Bulldogs v Saints 2021

Who will go better in 2021?

  • Total voters
    59
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

RandB

RandB

Brownlow Medallist
Veteran 10k Posts Melbourne Board Tipping Champion Melbourne Demons - Jake Lever Player Sponsor 2018 Melbourne Demons - Katherine Smith AFLW Player Sponsor 2018 Melbourne Demons - Ben Kennedy Player Sponsor 2017 Melbourne Demons - Katherine Smith AFLW Player Sponsor 2017 Ex-Moderator
Sep 9, 2007
16,602
12,793
AFL Club
Melbourne
Other Teams
MUFC Norwood
Both teams made finals this year and had some nice additions to their lists in the Trade/FA period.

Obviously we still have the drafts to go, fixtures to be released.

I expect them both to be having another decent crack next year either way.

Who do you have in front?
 
Good question.

We had a much, much better record against the other top 8 teams this year (two 4+ goal wins against teams that made the prelims, plus beating the Dogs by 39 points early in the year, and then again in the final, while their only win over a top 8 team was that nailbiter over a Natanui and Shuey-less WC, at the Gabba, while their % against the other top 8 teams was almost 30% worse than ours (66% to approx 95%), so that's a starting point.

Our final against them ended up being close, but that was only after we looked to get a bit of stage fright (in our first final in almost a decade) and went right into our shells in that final quarter. Prior to that we were all over them, like when we whacked them earlier in the year. They were a vastly more experienced team when it comes to playing finals, so to win that augurs well for us going forward.

We apparently fielded the 3rd least experienced teams on average this year, so that experience ought to do us wonders.

Now they add Treloar to a midfield that didn't really need reinforcements and was already by far their strongest area, while we add the similarly talented Crouch, to an area that wasn't as strong, and where we really could do with some help.

We also hopefully get Gresham back, who didn't play after R11.

With him in the team we won 7 of 11, while with him out we went 4-4. In R1 he played the first half and we won the half by 29, he didn't play any of the 2nd, and we lost it by 33! Had he not gotten injured that day, we probably go 8-3 with him in (all else being equal).

Not sure if the Dogs were missing anyone that important to their team for the finals at least, but no-one's coming to mind.

They do also potentially add Hannan and a 33yo Stef Martin, but not sure either are automatically best 22, plus JUH- who hasn't played for a year, but could impact immediately.

We also add Higgins (who was best 22 at Richmond prior to his brain surgery) and who cost us a lot more than Hannan or Martin, plus potentially McKernan (likely depth) and maybe Frawley (likely depth).

Quite possibly none of our 5 highest paid for the year came top 9 in our B&F (Hill, Hannebery, Billings, Gresham and Ross), so there's also serious scope for improvement there, if their outputs live more up to their paychecks next year.

Of the two teams, I imagine we'll also be much better able to cover for injuries. We look like having about $2mil or more worth of guys running around in the VFL next year, with all of the following having plenty of AFL experience, but not looking like being best 22: Roberton, Geary, Sinclair, Savage, Webster, Dunstan, Lonie, McKernan, Kent, McKenzie, Frawley (?).

So on paper at least I don't see any super-compelling reasons why they'll overtake us again, after we overtook them this year.

Especially when you take into account our significantly better record against the good teams (4 v 1 wins and 30 better % against them) and the fact that our inexperience saw us throw away two games where we had 30 point leads, while we lost two more by under a goal, and lost another that went down to the wire.

Inexperience was probably all that cost us a top 4 spot, if not top 2. There were only 3 games all year that we weren't in to the death, and two were against the eventual grand finalists.

But games aren't played on paper, so time alone will tell. Both will be aiming for top 4. Hopefully we'll meet in another prelim!
 
Last edited:
It all depends on whether Stef Martin is fit or not. Marshall & Ryder absolutely killed us last game and will do the same in 2021 if Martin doesn't play.

If we can get 10-15 games out of Stef Martin we will improve considerably. I doubt Libba can play as much as he did but Dunkley's year last year was ruined by injury so he steps straight in to that space. Treloar gives us pace we lacked, but Crouch will be a good get for the Saints, ditto Higgins, so their midfield improves too.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

aussierulesrules said:
Good question.

