Adelaide: future

[macca23]

I think Saints time is running out quicker than you might think. As mymansyd mentioned in his post, they are still relying heavily on their senior players. Gherig, Harvey, Thompson, Powell, Jones and Hamill can't go on forever, Someone like Harvey and Thompson will most lilely retire at the end of this season and a couple of others aren't far behind. If they don't make a run at it in the next couple of years their window might have just passed them by.

Its not as black and white as many think. I still think Geelong's list is better and in all honesty if they can find a gun key forward they are a better side than St. Kilda IMHO. If Cats had Reiwoldt in their line up they would be a dominat side.

But they haven't, Stiffy.

I really rate the Saints and they're my tip for the flag this year. Geelong have a terrific mid-field and a great FB in Scarlett. Ottens gives them a bit, but they're light on at CHF. IMO they're not the real deal.

 

[macca23]

sorry, entirely incorrect. this is what managing your cap and contracts is all about. fundamentally. When players are contracted to, how long, what the structure of the payments is, etc. you pay players according to their importance to the team, structure and their stage of development. If you will, you have 1 or 2 franchise players, senior players who have proven themselves B&F etc. Middle tier players getting a game every week, emerging young players, depth flotsom, and early draftees.
That you have to share the cake amongst them is why it is so fundamental, so basic, that they have to be paid according their respective rankings of importance. Players will always have an inflated view of their worth, it's a basic human right, however you need a strong tiered hierachy to regulate these payments. Adelaide has been outstanding in this regard. Remember when McLeod wanted to accept a big money offer from Brisbane after the 1997 GF? Reidy convinced him he couldn't be paid like a champion so early in his career, he has to take account of senior players, perform like this consistently and if he did - the numbers would take care of themselves.
Now if your players are all skewed towards the lower centre of tiers, then they all want to be paid for potential and no club can afford to do that for more than 1 or 2 players at a time. However then the player looks at a guy of similar age, earning far more, and he is convinced that he is better than that guy or almost as good - where is his money? A bottom dweller club with cap space, and a handy preseason pick steps in and it all goes south.
Especially with regards to club culture and team discipline.

you need a regulated structure to be able to keep player payments under control, and if they are all at the same age and development (relatively) then it is very hard to maintain this.



tell that to essendon after the 2000 season.

Been watching this debate with interest. Your last point about Essendon is very telling, and demonstrates what happenens when the babies all mature at the same time.

You definitely need a balanced payment structure with players at differing levels or it eventually implodes.

 

[outback jack]

a couple of you are saying that the saints are almost finished ???? If they are finished where does that leave us?? They will be around the mark for at least 5 yrs. The only players of any great talent that they will be losing are Gehrig and harvey, harvey hasnt been dominant for the past couple of yrs, and gehrig gets such good supply its hard to tell if losing him will make that bigger difference. The rest are gap players that can and are currently being replaced with the fiora and mcgough types. and having rich talent about the same age ie essendon doesnt really matter if they get greedy you trade them off. Sheedy did that very well he picked the ones that were overrated and virtually useless and get first rounders for them.

 

[Markthirtytwo]

tell that to essendon after the 2000 season.

Correcto Mondo. Thats a bloody good reason for not delisting all your 3rd tier and duds at the same time and draft youngsters. Need some experience as well.

 

[Bentleigh]

True but that doesn't make you a dominant team for an extended period of time. It might make you a good team over the extended period of time but not a dominat team. For example, Saints lose Lenny Hayes and Luke Ball to slary cap repssure they get good picks for them, but are those picks ready to play straight away and fill the roles of these 2? No because they will take 2-4 years to develop. So all of a sudden Saints drop off and are not the team they were with those 2 players in their 18.

Remember, Bentleigh is claiming that bottoming out makes teams dominat over extended periods of time which simply is not true because of other factors. This competition is designed in a way that the clubs get their turn at the top and no side stays dominant for a long period of time. Now you might say Brisbane but as Crow-mosone has already pointed out, it due to other factors, increased salary cap being one of them

The Saints are not going to lose Luke Ball, Lenny Hayes types. They are going to lose Heath Black, Trent Knoble types to keep there core players.

They may lose Leigh Montagna, Steven Baker types but there best players in Riewoldt & Goodard types will remain.

At the end of the day to have so many gun players you have to lose some is a brillant situation to be in.

