Flogstradamus Tom Boyd Deal Haters

[TiAn_]

I thought he was a mid.

Mate do you even watch football?

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

"And rucks take a long time so this trade was worth it" - HUGE LOL. Hickey's 25 and Longer's nearly 23 and you're posting this in a thread where you've been paying out on a 20 year old who's the same size.

Anyway your whole post is blah blah blah - you're hanging your hat on getting back late picks to justify trading out two first rounders and netting one average ruckman in return. And talking about some theoretical future trade where someone gives you a "pick in the teens" for Longer. Mate get your hand off it. That's just embarrassing.

One good forward... Even if that's true, doesn't that make us pulling your pants down in old St Nick's 300th even more embarrassing?

We have one very good ruckman if you watch games (which i doubt you do) and a very good number 2 ruck in Longer. They are not getting paid 1 million dollars a year to "bring structure" to a team but to do a job which they both do.

You are hanging shit on 2 player who are on far less money and have done so much more. Trade involve more then 1 pick for one player when it involves getting numerous downgrades on other picks.

And if we did not get hickey that means we do not trade mcevoy (who is a meh ruck but good around the ground which we did not need) so we do not get Dunstan and Savage.

Mate do you even watch football?

I actually do.

But thanks for asking

 

[BRWB]

It's the Bay mate! All in a bit of fun!
If this is the only thing they can hang shit on us about then we must be going okay

Just a bit bored with Boyd talk no one denies we overpaid. No one denies it was high risk. No one denies it was the only way we could get a young tall KPF after GWS draft concessions meant they drafted them all. Frankly if Boyd ends up as good as Tippet will be money well spent. IMO he will be better.

But if I'm honest with myself Murph's injury has got me a bit pissed. Nice to be able to take it out on the understanding flogs here who don't GAF.

 

[jack lives here]

Bulldog supporters ITT or IRL

 

[Defacto]

As above. If you're dragging Josh Bruce's shock transformation into a good forward into the argument to justify trading picks 12, 13 and 25 for effectively Tom Hickey, you're admitting it was horrible trading.

not at all. i think the jury is out on hickey, i do find it interesting that you have already written him off, even though he is currently ranked the 2nd best ruck in the land.

so back to bruce, why did the dogs get him? costs not even a 5th of boyd $$$ wise and without giving up a captain and pick 6.

 

[TiAn_]

We have one very good ruckman if you watch games (which i doubt you do) and a very good number 2 ruck in Longer. They are not getting paid 1 million dollars a year to "bring structure" to a team but to do a job which they both do.

I'm not the one who thought a 50 goal (!) forward that came 12th in the Coleman was a midfielder.

Longer's not a number 2 ruckman, he's a Sandringham ruckman. That's like me calling Minson a very good number 2 ruckman while he battles away for Footscray.

You are hanging shit on 2 player who are on far less money and have done so much more. Trade involve more then 1 pick for one player when it involves getting numerous downgrades on other picks.

They're on less money, yes, but done so much more? Longer's had two decent seasons as a purely tap ruckman who can't do anything else and Hickey's career to date has been about as exciting and effective as using a tic tac to treat your erection troubles.

And if we did not get hickey that means we do not trade mcevoy (who is a meh ruck but good around the ground which we did not need) so we do not get Dunstan and Savage.

While you're at it, why don't you tell me that Lockett leaving was a massive win because you drafted Jack Billings only 20 years later.

I actually do.

But thanks for asking

If you were truly greatful you'd stop lying, bro.

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

They're on less money, yes, but done so much more? Longer's had two decent seasons as a purely tap ruckman who can't do anything else and Hickey's career to date has been about as exciting and effective as using a tic tac to treat your erection troubles.

You have just proven that you do not watch St Kilda games.

Hickey has been very good for us.

While you're at it, why don't you tell me that Lockett leaving was a massive win because you drafted Jack Billings only 20 years later.

Expect the McEvoy trade happened a year later and it actually was a direct consequence of trading in Hickey.

But you know jack shit about football

If you were truly greatful you'd stop lying, bro.

I watch games and I dont need to prove it to w***er like you.

Now log off and do your homework.

 

[MAXIMUM GRUNDAGE]

Hickey is alright but he's no GAWN.

