Disappointing as Kent has something, I guess if Rohan was traded for Pick 60 we couldnt expect much more.

Edited October 11, 20187 yr by Jibroni

good luck dean

just play bad against us

Not official yet.  Just reported by Fairfax.  Lets see if it is premature speculation or the deal.

32 minutes ago, bluey said:

Gone for 65, that’s a head scratcher.

 

Not really. He's played 9 games in 2 years.

Put the shoe on the other foot, and ask yourself what you would be willing to give up if we were trading him in? 

Answer: Not much.  

Edited October 11, 20187 yr by Grapeviney

Kent has never turned up to a pre-season in top condition. He was always carrying weight and I genuinely wonder whether or not the penny will ever drop for him. Sighting reasons such as, "I want more midfield time" is all well and good, but he won't be getting in any side's midfield unless he gets fit.

Kent for 65?

Meh....

Seems around his true worth to me relative to other comparable trades, and his 'dodgy' hammys and shoulders.  Good luck to him.  He probably needs plenty of that just to get on the park consistently. 

Hasn’t played much footy in recent years due to form and injury. We were never going to get much for him. Good deal for the saints and sadly we lose a decent fringe player. 

65..... really -   Josh blinked first again!!  

 

1 minute ago, Canplay said:

65..... really -   Josh blinked first again!!  

 

Agreed.  “Yeh ok” was Josh Ms response to be being offered 65 and Smith’s chips for Dean Kent. 

You've got to love the armchair trading experts on here.

5 hours ago, daisycutter said:

good luck dean

just play bad against us

He’s statistically more likely to be out injured than to turn in a blinder against us.

6 minutes ago, Nasher said:

You've got to love the armchair trading experts on here.

So many Demonlanders seem to follow the Donald Trump thesis that each move has to have a winner and a loser. Sometimes blocking out all the noise and just getting stuff done pragmatically is the best approach, particularly when there are multiple parallel negotiations going on at the one time. Hard to judge such a small fry move in isolation.

Farewell Dean. You came to the club at a dark time and while I would have loved you to be part of this it doesn’t always work out. Hopefully you can get into tip top condition and give it a real go with the Saints. 

6 hours ago, bluey said:

Gone for 65, that’s a head scratcher.

 

 

I like Kent a lot as a player but you cant expect more than a late pick or a fringe player that is constantly injured.

Sad to see Kent go.  He could be a fast, tough and skillful player on his day.

Will never forget that goal he kicked to put the nail in the coffin against the Eagles in Rd 22 this year to put us into finals.

We have traded Kent for about the same as we got Garlett for.  If the Saints do as well out of Kent as we did out of Garlett, they will be doing ok I recon.

Despite what the haters may think, I recon we have done ok from Garlett.  A few 40 goal seasons was pretty important to us when we were struggling and trying to get back on our feet.  Practically won us the game against the Lions this year off his own boot, without which, we probably finish 7th or 8th and don't get a home final.  Also hoping that Garlett may still come good for us next year and give us some more spark and zip in the forward line.

Good luck to Kent.

Deal is about right, he has a body made of paper.  Breaks down too often for a higher pick.

From the AFL website: 

“Melbourne forward Dean Kent's move to St Kilda on a three-year deal is set to be formalised on Friday morning. Given the Saints don't hold a third-round pick, they are expected to use their fourth-round selection (currently No.65) as part of the transaction.”

65 is unders. He's a better player than Rohan but what can you do? It should be a future 3rd round pick.

7 hours ago, stevethemanjordan said:

Kent has never turned up to a pre-season in top condition. He was always carrying weight and I genuinely wonder whether or not the penny will ever drop for him. Sighting reasons such as, "I want more midfield time" is all well and good, but he won't be getting in any side's midfield unless he gets fit.

And he mightn't get into the midfield if he doesn't do something to improve his disposal on his non-preferred. This was also a problem for Viney and Tyson, but while neither are particularly good on their right foot, both seem to have improved significantly in the last 12 months.

Kent had a top 10 best and fairest vote per game time position this seAson.  Small forward is a weak position at the club.   With so many delistings, it seems a waste to effectively lose him for nothing when there is no list size pressures.  

7 hours ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

We have traded Kent for about the same as we got Garlett for.  If the Saints do as well out of Kent as we did out of Garlett, they will be doing ok I recon.

Despite what the haters may think, I recon we have done ok from Garlett.  A few 40 goal seasons was pretty important to us when we were struggling and trying to get back on our feet.  Practically won us the game against the Lions this year off his own boot, without which, we probably finish 7th or 8th and don't get a home final.  Also hoping that Garlett may still come good for us next year and give us some more spark and zip in the forward line.

When you consider what we gave up for Garlett he's been fantastic value. But that's what these trade of experienced players can do sometimes, look at Dunn at the Pies. Gone for all money with us but has found his place among the Collingwood backline, I was genuinely gutted for him the he got injured and missed the finals.

If the saints get a serviceable player then it's a win for them, I actually think if he'd stayed with us and been injury free I could've seen him playing 15+ games next year but I with where we're at there wasn't much job security with him.

Loved you at Melbourne Kent! The sealer against the eagles this year and that absolute Beauty against Essendon, 3 bounces down the wing and put us in front in the last. What a win that was in our dark days. The game against North a few years back from memory he kicked 3 and played a blinder! But the right decision has been made from all camps here. Kent is securing his future and Melbourne making the move easy. If Kent had injured his shoulder in the first quarter of the eagles game instead of a week later, I think we would have delisted him. So that pick is based on 1 game of footy. All the best Kenty, hope you can get your body right, except against us.

2 hours ago, goodoil said:

Kent had a top 10 best and fairest vote per game time position this seAson.  Small forward is a weak position at the club.   With so many delistings, it seems a waste to effectively lose him for nothing when there is no list size pressures.  

Would you have signed him for three years? That’s what it would take to have kept him. The MFC wanted to give him one year.

I would have kept him given the choice, but St Kilda put a deal in front of him that in my mind is preposterous and it tied our hands. Our options were 1) agree to St Kilda’s offer, 2) spend valuable time to and froing with them and risk having him walk, or 3) offer him three more years (the grapevine says they also offered him 3x the coin too, but this is uncorroborated). Given his injury history and sporadic form, I can’t see how 3) is in any way sensible and 2) I think would be a time waster, especially if we’re trying to line up Hogan/May deals.