Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Teflon wrote:Cmon lets have it!!..I wont tell anyone you made the tough call. Interesting listening to Port CEO on radio tonight talking about how they are prepared to make tough decisions on players......IMO St Kilda has a history of putting EVERY player on a pedestal.........AND NOT being able to make an objective tough call to get the necessary skills compliment for the team that DOES have obvious holes (eg) ruckman, midfielders, another defender.
When???
Port and talk the talk but they don't make the tough calls, the only one I can recall is Stevens which the general understanding is that was a stuff up on their behalf.
Teflon wrote:Cmon lets have it!!..I wont tell anyone you made the tough call. Interesting listening to Port CEO on radio tonight talking about how they are prepared to make tough decisions on players......IMO St Kilda has a history of putting EVERY player on a pedestal.........AND NOT being able to make an objective tough call to get the necessary skills compliment for the team that DOES have obvious holes (eg) ruckman, midfielders, another defender.
since you're so good at tough calls, you name the swap you think would be acceptable. i've obviously hit the nail on the head when i said goose, didn't i.
Carl I have already made a call mate - why cant you?
Be brave Carl...give us your thoughts - thats all Im asking.
Teflon wrote:Cmon lets have it!!..I wont tell anyone you made the tough call. Interesting listening to Port CEO on radio tonight talking about how they are prepared to make tough decisions on players......IMO St Kilda has a history of putting EVERY player on a pedestal.........AND NOT being able to make an objective tough call to get the necessary skills compliment for the team that DOES have obvious holes (eg) ruckman, midfielders, another defender.
since you're so good at tough calls, you name the swap you think would be acceptable. i've obviously hit the nail on the head when i said goose, didn't i.
Carl I have already made a call mate - why cant you?
Be brave Carl...give us your thoughts - thats all Im asking.
what call? did you say goose? c'mon, just say it then i'll tell you what i think
Teflon wrote:Cmon lets have it!!..I wont tell anyone you made the tough call. Interesting listening to Port CEO on radio tonight talking about how they are prepared to make tough decisions on players......IMO St Kilda has a history of putting EVERY player on a pedestal.........AND NOT being able to make an objective tough call to get the necessary skills compliment for the team that DOES have obvious holes (eg) ruckman, midfielders, another defender.
When???
Port and talk the talk but they don't make the tough calls, the only one I can recall is Stevens which the general understanding is that was a stuff up on their behalf.
Stevens wasnt a stuff up - they made the decision they werent dealing and that was it.
Point is they are prepared to let players go - we hold Brooks for 5 yrs.....they get Salopek. They aint afraid to move an Ackland on.....Carlton sign him for 20. They pick up a Rodan that NOBODY ELSE WANTED and make him a player.......
Sadly their CEO owuldnt name names - fair enough but Ports ability to rebound after being a Premiership team in the last few yrs has been superb......that doesnt happen by doing nothing.
Firstly and foremostly we have to keep all of the (now) 15 players Lyon has said would be more than capable on the last Saturday in September.
And we have to build the next 7 or 8 spots.
Basically we have a CHB (Maguire), a couple of defensive flankers (Gram, S. Fisher, L. Fisher) some mids (Hayes, Dal Santo, Montagna, Harvey, Ball, Gilbert, R. Clarke, X. Clarke, Goddard) and a couple of KPP's (Roo and Kosi). Plus, maybe, a ruckman (Gardiner). And, if Max stands up, a full back.
No doubt we are better served with 3 talls up forward - and someone who can rotate thru the ruck or hold down CHF in a rotation.
And we need more "run", both offensively and defensively from our mid-field.
And more blocking to make space for the runners.
And tackling and harrassing has to be addressed. This is vital. When it is "hot" in the kitchen these skills fall right away - causing collateral damage elsewhere.
And we need an unpredictable forward who can park on notionally a half forward flank, cause a mis-match, compete at ground level but also pull in a big mark - as Motlop did tonight. Maybe Fiora, but his goal kicking needs to be worked on big time. Maybe X. Clarke with a full pre-season and a licence to jump again.
But we have to develop from what we have and what we draft.
And if there have to be some sacrifices among those in whom it is concluded there is no more improvement, then that has to be done - but it needs to be restricted to mid-field players because we do not have enough talls to play with - and have a couple in reserve which is a pre-requisite.
