Training 2020 Pre-Season

[Johnnyrayflamingo]

Dont worry we will knock that out him quick smart

Try doing 20 shots whilst playing a game of AFL at the same time. See how many goals any AFL player gets then.

 

[jwikked]

Try doing 20 shots whilst playing a game of AFL at the same time. See how many goals any AFL player gets then.

I can’t see how anyone could defend our goal kicking over the last 3 years. It’s been so consistently poor it’s beyond a joke.

 

[Dr Spaceman]

Racist?? no.
Neckist Yes.

Just for you Snake you old neck perv you

 

[Keg on legs]

Racist?? no.
Neckist Yes.

Tou must really hate Jordan Silk then



Fair dinkum the bloke is part giraffe.


I wonder, when he goes to the bottle shop does he ask for a long neck?

 

[Ekomaira]

Tou must really hate Jordan Silk then

View attachment 810246

Fair dinkum the bloke is part giraffe.


I wonder, when he goes to the bottle shop does he ask for a long neck?

How's it goin down there!

 

[Parkers tatts]

Watching rnd3 1997 on fox Saints v Pies And they say Stkilda skills are poor


Lol nothing has changed

But gee it’s great footy to watch

And Heatly on fire

I recently watched the 97 prelim . Heatley was amazing . Then petered out . I remember holding his beer when I was about 10 in the Subiaco club rooms after the game while he signed my footy .

 

[Johnnyrayflamingo]

I can’t see how anyone could defend our goal kicking over the last 3 years. It’s been so consistently poor it’s beyond a joke.

Who is defending it?

 

[aussierulesrules]

I think Lethers and Gags have done a good job so far Regenerating our list.
Armo,Rowe,Longer,Pierce,White,Rice and Young have gone and none were likely to play many if any games in 2020,and therefore taken off the list.
Acres and Newnes are 2 others who were in the same boat,not likely to play on regular basis and Traded,so 9 players that wouldnt be Regulars .
.
Hill,Howard,Jones,Butler and Ryder ARE likely to be Regulars.
Also in my opinion players still on our list, Phillips,McKenzie,Clavarino,Joyce and Alabakis wont get many games, and a likely delistings from our current list at seasons end.
So in 2019 we had a huge14 players on our list that would struggle to get games this coming season.
Thats a huge amount of players that are not good enough.
SO depth has become much Deeper this coming season and will certainly Benefit our Chances.

Yeah, if we happen to get a better injury run this year, then there could be a bunch of guys who played most or all games last year (when available), who won't be playing regularly this year.

Sincs played 22 games last year, but few if any have him in their best 22.

Savage likewise played 22, but if Robbo holds up, he could potentially push Sav out, especially if Coffield steps it up and they want to get games into him.

Then there's Wilkie, who also played 22 games, who would only have to drop off slightly, and due to having so many other options for his spot, he too could find himself out if the team.

Then there's Dan MacKenzie, who played 15 games last year, who you'd think will only get a look in if we're hit hard by injuries. Ditto Nate Brown, who played 16.

Then there are all the options for the small/crumbing/running roles up forward, who all played seniors consistently when they were fit and available last season- Kent, Lonie, Long, Parker, and then Hind (who played our last 11 games).

Safe to say that they won't all be playing so much when available this year, unless we have a pile of injuries, and then there's Newnes and Acres (who played 20 and 19 games respectively), who likewise would have been up against it to get a game, had they stayed.

All this suggests that if we have a decent injury run, our "bottom 6" is going to be considerably stronger than it has been in recent years. Which is likely to make us harder to beat, due to having less "weak links".

 

[aussierulesrules]

Restricted Content - The Mongrel Punt

Content from our archives commencing with the 2018 season is restricted to members only. Gotta look after the people that look after us. Want a peek?

themongrelpunt.com

Haha, that's a terrific read!

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Haha, that's a terrific read!

The only thing i noticed is it said we'd drafted King, knowing he'd be sitting out the year.
That was Bytel. King was good to go AFTER a year out, but suffered an injury unrelated to his previous injury.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Marshall is heading elite but probably just off that at the moment possibly comparable to an ageing Goldy. I don't think Hill is elite but still an excellent player. Probably fair to say Higgins and Hill are on par. Ben Brown is a regular top 2 in the league goal kicker, that puts him in the true elite category. Cunnington is a top shelf elite inside mid, we still don't have players yet that are in that bracket. Possibly a fit Hanners if he gets back. Jye Simpkin looks like he's got elite qualities and Tarryn Thomas is suer impressive. Probably compatrable to Hunter Clark and maybe say Josh Battle even though they are different players.

Roberton etc are pretty similar in quality to Tarrant etc. Who's you cousin Molts? I have a family friend's son playing in their VFL team. I know a guy who works there as well.

Their top end is a bit better than our IMO. Just more top shelf than our where we might be a bit deeper on the good but not excellent types.

Here's the big difference between our list and North's.

