would batter an eyelid and say OK you keep him and manage/deal with the situation.
Midfield clearances and clear winners are needed to make an effective forward line.
You need to protect the ball handler to increase posession efficiency
BarryGrogan wrote: ↑Tue 15 Oct 2019 6:56pm
You missed the point.
It was zilch, or pick 58.
We took 58. Good deal.
Precisely, there's no point in agonising over this trade, Jack was most unlikely to return to anywhere near his best form when at his peak a few years ago. Winning 4 B&Fs at St Kilda has to be seen in context because not once did he make the AFL All Australian team of 22, and as far as I know he managed a nomination in the 40 man squad just once.
The other point to consider is that many players who once were stars achieve a late pick when they transfer to another club in their twilight years - players are valued exclusively on their most recent form. Pick 58 is about as much can be expected for Jack Steven based on 2019.
Agree totally. Best option, the past is the past the future potential is probably not significant. You can remind me if he gives us hell on the ground but I would be looking at groups of games for ratings and consistent performance.
Midfield clearances and clear winners are needed to make an effective forward line.
You need to protect the ball handler to increase posession efficiency
B.M wrote: ↑Tue 15 Oct 2019 2:04pm
Why should we have to ‘cop it’?
He’s a contracted player
58 for a four time b&f is a disgrace!
Geelongs question might be Why should we have to cop it. If Geelong rate Jack in terms of risk factors like consequence and frequency of issues, they may think all the potential value of Jack on the park after a great preseason, still wont cut it. I would think the downside to Jacks entry to the club might be higher to them than we think. They wouldn't be looking at past history of Jack as a leading factor as he recent condition could overrun the benefit.
Not my opinion, but if I was Geelong I would be very wary of this. Factors include; reputation, contract value and payment, games played, team cohesion and length of stay at AFL. In terms of average cost of Jack per game versus his ability to influence games would not match our view, thus the low pick.
A voice of reason.
The trade stinks but we had absolutely no leverage.
Makes you think, for every player that a club decides not to trade against their will (i.e. Tim Kelly), there is a Cam McCarthey / Jack Steven scenario where the club would have been a hell of a lot better off trading.
lol Pick 58 AND paying for his salary. Jack can have two options
1. Keep his higher pay and play at the saints.
2. Go to Geelong for lower pay and we'll receive a 3rd round pick without paying any of his salary.
That's it, not getting bent over by Geelong, it's ludicrous to pay for his wage. If Geelong want him, they can cut their players wage. They're the ones trying to make the grand final next year, they know their window is closing, its now or never for them, so they should rightly pay for it. They lost Kelly, they need a ready replacement, Jack could be that guy, it's a high risk high reward situation, either take it or leave it.
But we ain't giving him away for sweet fa and paying for it as well.
Last edited by lefty on Tue 15 Oct 2019 10:25pm, edited 2 times in total.
saint-stu wrote: ↑Tue 15 Oct 2019 1:33pm
We didn't have much leverage in this. Just have to cop it. It's just that Jack hadn't come out and said he wants to move this year, so I was sort of hoping he might decide to stay.
Yes we do have a say keep him, even if he doesn't play worth it for not getting bent over.
fugazi wrote: ↑Tue 15 Oct 2019 2:15pm
BM you have obviously heard the same rumours re JS.
The only explanation for allowing this trade to go thru is guilt.
Can you guys please enlighten those of us who don’t know what you’re talking about?
Have a look on Bigfooty scandals thread if you must. (Not sure how they get away with that, by the way)
Been pretty widely mentioned.
I'd written it off as garbage.
Just 4 posts above mine, someone actually uses the word leverage?
If you were reading the thread, you would have read that??
Then perhaps you could put 2 and 2 together and assume I’m replying to him.
I honestly don’t think it’s that difficult to follow a conversation? Without having to repeat something someone says before answering. But I guess some people need that to happen?
BarryGrogan wrote: ↑Tue 15 Oct 2019 6:56pm
You missed the point.
It was zilch, or pick 58.
We took 58. Good deal.
Precisely, there's no point in agonising over this trade, Jack was most unlikely to return to anywhere near his best form when at his peak a few years ago. Winning 4 B&Fs at St Kilda has to be seen in context because not once did he make the AFL All Australian team of 22, and as far as I know he managed a nomination in the 40 man squad just once.
The other point to consider is that many players who once were stars achieve a late pick when they transfer to another club in their twilight years - players are valued exclusively on their most recent form. Pick 58 is about as much can be expected for Jack Steven based on 2019.
That would be true if the ultimatum really was pick 58 or nothing... but its not here.
Just 4 posts above mine, someone actually uses the word leverage?
If you were reading the thread, you would have read that??
Then perhaps you could put 2 and 2 together and assume I’m replying to him.
