View Full Version : Loats
MaccasNeighbour
16 Oct 2003, 13:01
Originally posted by Mong
Any good?
Not bad but I couldn't eat more than 2 or 3.
Stiffy_18
16 Oct 2003, 15:09
Originally posted by MaccasNeighbour
Not bad but I couldn't eat more than 2 or 3. :D
he is alrighty
can atleast take a grab unlike a couple of other ruckmen that spring to mind
Stiffy_18
16 Oct 2003, 16:42
Seriously, Loats is nothing to write home about but he is better than Marsh. I guess his upside is that he is only 22 and still has plenty of development left in him.
Lets just hope he blossoms if we get him
Stiffy_18
16 Oct 2003, 17:08
Here is a bit of info on David Loats (http://hawthornfc.com.au/default.asp?pg=players&spg=playerprofile&personid=13324)
What's a likely trade?
2nd round pick? 3rd round pick?
Mong
Stiffy_18
16 Oct 2003, 17:09
Originally posted by Mong
What's a likely trade?
2nd round pick? 3rd round pick?
Mong No to 2nd and 3rd round pick. I would trade Gallagher;)
:D
Can't be much good then.
Mong
Stiffy_18
16 Oct 2003, 17:20
Rating of his games on Hawthorn board don't read too badly but then again they were provided by Hawthorn.
I still think he would be a better option than Marsh. He is still only 22 and COULD offer something.
I would prefer him over Peter Street any day of the week and twice on sunday :p
Beggers can't be choosers. :(
Russian
16 Oct 2003, 19:26
Originally posted by Mong
What's a likely trade?
2nd round pick? 3rd round pick?
Mong
late 3rd - early 4th imo
Stiffy_18
16 Oct 2003, 19:53
Well according to Ch9 he is not likely to be a Crow.
We will finish this trade period empty handed:(
macca23
16 Oct 2003, 21:37
Originally posted by Stiffy_18
Well according to Ch9 he is not likely to be a Crow.
We will finish this trade period empty handed:(
We'll go close to it anyway Stiffy. Stevens could be our only hope - unless there's a smokey they're not letting on about.
spindoctor
16 Oct 2003, 21:44
Yes, there is a smokey...his name is John Baird and he plays for the Kangaroos. Out of favour with Laidley. Mediocre KPP, could be cheap.
Stiffy_18
16 Oct 2003, 21:48
Originally posted by spindoctor
Yes, there is a smokey...his name is John Baird and he plays for the Kangaroos. Out of favour with Laidley. Mediocre KPP, could be cheap. Why the hell would we want him??????:confused:
Stiffy_18
16 Oct 2003, 21:50
Originally posted by macca23
We'll go close to it anyway Stiffy. Stevens could be our only hope - unless there's a smokey they're not letting on about. I want a bloody ruckman:mad: and to be honest I would rather go after Loats than Stevens.
We are more desperate for a ruckman than we are for a KPP.
spindoctor
16 Oct 2003, 21:50
Because Adelaide seems to have a history of recruiting crappy surplus talls from other clubs.
macca23
16 Oct 2003, 21:55
Originally posted by spindoctor
Because Adelaide seems to have a history of recruiting crappy surplus talls from other clubs.
Because we're never normally high enough in the draft to pick quality young KPP's.
But then again, you don't want us to trade our way into that position, do you. Or do you??
Which way do you want to go to get quality talls??
spindoctor
16 Oct 2003, 21:58
Look at draft history. You don't need a high pick to recruit a good young KPP. Look who our picks for Schell and Fitzgerald got for their respective clubs.
Whereas we seem to waste a mid-round pick that could get a young tall to work with to buy a matured tall that could get better, but realistically probably won't.
Stiffy_18
16 Oct 2003, 22:14
Originally posted by spindoctor
Look at draft history. You don't need a high pick to recruit a good young KPP. Look who our picks for Schell and Fitzgerald got for their respective clubs. Medhurst and Mark Powell. Medurst is not a tall AND Mark Powell has done bugger all so far and is unlikley to do more
Whereas we seem to waste a mid-round pick that could get a young tall to work with to buy a matured tall that could get better, but realistically probably won't. Have you got any idea about the depth of talls in this years draft??????
He's apparently off to Geelong which is pleasing.
Thunderstruck
17 Oct 2003, 13:12
It certainly is.....meanwhile still nothing at all for us.