List Management - Where to from here?

This unofficial St Kilda Saints fan forum is for people of all ages to chat Saints Footy and all posts must be respectful.

Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators

User avatar
meher baba
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 7122
Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
Location: Tasmania
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 473 times

Post: # 588085Post meher baba »

bigred wrote:The time for sticking with some of the cattle, hoping for them to come good must surely be over.
Nope, now you can be fairly accused of only reading what you want to read.

As I said in my earlier post.
2) A poster earlier on has suggested that we might end up with picks 6, 22, 38, 54, 70, 86 if we finish tenth. If we were to go ahead and attempt to draft six players to our senior list from this, and we used the 2005 draft as a guide, we would have ended up with Beau Dowler, Beau Muston, Travis Tuck, Kristin Thornton, Jonathan Giles and, I suppose, Justin Sweeney (who was the last player picked at 71). Personally, I would far rather have Blake, Fiora, R Clarke, Gwilt, X Clarke and L Fisher than that lot. Perhaps other drafts would look better, but - apart from the 2000 and 2001 super drafts, I doubt that it would be that much better.
A farmer who sent his dairy cattle off to the knackers on the basis that they were past their best before he had checked out the quality, price and availability of replacement dairy cattle on the market would rightly be called a fool.

This is not Fantasy Football. If you delist an Aaron Fiora this year and end up drafting an even bigger dud to replace him, you don't get to go back next year and get rid of the dud and bring Fiora back. He's gone for ever.

There is no question in my mind that TS40 - no matter how fat he got over the summer of 2006-07, would offer more value at the club right now than a number of our current list: C Gardiner, A Schneider, M Ferguson, B Howard all spring to mind. But he's gone for good now.

That's why it's a giggle to read all of the posters who used to lambast Guerra week in and week out now talking about him as if he was the proverbial one who got away.


"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
User avatar
Otiman
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 8497
Joined: Thu 28 Jul 2005 11:09pm
Location: Elsewhere
Has thanked: 182 times
Been thanked: 599 times

Post: # 588090Post Otiman »

Potential success is better than proven failure (or reasonable depth/backup)

It's not about finishing 2nd-8th, it's about winning a flag.

High list turnover is the way to go.

For example, you take picks 6, 22, 38, 54, 70, 86


Of which, for whatever reasons, Picks 6, 22, and 54 become quality AFL players. You ditch 38, 70, 86 in two years and try again.

It means your depth suffers, but if you're relying on depth then you will struggle anyway.

It means having considerable focus on player development and recruiting, so hopefully the recent changes at the club can make this happen. It's no good recruiting 6 kids (plus rookies) if your recruiting and development budget is similar to that of a local tennis club.


User avatar
skeptic
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 16621
Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 7:10pm
Has thanked: 3492 times
Been thanked: 2762 times

Post: # 588095Post skeptic »

I quite like the op although I would keep Raph and maybe McQualter too

good to see that in my week off to Tassie... not much has changed here :lol:


User avatar
meher baba
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 7122
Joined: Mon 14 Aug 2006 6:49am
Location: Tasmania
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 473 times

Post: # 588128Post meher baba »

Otiman wrote:High list turnover is the way to go.
Not outside of fantasy football, it isn't. Look at teams like Geelong, Sydney, Brisbane, Hawthorn, etc.: they do a cleanout when it becomes time to cleanout the list, but otherwise go for minimal turnover with a strong emphasis on developing their existing players.
For example, you take picks 6, 22, 38, 54, 70, 86


Of which, for whatever reasons, Picks 6, 22, and 54 become quality AFL players. You ditch 38, 70, 86 in two years and try again.

It means your depth suffers, but if you're relying on depth then you will struggle anyway.
I would have thought that the long-term result would be a terminal loss of depth. After all, you are ditching 6 current AFL players for a net gain of three. And, on top of that, you will be experiencing retirements, major injuries, etc, etc.

I would have thought that - outside of major rebuilding periods like 2000-01 at our club, you would aim to get the three best possible draft picks you could get each year to replace three retirees/delistees who are proven to be past their use-by dates. You would then develop other hopefuls through the rookie list with the hope of 1-2 making it each year.

Last year, we were able to get our hands on 3 premiership players and a set of steak knives (aka C Gardiner) for not much in the way of draft picks. This enabled us to delist more than the usual number of players. Surely this isn't going to happen every season.

