Discussion Brick by Brick...

[Persevering Saint]

Okay, so I'm thinking about this a bit tonight. What does a rebuild actually mean? I guess, as a start, I'm going to suggest that there is a natural progression we want to see kids go through (I only make this list as a starting point for us - I suspect it is far more complex, but it might be helpful to start somewhere in our analysis. In other words, if you want to rip it apart, in order to provide a better model, feel free - I'm not precious about it! ):

1. Get selected at a draft.
2. Show attributes in training, and build fitness (weight, run, skills, etc) off the track.
3. Play well in the Development side.
4. Play well in the senior VFL side.
5. Be ready to contribute at AFL level: either because you can play to about 75% the quality of the senior player you would replace, OR there is an injury to said senior player. Consequently, play 4-6 somewhat unconditional games to show your stuff, and learn the caper. After which, you either go back to 4, or move to 6.
6. Play on a week-by-week basis, assessed on fitness, attitude, and obviously contribution to the team.
7. Become a regular player.
8. Become a core player in the side, either because of consistent fulfilling of an important role, or because you are a gun.
9. Become an elite player in the team, top 5 in the best and fairest.
10. Become an elite player in the competition: Brownlow, Coleman, or AA.

Based on this, where do we see our under 50g,24y players? Which ones are where on that list?

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

I recognise that they both have plenty of time to develop, I just think defence and midfield are probably more pressing areas than forward line and ruck for us.

I reckon FA/Trading we'll look for ready made midfielders along with the up and coming drafts.

 

[Defacto]

jamie elliott from the pies, played today. not only did he play a part but he starred.

there is a huge difference in mind set between sides like the pies and geelong and us. they trust their kids and try and give them games. hell go back long enough and malthouse was playing the unproven kids in front of proven older players in the twilight of their career. now they have players like swan, pendles, reid, brown etc.

we need to press forward and do the same.

i see absolutely no value in taking lenny hayes, jason blake and milney up to canberra to take on a side where the majority of their players are in their second season.

especially when we have to take on a red hot essendon and sydney in NZ with a 4 day turn around.

 

[aussierulesrules]

The main issue, arising from the interview, is that he NAMED it. Which is why I made this thread - now we actually know this is a specific goal of the club.

Who was not aware of this though and again, which club is not "rebuilding" to a degree? Which club thinks they are the finished product and in no more need of work, regeneration, etc? This is why Scotty has been loath to use the word previously, but yesterday, when he was pushed on it, he admitted that that was what we are doing, but as I said, it is no different to what we've been doing since he walked in the door, I don't think.

Even clubs that are in "contention" are still "rebuilding" to a degree. If someone is out of form in their team, they will get replaced by someone who is in form in their 2nds. If someone older on their list is no longer up to it, they will get the ass. At the end of the year, they will make changes to their list to make them better the following year. Every club is doing what they believe is best to bring them their next premiership and we are no different.

I don't think anyone was expecting us to win it this year. It was probably considered by some and perhaps the club to be a remote possibility at best, if pretty much everything imaginable went right. I think the best anyone was hoping for was that we move up the ladder from where we finished last year, to set ourselves up for another big tilt in the next year or two, as Sydney did in 2010, depending on how things evolved.

Secondly, Scott explicitly said in the interview that he would be eyeing out young talent playing in the VFL.

I can say with a very strong degree of confidence that he will have been doing that every single week since he arrived at the club, as we all do each week. It's just that some weeks he wants to make more changes than he does other weeks.

These two losses may have changed our plans or goals for the year, but he didn't say that that was the case, from what I heard.

It was pretty similar last year, when we picked the likes of Peake and Polo in R1 and lost. They were very quickly out of the team the next week and we didn't see much of them for the rest of the year, ditto Raph. I think it will be much the same this year. I dare say if we don't really pick up in the next few weeks, or don't win enough games,that we will bring in more and more "kids" though, like what happened early in 2011, when we had a terrible start to the year.

