Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
joffaboy wrote:
It has been stated here that even though the coach of the day never interfered in drafting (in his words), in the case of Luke Ball, he insisted that we pick Ball first and that Judd would be available at pick five.
Actually I can correct that. As at August of that year, GT (and I believe RB) wanted Judd. A person who has been in the news of late, in a Storm of controversy, was dead set sure we would get both and wanted to take Ball at #2.
Now between August & November, GT may have relented and changed his tune. But as at August, he was very keen to take Judd first.
No worries, I stand corrected.
And it is all good because I can still blame it on GT as he was coach and should have insisted on us picking up Judd first
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
joffaboy wrote:
It has been stated here that even though the coach of the day never interfered in drafting (in his words), in the case of Luke Ball, he insisted that we pick Ball first and that Judd would be available at pick five.
Actually I can correct that. As at August of that year, GT (and I believe RB) wanted Judd. A person who has been in the news of late, in a Storm of controversy, was dead set sure we would get both and wanted to take Ball at #2.
Now between August & November, GT may have relented and changed his tune. But as at August, he was very keen to take Judd first.
No worries, I stand corrected.
And it is all good because I can still blame it on GT as he was coach and should have insisted on us picking up Judd first
rodgerfox wrote:
As for the Luke Ball call, I can't agree that he is the worst.
Club captain, All Australian, B&F winner - I think you'd generally be pretty happy with that output from any draftee.
Compare that to Kosi, and suddenly you see how disappointing Kosi has been - or how good Ball was.
Thats a pretty fair call. Luke Ball is not a bad draft selection, but in a comparasion with Chris Judd it was a bad miss.
All in hindsight of course.
If Ball had not been injured and retained his pace and kicking penetration he would have been the equal to anyone in the League.
As trav says if Judd had been drafted by the saints he may well have had extended OP and been in the same position Ball now is.
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
In the 2000-2005 drafts we picked up the nucleus of the team that took us to 4 preliminary finals in 6 years and went within a whisker of beating Geelong in the 2009 GF.
We got some easy picks totally right: Riewoldt, Goddard.
We nailed three champions with picks outside the top 10: Dal, Joey and Sam Fisher.
We nailed two other great smokies with late picks: Gilbert and Gwilt - plus a recycled star in Gram.
Two other lower picks gave us good service for a while: Goose and Leigh Fisher.
A couple of our first round picks didn't start well, but seem to have come good (or, at least, better): Raph and McQualter
We perhaps paid too high a price with two first round picks in 2001 - Ball and X - although it is arguable that both would have provided full value but for injury. Ball, in particular, gave a lot to our club and might still play a big part in future success for the Pies (hope not).
We made bad trades with three early picks: for Brooks and Watts.
All in all, did any other club do any better than this over the period?
Remember, the Eagles, who hit the jackpot with Judd, then used their other top 10 pick in 2001 on Sampi and had used their #5 pick the year before on Andrew McDougal (although they compensated a bit by getting Kerr with pick 18).
Their supporters might well be thinking "what if we'd taken Bartel or Dal Santo with pick 6 in 2001 rather than Sampi?"
Drafting has always been, and will always be, an imperfect science.
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
SENsaintsational wrote:
St Kilda wanted Judd and Ball. Fell for the three card trick from West Coast. Everyone knew Hodge was going to Hawthorn. St Kilda had 2 & 5 and thought Ball with 2 and West Coast would take Sampi with #3 being an WA kid.....Polak was going to Fremantle....so St Kilda could then pick up Judd, the player with the dodgy shoulders, with pick #5.
Out smarted by West Coast unfortunately.
Yep this is how I heard it - Saints thought that the 2 WA clubs would take the 2 WA boys Polak & Sampi with picks 3 & 4 .....
I just wish they had taken Judd at 2 then Ball at 5
Bartel went at pick 8
- Brookes, trading 8 & 35
- Beetham at 9
- Barlow, not picking him up, after he had done pre-season at the Saints
- Lovett, giving up 16
Last edited by MCG-Unit on Mon 10 May 2010 3:11pm, edited 2 times in total.