So I really simply don't agree with your approach, Otiman.

But, to each their own. :)


"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."
- Jonathan Swift
User avatar
Otiman
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 8497
Joined: Thu 28 Jul 2005 11:09pm
Location: Elsewhere
Has thanked: 182 times
Been thanked: 599 times

Post: # 588250Post Otiman »

meher baba wrote:So I really simply don't agree with your approach, Otiman.
I appreciate the points you are trying to make.

The problem at present is that we have a large number of players who are past development age, and are still on the list. Unless we top up with recycled players or elevate a whole bunch of rookies, we will have a large amount of picks to take this year.

You say get three best draft picks per year. I'd argue we have at least 6 players to turnover this year, including retirements and delistings, not including rookie elevations/delistings.

In two years time, it will be clear that we need to get rid of a few of the players from last years draft (probably already gone), as well as this years.

Therefore we're in the situation again where we need to draft a large number of kids.

It's more of a comparison between guys like L. Fisher, Blake, Gwilt, Dempster, C. Gardiner, Fiora, X, Ferguson, Rix - who are known 'depth' or 'fringe' players with no further development, and the unknowns like Jack Steven, Eljay Connors, and Luke Van Rheenen (among others) who could become anything, only guys like Danny Sexton and Greg Hutchison will know for sure.

If we can double up and make our fringe players the kids we are developing, we can get ahead of the game.

That's what it's about at present, we're behind the game at the moment, and with recycling duds, and keeping older fringe players on the list, we are certain to stagnate.

At least this way we get to take some calculated risks with some kids. We will have the irish recruitment coming into play soon, so that will help.

I am also not sure how our Scholarship players are going, hopefully well. Haretuku seems to be holding up first ruck in the Casey seconds. (Wouldn't get a game in the Casey firsts with Rix, McEvoy, and Van Rheenen (when fit) around)

I agree that our dealings last year were fantastic even though Schneider hasn't lived up to potential, but we only spent three picks on kids. (#26 traded, #57 on gehrig).


User avatar
borderbarry
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 6676
Joined: Mon 19 Apr 2004 11:22pm
Location: Wodonga

Post: # 588266Post borderbarry »

I thought they had Haretuku lined up as a future key position defender!!

The oldest of our Sydney cadet boys is the 208cm boy (whatever height he is now) He should be the next introduced as a rookie. (Correct me if I am wrong).


User avatar
Otiman
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 8497
Joined: Thu 28 Jul 2005 11:09pm
Location: Elsewhere
Has thanked: 182 times
Been thanked: 599 times

Post: # 588278Post Otiman »

borderbarry wrote:I thought they had Haretuku lined up as a future key position defender!!
http://www.scorpions.com.au/latest/late ... round.html

He's named each week as a Ruckman.


User avatar
borderbarry
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 6676
Joined: Mon 19 Apr 2004 11:22pm
Location: Wodonga

Post: # 588283Post borderbarry »

I realise we have been playing him in the ruck, but if you check his profile on the NSW Scholarship site you will find that we have him earmarked as a key position forward/defender. He is 1cm taller than Kosi.


cwrcyn
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 4219
Joined: Fri 15 Sep 2006 10:35am
Location: earth
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1383 times

Post: # 588298Post cwrcyn »

Getting rid of 10 players is highly unlikely, and I think Meher Baba's argumnents are sensible.

If you look at the higly speculatice draft picks, ie picks beyond number 70, the track record of all clubs over the past 7 or 8 years is unremarkable at the very best. Rookie draft selections have provided far more talent to clubs than the later piick in the actual draft. Therefore, getting rid of 10 to 12 players in one year, two thirds of whom are capable depth players, is fraught with danger.

Realistically, we don't have a heap of untried talent on the list that shows genuine potential, and we have to address this. However, gambling on highly speculative picks at the expense of mature-bodied depth players presents a potential problem of an all or nothing list. That is, 24 mature-bodies, talented players and a bunch of skinny, untried kids who aren't ready for the rigours of senior football.

Basically, this means that we have to retain some of these depth players, particularly in areas where we don't have sufficient depth. For example, Blake has to be kept due to our lack of tall defensive options. King has to be kept while Mc Evoy is given time to physically mature. If McQualter does reasonably well for the rest of 2008, then he is retained to allow jack Steven to develop as a player.