Of course other factors come in to in but in the best case the AFL has to offer, Saint Kilda the primary reason is due to Draft Picks. If tryed to rank the most important players in the Saints future the following likes would be the high part of the list: Nick Riewoldt (no.1), Lenny Hayes (no.11), Luke Ball (no.2), Nick Dal Santo (no.13), Matthew Maguire (no.21), Justin Koschitzke (no.2), Brendon Goddard (no.1), Xavier Clarke (no.5)

You are right that history doesnt show teams dominating after bottoming out. But I have 2 issues with this......Firstly, why is the question one of domination? If St Kilda gets up and wins a couple of flags in the next 5 yrs (which is reasonably likely IMO), surely fans would be comfortable with the previous pain inflicted. Take out Riewoldt, Kozi and Ball etc and they wouldnt be in this situation. Secondly, history is one thing but to be forward looking I dont think anyone can deny that the Saints look as likely as any other team in the next 5 yrs to win a couple of flags. History may well show that the Saints were the first team to dominate after bottoming out over a few years - we will have to wait and see but if I was a betting man.....

Maybe so but a AFL flag is a flag. Other people can bag you as much as you like but to see your club win one in your lifetime is something fairly special. I doubt people 'having a go' would fase you.

I think Saints time is running out quicker than you might think. As mymansyd mentioned in his post, they are still relying heavily on their senior players. Gherig, Harvey, Thompson, Powell, Jones and Hamill can't go on forever, Someone like Harvey and Thompson will most lilely retire at the end of this season and a couple of others aren't far behind. If they don't make a run at it in the next couple of years their window might have just passed them by.

Its not as black and white as many think. I still think Geelong's list is better and in all honesty if they can find a gun key forward they are a better side than St. Kilda IMHO. If Cats had Reiwoldt in their line up they would be a dominat side.

They are going to lose some player in the next couple years, indeed but there core is still very young and I beleive, realsiticly its just starting to open. They are goign to lose Harvey, Peckett, Thompson but everyone else on there list is 28 or younger.

With the following under 22:

Koschitzke, Justin
Riewoldt, Nick
Clarke, Xavier
Montagna, Leigh
Brooks, Barry
Dal Santo, Nick
Fisher, Leigh
Gram, Jason
Ball, Luke
Maguire, Matthew
McGough, Mark
Ferguson, Matthew
Mullins, Luke (R)
Goddard, Brendon
Clarke, Raphael 1


Gehrig, Hudghton, Powel, Jones 'only' 28 Id say there best is very much yet to come. While the window is closing the door is starting to open...

If you compared the Saint and Geelong list, i would think Geelong would be a little behind.

And for the record, Jono Brown would much better suits Geelong over Big Nick I would reckon.

Been watching this debate with interest. Your last point about Essendon is very telling, and demonstrates what happenens when the babies all mature at the same time.

You definitely need a balanced payment structure with players at differing levels or it eventually implodes.

Id agree there best players are reasonably spread:

Harvey - 33
Gehrig - 28
Jones - 28
Hamill - 27
Voss - 27
Hayes - 25
Penny -24
Koschitzke - 22
Riewoldt - 22
Dal Santo - 21
Ball - 20
Goodard - 19

---

Bit off topic; if you claim Saints window is closing (no matter how good there bottem-mid range players are) with

Harvey 33, Peckett 32, Thompson 32, Gehrig 28, Hudghton 28, Powell 28,
Jones 28, Hamill 27, Voss 27....

Then what kind of situation do you rate the Crows in with there best players very much top age -

Clarke, Matthew 31
Hart, Ben (V+) 30
Ricciuto, Mark ( 29
Stevens, Mark 29
McLeod, Andrew 28
Edwards, Tyson 28
Bassett, Nathan 28
Goodwin, Simon 28

 

[marvin]

Id agree there best players are reasonably spread:

Harvey - 33
Gehrig - 28
Jones - 28
Hamill - 27
Voss - 27
Hayes - 25
Penny -24
Koschitzke - 22
Riewoldt - 22
Dal Santo - 21
Ball - 20
Goodard - 19

---

Bit off topic; if you claim Saints window is closing (no matter how good there bottem-mid range players are) with

Harvey 33, Peckett 32, Thompson 32, Gehrig 28, Hudghton 28, Powell 28,
Jones 28, Hamill 27, Voss 27....

Then what kind of situation do you rate the Crows in with there best players very much top age -

Clarke, Matthew 31
Hart, Ben (V+) 30
Ricciuto, Mark ( 29
Stevens, Mark 29
McLeod, Andrew 28
Edwards, Tyson 28
Bassett, Nathan 28
Goodwin, Simon 28

Not an accurate selection. Compare the top 10's in the B+F's at each club last year. Each had one 30 year old (Clarke, Harvey). St Kilda had 3 genuine youngsters >22 (Riewoldt, Ball, Dal Santo), Adelaide had 2 (Johncock, Hentschel). Adelaide had 5 top age players (Clarke, Ricciuto, McLeod, Edwards, Bassett), Saints had 4 (Harvey, Jones, Gehrig, Voss). Average age of Adelaide's top 10 is 26.7, of St Kilda's 25.6.