We had a much, much better record against the other top 8 teams this year (two 4+ goal wins against teams that made the prelims, plus beating the Dogs by 39 points early in the year, and then again in the final, while their only win over a top 8 team was that nailbiter over a Natanui and Shuey-less WC, at the Gabba, while their % against the other top 8 teams was almost 30% worse than ours (66% to approx 95%), so that's a starting point.

Our final against them ended up being close, but that was only after we looked to get a bit of stage fright (in our first final in almost a decade) and went right into our shells in that final quarter. Prior to that we were all over them, like when we whacked them earlier in the year. They were a vastly more experienced team when it comes to playing finals, so to win that augurs well for us going forward.

We apparently fielded the 3rd least experienced teams on average this year, so that experience ought to do us wonders.

Now they add Treloar to a midfield that didn't really need reinforcements and was already by far their strongest area, while we add the similarly talented Crouch, to an area that wasn't as strong, and where we really could do with some help.

We also hopefully get Gresham back, who didn't play after R11.

With him in the team we won 7 of 11, while with him out we went 4-4. In R1 he played the first half and we won the half by 29, he didn't play any of the 2nd, and we lost it by 33! Had he not gotten injured that day, we probably go 8-3 with him in (all else being equal).

Not sure if the Dogs were missing anyone that important to their team for the finals at least, but no-one's coming to mind.

They do also potentially add Hannan and a 33yo Stef Martin, but not sure either are automatically best 22, plus JUH- who hasn't played for a year, but could impact immediately.

We also add Higgins (who was best 22 at Richmond prior to his brain surgery) and who cost us a lot more than Hannan or Martin, plus potentially McKernan (likely depth) and maybe Frawley (likely depth).

Quite possibly none of our 5 highest paid for the year came top 9 in our B&F (Hill, Hannebery, Billings, Gresham and Ross), so there's also serious scope for improvement there, if their outputs live more up to their paychecks next year.

Of the two teams, I imagine we'll also be much better able to cover for injuries. We look like having about $2mil or more worth of guys running around in the VFL next year, with all of the following having plenty of AFL experience, but not looking like being best 22: Roberton, Geary, Sinclair, Savage, Webster, Dunstan, Lonie, McKernan, Kent, McKenzie, Frawley (?).

So on paper at least I don't see any super-compelling reasons why they'll overtake us again, after we overtook them this year.

Especially when you take into account our significantly better record against the good teams (4 v 1 wins and 30 better % against them) and the fact that our inexperience saw us throw away two games where we had 30 point leads, while we lost two more by under a goal, and lost another that went down to the wire.

Inexperience was probably all that cost us a top 4 spot, if not top 2. There were only 3 games all year that we weren't in to the death, and two were against the eventual grand finalists.

But games aren't played on paper, so time alone will tell. Both will be aiming for top 4. Hopefully we'll meet in another prelim!
Click to expand...

Dogs by miles

Saints will drop off IMHO
 
aussierulesrules said:
I rest my case.
Click to expand...

Which part do you not agree with?

Leigh Montagna, money ball.

Butler's last goal was pretty dodgy too
 
Marcel Proust said:
Which part do you not agree with?
Click to expand...
How about the part where you said that a guy who came top 10 in the Coleman, while simultaneously being no.1 in the comp for forward 50 tackles, who came 2nd in the B&F of the team who finished 5th, made the AA squad, was super-stiff according to many to not make the team, who got 8 Brownlow votes and was 31st in Slobbo's top 50 for the year wouldn't have been best 22 for a Richmond team that had Rioli and Castagna in it?
 
Marcel Proust said:
To reiterate; Treloar. Bont. McCrae. Dunkley. Smith. Etc. Is miles ahead of the saints imo.

JUH has king covered too
Click to expand...
You also said this time last year that you couldn't see us finishing ahead of Sydney this year, only for us to finish 5th and them 16th, us with a percentage of 116 and them 82...