And, as Westhoff showed tonight, we have to trawl the SANFL and the WAFL for rookie list talent.
Alignment clubs, once they have 12 AFL listed players in their side, do not play the 19 year olds and 20 year olds for Victorian AFL clubs to cast their eyes over.
That is why Gwilt and Sweeney have come from the competitions they have come from.
The VFL is a waste of space when it comes to "eyeing" someone who has slipped thru the draft system.
Teflon wrote:Cmon lets have it!!..I wont tell anyone you made the tough call. Interesting listening to Port CEO on radio tonight talking about how they are prepared to make tough decisions on players......IMO St Kilda has a history of putting EVERY player on a pedestal.........AND NOT being able to make an objective tough call to get the necessary skills compliment for the team that DOES have obvious holes (eg) ruckman, midfielders, another defender.
since you're so good at tough calls, you name the swap you think would be acceptable. i've obviously hit the nail on the head when i said goose, didn't i.
Carl I have already made a call mate - why cant you?
Be brave Carl...give us your thoughts - thats all Im asking.
what call? did you say goose? c'mon, just say it then i'll tell you what i think
go back and do some reading Carl....Let me guess.....youd reckon Eagles would let go of Judd for a third rounder and Sweeney????
Very simple question - why the reluctance to put up? I have.
HSVKing wrote:Don't think Fergus is big and strong enough yet. A couple of years time maybe yes.
Yeah, try saying the same thing about Westoff from Port...
He doesn't seem big and strong enough, yet he his killing them!
Maybe... But what position is he playing?
The point I'm trying to make is that we need a genuine full forward. If westhoff was the key forward tonight, the eagles backline would have destroyed him. But because there were other forwards they have to concentrate on he doesn't get the #1 backman.
When you have a genuine FF such as fevola, hall, brown, mooney, lloyd etc the #1 defender will always go to them. If the #1 goes to the FF, then the 2nd best is stuck on Roo, 3rd on Kosi etc etc. Without them the best goes to Roo, 2nd Kosi and so on.
Gehrig was that player, but we don't have someone to take that position he played. Riewoldt is a CHF/Winger, Kosi is a Ruck/Resting Forward/Covering Back.
We don't want to go into the season with no real FF, then lose our ruckmen, have Kosi rucking every game, Roo at CHF, and then relying on the likes of Watts having to take the second best backman (as the best would then move to Roo) and being beaten hands down.
okay teflon, so we've established that you reckon we should trade goose for jolly.
no.
we need goose to hold down chb. he's a very good young (potentially great) key defender who is coming back from a serious injury. though he clearly was a long way from his best in the second half of the season, i think it's significant that we lost only the three matches with him back in the side. trade him and it is (another) decision that is likely to come back and haunt us.
max has one or two (at the most) seasons left in him.
sam fisher is a terrific player but lacks the physical strength to play on blokes like brown, tredrea etc and is better used on a flank.
gilbert is extremely promising and would make a full back or chb but imo can be better used at the moment on the ball, the wing or half-forward line.
what i think we should do about the ruck situation is
1) get gardiner right
2) give brooks an extended run in the seniors with the message that it's now or never ... a chance which he's never been given, incidently.
3) use blake and goose to pinch-hit. while they might not be tap out kings, they'll at least contribute more around the ground than either rix or m. clarke did this year.
4) see if we can pick a serviceable ruckman up for someone we can afford to lose. not goose.
IF we had but one deficiency, and plenty of strength elsewhere where we had players who would get a game in other teams but can not make our team, then yes, I would trade for (say) Jolly.
BUT, we are NOT in that position. Not in any area of the ground.
Which begs the question asked - who would you put on the table?
Port Adelaide develop good ruck strength - always did from having Fos Williams as coach and they still do.
They have a production line, including now Minson who is at Norwood, and if they lose one from that production line to grab a meaningful draft pick, then they do that and do not miss a beat - because the have other options coming through.
So what do we produce as a signature of St Kilda as a footy club - key forwards? Mid-fielders? Ruckmen? Defenders?
Who do we have a surplus of because we concentrate on them and produce them - over years in some instances.
Look at Primus, from Geelong where he could not make the grade, to Fitzroy, to Norwood and then to Port Adelaide where he captained. And look at the development of Lade.
