Trade King

[older saint]

Nothing like an over reaction.
Glad some are not on match committee or head of football

74 games and Ave just under 2 goals per game in a team which has made finals once in previous 4 season.

Give it some context:
Tom Hawkins first 60 games averaged 1.3 goals per game
Jack Riewoldt first 68 games averaged 1.98 goals per game
Charlie Curnow first 68 games averaged 1.16 goals per game.

Yes he was poor yesterday , delivery was ordinary and we would all like him to lead more but sureky he is playing within a structure the team wants.

Take a chill pill people and be patient.

[Teflon]

Nothing like an over reaction.
Glad some are not on match committee or head of football

74 games and Ave just under 2 goals per game in a team which has made finals once in previous 4 season.

Give it some context:
Tom Hawkins first 60 games averaged 1.3 goals per game
Jack Riewoldt first 68 games averaged 1.98 goals per game
Charlie Curnow first 68 games averaged 1.16 goals per game.

Yes he was poor yesterday , delivery was ordinary and we would all like him to lead more but sureky he is playing within a structure the team wants.

Take a chill pill people and be patient.

Perspective
Thank you

[Saints58]

Play King a CHF he is mobile and it would allow him to receive the ball on the move harder for defence to match up on.
He would be in the play more often and he is good below knees.

[nostalgicsaint]

Nothing like an over reaction.
Glad some are not on match committee or head of football

74 games and Ave just under 2 goals per game in a team which has made finals once in previous 4 season.

Give it some context:
Tom Hawkins first 60 games averaged 1.3 goals per game
Jack Riewoldt first 68 games averaged 1.98 goals per game
Charlie Curnow first 68 games averaged 1.16 goals per game.

Yes he was poor yesterday , delivery was ordinary and we would all like him to lead more but sureky he is playing within a structure the team wants.

Take a chill pill people and be patient.

Again I don't think anyone has said he is failing as a footballer.

Most who are being critical are looking at the ROI (noting he is already our highest paid player) and the relative opportunity trading would give us.

The role he is playing doesn't require his talent.
He is paid well enough for us to bring in elite talent in another position that suits our game plan
And we can get good return on the trade table.

[samoht]

Nothing like an over reaction.
Glad some are not on match committee or head of football

74 games and Ave just under 2 goals per game in a team which has made finals once in previous 4 season.

Give it some context:
Tom Hawkins first 60 games averaged 1.3 goals per game
Jack Riewoldt first 68 games averaged 1.98 goals per game
Charlie Curnow first 68 games averaged 1.16 goals per game.

Yes he was poor yesterday , delivery was ordinary and we would all like him to lead more but sureky he is playing within a structure the team wants.

Take a chill pill people and be patient.

But our forward line kicks as many goals with him at FF as it does when he's either out of the side. not playing, or not at FF.
It functions just as well.
If you're kicking as many goals spread over more players, it's always harder for the opposition to defend against.

I don't agree with trading him, but maybe look for a position where he could contribute to making our team better ... where he can use his height, use that athleticism.

It could be in defence .... at CHB, even ... taking 12 intercept marks, etc...
I'm confident in his abilities. He's a number 4 draft pick.

The opportunity is there to explore ... and it's not going to cost our side goals. We could become a 3 goal better side this way, who knows?
So, why not?? At worst, we might find out he's a one-trick pony (and start paying him accordingly)?

[samoht]

To be fair though, if you look at Max's stats, he's credited with 4.2 inside 50s per game ave this year, which suggests he's roaming around a bit more ( outside the 50m arc) - which would of course impact the number of goals he kicks himself, as well as his accuracy, as he's kicking it from a bit further out, and there's less opportunities for him to kick from inside 50 - which also means that he'd be more likely to pass to someone instead (hence his score involvements improving to 7.0, and his shots for goal declining).

So, we are making more use of that athleticism of his, so far this year. This is a welcome change, if it continues (it is a small sample size).
He did have a poor game, and that happens - but his ave disposal numbers are up this year despite that.

At the end of the day, we just want to kick more goals overall ... and a nice spread of goals.

So, I'm reserving judgement - happy to sit on the fence for now and let the cobblers cobble (and the Kings alone) for the time being.

[Otiman]

I think we will learn by the end of the year a few things that are already apparent to me.