SENsaintsational wrote:
St Kilda wanted Judd and Ball. Fell for the three card trick from West Coast. Everyone knew Hodge was going to Hawthorn. St Kilda had 2 & 5 and thought Ball with 2 and West Coast would take Sampi with #3 being an WA kid.....Polak was going to Fremantle....so St Kilda could then pick up Judd, the player with the dodgy shoulders, with pick #5.
Out smarted by West Coast unfortunately.
Yep this is how I heard it - Saints thought that the 2 WA clubs would take the 2 WA boys Polak & Sampi with picks 3 & 4 .....I just wish they had take Judd at 2 then Ball at 5
Bartel went at pick 8
- Brookes, trading 8 & 35
- Beetham at 9 - Barlow, not picking him up, after he had done pre-season at the Saints
- Lovett, giving up 16
look i know Barlow has been great this year and is a realthreat for the brownlow at the moment but do you honestly believe had St Kilda taken Barlow he would of got a game ahead of Lenny , Dal , Joey , CJ or Armo ...yes he is a great player but had we taken him he would be playing VFL the only reason he got his chance was cause Freo had no better option .. full credit to him he has taken his chance and made the absoulute most of it and cemented his spot in the dockers line up but i reckon if we had picked him he wouldnt of had his chance yet to prove anything
"The team that wins in the most positions and makes the least amount of mistakes, usually wins the game." -- Allan Jeans
rodgerfox wrote:Yeah, the Lovett selection can't be overlooked.
in hinesight yes but you reckon Hawthorn are thinking they should of chased a ruckman insted of the injured hype from port ??
who is to blame for the Lovett situation ?? ill tell you who .. LOVETT is giving up pick 16 for a clasy player who adds a dimension to the team is fine in my book the fact he gets charged for rape and never plays for us is his fault not the clubs ... we wear it but its not our fault
"The team that wins in the most positions and makes the least amount of mistakes, usually wins the game." -- Allan Jeans
rodgerfox wrote:Yeah, the Lovett selection can't be overlooked.
in hinesight yes but you reckon Hawthorn are thinking they should of chased a ruckman insted of the injured hype from port ??
who is to blame for the Lovett situation ?? ill tell you who .. LOVETT is giving up pick 16 for a clasy player who adds a dimension to the team is fine in my book the fact he gets charged for rape and never plays for us is his fault not the clubs ... we wear it but its not our fault
....Brookes, trading 8 & 35
- Beetham at 9 - Barlow, not picking him up, after he had done pre-season at the Saints
- Lovett, giving up 16
look i know Barlow has been great this year and is a realthreat for the brownlow at the moment but do you honestly believe had St Kilda taken Barlow he would of got a game ahead of Lenny , Dal , Joey , CJ or Armo ...yes he is a great player but had we taken him he would be playing VFL the only reason he got his chance was cause Freo had no better option .. full credit to him he has taken his chance and made the absoulute most of it and cemented his spot in the dockers line up but i reckon if we had picked him he wouldnt of had his chance yet to prove anything
Well you may be right, still I'm sure they could have slotted him on a HFF, wing, or very handy backup....
He couldn't displace the players you mentioned, although I reckon he's just as good as Armitage - I doubt Barlow is restricted to an on-ball role - he could have been vying for a spot with McQualter, Ray, Clarke, Geary, Eddy, Peake and Dempster
rodgerfox wrote:Yeah, the Lovett selection can't be overlooked.
in hinesight yes but you reckon Hawthorn are thinking they should of chased a ruckman insted of the injured hype from port ??
That's why I posted what I did earlier.
Plenty of clubs have made mistakes. You need to look at what other clubs have done aswell to put some perspective on how well or how poorly we've done.
Brooks is the big one for mine, a confusing move at the time, a truly baffling one in hindsight. Picks 8 and 35 should get you a prime ruckman, not someone drafted the year before. And to think they would've turned into picks 6 and 31 thanks to Carltank.
