Not according to Gary Lyon. Reckons he was a huge loss to Port.Saintmatt wrote: ↑Mon 05 Oct 2020 1:44pmNah - Port did as well as we did out of that trade. They drafted Mitch Georgiades (who'll be a ripper and eventually replace Dixon) with the Howard pick and they already had Peter Ladhams (who's Marshall-esque). We got exactly what we needed and Port didn't stuff up the pick.
Once of those rare win/win trades.
Doogie Howard
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
saynta
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 22740
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 3:53pm
- Has thanked: 8653 times
- Been thanked: 3789 times
Re: Doogie Howard
-
Saintmatt
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 2559
- Joined: Fri 20 Jan 2012 4:57pm
- Has thanked: 2029 times
- Been thanked: 1148 times
Re: Doogie Howard
Yep - I agree that Howard was a huge loss to Port. Garry is a little late to the party on that though ... Kane Cornes has been going bezerk over that trade since the day it happened. But - he's also since acknowledged that they already had other defenders to cover (Clury and Jonas) and they really needed to get some more forwards as until this year - Dixon had been streaky and injury prone and Marshall was still very young.saynta wrote: ↑Tue 06 Oct 2020 10:50amNot according to Gary Lyon. Reckons he was a huge loss to Port.Saintmatt wrote: ↑Mon 05 Oct 2020 1:44pmNah - Port did as well as we did out of that trade. They drafted Mitch Georgiades (who'll be a ripper and eventually replace Dixon) with the Howard pick and they already had Peter Ladhams (who's Marshall-esque). We got exactly what we needed and Port didn't stuff up the pick.
Once of those rare win/win trades.
So - I'd say that based on pure output - we're ahead in that trade but, Port got an excellent young KF in Mitch G which they'll need as much in a couple of years as we needed Howard now.
Go you red, black & white warriors