Max King is not a marquee, once in a generation player (like a Plugger, Harvey, Riewoldt).
You cannot build a premiership side around King, but he will certainly play an important part.
The rest of the team must understand that King isn't a magician that can make goals out of terrible entries.
The rest of the forwards must understand that they are just as good as King and to present in their own way and not play second fiddle.

[saintsRrising]

The rest of the forwards must understand that they are just as good as King and to present in their own way and not play second fiddle.

I think it is more that the rest of the team need to learn to always look for the best option.

When Sharman is allowed to play forward you will note that he leads and leads. But is often ignored. Especially prior to this year.

[Sainter_Dad]

The rest of the forwards must understand that they are just as good as King and to present in their own way and not play second fiddle.

I think it is more that the rest of the team need to learn to always look for the best option.

When Sharman is allowed to play forward you will note that he leads and leads. But is often ignored. Especially prior to this year.

If King has two on him - 90% of the time there is a spare in the area - even a mid who has drifted down - FFS look!

As I intimated in another thread - we are literally 2 goals a game away from being a very lucky 5-0.

[Otiman]

The rest of the forwards must understand that they are just as good as King and to present in their own way and not play second fiddle.

I think it is more that the rest of the team need to learn to always look for the best option.

When Sharman is allowed to play forward you will note that he leads and leads. But is often ignored. Especially prior to this year.

That was my exact point of the line above the one you quoted, so yes absolutely agree.

[King Max]

The coaches of the 17 oppo teams endorse this thread wholeheartedly.
After they stopped laughing.

Imagine getting Nas, Windy, Owens in exchange.

Then taking the cash and grabbing Tim English.

Is it still laughable.

English and Rowan swapping ruck/forward. Midfield depth sorted.

All from trading one player...

I get the argument it is crazy to trade him- his ceiling is ridiculously high- what if he doesn't hit it? What if this is as good as he gets? (still very good)

It may not be the right call, but it is worth a thought/exploring.

Imagine getting Tambling, O'Rourke, Angwin - and using the cash to grab Rhys Stanley back!

We are St Kilda - we CAN and most probably WOULD

Nonsense. 1st round picks are a lot more bankable these days.

Clark & Coffield?

Would you trade out Max for a combination of Clark & Coffield?

No thank you.

Throw in Billings and use the extra cash on another Dan Hannaberry.

[saintsRrising]

The rest of the forwards must understand that they are just as good as King and to present in their own way and not play second fiddle.

I think it is more that the rest of the team need to learn to always look for the best option.

When Sharman is allowed to play forward you will note that he leads and leads. But is often ignored. Especially prior to this year.

That was my exact point of the line above the one you quoted, so yes absolutely agree.

Yes I understand that. I was more disagreeing with your the point below it, as they do present.

The rest of the team must understand that King isn't a magician that can make goals out of terrible entries.

The rest of the forwards must understand that they are just as good as King and to present in their own way and not play second fiddle.

Higgins often plays as a small leading forward. Sharman and Membrey both lead a lot (Though Membrey does it differently as he often tries to maximise his extraordinary vertical leap to mark). Caminiti tries to, but at present often runs under it as he is against much better defenders than he is at lower levels. He will get better with experience

Poo and Owens are often on.

So all in all there are normally already marking targets. The players up the field focus too much on King, and too much on roosts still. Now that may be a coaching instruction, and if so the that needs to change.

However as other have noted without King , the players spread the ball around more. Is this due to there being no coaching imperative to kick it to King, or is it just that the players themselves tend to wrongly look for King too much?


We should certainly be a better team with King in it, than without him, as long as we also make the most of our other options.

Focussing on King too much makes us too predictable, and too easy to defend as the opposition then sets up to spoil King and to have an outnumber to then crumb and clear the spoil.

[Otiman]

Is this because it's being bombed in and everyone can get to the same contest due to the air time of the ball? I'm not sure.

The reality is that our team performs different with and without King in there - and part of this is certainly on the other forwards demanding the ball in the right places, and taking opponents away from King (and vice versa).

Higgins shouldn't be a leading forward when we have the rest of the team available. We need ground ball contest.

[samoht]

Is our bombing of the ball into the F50 as a result of Max choosing not to lead as it doesn't come naturally to him or is it because he's being instructed not to lead?

Our default F50 entry method, to bomb away to a contested hot spot, might just be due to our unreliable or poor kicking skills? But, then. how come Higgins and Membrey, etc.. get the ball delivered to them when they lead?

I know, we've all been asking these questions ... which remain unanswered. And the answer could be a combination of all the above things?