I suppose it could've been worse, we could've drafted him the year before. Two picks earlier than he wound up going, at pick 13. Would've only cost us Nick Dal Santo.
....Brookes, trading 8 & 35
- Beetham at 9 - Barlow, not picking him up, after he had done pre-season at the Saints
- Lovett, giving up 16
look i know Barlow has been great this year and is a realthreat for the brownlow at the moment but do you honestly believe had St Kilda taken Barlow he would of got a game ahead of Lenny , Dal , Joey , CJ or Armo ...yes he is a great player but had we taken him he would be playing VFL the only reason he got his chance was cause Freo had no better option .. full credit to him he has taken his chance and made the absoulute most of it and cemented his spot in the dockers line up but i reckon if we had picked him he wouldnt of had his chance yet to prove anything
Well you may be right, still I'm sure they could have slotted him on a HFF, wing, or very handy backup....
He couldn't displace the players you mentioned, although I reckon he's just as good as Armitage - I doubt Barlow is restricted to an on-ball role - he could have been vying for a spot with McQualter, Ray, Clarke, Geary, Eddy, Peake and Dempster
yes he would get a game over all of those guys ... NOW but 7 weeks ago would you picked him over any of those guys ?? fact is he got his shot at freo and has taken the comp by storm he wouldnt have got his shot if he was pick up by St Kilda .. he would still be on the rookie list playing VFL ..
"The team that wins in the most positions and makes the least amount of mistakes, usually wins the game." -- Allan Jeans
From BigFooty referring to Stephen O'Reilly going to Carlton
Originally Posted by Weaver View Post
Worst trade ever?
That's easy. Pick 16 and 46 for Stephen O'Reilly who played 12 games for you. AND you had to pay him illegally outside the cap. AND he blew the whistle on you. AND you had to pay a fine. AND you got kicked out of the draft and had to recruit hacks. AND it meant that your mulit-million investment in Denis Pagan was a waste because he had no players.
Stephen O'Reilly for - Pick 16, pick 46, $1m fine, pick 1, 2, 17 and 33 in the 2003 draft, pick 1 in the 2003 PSD, 1st and 2nd round picks in the 2004 draft.
kosifantutti23 wrote:From BigFooty referring to Stephen O'Reilly going to Carlton
Originally Posted by Weaver View Post
Worst trade ever?
That's easy. Pick 16 and 46 for Stephen O'Reilly who played 12 games for you. AND you had to pay him illegally outside the cap. AND he blew the whistle on you. AND you had to pay a fine. AND you got kicked out of the draft and had to recruit hacks. AND it meant that your mulit-million investment in Denis Pagan was a waste because he had no players.
Stephen O'Reilly for - Pick 16, pick 46, $1m fine, pick 1, 2, 17 and 33 in the 2003 draft, pick 1 in the 2003 PSD, 1st and 2nd round picks in the 2004 draft.
goodie wrote:Brooks is the big one for mine, a confusing move at the time, a truly baffling one in hindsight.
I didn't think it was baffling then or now.
We traded the under-performing Everitt to Hawthorn which reportedly - at the time - freed up somewhere around 20% of our salary cap.
It left us with very lean ruck stocks which we attempted to recify.
We used that pick 7 & 31 (?) on Brooks who Port had seen fit to use pick 15 to secure the previous year. Port had Primus & Lade at the time so Brooks was never going to get a game for them.
Brooks looked pretty good before he did his knee I thought.
It's an example of moving out a high profile player who was not contributing enough to warrant his wages and bringing in a player to fill a list requirement. Very similar to the Luke Ball scenario.
goodie wrote:Brooks is the big one for mine, a confusing move at the time, a truly baffling one in hindsight.
I didn't think it was baffling then or now.
We traded the under-performing Everitt to Hawthorn which reportedly - at the time - freed up somewhere around 20% of our salary cap.
It left us with very lean ruck stocks which we attempted to recify.
We used that pick 7 & 31 (?) on Brooks who Port had seen fit to use pick 15 to secure the previous year. Port had Primus & Lade at the time so Brooks was never going to get a game for them.