But please, keep on saying embarrassing stuff!
 
aussierulesrules said:
How about the part where you said that a guy who came top 10 in the Coleman, while simultaneously being no.1 in the comp for forward 50 tackles, who came 2nd in the B&F of the team who finished 5th, made the AA squad, was super-stiff according to many to not make the team, who got 8 Brownlow votes and was 31st in Slobbo's top 50 for the year wouldn't have been best 22 for a Richmond team that had Rioli and Castagna in it?
Click to expand...

There is a very low chance butler would have played in the grand final in 20 if he were a richmond listed player. This is an opinion but a fact the previous season vs gws

If you watch the tigers v saints final again you will notice George and rioli are not fashionable but rated by the coach.

This is a very interesting conversation and i would be happy to continue elsewhere. However I don't think it's related to OP and in my neutral opinion. Dogs are light years ahead.

Flag winning core with a lot of firepower added to it

Good luck next season.

aussierulesrules said:
You also said this time last year that you couldn't see us finishing ahead of Sydney this year, only for us to finish 5th and them 16th, us with a percentage of 116 and them 82...

But please, keep on saying embarrassing stuff!
Click to expand...

That's a fair point but the saints have to do it again.

Can they over perform for another season ? Or does the rest of the pack catch up to them.

Dogs list is simply much better. I was happy the dogs lost to St Kilda in the finals ..
 
Last edited:
No idea on this one. For us a lot will depend on 1. Stef Martin being fit, 2. Naughton finally getting his first pre season as a forward. Obviously Bruce has to find better form as well.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

To me the Dogs have now got arguably the best midfield in the AFL now, and its quite versatile with different skill sets too.

I think the Saints are a little weaker there, and lack another A grader or two there. I feel that's so important in modern footy.

If the Dogs get Naughton fit and healthy and he can hold down FF or CHF all year, I think they are a top 4-8th candidate. I have the Saints just outside that at 5th-10th range, more likely in the 8 though.
 
Marcel Proust said:
Can they over perform for another season ? Or does the rest of the pack catch up to them.
Click to expand...
Well given the fact that quite probably our 5 highest paid for the year (Hill, Hannebery, Billings, Gresham and Ross) all finished outside the top 9 in our B&F, that would suggest significant scope for improvement next year.

As generally a team's highest paid are the ones they rely on to be at their best as a team, so us going as well as we did, despite so little input from that group as a whole augers well for how well we could go next year, if they start playing to the level their pay packet suggest they can. On top of adding Crouch and Higgins.

Then there's the fact we fielded on average the 3rd youngest team in the comp each week for the year, and 5 of our regular back 7 for the year had played less than 50 games each going into the season. So another preseason into those young guys ought to do a big chunk of our team good.

No guarantees though of course, so we'll just see.
 
Last edited:
aussierulesrules said:
Well given the fact that quite probably our 5 highest paid for the year (Hill, Hannebery, Billings, Gresham and Ross) all finished outside the top 9 in our B&F, that would suggest significant scope for improvement next year.

As generally a team's highest paid are the ones they rely on to be at their best as a team, so us going as well as we did, despite so little input from that group as a whole augers well for how well we could go next year, if they start playing to the level their pay packet suggest they can. On top of adding Crouch and Higgins.

Then there's the fact we fielded on average the 3rd youngest team in the comp each week for the year, and 5 of our regular back 7 for the year had played less than 50 games each going into the season. So another preseason into those young guys ought to do a big chunk of our team good.

No guarantees though of course, so we'll just see.
Click to expand...



I dunno if a saints player would make the dogs first 3, 4 mid rotations
 
Marcel Proust said:


I dunno if a saints player would make the dogs first 3, 4 mid rotations
Click to expand...

You also reckon Butler wouldn't have been best 22 at Richmond this year, despite the season he had, and that Aarts performed similarly.

And yeah, I'm sure the guy who came equal-3rd in the Brownlow and top 4 in the Coaches Votes wouldn't make the Dogs first 3-4 mid rotations.

I'm amazed they let us beat them twice this year and finish above them!
 
aussierulesrules said:
You also reckon Butler wouldn't have been best 22 at Richmond this year, despite the season he had, and that Aarts performed similarly.