In any case, we're kicking as many goals with or without him at FF.

Time to explore/entertain a move into defence? Or maybe a utility, around the ground role?

[Yorkeys]

It's not Max King that's a problem.
The players problematic decision making and ball delivery is enough to drive all forwards to despair.
Even if there was consistency to the way the ball is brought in that would allow the forwards to adapt, but its so random.
We have already lost two games because ball carriers ignored leads or guys clear. What are the forwards supposed to do absent a reliable system and any personal discipline (or requisite skill) from the ball carriers.

[samoht]

Even if Max isn't the problem - and as you say we lack system and/or the required kicking skills (no arguments from me there), the bottom line is we're kicking as many goals with him or absent him at FF.

The question remains, can we utilise our number 4 draft pick more productively in another position, so that we end up a 3 goal better side?

I have faith in his skills, athleticism and abilities ... that he is more than a FF.
At this stage ... given our poor F50 entries (and we can't keep blaming Richo and Ratten for that), we could be wasting him at FF - he could improve us in a different role/position?

Maybe, we should explore that?

[Yorkeys]

Fair enough.
Max is a massive kick and seems more accurate from a way out.
New cheer squad song: King to Caminiti, Gooooaaaal.

[Saint 58]

Play King a CHF he is mobile and it would allow him to receive the ball on the move harder for defence to match up on.
He would be in the play more often and he is good below knees.

+1

[Scollop]

People need not get confused about the game plan. Watch our matches a bit more closely

I'm sure the opposition knows what our game plan is

E.g. The third quarter against Richmond.

We had 9 x inside 50's in the first five minutes of the 3rd quarter...No chip kicks just inside 50.

Zero goals from those first NINE entries (nearly ALL long bombs)

Our first goal in the 3rd wasn't from a leading forward taking a mark and having set shot. It was a crumb that Membrey kicked on his left AFTER another long bomb!!

Our strategy seems to be based on bombing it in and hoping for the best. Incidental goals or King taking a pack mark. Who knows...maybe the plan against Richmond was different because they'd lost a few talls from their backline. Injuries to Balta etc. This was really the first game where we had King, Caminiti, Membrey and Sharman all playing in the team

Every time they were doing it in the 3rd quarter, I thought they'd learnt their lesson...but no!! They just kept bombing it in long to the congested hotspot 20-30m in front of goal.

Straight after our first goal by Membrey, we got the centre clearance with Steele getting a handball out to Seb who was on the run.

What does Sebby do? Bombs it long, to the hotspot!!

After Butler was paid a free deep in our forward pocket for a dangerous tackle from Vlastuin and Wilson played on and kicked a goal, we had about 4 more inside 50s within the next 3-4 minutes.

Again...it was a long bomb from Batts ( marked by Nank) a long bomb from Stocker ( marked by Nank ) and another bloody long bomb from Sincs...after our last goal we got a centre clearance and guess what Zak Jones does...yep...bomb it to the hotspot!!

We dominated the 3rd with 22 x i50's to Richmond only 9...BUT it was all incidental and unplanned goals.

It seems our forwards don't lead early enough or high enough up the ground. Don't they know how to lead?

Are they told not to lead? Have they forgotten how to lead?

At times I have to wonder if our mids have been instructed not to have a ping at goals and instead bomb to hotspots. Maybe to prevent quick transition back up the field if they miss? Or maybe we're just determined to back our talls in.

[B.M]

I would have been doing the opposite to trading King

I’d add more King

I said 4 years ago

Max and Ben - twin towers - one at chf (Max) away from the goals and one at FF (who leads well and is a dead eye (Ben)

You need a point of difference to win a premiership

2 x 202cm key forwards with speed and agility- yep that’d do it

I see Ben as a 70-80 goal FF
And Max as a 50- 60 goal CHF

[The Fireman]

the title of the read is of course ridiculous but im sure it was meant to provoke debate.
Kudos.

[Teflon]

I would have been doing the opposite to trading King

I’d add more King

I said 4 years ago

Max and Ben - twin towers - one at chf (Max) away from the goals and one at FF (who leads well and is a dead eye (Ben)

You need a point of difference to win a premiership

2 x 202cm key forwards with speed and agility- yep that’d do it

I see Ben as a 70-80 goal FF
And Max as a 50- 60 goal CHF

I used to think that too but now not so sure
2 Kings in forward half = no pressure on ball leaving 50
King + Caminiti probably gives me some attack/pressure and star quality