We have been down the road of throwing youngsters to the wolves, such as X.Clarke, Koschitzke, and R.Clarke, and the result has been battered and fragile bodies. Too much, too soon, and the physical toll means that they are physically behind others in their age group when they hit their mid-twenties.

This is why 'depth' players play an important role, and like it or lump it, sometimes mediocre players spend time on the ground and sometimes they stay on the list for a year or two too many. THe young talent we pick up this year will not likely playe senior football until 2010, so hang on to your hats and take your blood pressure medication for another twelve months and hope to God that the 5 or 6 players we recruit will be worth the wait.


awesome_days
Club Player
Posts: 228
Joined: Wed 13 Sep 2006 8:38pm
Been thanked: 3 times

Post: # 589301Post awesome_days »

A quick review of our list and the worse pick I would give up for them is as follows:

Allen, Jarryd - 20
Armitage, David - 5
Baker, Steven - 40
Ball, Luke - 10 + 2nd rd upgrade
Birss, Shane - 35
Blake, Jason - 50
Clarke, Raphael - 40 (trade)
Clarke, Xavier - 25 (trade)
Connors, Eljay - 30
Dal Santo, Nick - 5 + 2nd rd upgrade
Dempster, Sean - 60 (delist)
Ferguson, Matthew - 60 (delist)
Fiora, Aaron - 60 (delist)
Fisher, Leigh - 40
Fisher, Samuel - 5
Gardiner, Charlie - 60 (delist)
Gardiner, Michael S. - 30
Geary, Jarryn - 30
Gehrig, Fraser - N/A (retire)
Gilbert, Sam - 10
Goddard, Brendon - 5 + 20
Gram, Jason - 15
Gwilt, James - 60 (delist)
Harvey, Robert - N/A (retire)
Hayes, Lenny - 12
Howard, Brad - 20
Hudghton, Max - N/A
Jones, Clinton - 40
King, Steven - N/A
Koschitzke, Justin - 15 (Trade)
Maguire, Matthew - 20
McEvoy, Ben - 3
Milne, Stephen - 50 (Trade)
Montagna, Leigh - 10
Riewoldt, Nick - 3 + 15
Rix, Michael - 60 (delist)
Schneider, Adam - 40
Steven, Jack - 15

I would also have the aim of 8 picks in the top 60 (4 in top 25).

I would also promote the following rookies:
Eddy
McQualter
Miles
Attard

That means 12 delistings/retirements/trades.

If we finish 10th, our picks would be (assuming no PP)....

7, 15 (Koschitzke), 23, 25 (X Clarke), 39, 40 (R Clarke), 50 (Milne) 55
+ 5 rookie selections (delist Van Rheenan - injuries at wrong time)

I would also look at upgrading as many picks below # 55 (say we can trade "delist" guys for an upgrade etc).

This cull would cut most of our depth players, but leave us with about 30 guys who have 2+ preseasons.


Ralphy
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 4080
Joined: Wed 20 Feb 2008 8:26pm
Location: Morwell Gippsland Australia
Contact:

Post: # 589306Post Ralphy »

awesome_days wrote:A quick review of our list and the worse pick I would give up for them is as follows:

Allen, Jarryd - 20
Armitage, David - 5
Baker, Steven - 40
Ball, Luke - 10 + 2nd rd upgrade
Birss, Shane - 35
Blake, Jason - 50
Clarke, Raphael - 40 (trade)
Clarke, Xavier - 25 (trade)
Connors, Eljay - 30
Dal Santo, Nick - 5 + 2nd rd upgrade
Dempster, Sean - 60 (delist)
Ferguson, Matthew - 60 (delist)
Fiora, Aaron - 60 (delist)
Fisher, Leigh - 40
Fisher, Samuel - 5
Gardiner, Charlie - 60 (delist)
Gardiner, Michael S. - 30
Geary, Jarryn - 30
Gehrig, Fraser - N/A (retire)
Gilbert, Sam - 10
Goddard, Brendon - 5 + 20
Gram, Jason - 15
Gwilt, James - 60 (delist)
Harvey, Robert - N/A (retire)
Hayes, Lenny - 12
Howard, Brad - 20
Hudghton, Max - N/A
Jones, Clinton - 40
King, Steven - N/A
Koschitzke, Justin - 15 (Trade)
Maguire, Matthew - 20
McEvoy, Ben - 3
Milne, Stephen - 50 (Trade)
Montagna, Leigh - 10
Riewoldt, Nick - 3 + 15
Rix, Michael - 60 (delist)
Schneider, Adam - 40
Steven, Jack - 15

I would also have the aim of 8 picks in the top 60 (4 in top 25).