I honestly don’t think it’s that difficult to follow a conversation? Without having to repeat something someone says before answering. But I guess some people need that to happen?
I didn't realise you expected a reply. Jack hardly played this year due to his health. It sounds like he needs to move to be closer to family and the root cause won't be resolved until he does that. (I'm just reading between the lines). He came back late in the year, visibly unfit and had a rare poor game after a pretty good game. He asked to go last year and Richo refused and this year was the result. James Gallagher said today that he wants to go to Geelong, so we won't get much out of him if we force him to stay. In this case, what can we do? Hold him back in spite? That's pretty childish and not a good look for the club. Ratts and others at the club have said on many occasions that their main concern is Jacks health. So we have to make a trade. Geelong are taking advantage of this and screwing us, but I can't see how we have a *realistic* choice in this.
Just 4 posts above mine, someone actually uses the word leverage?
If you were reading the thread, you would have read that??
Then perhaps you could put 2 and 2 together and assume I’m replying to him.
I honestly don’t think it’s that difficult to follow a conversation? Without having to repeat something someone says before answering. But I guess some people need that to happen?
B.M. Could you at least say the Nic of the person you are responding to ... most of us come in and out of threads and it might only be a comment 4 above yours BUT some of may have read that comment and then left the topic and read another 2 or 3 topics awaiting more comments in that original thread. Quoting reminds and links the conversation. Of course there is usually no need to research-read the whole quote. It acts as a prompt.
AwayInUSA no longer ... have based myself back in Melbourne for a decade of Saintsational Success (with regular trips back to the USA)
Just 4 posts above mine, someone actually uses the word leverage?
If you were reading the thread, you would have read that??
Then perhaps you could put 2 and 2 together and assume I’m replying to him.
I honestly don’t think it’s that difficult to follow a conversation? Without having to repeat something someone says before answering. But I guess some people need that to happen?
B.M. Could you at least say the Nic of the person you are responding to ... most of us come in and out of threads and it might only be a comment 4 above yours BUT some of may have read that comment and then left the topic and read another 2 or 3 topics awaiting more comments in that original thread. Quoting reminds and links the conversation. Of course there is usually no need to research-read the whole quote. It acts as a prompt.
Agree.
More importantly, the use of the quote function ensures other posters are not misquoted which I think is the main motivation to not using the quote function.
Ok. The deal has been done. JS to the Cats for pick 58.
While I appreciate the reasons why Jack sought a trade, I think it is an absolute disgrace that our four times best and fairest winner, rated elite in so many areas, has been traded for peanuts.
It is disrespectful of Jack, even though he is getting to his desired destination.
It is also deeply disrespectful of our footy club.
The only comfort I take from this, is it might help secure the Hill deal.
damienc wrote: ↑Wed 16 Oct 2019 3:19pm
Ok. The deal has been done. JS to the Cats for pick 58.
While I appreciate the reasons why Jack sought a trade I think it is an absolute disgrace that our four times best and fairest winner, rated elite in so many areas, has been traded for peanuts.
It is disrespectful of Jack even though he is getting to his desired destination. It is also deeply disrespectful of our footy club.
The only comfort I take from this is it might help secure the Hill deal.
But this is shameful. Just my opinion.
Based on his output this year, what would you have offered?
damienc wrote: ↑Wed 16 Oct 2019 3:19pm
Ok. The deal has been done. JS to the Cats for pick 58.
While I appreciate the reasons why Jack sought a trade I think it is an absolute disgrace that our four times best and fairest winner, rated elite in so many areas, has been traded for peanuts.
It is disrespectful of Jack even though he is getting to his desired destination. It is also deeply disrespectful of our footy club.
The only comfort I take from this is it might help secure the Hill deal.
But this is shameful. Just my opinion.
Based on his output this year, what would you have offered?
You can't base his value on this year which was a write off for Jack Steven. He has been our best player for the past five years. It's a bloody disgrace to let him go for 58. He deserved at least, at least, a second round pick.
damienc wrote: ↑Wed 16 Oct 2019 3:19pm
Ok. The deal has been done. JS to the Cats for pick 58.
While I appreciate the reasons why Jack sought a trade I think it is an absolute disgrace that our four times best and fairest winner, rated elite in so many areas, has been traded for peanuts.
It is disrespectful of Jack even though he is getting to his desired destination. It is also deeply disrespectful of our footy club.
The only comfort I take from this is it might help secure the Hill deal.
But this is shameful. Just my opinion.
A voice of reason amid the colour and emotion of others.
At the end of the day, we're in the business of winning premierships - something we've absolutely sucked at for as long as I can remember.
You don't give away your best player for nothing. An iconic player. You move heaven and earth to get it right.
On the flip side, how impressive are Geelong at trading?
They paid unders to bring in Dangerfield; recieved the farm for Tim Kelly, and now rake in Steven for absolutely nothing.