 

[Defacto]

Blake is the obvious one that is likely to make way this week from the older brigade, along with Dempster and maybe Siposs will be swapped for someone else young, just to give him a bit of a reality check and bring him down to Earth a bit, if that is what the club feels he is in need of.

i see no value in dropping siposs. he had 1 bad game, since being put down back. is that the kind of message we want to send our young players. 1 bad game and you're dropped. its doesnt happen when you are an experienced star player, so why should it happen when you are developing your trade. you have to back siposs in and his strength of character to bounce back. thats what good players do, if they have a bad game, they bounce back and make up for it the week after. so why not get him to do this?

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

i see no value in dropping siposs. he had 1 bad game, since being put down back. is that the kind of message we want to send our young players. 1 bad game and you're dropped. its doesnt happen when you are an experienced star player, so why should it happen when you are developing your trade. you have to back siposs in and his strength of character to bounce back. thats what good players do, if they have a bad game, they bounce back and make up for it the week after. so why not get him to do this?

Agree actually, Don't drop Siposs.

 

[Persevering Saint]

Here's a thought, play Siposs as a third tall forward? That's what he was recruited as. That was what he's already excelled at, both at VFL and AFL level. That's where we have a distinct absence. If we want that running half-back (the "Goddard role"), Dunell played that role well apparently in the VFL, so bring him in - he played it better than Lee played the 3rd tall role.

 

[Squizz]

I recognise that they both have plenty of time to develop, I just think defence and midfield are probably more pressing areas than forward line and ruck for us.

Well I thought (being harsh) that we could have traded Faz for Martin - manageable cost, but helps in defence with covering the really tall forwards. If Stanley is the best option, Martin had the ability to play forward.

But our two main forwards of the last 5 years are now over 30, and I saw young tall forwards as critical. Both the rucks and tall forwards take time to develop. Recruiting a proven tall forward or ruck is going to be overpaying (whether through salary and/or draft picks). Lee and Hickey seemed to strike a balance for mine.

Our midfield looks OK for 2013, and we could afford to wait until the end of this season to pursue another player.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Agree actually, Don't drop Siposs.

As I said, I would only do it if the club feels that he is getting a bit too big for his boots and that he will benefit from it. Otherwise, I expect he will stay in there.

He has been struggling to get into games on the wing (where he played mostly on Friday night) though, so far this year, so I think the club needs to work out whether they would prefer to have him across HB (where he clearly played his best footy in the preseason and I'm pretty sure was playing in R1 when I thought he did some really good things) or back up forward again, where he has also played good footy.

 

[Q TRAIN]

How's the progress of Spencer White coming along?. I know he had some hand or wrist problems in the pre season. So he is prob a bit rusty still and was always gonna be a bit of a longer term prospect. But i have heard some good stuff about this kid.
I havnt seen any Sandy games this yr so i dont know hows he is going.

 

[Squizz]

i see no value in dropping siposs. he had 1 bad game, since being put down back. is that the kind of message we want to send our young players. 1 bad game and you're dropped. its doesnt happen when you are an experienced star player, so why should it happen when you are developing your trade. you have to back siposs in and his strength of character to bounce back. thats what good players do, if they have a bad game, they bounce back and make up for it the week after. so why not get him to do this?

If he lights up the track, that's fine. But there's something a bit one-paced about our defence at the moment - and with our midfield not being elite in the area of legspeed I think we need alot more rebound out of the back 6.

Something needs to change ASAP.

 

[aussierulesrules]

I recognise that they both have plenty of time to develop, I just think defence and midfield are probably more pressing areas than forward line and ruck for us.

The thing about that though, is that we are hoping/expecting to fill those holes (key defence, midfield) through trading and FA, in particular and it's also a lot easier to get someone for the midfield who is able to hit the ground running through the draft than it is to get a "key forward" from there and have them be able to play a high level in senior AFL any time soon, so you probably hold off for longer to get a "mid", hence leaving it to this year.