But, despite having Primus and Lade, they still drafted Brogan & Brooks & Ackland. So they had 5, and I think there was one other, because Brooks, as the youngest, was behind 5 others.
And the game starts with a dominating ruck division - as Port Adelaide know. They lost big Marrett (who could also bowl - but that is another story!) to a bank transfer to the country - but bought him back for finals. Despite having Hannaford in the side. Simply, they wanted to dominate in the ruck.
It pains me to comment on Port Adelaide in such a way - because many years ago they were the despised enemy - and still are.
There was nothing like beating them anytime - and particularly when you went past the cemetary to Alberton.
But, you have to acknowledge them.
And St Kilda FC should learn from them and develop a a core strength -where the game starts.
We have started, because we have a 200cm plus guy on the rookie list - from a suburban club - not from the VFL.
Joining Gwilt and Sweeney.
Nuff said!
Back to Marketwatch to see what the damage is and to see what buying opportunities present!
Kosi may not have been that gamebreaker this year but he needed to have this year to set himself up for somthing big next year. During that patch on 05 I don't think anyone could say he wasn't a gamebreaker and hopefully using this year as a stepping stone he can play those sort of games consistently and then he'd definately be a gamebreaker and a great option at FF. At the moment he's the best option we've got even though he may not be the prototype FF. But how many of those FF's are there around and then how could we possibly get one? We're going to be very hard pressed to find anyone better than Kosi for FF. And I don't think J. Brown is the quickest off the mark or the most manouverable but he makes do and lazily wins the COleman. Don't see any reason why Kosi couldn't do the same.
But we need either a another tall forward or another ruckmen. If we got another ruckmen and Gardiner goes down we could play that ruckmen in the ruck and Kosi forward and if we got another tall forward Kosi could play ruck if Gardiner goes down and we still have another forward besides Roo.
FG didn't play FF seriously till after 25, same with ablett.
how old is quinton lynch?
when did alistayre lynch move to FF? it was around 25.
I am NOT saying Kosi will be a great FF, or will play FF but its interesting everyone writing him off.
IMO he is a great pack mark, he is very good on the lead, he has a lovely kicking style as opposed to some forwards who jab the ball, he has a capacity to kick the ball 55m plus.
IMO also he has all the tickets to be a very good FF, if that is where we play him.
as for his accuracy, really anything over about 65% ot 70% is more than par for the course for FF.
ppl look at lloyds 'great' games and yet he has so many more 'ordinary' games that no one takes any notice off.
give him a good preseason, a fair amount of decent delivery and he will kick a few bags or better.
Bewaire krime, da krimson bolt is comeing to yure nayborhood to smach krime
HSVKing wrote:Don't think Fergus is big and strong enough yet. A couple of years time maybe yes.
Yeah, try saying the same thing about Westoff from Port...
He doesn't seem big and strong enough, yet he his killing them!
Maybe... But what position is he playing?
The point I'm trying to make is that we need a genuine full forward. If westhoff was the key forward tonight, the eagles backline would have destroyed him. But because there were other forwards they have to concentrate on he doesn't get the #1 backman.
When you have a genuine FF such as fevola, hall, brown, mooney, lloyd etc the #1 defender will always go to them. If the #1 goes to the FF, then the 2nd best is stuck on Roo, 3rd on Kosi etc etc. Without them the best goes to Roo, 2nd Kosi and so on.
Gehrig was that player, but we don't have someone to take that position he played. Riewoldt is a CHF/Winger, Kosi is a Ruck/Resting Forward/Covering Back.
We don't want to go into the season with no real FF, then lose our ruckmen, have Kosi rucking every game, Roo at CHF, and then relying on the likes of Watts having to take the second best backman (as the best would then move to Roo) and being beaten hands down.
You know Glass went to Westhoff tonight
And did West Coast Win?
No.
Because they moved him onto Westhoff when he looked dangerous, then other forwards started becoming dangerous.
But, we have to start somewhere because recruiting ruckmen from other clubs has not been a success for St Kilda - since I have been in Melbourne and following St.Kilda, a couple of guys (Bingham and Flanigan) when Sheldon coached, Cook, Vidovic, Knobel, Ackland and probably some I have missed.
