No it was 18 according to the poster that told us of the Hickey trade an hour before it was released anywhere else.
-
LIVE: Geelong v Brisbane Lions - 7:30PM Sat
Squiggle tips Cats at 54% chance -- What's your tip? -- Teams on Thurs »
-
Weekly Prize - Join Any Time - Tip Prelim Finals
The Golden Ticket - MCG and Marvel Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the Gabba, MCG and Marvel.
Round SF Winner: And_ROOS
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 3 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Official Trade Period Discussion 2012 Thread (#3)
- Thread starter Colin D'Cops
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Aug 22, 2009
- 24,479
- 28,793
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Very surprised by the trade. Did the Saints get any picks in return?
This is like a triple tautology.
26 and 47
PieBeast
Brownlow Medallist
1 out of 2 ain't bad, it was 21.
How would you know? The poster has connections at the club, he told us the Lee trade before it was announced as well.
- Aug 22, 2009
- 24,479
- 28,793
- AFL Club
- West Coast
Just saw the details. Strange trade. Very strange.
12 and 13 gone, Lee and Hickey in? I know there are a few picks left but it's just weird IMO.
12 and 13 gone, Lee and Hickey in? I know there are a few picks left but it's just weird IMO.
PieBeast
Brownlow Medallist
I have connections to common sense, something you're obviously struggling with.
Goddard for a Gold Coast third choice ruck and a minor second round upgrade.
The whole Football World is laughing at your club right now, and judging by the ever increasing anger in your posts you know it.
Adios.
You can question that St Kilda paid too much, but saying that they aren't trying to rebuild is a load of crap. Hickey is 21 year old ruckman FFS! Lee is about the same age. Saad and Milera worked out pretty well for them this year too, so I can see what they are trying to do picking up slightly more developed players who are still young. Theres a fair chance that Ben Jacobs could be an option with pick 26 now too. It is questionable that Lee and Hickey were both worth as much as they were, but lets not try and pretend that they are picking up guys in/past their prime.
FWIW, I think involving 13 for Hickey was probably too much, but if they have identified that they need another "pure" ruckman to partner McEvoy and ensure that Kozi and Stanley have no reason to be anywhere near a ruck contest again then it's understandable.
FWIW, I think involving 13 for Hickey was probably too much, but if they have identified that they need another "pure" ruckman to partner McEvoy and ensure that Kozi and Stanley have no reason to be anywhere near a ruck contest again then it's understandable.
ajsuperstar
Team Captain
people tend to only see that we have given up pick 13 in a trade like this. When in reality the other upgrade of picks are very significant in this case and are often glossed over on many occassions during trade period.
Far from angry mate, maybe this isn't the best place for you if you want to ignore facts though.
Why come here to troll when there's a whole board dedicated to it?
Vdubs
Hall of Famer
Any knowledge, is he potentially on the move?
I'd like to see that .
I'd like to see that .
- Aug 22, 2009
- 24,479
- 28,793
- AFL Club
- West Coast
With the upgrades the saints have given up less than we did for Wellingham. Hickey is three years younger, so if he is a reasonable ruck it will likely be a better deal. Higher risk, higher return than Wellingham IMO.
bombermick
Norm Smith Medallist
Interesting strategy by the Saints to move themselves down the draft order, as they obviously think the top 30 picks or so are strong.
It's a masterstroke if this draft is like 2009, but it's a huge gamble.
It's a masterstroke if this draft is like 2009, but it's a huge gamble.
People are talking like its Hickey for 13.
Saints get Hickey, 26 and 47
Gold Coast get 13, 37 and 57.
We have a huge gap on our list between young and old players, that's why we're trying to fast track the process. We just really need a key defender now (Brown would be ideal but it doesn't look likely).
Saints get Hickey, 26 and 47
Gold Coast get 13, 37 and 57.
We have a huge gap on our list between young and old players, that's why we're trying to fast track the process. We just really need a key defender now (Brown would be ideal but it doesn't look likely).
- Mar 15, 2009
- 1,365
- 297
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Gold Coast
Good trade by the Saints, they have just got a great young ruck prospect who has a ton of potential. He had as much talent as any prospect they would have picked up at 13 and he had showed that he can perform at AFL level. Also don't discount the fact that they have upgraded their second and third round picks by 10 places. They are in a strong position with picks 25 and 26, as well as bringing in two ready to go youngish players with upside. They are now capable of pushing into the 8 imo.
- Nov 27, 2000
- 16,249
- 32,961
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Triple M commentary team
They could have offloaded pick 13 for Matt Campbell and hailed it a trading masterstroke.
As opposed to picking up two unproven 18 year olds? They're hardly mature aged, they're 21. And Hickey has shown he can have an impact at the top level.Pick 13 and pick 12 for 2 mature aged unproven AFL players. Ouch! Scott Clayton loves Pelchen
Dwight Schrute
Club Legend
Not really.
Lol at all the Collingwood fans saying Saints have overpaid. If Pies got Hickey they would have said he was the new NicNat.
Funny stuff. Saints got what they wanted. Pelchen gets things done and Saints should be happy, IMHO.
Funny stuff. Saints got what they wanted. Pelchen gets things done and Saints should be happy, IMHO.
You don't have a clue
Emma Quayle @emmasq
The Hickey deal isn't a bad one IMO. If he was in the draft he'd prob be the 2nd ruckman picked behind Brodie Grundy. Getting 26 back helps.
The Hickey deal isn't a bad one IMO. If he was in the draft he'd prob be the 2nd ruckman picked behind Brodie Grundy. Getting 26 back helps.
Similar threads
- Locked