 

[TiAn_]

not at all. i think the jury is out on hickey, i do find it interesting that you have already written him off, even though he is currently ranked the 2nd best ruck in the land.

so back to bruce, why did the dogs get him? costs not even a 5th of boyd $$$ wise and without giving up a captain and pick 6.

HICKEY "the second best ruck in the land" ??? Hahaha

FFS I've heard some stupid stuff on here but that's right up there.

He's certainly been serviceable for 2/3 of games this season, but if I'm trading 12, 13 and 25 I want to end up with more than a serviceable ruckman and two blokes who can't get a game.

17 other clubs weren't interested in Josh Bruce and you played him as a defender for a year. Congrats, one of your trades unexpectedly panned out.

Looks like he'll be re-signing shortly. If you think he's suffering through your rebuild for $200k per season you're sadly mistaken. Big $$ coming Joshua's way.

You have just proven that you do not watch St Kilda games.

Hickey has been very good for us.


Expect the McEvoy trade happened a year later and it actually was a direct consequence of trading in Hickey.

But you know jack shit about football


I watch games and I dont need to prove it to ****** like you.

Now log off and do your homework.

Your posts here have been dreadful. Tom Lee and Billy Longer combined type bad. Another season at Sandringham for you.

 

[Stan_Darsh72]

Looks like he'll be re-signing shortly. If you think he's suffering through your rebuild for $200k per season you're sadly mistaken. Big $$ coming Joshua's way.

And he has proven to be worth it.

Unlike Boyd

 

[A Cut Above]

Not sure why Doggies fans keep on mentioning McCartin when he's one of a very long list of young KPF's who've gone past Tom Boyd, James Sicily being the latest addition.

Its amazing to think Matt Taberner is statistically more effective than Boyd, a kid who's struggling to get a game in Freo's forwardline.

 

[MAXIMUM GRUNDAGE]

He's certainly been serviceable for 2/3 of games this season, but if I'm trading 12, 13 and 25 I want to end up with more than a serviceable ruckman and two blokes who can't get a game.

What do you want to end up with if you're trading pick 6 and your captain?

 

[Defacto]

HICKEY "the second best ruck in the land" ??? Hahaha

FFS I've heard some stupid stuff on here but that's right up there.

He's certainly been serviceable for 2/3 of games this season, but if I'm trading 12, 13 and 25 I want to end up with more than a serviceable ruckman and two blokes who can't get a game.

17 other clubs weren't interested in Josh Bruce and you played him as a defender for a year. Congrats, one of your trades unexpectedly panned out.

Looks like he'll be re-signing shortly. If you think he's suffering through your rebuild for $200k per season you're sadly mistaken. Big $$ coming Joshua's way.



Your posts here have been dreadful. Tom Lee and Billy Longer combined type bad. Another season at Sandringham for you.

bruce apparently re-signing for 450k for 3-4 years... no where near the boyd money (as i said not even a 1/5th) and probably 10x the output

why didnt the dogs do this?

as for the trade atleast get the details right. 25 was never handed over in any trade. we parted with picks 12, 13, 37, 46 and 57 in that trade window. the following players were available at these picks:
where pick 12 and 13 could have netted the following players:
12: Jaksch (shite)
13: Lonergan (injury prone)
14: Corr (KPD, would rather goddard/carlisle/roberton tbh)
15: Garner (MID thats hardly setting the world on fire, would rather newnes)
16: Thurlow (injury prone)
17: Simpson delisted
18: Grundy (unexpected he would slide)
19: Kennedy (MID hard working, would rather billings)
20: N/A
21: Broomhead (MID not looking good for him, given the down trend in games played)
22: Hrovat (Small inside MID would rather stevens)
23: Towers (Mature MID would rather armitage)
24: Paparone (KPF would rather Bruce)

37 and 57 netted Tanner Smith (didnt count broughton here because we didnt have the cap room for him anyway. tanner smith has been on the rookie list and serious injury prone), Tim Sumner (retired)

46 and 47 netted Colledge (cant get a game at wce and has been average at WCE), Membrey (now with us anyway for effectively nothing as a DFA)

what we got:
Hickey
Saunders
Murdoch
Lee
Membrey

this trade also allowed us to get:
Dunstan, Acres, Longer, Savage, Delaney

so go on, please tell me what alternative you'd prefer over:
Dunstan, Acres, Hickey, Longer, Savage, Delaney, Membrey, Saunders, Murdoch, Lee

 

[TiAn_]

What do you want to end up with if you're trading pick 6 and your captain?