If we wanted to get anyone for a long term key forward position in particular, which we clearly did, to eventually take over from Roo and Kosi, it would cost way too much to get anyone decent through a trade or FA, but you can get them much more cheaply (money wise) through the draft or a prelisting, like how we got Lee and White. I doubt the club would have any regrets whatsoever about the Lee deal, considering we effectively got Wright and Saunders in it as well.

The club also considers that it is only half way through rebuilding the list, as Watters said the other day, so it also probably comes down to grabbing the best deals while they are there. Hickey and Lee were up for grabs and the club felt that they were deals that were too good to refuse, so they took them and ticked off those boxes that we needed to fill. Now we can turn our attention completely to the midfield and key defence and go super-hard at those areas this year. To bring us closer to rebuilding the list to one we are comfortable with.

They also would have had a good idea of who is available through FA this year and may have someone in mind for that that we aren't aware of. We may also have had hopes for one of GWS' 25 "gun young mids" to slip loose and to be able to grab them this year.

If we continue on like this, we are now likely to have a pick in the 5-8 range this year and that is where you can get an Ollie Wines or a Joel Selwood (who both went at no.7 and both came straight in and went bang, as has Viney, who would have likely gone at 7 if Melb had not had dibbs on him). Get someone like that and maybe someone through FA for the midfield and say Mitch Brown through a trade and all of a sudden we have filled all the glaring holes that we had on our list, as long as we don't lose anyone we really don't want to in the meantime. Finish higher on the ladder this year and we may in a position to get this year's version of Lonergan.

As for Corr, we needed someone ASAP for key defence, whereas he was probably 2-4 years off it and as such he wasn't really going to help us in the short-term.

 

[saber_32au]

I agree to an extent, but you need to balance it like the pies and cats..

Some guys are great at teaching their craft and bringing younger guys into the match

As long as its brick by brick, and not straw

+1

You've got to admire how the cats and pies have bought on their younger players while maintaining consistently high performances.

It's finding that balance which is proving somewhat difficult. Not sure how many youngsters (and when I mean young I mean players with less than 10 games experience) you can play at once whilst remaining competitive. Thinking somewhere from 3-4...ideally you'd have more, but I feel (unfortunately) we won't remain competitive.

 

[kernelT]

I tend to think of playing veterans from two perspectives: either they contribute significantly enough to win games, or they represent characteristics that we want the young guys to emulate (and often, these two things are symbiotic).

So, a player like Riewoldt can still win us games. A player like Hayes can do that. A player like Jones is less likely to be a game changer, but he represents characteristics that I think the kids really benefit from.

So, of the older players that played the other night, the only one that doesn't REALLY meet those criteria, is Blake. I love the guy, but he's not going to win us games, and doesn't really teach much in terms of either technique or grit, not like Jones is right now.

I like the criteria you have set, only sometimes you just might have too many that fit…

I mean if we still had Gram & Goddard in the side, we would barely have room for a youngster.

For me CJ is probably the first of our older midfielders that has to make way, which seems unfair for a guy who is performing pretty well and tries harder than anyone, but… his skills just aren't up to the standard required. The problem is with these fringe guys on the list is the temptation to play them… CJ offers more than Curren, Blake more than Simpkin, Kosi more than Lee… at the moment, but we now know that a team with these older guys just isn't good enough anymore.

Watters said in the interview today that having "red hot go" but lacking in execution just isn't good enough… and I guess he is talking about the CJ types…

I don't think we can wait for injuries to force us to play more kids, we have to bite the bullet… and just play more younger guys that offer less initially, but will learn at 10X the pace than in the VFL.

How many average games does Milne need before he goes back to Sandy? If he kicks 7 this week against GWS, does that mean anything? We can't afford to drop Saad unless he really stinks IMO, just has to keep learning at the top level.

 

[mysainters]

Agree with freak to be honest.

I will just muse aloud for conversations sake, though this could all prove to be unjustified and Pelchen is a visionary.