I would also promote the following rookies:
Eddy
McQualter
Miles
Attard

That means 12 delistings/retirements/trades.

If we finish 10th, our picks would be (assuming no PP)....

7, 15 (Koschitzke), 23, 25 (X Clarke), 39, 40 (R Clarke), 50 (Milne) 55
+ 5 rookie selections (delist Van Rheenan - injuries at wrong time)

I would also look at upgrading as many picks below # 55 (say we can trade "delist" guys for an upgrade etc).

This cull would cut most of our depth players, but leave us with about 30 guys who have 2+ preseasons.
i highly doubt he is going to delist a swan in dempster.


plugger66
Saintsational Legend
Posts: 50626
Joined: Mon 26 Feb 2007 8:15pm
Location: oakleigh

Post: # 589307Post plugger66 »

awesome_days wrote:A quick review of our list and the worse pick I would give up for them is as follows:

Allen, Jarryd - 20
Armitage, David - 5
Baker, Steven - 40
Ball, Luke - 10 + 2nd rd upgrade
Birss, Shane - 35
Blake, Jason - 50
Clarke, Raphael - 40 (trade)
Clarke, Xavier - 25 (trade)
Connors, Eljay - 30
Dal Santo, Nick - 5 + 2nd rd upgrade
Dempster, Sean - 60 (delist)
Ferguson, Matthew - 60 (delist)
Fiora, Aaron - 60 (delist)
Fisher, Leigh - 40
Fisher, Samuel - 5
Gardiner, Charlie - 60 (delist)
Gardiner, Michael S. - 30
Geary, Jarryn - 30
Gehrig, Fraser - N/A (retire)
Gilbert, Sam - 10
Goddard, Brendon - 5 + 20
Gram, Jason - 15
Gwilt, James - 60 (delist)
Harvey, Robert - N/A (retire)
Hayes, Lenny - 12
Howard, Brad - 20
Hudghton, Max - N/A
Jones, Clinton - 40
King, Steven - N/A
Koschitzke, Justin - 15 (Trade)
Maguire, Matthew - 20
McEvoy, Ben - 3
Milne, Stephen - 50 (Trade)
Montagna, Leigh - 10
Riewoldt, Nick - 3 + 15
Rix, Michael - 60 (delist)
Schneider, Adam - 40
Steven, Jack - 15

I would also have the aim of 8 picks in the top 60 (4 in top 25).

I would also promote the following rookies:
Eddy
McQualter
Miles
Attard

That means 12 delistings/retirements/trades.

If we finish 10th, our picks would be (assuming no PP)....

7, 15 (Koschitzke), 23, 25 (X Clarke), 39, 40 (R Clarke), 50 (Milne) 55
+ 5 rookie selections (delist Van Rheenan - injuries at wrong time)

I would also look at upgrading as many picks below # 55 (say we can trade "delist" guys for an upgrade etc).

This cull would cut most of our depth players, but leave us with about 30 guys who have 2+ preseasons.
Again people overating the list. Most of those picks are way to high and what you said will not happen anyway. We can only promote 3 rookies as well but should only promote at the moment 2 at the most. Just because rookies are young doesnt mean they are senior footballers. At best all of them are average footballers. Nice fantasy land stuff but impossible to happen.


Rickabee
Club Player
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005 8:30pm
Location: Sydney, but grew up in Melbourne - 1st Saints match = Rnd 4 1966
Been thanked: 1 time

Post: # 589368Post Rickabee »

One the biggest problems we have I never see addressed here.

What DEVELOPMENT" do we provide our players?

Does anyone kick better? Field kicking or goalkicking?

Does anyone tackle better than previous years?

Is anyone's fitness better than prior years?

We seem to bring players in and then "you're on your own" to sink or swim and then we want to get rid of them.

Who does any analysis what a players strengths and weaknesses are?

Then who is going to coach them to be better??