Not sure if serious.

Serious response: I'm happy with what we gave up to get him trade-wise given what Boyd's shown and that we were on a hiding to nothing thanks to Rain Gryphon's pig hunting escapade. If Boyd totally flatlines from here, it was a bad contract. If he turns into Kurt Tippett Mk II the contract will probably end up around the mark.

Not serious: Would probably prefer to trade for pick #1 so we could draft a Jack Watts type, then sign a Chris Dawes type and pay them $1M per season to somehow get periodically outplayed by a Cam Pedersen type while our team stinks to high heaven. What are you hoping to get back from Fremantle for Jesse Hogan?

 

[MAXIMUM GRUNDAGE]

Not sure if serious.

Serious response: I'm happy with what we gave up to get him trade-wise given what Boyd's shown and that we were on a hiding to nothing thanks to Rain Gryphon's pig hunting escapade. If Boyd totally flatlines from here, it was a bad contract. If he turns into Kurt Tippett Mk II the contract will probably end up around the mark.

Not serious: Would probably prefer to trade for pick #1 so we could draft a Jack Watts type, then sign a Chris Dawes type and pay them $1M per season to somehow get periodically outplayed by a Cam Pedersen type while our team stinks to high heaven. What are you hoping to get back from Fremantle for Jesse Hogan?

Nothing, I'd rather he stay at the Dees. But thanks for asking.
Boyd is a downgrade on Chris Dawes, who incidentally has the same number of premierships as your club, and has played in more Grand Finals than your club too.
Watts has more goals than Boyd this year and he's not even our #1 forward.
Only thing I was hoping for was bathwater tears and I got them.

 

[TiAn_]

bruce apparently re-signing for 450k for 3-4 years... no where near the boyd money (as i said not even a 1/5th) and probably 10x the output

why didnt the dogs do this?

What kind of pointless argument is this? What are you even saying? Why didn't ANY team trade a pick less than 48 for Josh Bruce? Because no one thought he'd be anywhere near as good as he's turned out. Even then, so far this season you're getting literally 1x the output and Boyd is 3 years younger. And $450k (wishful thinking I'm assuming) is not 1/5th of $1m. What is it about numbers that you Saints supporters struggle with?

as for the trade atleast get the details right. 25 was never handed over in any trade. we parted with picks 12, 13, 37, 46 and 57 in that trade window.

FFS Pick 25 was your compo pick and you traded it to Brisbane as part of the Billy Longer deal and they drafted Daniel McStay with it. How is this so difficult for you two to get right?

so go on, please tell me what alternative you'd prefer over:
Dunstan, Acres, Hickey, Longer, Savage, Delaney, Membrey, Saunders, Murdoch, Lee

I'd probably rather saw off own penis with a rusty spoon than give up any 10 Bulldogs players for that lot. Gee that's grim.

 

[TiAn_]

Nothing, I'd rather he stay at the Dees. But thanks for asking.
Boyd is a downgrade on Chris Dawes, who incidentally has the same number of premierships as your club, and has played in more Grand Finals than your club too.
Watts has more goals than Boyd this year and he's not even our #1 forward.
Only thing I was hoping for was bathwater tears and I got them.

Nothing could better sum up how pathetically dismal your club's been for 10 years than bragging about how many flags one of your endless stream of terrible recycled players won at his former club.

 

[BRWB]

not at all. i think the jury is out on hickey, i do find it interesting that you have already written him off, even though he is currently ranked the 2nd best ruck in the land.

so back to bruce, why did the dogs get him? costs not even a 5th of boyd $$$ wise and without giving up a captain and pick 6.

Is Hickey even the second best ruck at St Kilda??

You had bugger all credibility but saying Hickey is the second best ruck in the land? FMD.

That is the most bizarre claim I've ever read here. Congratulations.

 

[The Mighty Boosh]

Nothing could better sum up how pathetically dismal your club's been for 10 years than bragging about how many flags one of your endless stream of terrible recycled players won at his former club.