 

[Bentleigh]

Not an accurate selection. Compare the top 10's in the B+F's at each club last year. Each had one 30 year old (Clarke, Harvey). St Kilda had 3 genuine youngsters >22 (Riewoldt, Ball, Dal Santo), Adelaide had 2 (Johncock, Hentschel). Adelaide had 5 top age players (Clarke, Ricciuto, McLeod, Edwards, Bassett), Saints had 4 (Harvey, Jones, Gehrig, Voss). Average age of Adelaide's top 10 is 26.7, of St Kilda's 25.6.

I reckon thats farily misleading mate. Which players are each clubs most important?

Saints - Hayes 25, Riewoldt 22, Dal Santo 21, Ball 20

Crows - Ricciuto 29, McLeod 29, Joncock 24, Hart (?) 30, Edwards (?) 28,

 

[Mong]

is that the same ex-brownlow favourite and runner up Craig Turley that won't reach top 10 at the club status?

True. But Turley was winding down by that stage. He had probably slipped out of the Eagles top 10, or at the very least close to the edge of that top group by that stage. His future was limited. He was only going to drop further over the next couple of years. It was a good time to trade him.

Plus trading and drafting in the early 90's is very different to today. Back then you got the no.1 pick for scott watters and junk.

Also true. But even if you only got a pick in the teens these days it still gives you a shot at a decent player.

tell that to essendon after the 2000 season.

Essendon didn't lose any of their best players, did they? They lost the type of player I'm talking about. Blumfield etc. Who else did they lose?

 

[No 1 Draft Pick]

Not an accurate selection. Compare the top 10's in the B+F's at each club last year. Each had one 30 year old (Clarke, Harvey). St Kilda had 3 genuine youngsters >22 (Riewoldt, Ball, Dal Santo), Adelaide had 2 (Johncock, Hentschel). Adelaide had 5 top age players (Clarke, Ricciuto, McLeod, Edwards, Bassett), Saints had 4 (Harvey, Jones, Gehrig, Voss). Average age of Adelaide's top 10 is 26.7, of St Kilda's 25.6.

Fair point above Marvin

However IMO we also need to recognise the MASSIVE deficiencies in class of our youngsters versus the Saints (who are probably leagues best)

have a look again at Bentleighs list - we would kill for a list of youngsters like that. Not just their 3-5 absolute standouts (from early draft picks), but also the 2nd tiers like the Maguires etc (from excellent value drafting with later picks). Thats the reason I see the Saints winning a couple over the next 5 years - a combination of excellent priority draft picking (ie top 6-7 picks in the draft which they have had many in recent years) but also excellent value drafting with mid range picks also.

Hopefully with the Crows trio of Fantasia, Stewart and Fantasia we can be near league best going forward

With the following under 22:

Koschitzke, Justin
Riewoldt, Nick
Clarke, Xavier
Montagna, Leigh
Brooks, Barry
Dal Santo, Nick
Fisher, Leigh
Gram, Jason
Ball, Luke
Maguire, Matthew
McGough, Mark
Ferguson, Matthew
Mullins, Luke (R)
Goddard, Brendon
Clarke, Raphael 1

 

[No 1 Draft Pick]

Essendon didn't lose any of their best players, did they? They lost the type of player I'm talking about. Blumfield etc. Who else did they lose?

No they didnt lose any of their best players

Blumfield, Heffernan and Caracella went - only one of these guys is still kicking (injuries have obviously played a part with the others decline)

 

[marvin]

I reckon thats farily misleading mate. Which players are each clubs most important?

Saints - Hayes 25, Riewoldt 22, Dal Santo 21, Ball 20

Crows - Ricciuto 29, McLeod 29, Joncock 24, Hart (?) 30, Edwards (?) 28,

Define "most important". It's not the same as "best" by a long shot.

You'd have to consider Gehrig in the most important players for the Saints - he's a 100 goal forward. When he's kept quiet, or doesn't play, the Saints are pretty vulnerable (like in the middle of last year). Luke Penny is another critical player for the Saints, like Kenny McGregor is for the Crows. Aaron Hamill also is in the most important half dozen.

The objective way to look the most important players is to look at the B+F results, which are voted on by the match committee and therefore reflect (a) the importance of the job assigned to a player and (b) their effectiveness in carrying it out. That's what I tried to do.