I recall Beveridge saying at the Casino in Adelaide after we beat Adelaide and Lockett kicked his 100th, and Rhen had caught the eye, that we had one on the horizon like Rehn (Everitt).
Apart from Everitt we have not developed any ruckman of note - and I do not include Kosi because he currently needs to ruck by default.
I omit Brooks from the list of ruckmen recruited (and Rix came from a Rookie list elsewhere, so he is a recruit from another club as is Gardiner) because he was a high draft selection development player at Port Adelaide - and was still a good couple of years away from AFL footy there - including because of those he had to jump in front of starting with Primus and Lade.
Van Reehan you would expect will remain on the Rookie list next year, then may spend another 2/3 years on the list, getting some occasional exposure in the education process.
So, by age 24/25 he may establish as a senior ruckman and then, hopefully, progress to an influential player at AFL level.
Because that is the process.
KPP's and ruckmen are different. Gehrig did not start as a KPP, he played on a wing. Maguire did not start as a CHB. Hudgden did not start as a full back. Roo started on a wing. Kosi started as a CHB, by absolute de-fault - including because the Wakelins were de-listed by Blight.
Developing mid-fielders can be covered by numbers and rotations.
Ruckmen can not be hidden. And they, generally, can not start in other positions on the field. So you need to cut some slack.
So, Van Reehan is a start, from Division 3 Under 18's in the EFL, but a start.
We need 3 or 4 such players on our list, so that, come 2010 and onwards we have a ruck strength to be envied.
North Melbourne has followed this course.
But we lose patience with our one project ruckman (since Everitt) because he is not a "star" at 23 or 24 - having missed virtually 2 seasons with injury and the rehabilitation of that injury.
Well, we just have to show patience and work at developing options.
History has shown us the alternative just does not work.
To the top wrote:But we lose patience with our one project ruckman (since Everitt) because he is not a "star" at 23 or 24 - having missed virtually 2 seasons with injury and the rehabilitation of that injury.
are you talking about brooks here and do you think we will delist him? a mistake if we do imo.
I view that he should be retained, most definately. On the basis of his potential, which is obvious, what we have put into his development to date and his efforts at Casey in 2007. He may evolve to leading our rucks because he can actually jump, which compensates for 198cm versus over 200cm which is what the top teams have. But more experience is required to take this step (2/3 years). First up, hopefully, is the support role to Gardiner and some forward duties when Gardiner is on the ground (fingers crossed), giving the opposition match up problems - because how many can cover 3 talls in an attack - including us?
I also do not lose sight of the fact that we only have Gardiner, Rix, Brooks, Watts and Kosi over 196cm.
Plus Van Reehan on the Rookie List.
And, we are not in a position to trade for anyone of size with "last day in September" quality.
So we continue to work on the development of project players.
The problem is that Brooks has infrequently played as the #1 ruck for Casey (according to some reports).
His ruckwork has never been described as great, and his value is more as a ruck/forward and around the ground, in the mould of Koschitzke.
In terms of giving our midfielders first use, and giving us that advantage in clearances, it would seem that Brooks does not offer anything more than Rix or even Blake.
Brooks has been earmarked by Lyon as a forward who can pinch-hit, rather than a #1 or #2 ruckman in an AFL side.
Whether that is right or wrong ... that's the judgement that has been made.
Looking at it from that perspective - from Lyon's perspective - instead of from your own judgement, it is hard to see why Brooks would stay on the list, as we have a couple of developing young ruck/forwards (Allen, Watts).
They should only play AFL games now when it's raining. Slow games of footy are so much better to watch.
Oh When the Saints wrote:Brooks has been earmarked by Lyon as a forward who can pinch-hit, rather than a #1 or #2 ruckman in an AFL side.
Whether that is right or wrong ... that's the judgement that has been made.
now that fraser has retired and kosi looks like his replacement, RL might have to revise his judgement imo
how can we know if he'll not make a #1 or #2 ruckman if he's never been given a proper chance in that role?
people can surprise you all the time. many seem to thrive and grow when given responsibilities.
from what i've heard about brooks he is very skilful and talented but needs to be tougher and have more confidence in his ability to stand up physically against the other rucks.
i'd have him doing a lot of gym work over summer to bulk up and maybe just give him some confidence in his ability to physically match it with some of the monsters going around.
tell him that this is his chance and he needs to grab it now ... or never