I don't see any improvements anywhere and I WAS hoping to see this since we are now investing more $'s in our football Dept. Right now it looks like a complete waste of $'s, doesn't it.


awesome_days
Club Player
Posts: 228
Joined: Wed 13 Sep 2006 8:38pm
Been thanked: 3 times

Post: # 591031Post awesome_days »

plugger66 wrote:
awesome_days wrote:A quick review of our list and the worse pick I would give up for them is as follows:

Allen, Jarryd - 20
Armitage, David - 5
Baker, Steven - 40
Ball, Luke - 10 + 2nd rd upgrade
Birss, Shane - 35
Blake, Jason - 50
Clarke, Raphael - 40 (trade)
Clarke, Xavier - 25 (trade)
Connors, Eljay - 30
Dal Santo, Nick - 5 + 2nd rd upgrade
Dempster, Sean - 60 (delist)
Ferguson, Matthew - 60 (delist)
Fiora, Aaron - 60 (delist)
Fisher, Leigh - 40
Fisher, Samuel - 5
Gardiner, Charlie - 60 (delist)
Gardiner, Michael S. - 30
Geary, Jarryn - 30
Gehrig, Fraser - N/A (retire)
Gilbert, Sam - 10
Goddard, Brendon - 5 + 20
Gram, Jason - 15
Gwilt, James - 60 (delist)
Harvey, Robert - N/A (retire)
Hayes, Lenny - 12
Howard, Brad - 20
Hudghton, Max - N/A
Jones, Clinton - 40
King, Steven - N/A
Koschitzke, Justin - 15 (Trade)
Maguire, Matthew - 20
McEvoy, Ben - 3
Milne, Stephen - 50 (Trade)
Montagna, Leigh - 10
Riewoldt, Nick - 3 + 15
Rix, Michael - 60 (delist)
Schneider, Adam - 40
Steven, Jack - 15

I would also have the aim of 8 picks in the top 60 (4 in top 25).

I would also promote the following rookies:
Eddy
McQualter
Miles
Attard

That means 12 delistings/retirements/trades.

If we finish 10th, our picks would be (assuming no PP)....

7, 15 (Koschitzke), 23, 25 (X Clarke), 39, 40 (R Clarke), 50 (Milne) 55
+ 5 rookie selections (delist Van Rheenan - injuries at wrong time)

I would also look at upgrading as many picks below # 55 (say we can trade "delist" guys for an upgrade etc).

This cull would cut most of our depth players, but leave us with about 30 guys who have 2+ preseasons.
Again people overating the list. Most of those picks are way to high and what you said will not happen anyway. We can only promote 3 rookies as well but should only promote at the moment 2 at the most. Just because rookies are young doesnt mean they are senior footballers. At best all of them are average footballers. Nice fantasy land stuff but impossible to happen.
If we offer every player up for trade - if the price is right - you still will want a premium for the top ones.

You also need to keep a certain number of players - cant trade them all for 4th rd picks.

3 rookies promoted - the tree that will have played AFL games by the end of the night - If they werent good enough, they would not have been promoted off the list to play.

Edy & McQualter - good midfielder - room for improvement and maybe a little premature to say he should be promoted.

Attard was first 22 last year and was having good impact in his last game before getting injured - he deserves the chance.

Miles - mature age recruit - have to take him or leave him - is he worth more than a 65 pick???


Jaz
Club Player
Posts: 187
Joined: Fri 19 May 2006 11:33pm
Been thanked: 6 times

Post: # 591163Post Jaz »

I think we need to look at everyone over 25 and if they are not good enough to be a premiership player then we trade / delist them.

Yes we will loose out on depth and backup, but i would rather play kids for the next 2 years than older players who can fill a gap but aren't good enough to be in our best 22. And as you have seen tonight, the young kids at least have a red hot dip unlike some of our other elder players ( eg Fiora)

so at the end of the year I would try to trade blake, L. Fisher and Fiora ( I love Blake but he does not fit with what I stated above)

then i would delist rix, fergusson, (Birss is borderline for mine)


User avatar
goodie
Club Player
Posts: 1289
Joined: Sun 31 Dec 2006 6:41pm

Post: # 591238Post goodie »

Nothing against LVR, but we've got a scholarship kid coming through this year who I think could be a better prospect on the rookie list.

Blake McGrath, 208cm ex-basketballer


Post Reply