Why Dowler trained with us, was it cause he couldn't be wrong about where he originally took him in the draft?
The fact he let Zac walk and then weeks later gave new contracts to Polo, Raph and Peake.
What he saw in Brown, because I'm yet to be convinced
The recruitment of Hickey (not that I doubt his talent) rather than a utility
The recruitment of Lee who I hope makes the most of his second opportunity
How the BJ departure was handled

Probably some more things if I think about it some more.

Seems a proud man, hope this self pride is not misplaced and he has reason to beat his chest in a couple of years.

 

[Persevering Saint]

I like the criteria you have set, only sometimes you just might have too many that fit…

I mean if we still had Gram & Goddard in the side, we would barely have room for a youngster.

For me CJ is probably the first of our older midfielders that has to make way, which seems unfair for a guy who is performing pretty well and tries harder than anyone, but… his skills just aren't up to the standard required. The problem is with these fringe guys on the list is the temptation to play them… CJ offers more than Curren, Blake more than Simpkin, Kosi more than Lee… at the moment, but we now know that a team with these older guys just isn't good enough anymore.

Watters said in the interview today that having "red hot go" but lacking in execution just isn't good enough… and I guess he is talking about the CJ types…

I don't think we can wait for injuries to force us to play more kids, we have to bite the bullet… and just play more younger guys that offer less initially, but will learn at 10X the pace than in the VFL.

How many average games does Milne need before he goes back to Sandy? If he kicks 7 this week against GWS, does that mean anything? We can't afford to drop Saad unless he really stinks IMO, just has to keep learning at the top level.

I said above that I think a young player needs to play to about 75% the quality of the one they would replace. Otherwise it's perpetuating unaccountable selection.

 

[Defacto]

Agree with freak to be honest.

I will just muse aloud for conversations sake, though this could all prove to be unjustified and Pelchen is a visionary.

Why Dowler trained with us, was it cause he couldn't be wrong about where he originally took him in the draft?
The fact he let Zac walk and then weeks later gave new contracts to Polo, Raph and Peake.
What he saw in Brown, because I'm yet to be convinced
The recruitment of Hickey (not that I doubt his talent) rather than a utility
The recruitment of Lee who I hope makes the most of his second opportunity
How the BJ departure was handled

Probably some more things if I think about it some more.

Seems a proud man, hope this self pride is not misplaced and he has reason to beat his chest in a couple of years.

did he really give a new contract to peake, raph and polo?

couple of points. i truely believe the original plan was to do a mini re-build and stay competitive and aim for a flag whilst we still have reiwoldt and co. i think they now realise the chance of this happening is gone and theyve gone the full rebuild.

second points. lets no forget the draft was pretty shallow back then and compromised. i imagine the club had the future drafts as being stronger and were probably more interested in picking up talent then.

on hickey i think he was a good acquisition. after all who do we have if mcevoy goes down? i think hickey being there has put more pressure on mcevoy as well, something he thrives on. the only thing i question is the price, but hey, jury's still out on that one.

lee, i am puzzled on. he's not a CHF/FF he's a third tall/HFF. i dont believe that crap about freo willing to throw up their first rounder. but hey we got quite a bit back, so we'll have to see.

 

[kernelT]

I said above that I think a young player needs to play to about 75% the quality of the one they would replace. Otherwise it's perpetuating unaccountable selection.

Okay, but what happens if we just don't have guys even at 75% of all of our older players… Do we just continue on playing the older ones…? I am sure Newnes isn't playing at 75% of CJ's output at the moment… Siposs wouldn't be 75% of any 50 game player at the moment… but I am sure most of us want to see those guys playing. Raph, Peake & Polo are probably well ahead of Murdoch, Wright & Ross…

 

[aussierulesrules]

I'm starting to question the decision of picking up Hickey and Lee tbh, Jesse Longergan and Aidan Corr would've been pretty nice

The other thing I forgot with regards to that of course is that with no Hickey, there is most likely no Spencer White, either, as it is pretty unlikely that he would have been available at the pick we upgraded in the Hickey deal to get him and of course with no Lee there is most likely no Wright (who has looked so good for us so far) and no Saunders, who is also promising.

