Hawks interested in Pettifer

[mightytiges]

From the Hun (last line in article):

Bombers eye Dogs star
By Michael Stevens
Herald Sun
September 28, 2004

....

And Richmond's Kane Pettifer has attracted interest from Hawthorn.

[WilliamPowell]

Joel Smith for Kane Pettifer ???? 

What could the hawks offer us for Pettifer I wonder

[om21]

In all honesty, after reading the basis of the Scott West article, that has no crediability (even though Dermie does love Petters).

[mightytiges]

What could the hawks offer us for Pettifer I wonder

Waas asking myself that same question WP  ??? There's no one who the Hawks would offer in return that IMO is any better than Kayne. I would rather keep him if that's the case. He has the foot skills and is a precise long kick. Been given the kick-outs was a sign of that. Took Frawley 4 years to realise he wasn't a forward  . Before he got injured he finally appeared to have his head screwed on and was willing to put his body on the line instead of running away from a contest as he had done previously. Maybe a one-year contract as he still has prove himself and stick him on a HBF opposite a Bowden or Newman.

[Harry]

A pick in the 50's will do.

[Bulluss]

Was reported on the news that Lekkas and Dixon have been told that they will be traded if a deal can be done.

I know Lekkas didnt do jack this season, he has shown that he can play on the ball and may be a handy pick up in a new environment.

[froars]

Hawks are the ultimate optimists hey?  First Wallace and Pagan, now Petticoat - dream on!

[WilliamPowell]

Was reported on the news that Lekkas and Dixon have been told that they will be traded if a deal can be done.

I know Lekkas didnt do jack this season, he has shown that he can play on the ball and may be a handy pick up in a new environment.

Lekkas is too old - 28 now (29 next june) no thanks

Ditto Dixon is 27 - too old

[Jackstar]

Take him please Hawks !

[om21]

Dixon is useless....Lekas would be an ok midfielder for 2 years....Wouldnt give a hell of a lot for him though. Fiora? Chaffey? Fleming?

[RonBranton]

I heard somewhere that Port had 9 players from other clubs in the GF side - recruiting from other clubs has become an art form - look at St Kilda - they have a great mix of draft choices and recycled players.

[mightytiges]

I heard somewhere that Port had 9 players from other clubs in the GF side - recruiting from other clubs has become an art form - look at St Kilda - they have a great mix of draft choices and recycled players.

Problem is we've mainly recruited other clubs' discards who either struggled to get a game or were too old/well past their best - Houlihan, Marsh, Fletcher, Hudson, Pickering, Nicholls, Blumfield, Fleming, Morrison and Weller. That's just under Danny. Add to that giving up 1st and 2nd round picks in one year for Hilton and Bidders  under Geischen.

Compare our recruits to Port - Primus, Wakelin, Pickett, Wanganeen, Hardwick, Montgomery, Bishop, Schofield, Mahoney, Cochrane, Forster-Knight. Only the latter couple are duds. The Saints up and coming stars were mainly drafted with first and second round picks yet they still scored Gehrig, Hamill, Penny, Voss, Black, Powell, Guerra plus a couple of duds.

Lesson is if you can score a decent player from another AFL club reasonably cheaply (eg: via the PSD) then you don't say no but you never trade your early National draft picks. They are gold!

[froars]

The difference with our choices and Ports are that theirs when they recruited them were getting games at their other clubs.  We got players from bottom teams who couldn't get a regular senior game.  I have no problem with getting other players from other clubs - just hacks.  But as you say MT, you don't trade your early draft picks.