Not denying by any means that the Saints have some brilliant youngsters,
but they rely on their mid-age and top-age players as much as anybody. And for every Ball/Dal Santo/Riewoldt on their list, there's an unproven Brooks/Gram/R Clarke, and a fringe X Clarke/Montagna/Fisher. No different to any other list.

Oh, and Johncock is 22, and is younger than Nick Riewoldt.

 

[Bentleigh]

Define "most important". It's not the same as "best" by a long shot.

You'd have to consider Gehrig in the most important players for the Saints - he's a 100 goal forward. When he's kept quiet, or doesn't play, the Saints are pretty vulnerable (like in the middle of last year). Luke Penny is another critical player for the Saints, like Kenny McGregor is for the Crows. Aaron Hamill also is in the most important half dozen.

The objective way to look the most important players is to look at the B+F results, which are voted on by the match committee and therefore reflect (a) the importance of the job assigned to a player and (b) their effectiveness in carrying it out. That's what I tried to do.

Not denying by any means that the Saints have some brilliant youngsters,
but they rely on their mid-age and top-age players as much as anybody. And for every Ball/Dal Santo/Riewoldt on their list, there's an unproven Brooks/Gram/R Clarke, and a fringe X Clarke/Montagna/Fisher. No different to any other list.

Oh, and Johncock is 22, and is younger than Nick Riewoldt.

The difference is Robert Harvey, Robert, Justin Peckett & Andrew Thompson are the Saints only players above 28 years of age. Saint Kilda hardly depend on these players do they? I doubt Peckeet is in there best 18, Thompson comes off the bench while Harvey, as much as a superstar he is will be replaced in the likes of Goddard, Clarkes etc.

Compare that to the Crows 28's and above. Ricciuto (29) & McLeod (28) are in your 'best' every week. I would agrue those 2 and Clarke, Hart, Stevens, Edwards are depended apon far more than the Saints top age players.

Johncock might be younger than Saint Nick... but not really in his class is he?

 

[Stiffy_18]

a couple of you are saying that the saints are almost finished ???? If they are finished where does that leave us?? They will be around the mark for at least 5 yrs. The only players of any great talent that they will be losing are Gehrig and harvey, harvey hasnt been dominant for the past couple of yrs, and gehrig gets such good supply its hard to tell if losing him will make that bigger difference. The rest are gap players that can and are currently being replaced with the fiora and mcgough types. and having rich talent about the same age ie essendon doesnt really matter if they get greedy you trade them off. Sheedy did that very well he picked the ones that were overrated and virtually useless and get first rounders for them.

No not at all. The saints are not almost finished. Their window of opportunity is just coming but it won't be open for as long as some people beleive. St. Kilda have a great bunch of players but their depth is not all that great. Geelong has a better depth than St. Kilda but St. Kilda has more class. You call some of those veterans as gap players but I would disagree. Just look at where they finished in the B&F and that will tell you how important they are to St. Kilda. They are relied upon more than people realise.

On Essendon, yes they can trade them off and get picks in return but does that strengthen them for the upcoming season or weaken them? You used Essendon as an example, they won it in 2000 and lost in the GF in 2001. What have they done since then and have they even looked like winning it?????? The answer is no. The structure of the competition doesn't allow teams to dominate for extended periods of time. Lions are the exception but we all know why they were able to keep their list together and no I am not blaming them for it.

 

[Bombers 2003]

阿德來的 哈 f圖熱。

 

[macca23]

阿德來的 哈 f圖熱。

You wouldn't realize it, but that's probably the most sensible thing you've ever said!!

 

[Crowked]

阿德來的 哈 f圖熱。

Your posts just get better and better.

 

[johnnypanther]

Correcto Mondo. Thats a bloody good reason for not delisting all your 3rd tier and duds at the same time and draft youngsters. Need some experience as well.

i'ld rather have had inexperienced youngsters such as Davey,Tom Redden, Juniper, Pearce etc rather than all those 3rd tier and duds on our list (what are they experienced at? - not being good enough at AFL level & that was obvious long ago)

 

[marvin]

The difference is Robert Harvey, Robert, Justin Peckett & Andrew Thompson are the Saints only players above 28 years of age. Saint Kilda hardly depend on these players do they? I doubt Peckeet is in there best 18, Thompson comes off the bench while Harvey, as much as a superstar he is will be replaced in the likes of Goddard, Clarkes etc.

Compare that to the Crows 28's and above. Ricciuto (29) & McLeod (28) are in your 'best' every week. I would agrue those 2 and Clarke, Hart, Stevens, Edwards are depended apon far more than the Saints top age players.