9 of the top 10 in their B&F are currently 27yo or older (with the other one being 24yo Dumont- who might not get a game in a good team), whereas of the top 8 in our B&F, ZERO are currently 27yo or older.

Nor are Hill, Howard, Jones or Butler, who we've just brought in.

We also would have killed for their injury run last season (6 of their very best played all 22 games, and most of the rest of their best played 17-21), yet they won just one more game than us.

22 games:
Brown
Cunnington
Ziebell
Goldstein
Polec
Tarrant
Pittard
(All top 10 in their B&F, with the first 6 all top 7!)
21: Dumont, Simpkin and Atley
20: Thomas
17-19: Higgins, Williams, Anderson, Wood and Zurhaar.

So 16 of their best 22 played 17-22 games!

What Richo would give for us to have had that injury run last season!

 

[The_Steadier]

yet they won just one more game.

Could quite easily be a case of us overachieving last year and them underachieving.

It's all a bit irrelevant anyway though I think.
Comparing ourselves against north is a distraction from the real task which is how far are we off the best teams in the comp.
(And tracking our progress to closing that gap)

Who cares if we are or aren't better than fellow middling battlers like north?

 

[aussierulesrules]

Could quite easily be a case of us overachieving last year and them underachieving.

It's all a bit irrelevant anyway though I think.
Comparing ourselves against north is a distraction from the real task which is how far are we off the best teams in the comp.
(And tracking our progress to closing that gap)

Who cares if we are or aren't better than fellow middling battlers like north?

Obviously not you, so you don't have to get involved in the discussion if you don't want to.

I'm not sure how what we discuss on here is going to make any significant difference to how our team performs though.

Pretty sure we're largely just passing the time until the footy starts up again, or there's significant news!

As for the suggestion that we might have "overachieved", I don't really see how that's likely.

In 2016/2017 we won more matches than we lost across those two seasons, but then had a stinker or a year in 2018, before starting off last season like the 2016/2017 team again, before our significant injuries started to really take their toll.

Simple logic would suggest that if we'd had a North (or Brisbane, or Adelaide) type injury run, we would have won at least 2-3 more games than the 9 we did win, which would have put us right back to being the sort of team we were in '16/17.

Making 2018 the clear aberration. Not 2016, 2017 and 2019.

 

[gringo2011]

Obviously not you, so you don't have to get involved in the discussion if you don't want to.

I'm not sure how what we discuss on here is going to make any significant difference to how our team performs though.

Pretty sure we're largely just passing the time until the footy starts up again, or there's significant news.

As for the suggestion that we might have "overachieved", I don't really see how that's likely.

In 2016/2017 we won more matches than we lost across those two seasons, but then had a stinker or a year in 2018, before starting off last season like the 2016/2017 team again, before our significant injuries started to really take their toll.

Simple logic would suggest that if we'd had a North (or Brisbane, or Adelaide) type injury run, we would have won at least 2-3 more games than the 9 we did win, which would have put us right back to being the sort of team we were in '16/17.

Making 2018 the clear aberration. Not 2016, 2017 and 2019.

I thought we did for our injury list.

 

[aussierulesrules]

I thought we did for our injury list.

TBH I don't really even get the term "overachieved".

I mean you're not capable of doing more than you're capable of doing, so if you do something better than you usually would, I would have thought that suggests that previously you weren't performing to your capabilities.

Not that you've suddenly magically performed beyond them!

 

[The_Steadier]

TBH I don't really even get the term "overachieved".

I mean you're not capable of doing more than you're capable of doing, so if you do something better than you usually would, I would have thought that suggests that previously you weren't performing to your capabilities.

Not that you've suddenly magically performed beyond them!

In a nutshell, the answer lies within the murky world of probabilities and chance, in particular reversion to the mean.

True randomness and chance play a huge role in a game like AFL just because of the sheer number of variables inherent in the game itself.
The shape of the ball creates highly irregular motion, 36 players on the ground at once on a massive expanse, all 360 degrees of play is possible at all times.... not to mention atmospheric conditions like wind, rain etc.
Plus the randomness induced by injuries etc.

Unlike say tennis for instance, where there are far fewer variables- the players are able to control their own destiny to a far greater extent than in AFL.

So basically, in a game like AFL the factor of chance/randomness is amplified- especially with the equalisation measures like the salary cap and the draft which means there is relatively little separating the best teams from the worst.

So it's more often the case in a game like AFL which has more uncontrollable variables (as opposed to tennis or squash for instance), that teams and players will go through phases of over and under achieving, based largely on nothing more than good ol fashioned good and dumb luck (ie random chance)

So perhaps we had a few key moments go our way last year whereas north had less? or even the opposite where they had a few key moments go completely against them?

Reversion to the mean says that it would be more likely than not for our good luck to even out over time (giving the appearance of us doing worse), and norths luck to also even out (giving them the appearance of doing better).

/Insert milney 2010 grand final ball bounce gif.
mic drop.