Brooks looked pretty good before he did his knee I thought.
It's an example of moving out a high profile player who was not contributing enough to warrant his wages and bringing in a player to fill a list requirement. Very similar to the Luke Ball scenario.
Brooks - the coaching staff felt he was the type of player we needed and we got a reasonable deal on him (pick 7 for a top 15 draft pick who had been tutored by Lade and Primus for 12 months).
Unforeseen circumstances prevented him from ever getting the chance to show what he could offer.
Andrew Lovett - the coaching staff felt he was the type of player we needed and we got a reasonable deal on him (pick 16 for a dude who'd just had his best season).
Unforeseen circumstances prevented him from ever getting the chance to show what he could offer.
I know it's going back a fair way but we used pick 3 on Jodie Arnol the year Peter Matera went at 4.
Don't worry Jodie, I still remember the day you kicked 3 in a quarter against the Dees at the G.
I reckon we would have lost more than we would have gained by now if we picked Judd. Unless we got a premiership or two somewhere in 04-06 then I doubt we'd either a) still have him on our list or b) we'd have to lose a few seriously quality players to keep him on the list I'd wager.
I think all you can ask off the recruiting staff (and coaches)of the time is whether based on the information that they had (or should of had!!!) was the player a fair and reasonable pick.
By that measure to me Frost is the stand-out bad selection and that time the football world was stunned by the selection.
When you look at the players taken in the lower part of the draft that year there was plenty of good talent on offer.
Games Since Drafted
1 Sydney Darren Gaspar 228
2 Brisbane Nigel Lappin 279
3 Richmond Justin Murphy 185
4 Sydney Glenn Gorman 2
5 Sydney Adam Heuskes 125
6 Fitzroy Trent Cummings 29
7 Fitzroy Chris Johnson 264
8 St Kilda Michael Frost 11
9 Fitzroy Rowan Warfe 110
10 Melbourne Trent Ormond-Allen 50
11 Western Bulldogs Brad Johnson Western Bulldogs 352
12 Brisbane Christopher Scott 215
13 Geelong David Ugrinic 0
14 North Melbourne Adam Simpson 306
15 Hawthorn Luke McCabe 138
16 West Coast Fraser Gehrig 260
17 Hawthorn Angelo Lekkas 180
18 Carlton Simon Beaumont 179
Brooks : Not that phased we took him, but the price paid was too high. Subsequent trades for ruckman in later years by Clubs has had proven ruckman going for a lot less than the price paid. We got reemed in this deal.
Judd and Ball. Both players were at the time stand out selections, as was Hodge.You would feel a lot happier about this draft if we had of just gone for the best player, rather than trying to be cute by guessing what players the WA clubs would take. We reemed ourselves.
Lovett: well having seen the first 6 rounds and looking at how all teams are now playing, a player like Lovett in-form and committed would have been great in our current line up. However Lovett was a known idiot who in this case has been an even bigger idiot. Hindsight indicates we got burnt, but you can understand why the coaches wanted him.
Drafting/trading is always not an exact science...but with Frost you are still scratching your head.
Last edited by saintsRrising on Mon 10 May 2010 6:18pm, edited 1 time in total.
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
remboy wrote:I know it's going back a fair way but we used pick 3 on Jodie Arnol the year Peter Matera went at 4.
Don't worry Jodie, I still remember the day you kicked 3 in a quarter against the Dees at the G.
That wet day at the G is one of my fondest footy memories.
Not sure why. I was a kid at the time, but for some reason it was just a real special win.
Also remember Nicky taking a huge Harry Reamer at CHB then kicking a 75m torp with a heavy ball.
Our worse trade EVER, unless Luke Ball goes on and wins a Brownlow at Collingwood, would have to be Stewart for Barrot.
There have been a few stuff ups of recent years, but none as costly as that one.
As far as Draft Picks go, they are all pretty much a lottery in advance. It is only in hind-sight that real comparisons can be made. I still think McEvoy instead of Rioli was tragic.