Lonergan and Corr and whoever we would have gotten with the pick 37 that we upgraded to 25 v Lee, Hickey, Wright, Saunders and White. The latter still looks damn good to me, but this is something that will become more clear in about 3-4 years, not two weeks into the first season.

 

[saintsrfreak]

Okay, but what happens if we just don't have guys even at 75% of all of our older players… Do we just continue on playing the older ones…? I am sure Newnes isn't playing at 75% of CJ's output at the moment… Siposs wouldn't be 75% of any 50 game player at the moment… but I am sure most of us want to see those guys playing. Raph, Peake & Polo are probably well ahead of Murdoch, Wright & Ross…

Raph, Peake and Polo had no room for improvement though, and for young players to improve they need AFL experience (but certainly not suggesting to gift players games if their performances don't warrant them)

 

[kernelT]

I don't think any player comes in for their first 20 games at 75% of a 100+ game player… GAJ, Judd, Dangerfield, they all start out pretty ordinary, just the way it is.

 

[BrianSpeaking]

You guys need to learn to have some patience with all of the new kids, simple as that. Watters and co are paid employees of the club, if they don't perform they are out of a job, not something they are aiming for. We are supporters, they do this for their life and family and to pay their bills, they are the best in Australia, trust in them and all of our pro scouts, our recruiters and the draftees themselves.
With a little luck J Selwood and Steele Sidebottom would have been playing with us, but it didn't happen, it's sliding doors.
The future is bright, as long as GWS and GC don't ruin the comp by keeping all of their players.

Saints Freak, KPP and Ruckman win you premierships, tell me one team who has won a flag without these components.

 

[saintsrfreak]

I don't think any player comes in for their first 20 games at 75% of a 100+ game player… GAJ, Judd, Dangerfield, they all start out pretty ordinary, just the way it is.

There are bound to be ordinary senior players in the team as well though, as already said in this thread Malthouse chose to play younger players over those average senior players.

 

[kernelT]

There are bound to be ordinary senior players in the team as well though, as already said in this thread Malthouse chose to play younger players over those average senior players.

Yes and I think CJ & Blake would qualify… we love them cause they're saints and they give their all, but they are both probably good ordinary players, who I feel are on the list as back-up.
All of Jones, Kosi & Blake were out of the side towards the end of last year, so it's obviously not just some crazy idea I've had.

 

[StFly]

To me, a rebuild denotes something is broken, hence rebuilding as opposed to recycling. Exchanging players in roles, the team or on the list is simple list management, and seeing your assets (the players) in terms of output and what they deliver to the club, for the club at acceptable terms for both parties. To me, this is why we are not in a rebuild, we are in a transition period, which, funnily enough, echoes the turn of the millennium. Everyone rushed to upgrade, doomsday prophecies denoted 99-00 would end in a holocaust and it instead fizzled to a practical joke and song by Prince.

It's no secret we have a rather large veteran count in comparison to other teams, just as it isn't that with such a thing there will be overlap and consecutive vacating of space on the list, it's not a building analogy of taking a brick out of a wall or otherwise weakening the integrity of said wall, it's going from one Toyota to the next and expecting that without any sort of preparation it'll handle the exact same jobs as the previous at either the exact or greater level than its predecessor. It just doesn't happen all that often and you'll crack the shits when your sat nav speaks to you in Arabic and randomly immobilises your engine because it sees uncovered female cars.

What I'm getting at is that over the course of this season and the next we will simply need to transition out of relying on Hayes, Milne, Riewoldt, Dal, Joey to have sizable contributions to ensure victory and instead be relying more heavily on the next stage Armo, Saad, Steven, Stanley. For mine, if we have to delve into a rebuild of the club, then the club needs to be flushed out again because it won't be the players at fault when we once again have 32 HBF on the list (embellishment to prove point).