 

[tomjoad]

When you over achieve it is because you are perceived externally to be inferior to those whom you are outperforming.
The Saints are over achieving every time we win, just as the other teams are underperforming whenever they lose to us. Just look at the commentary surrounding a St.Kilda vs. Gold Coast match. Two losers having a tug fest to see who is marginally better. Then see how Carlton is perceived when playing Gold Coast...and people wonder why Saints fans have a chip on their shoulder (and proud of it by the way...f*CK 'em)

 

[tomjoad]

Or what the Steadier said...except not as cool.

 

[The_Steadier]

Obviously not you, so you don't have to get involved in the discussion if you don't want to.

I'm not sure how what we discuss on here is going to make any significant difference to how our team performs though.

Pretty sure we're largely just passing the time until the footy starts up again, or there's significant news!

As for the suggestion that we might have "overachieved", I don't really see how that's likely.

In 2016/2017 we won more matches than we lost across those two seasons, but then had a stinker or a year in 2018, before starting off last season like the 2016/2017 team again, before our significant injuries started to really take their toll.

Simple logic would suggest that if we'd had a North (or Brisbane, or Adelaide) type injury run, we would have won at least 2-3 more games than the 9 we did win, which would have put us right back to being the sort of team we were in '16/17.

Making 2018 the clear aberration. Not 2016, 2017 and 2019.

Btw, apologies for sounding harsh earlier- I certainly didn't intent to stifle your views on how we are going- you have made some great points.
I just wanted to point out we should be using a better yardstick is all.

 

[StJHD]

In a nutshell, the answer lies within the murky world of probabilities and chance, in particular reversion to the mean.

True randomness and chance play a huge role in a game like AFL just because of the sheer number of variables inherent in the game itself.
The shape of the ball creates highly irregular motion, 36 players on the ground at once on a massive expanse, all 360 degrees of play is possible at all times.... not to mention atmospheric conditions like wind, rain etc.
Plus the randomness induced by injuries etc.

Unlike say tennis for instance, where there are far fewer variables- the players are able to control their own destiny to a far greater extent than in AFL.

So basically, in a game like AFL the factor of chance/randomness is amplified- especially with the equalisation measures like the salary cap and the draft which means there is relatively little separating the best teams from the worst.

So it's more often the case in a game like AFL which has more uncontrollable variables (as opposed to tennis or squash for instance), that teams and players will go through phases of over and under achieving, based largely on nothing more than good ol fashioned good and dumb luck (ie random chance)

So perhaps we had a few key moments go our way last year whereas north had less? or even the opposite where they had a few key moments go completely against them?

Reversion to the mean says that it would be more likely than not for our good luck to even out over time (giving the appearance of us doing worse), and norths luck to also even out (giving them the appearance of doing better).

/Insert milney 2010 grand final ball bounce gif.
mic drop.

You lost me at squash. The court in my building has chips out of the walls and an assortment of other anomalies. I'd argue the bounce is even more random than that of a footy, it is like being in an episode of It's A Knockout. Honestly, playing on it now borders the frustration felt supporting this team.

 

[Human Person]

Jake hasnt shown he can play forward since 2014 , Battle looked pretty damn good to me as forward in his first year before he got injured and even last year played on some big guys in the backline so i dont consider him a medium .
You have lost me with who is going to miss out ? Which backman misses out that upsets you

Not upsets, but would like Brown there. And would like a solid forward line.

 

[gringo2011]

TBH I don't really even get the term "overachieved".

I mean you're not capable of doing more than you're capable of doing, so if you do something better than you usually would, I would have thought that suggests that previously you weren't performing to your capabilities.

Not that you've suddenly magically performed beyond them!

Then Melbourne had an okay year by that logic. We had so many injuries and Robbo and Stuv going down for nearly a full year and Carlisle, Geary, Hanners etc all missing big chunks made us light on. No Longer after trading Hickey worked out in the end but more luck than management. So many kids and new players stepped up while Seb and Gresh both went backwards. We got Essendon at the right time and a bit of luck against GC twice. Richo had a boring style but when it worked the grind-down trips a few up. I thought on paper for the players we put up we overachieved. Melbourne had injuries and collapsed with a technically superior list by most experts measure.

 

[prophetic1]

• THE MAYO CLINIC ON THE BILLINGS METHOD

 

[CaptainRisky]

Not upsets, but would like Brown there. And would like a solid forward line.

Ah , so your saying Brown is one of our best players , Most on here didnt even pick him in our team for round 1 ,

 

[The_Steadier]

You lost me at squash. The court in my building has chips out of the walls and an assortment of other anomalies. I'd argue the bounce is even more random than that of a footy, it is like being in an episode of It's A Knockout. Honestly, playing on it now borders the frustration felt supporting this team.

I was referring to sports at the elite level where things like facilities and equipment are curated to relative perfection, but yes I know what you mean.

I'm convinced that I'd be the next don bradman if only I ever got the chance to bat on the MCG with it's bowling green grass.

(I hit the ball along the ground all the time, which on sandy, rocky, overgrown C grade suburban grounds- is a recepie for never getting the ball past the infield