Lol

 

[Defacto]

What kind of pointless argument is this? What are you even saying? Why didn't ANY team trade a pick less than 48 for Josh Bruce? Because no one thought he'd be anywhere near as good as he's turned out. Even then, so far this season you're getting literally 1x the output and Boyd is 3 years younger. And $450k (wishful thinking I'm assuming) is not 1/5th of $1m. What is it about numbers that you Saints supporters struggle with?



FFS Pick 25 was your compo pick and you traded it to Brisbane as part of the Billy Longer deal and they drafted Daniel McStay with it. How is this so difficult for you two to get right?



I'd probably rather saw off own penis with a rusty spoon than give up any 10 Bulldogs players for that lot. Gee that's grim.

Rofl attention to detail buddy... boyd is 7m over 7 years plus the 500k you coughed up to pay your captain to pay at another club. Bruce was on pretty much nothing this year and last. His next 4 years will be at no more than 500k so
Bruce: 250k 250k 500k 500k 500k 500k = 2.5m
Boyd: 200k 500k 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m = 6.75m

So whilst i was a bit high with the % its still a massive margin. Especially when you consider bruces output

Who would you prefer? Bruce or boyd?

Why didnt you identify a better KPF that would cost you less?

As for pick 25 oh cmon mate. Youre club would have done that deal in an instant. You were desperate to get lobbe ffs thats how bad your ruck stocks are looking

Lasty i like how you completely ignored the question and then offered to cut off something that you dont have

 

[Deadly Darcy]

What do you want to end up with if you're trading pick 6 and your captain?

I'm quite keen to end up with the player Boyd looks like becoming by the time he is 22-24 and hits his peak with stringer, Bont and the rest.

This thread is so 19 year old Tom Hawkins....

 

[Deadly Darcy]

Who would you prefer? Bruce or boyd?

Impossible to say as Boyd is only 20.

Bruce debuted at 19 and 325 days and fair to say he did F'all for 3 years after that.

Also fair to say Boyd is light years ahead at the same point in his career

Why didnt you identify a better KPF that would cost you less?

I just want the one that's better. If we've achieved that we have found ourselves a gun forward and that is Jason McCartneys job. Between him and Dalrymple they have runs on the board that blows every other recruitment team out of the park over the last 5 years. The money will be normal in the new player payment cap this year and the core is signed to 2018 and beyond...

Geeze - All this typing is making me thirsty.

Off to lap the bath water some more

 

[kangafruity]

Your avatar

There is two big differences though, we aren't paying him a mil a year and he is contributing and kicking goals

 

[TiAn_]

Rofl attention to detail buddy... boyd is 7m over 7 years plus the 500k you coughed up to pay your captain to pay at another club. Bruce was on pretty much nothing this year and last. His next 4 years will be at no more than 500k so
Bruce: 250k 250k 500k 500k 500k 500k = 2.5m
Boyd: 200k 500k 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m 1m = 6.75m

That still doesn't equal 1/5. That's actually greater than 1/3. Even including the extra $500k you added to Boyd for no reason.

So whilst i was a bit high with the %

Fraction bro, not percentage. And yes, "a bit high".

its still a massive margin. Especially when you consider bruces output

Who would you prefer? Bruce or boyd?

Their output is almost identical so far this season, except Boyd is actually a competent backup ruck.

I'll give you a pass here because stats are numbers and it's obvious numbers aren't your friend.

Why didnt you identify a better KPF that would cost you less?

Pls. That collection of 10 players the saints picked up recently that you rattled off is probably the most depressing list since Schindler's.

As for pick 25 oh cmon mate. Youre club would have done that deal in an instant. You were desperate to get lobbe ffs thats how bad your ruck stocks are looking

Haha oh so now you concede you traded pick 25. Guess it's your attention to detail that sucks, homie. Can't you just enjoy the Billy Longer primetime show every week and leave us poor Dogs supporters alone?

Lasty i like how you completely ignored the question and then offered to cut off something that you dont have

I like how you call me Lasty.

 

[bontshow]

There is two big differences though, we aren't paying him a mil a year and he is contributing and kicking goals

Nice deflection