Johncock might be younger than Saint Nick... but not really in his class is he?

I agree about Peckett and Thompson, to an extent. Thompson rotates off the bench, but his importance to the Saints was shown in last year's PF.

Harvey will of course in time be replaced by Goddard or Clarke. Will they be ready if Harvey declines as rapidly as Nathan Burke did at the end? Given that Harvey finished well above either Goddard or Clarke in B+F voting, is it not reasonable to expect a slip in St Kilda's best performance when he goes out of the midfield? Personally, I rate Goddard as ready to step up, but the facts are that he got a total of 16 possessions in 3 finals last year, and 4 in the last 2 games. Clarke averages only 10 touches per game, and is at least a year away from moving into the midfield on a serious basis.

My point about Johncock (and obviously he doesn't have the same impact on matches as does Riewoldt) is that it's an example of where you are being a bit lax with the facts. He's 22, he's as young as Riewoldt; he's in our 5 most important players - but you list him as 24, and therefore exclude him from the list of young players.

In a similar fashion, you say (rightfully) that the Sainters only have 3 players older than 28. Adelaide have 4. You conveniently compare St Kilda players older than 28 with Adelaide's players 28 or above, so you can keep throwing the names of Edwards, Goodwin, Bassett and Stevens into the debate, while ignoring the likes of Aussie Jones (all-Australian in 2004), Fraser Gehrig (all-Australian in 2004, 100 goal kicker) Max Hudghton and Stephen Powell.

You may beg to differ, but I would say that St Kilda depend every bit as much on Harvey, Gehrig and Jones (in particular), Hudghton and Powell as the Crows do on Ricciuto, McLeod, Edwards, Goodwin, Stevens (11 games in 2 years) and Clarke. I'm not arguing that Ball + Riewoldt + Dal Santo is the core of an exciting future for the Saints, or that Johncock or Hentschel are better than them, but I think it's undeniable that the Saints rely more on their senior players than you'd let on.

Two analogies for your consideration:

1997-1998 Adelaide Crows by the time Adelaide won their second premiership in 1998, there was a brilliant core of youngsters with one or more premierships under their belt. McLeod (22), 2x Norm Smith medallist. Kane Johnson (20). Mark Ricciuto (23), 2xAll Australian. Simon Goodwin (21). Tyson Edwards (22). Peter Vardy (22). Mark Stevens (22). Andrew Eccles (19). High hopes were also held for Nathan Bassett (21), Ben Marsh (22), Ian Perrie (19), Lance Picioane (18).

1997 St Kilda After the disappointment of their loss in the Grand Final, everyone expected a side with a core of youngsters of the calibre of Tony Brown (20), Jason Cripps (21), Peter Everitt (23), Barry Hall (20), Max Hudghton (21), Aussie Jones (21), Matthew Lappin (21), Joe McLaren (20) and two Wakelins (23) to fight out the September action for the next few years.

Why did these two clubs fall as far as they did, with a core of youngsters that are at least on the same page as the current Saints squad?

 

[drakeyv2]

I read a comment on an SANFL site that Brice Gibbs had a good internal trial with Glenelg & could be inline for a game with the seniors in rnd 1.

The kid is still only 16 isn't he?

Father son, here we come.

 

[Stiffy_18]

I read a comment on an SANFL site that Brice Gibbs had a good internal trial with Glenelg & could be inline for a game with the seniors in rnd 1.

The kid is still only 16 isn't he?

Father son, here we come.

Its good to hear he is developing along nicely

Hopefully he lives up to the hype and grows into a top notch key forward

 

[No 1 Draft Pick]

I read a comment on an SANFL site that Brice Gibbs had a good internal trial with Glenelg & could be inline for a game with the seniors in rnd 1.

The kid is still only 16 isn't he?

Father son, here we come.

Any idea on his current height drakeyv2?

 

[Crow-mosone]

Essendon didn't lose any of their best players, did they? They lost the type of player I'm talking about. Blumfield etc. Who else did they lose?

at the time blumfield was one of their best players. off the top of my head they also lost Caracella & Heffernan, both of whom they did not want to lose. and there may have been more.

 

[Stiffy_18]

at the time blumfield was one of their best players. off the top of my head they also lost Caracella & Heffernan, both of whom they did not want to lose. and there may have been more.

Hardwick?????

 

[Crow-mosone]

Hardwick?????

indeed.

the thing though with the other 3 is that were key members of the 2000 side, that they have done jack since doesn't change their importance to the bombers at that time and that the club were reluctant to let them go.