List Mgmt. 2019 Trade Thread - Part III

[plugger66]

They can bite as hard as they like. We won’t give him away, he is contracted.

No he won’t be free

 

[plugger66]

“In my opinion, we won’t get that”

I think we take it as read that it’s opinion unless you think someone on here actually works at the club. I certainly have no knowledge of any trading numbers. I use common sense and try not to be biased

 

[TheJackal]

Put me on ignore. Not that hard. Fancy talking trading

I should but then I never understand everyones replies to you.

Bugger it, I'm out. Its insufferable and takes over.

 

[VDS66]

I don’t think we instigated it at all unless you’ve got something that backs this up

Club has put it out there that it will listen to good offers on pretty much all but about 6 players.

 

[plugger66]

Adelaide got pick 13 for Mitch bloody McGovern

Well that’s only part of the story. A small part

 

[VDS66]

I think we take it as read that it’s opinion unless you think someone on here actually works at the club. I certainly have no knowledge of any trading numbers. I use common sense and try not to be biased

Depends how badly they want him.

21 for Stanley ring a bell?

 

[PandaG]

The way I see it, there is no reason to trade Bruce for less than pick 12. Unless he has shit the bed in some way at the club, how does common sense lead anyone to the conclusion that we trade Bruce for a pick in the 20s..? My common sense suggests that the Saints see an opportunity to get overs for an above average player, are seeing if the Dogs will bite, if they don’t then we keep Bruce...so I can very much see 12 landing in our laps from a club who thinks they are a good forward off another premiership..?

 

[plugger66]

Depends how badly they want him.

21 for Stanley ring a bell?

What about hickey and hanners

 

[VDS66]

What about hickey and hanners

If you use Hickey as a comparison then Bruce is a top 5 pick... Lots of love.

Hanners came cheap because of injuries and we took a fair bit of salary from the Swans. I suspect the favour to be returned this year with Jones.

 

[BrutThough]

The way I see it, there is no reason to trade Bruce for less than pick 12. Unless he has s**t the bed in some way at the club, how does common sense lead anyone to the conclusion that we trade Bruce for a pick in the 20s..? My common sense suggests that the Saints see an opportunity to get overs for an above average player, are seeing if the Dogs will bite, if they don’t then we keep Bruce...so I can very much see 12 landing in our laps from a club who thinks they are a good forward off another premiership..?

Agreed. Why else would we be trading a contracted, best 22 player in an area with no depth if we weren't getting something which absolutely suits us.

This isnt a fire sale. We need to be making trades to improve our side, and handing Bruce over unnecessarily for a mid 20s pick doesn't help us improve.

 

[plugger66]

If you use Hickey as a comparison then Bruce is a top 5 pick... Lots of love.

Hanners came cheap because of injuries and we took a fair bit of salary from the Swans. I suspect the favour to be returned this year with Jones.

Is that the hickey who plays in maybe a premiership side. We obviously see footy differently. Anyway I made my point that pick 12 is not happening in my opinion unless we give a fair bit back.

 

[BrutThough]

What about hickey and hanners

We got Hannebery cheaper than we should have because we took on him whole salary and Sydney needed that cap relief. We did them a favour, and the trade reflected that.

Dogs aren't doing us a favour by taking our contacted, number one key froward and the trade should reflect that.

 

[BrutThough]

Is that the hickey who plays in maybe a premiership side. We obviously see footy differently. Anyway I made my point that pick 12 is not happening in my opinion unless we give a fair bit back.

I, personally, found his 6 disposal, 12 hit out performance on Thursday inspiring. What a star we let go

 

[VDS66]

Is that the hickey who plays in maybe a premiership side. We obviously see footy differently. Anyway I made my point that pick 12 is not happening in my opinion unless we give a fair bit back.

Plenty spuds have ended up as premiership players. I'm not sure what your point is with that comparison.

It's funny because on previous discussions you have continually said that if we want a player, we pay the price and get it done.

Is Hall worth pick 5? No but we might end up payingbit because we want him badly enough and he fills a need.

So why wouldn't the Dogs do the same for Bruce? If he fills a specific need and they are happy to throw big $$$ at him, then common sense says they will pay overs for him.

 

[plugger66]

Plenty spuds have ended up as premiership players. I'm not sure what your point is with that comparison.

My point is he is the best ruck in the afl and we let him go for a third rounder.

 

[PandaG]

I, personally, found his 6 disposal, 12 hit out performance on Thursday inspiring. What a star we let go

Hickey is terrible
One of our biggest mistakes

 

[CatToTheFuture]

He's currently the third banana behind Stanley and Blicsavs yeah?

I think i'd rather Isaac! Is he seriously up for trade?

Free agent. Free to good home. Hope you use him

 

[BrutThough]

Hickey is terrible
One of our biggest mistakes

He was much better when third man up was still around. The removal of that rule hurt him badly.

Hindsight, should have just drafted Grundy or not traded McEvoy, but somehow at the end of all this we ended up with Marshall so maybe the ruck merry-go-around has been worth it in the end.

 

[PandaG]

Finally found some rumour floating on why the sudden trade of Bruce...poster in SS said Bruce was a disruptive figure at the club...not sure what that means or if it’s true but at least it’s a reason to be considering picks in the 20s...

 

[VDS66]

My point is he is the best ruck in the afl and we let him go for a third rounder.

hickey?

Has someone hacked your account?

 

[malevu]

Mate that's an easy one. Just stick a blonde wig on me...

She seems like a nice enough bloke.

It's been a slow news day so I'll run with this -

Prince Charles was staying at his country retreat and every day he left Camilla at home and went for an evening stroll around the local village with his bodyguards. On the street corner outside the town pub he was continually propositioned by the local hooker.

"I'll do you for ten quid, Charlie," she offered every day. Charles always politely declined her offers. One day as he walked past, Charles cheekily called back to her, "I wouldn't pay more than a fiver, anyway."

The next day Camilla decided to accompany Charles on his evening walk. As they walked past the hooker arm-in-arm she called out to Charles, "You cheapskate, Charlie. See what a fiver gets for you !"

 

[Saintos The ITK]

Plenty spuds have ended up as premiership players. I'm not sure what your point is with that comparison.

It's funny because on previous discussions you have continually said that if we want a player, we pay the price and get it done.

Is Hall worth pick 5? No but we might end up payingbit because we want him badly enough and he fills a need.

So why wouldn't the Dogs do the same for Bruce? If he fills a specific need and they are happy to throw big $$$ at him, then common sense says they will pay overs for him.

Cripps

 

[plugger66]

Cripps

A spud? Don’t think so or are you saying you sometimes get ripped off in trades.

 

[Premium]

And someone put up a savage Josh Bruce petition on change through facebook. https://www.change.org/p/st-kilda-f...e_location=combo_psf&psf_variant=combo&skip=1

They are going to start thinking Saints fans are nutters, the second one I have seen where fans are tying to overrule the club. Brad Scott had one too.

they have no chance - the board makes the call not some knob on facebook

 

[mightymalaka]

Cripps

Shane Kerrison!
His biggest highlight previously was being the
Ugly head that Jimmy Krackour thankfully punched
Right in the moosh!