And yeah, I'm sure the guy who came equal-3rd in the Brownlow and top 4 in the Coaches Votes wouldn't make the Dogs first 3-4 mid rotations.

I'm amazed they let us beat them twice this year and finish above them!
Click to expand...

He is too soft to play at tigerland in the forward line

I love butler but dimma would not play him over the status quo imo

There is a reason butts has 1 flag not 3.

Before you keep demeaning them remember rioli and George are essentially kids and triple premiership players
 
aussierulesrules said:
You also reckon Butler wouldn't have been best 22 at Richmond this year, despite the season he had, and that Aarts performed similarly.

And yeah, I'm sure the guy who came equal-3rd in the Brownlow and top 4 in the Coaches Votes wouldn't make the Dogs first 3-4 mid rotations.

I'm amazed they let us beat them twice this year and finish above them!
Click to expand...

Caddy kicked 50 odd goals quite recently. Can't get a game. Good Coleman ranking too.

Stats are overrated - yet as to your question. Did you watch foxfooty last night?

From a money ball perspective aarts did indeed have a similar season.

Obviously butler is the more valuable in a vacuum
 
A lot of talking up of our midfield but it doesn't mean s**t if they can't gel. Look at bruce and naughton, they did not work well together. There is only 1 ball, so having 7 guys that can average 30 touches doesn't mean much if they can't influence the game without the ball.
 
It's an interesting comparison. Top end talent wise there is seriously no discussion. Bontempelli, Dunkley, Macrae, Treloar, Hunter, Daniel, Wallis are all definite AA chances next year on paper and the immense talent of players such as Naughton, Smith, English can propel them into that discussion in no time. Those are 10 players that can or will be A graders in 2021 (obviously not all of them will play to that level).

In comparison, St Kilda has Hill, Steele, Crouch, Butler who I'd really describe in that A grade level of playing ability (currently), with Clark, King, Marshall having obvious potential to perhaps reach that level.

However, St Kilda's 16-22 and role players are what has put them at the level we saw this level and their expected fortunes in 2021. Players such as Battle, Geary, Wilkie, Ross, Paton, Coffield and a myriad of others who don't necessarily exude star quality but have clearly defined roles and can play them to a T. The Dogs, in contrast, have players such as Richards, Roarke Smith, Will Hayes, Gowers, Bruce etc who have often found themselves in our best 22 and establish themselves as liabilities.

So honestly, I think it comes down to how the Dogs are able to cover these liabilities and have enough natural improvement in players such as West, Richards, Vandermeer, Dale and more young talent to really take their positions by the scruff of the neck and make them their own. Limiting Bevo's ridiculous coaching moves can also help out too.

To conclude, my opinion is that the dogs have a much higher ceiling that the saints, but I'm not as confident that the Dogs will finish higher on the ladder due to the aforementioned.
 
conrad_437 said:
It's an interesting comparison. Top end talent wise there is seriously no discussion. Bontempelli, Dunkley, Macrae, Treloar, Hunter, Daniel, Wallis are all definite AA chances next year on paper and the immense talent of players such as Naughton, Smith, English can propel them into that discussion in no time. Those are 10 players that can or will be A graders in 2021 (obviously not all of them will play to that level).

In comparison, St Kilda has Hill, Steele, Crouch, Butler who I'd really describe in that A grade level of playing ability (currently), with Clark, King, Marshall having obvious potential to perhaps reach that level.

However, St Kilda's 16-22 and role players are what has put them at the level we saw this level and their expected fortunes in 2021. Players such as Battle, Geary, Wilkie, Ross, Paton, Coffield and a myriad of others who don't necessarily exude star quality but have clearly defined roles and can play them to a T. The Dogs, in contrast, have players such as Richards, Roarke Smith, Will Hayes, Gowers, Bruce etc who have often found themselves in our best 22 and establish themselves as liabilities.

So honestly, I think it comes down to how the Dogs are able to cover these liabilities and have enough natural improvement in players such as West, Richards, Vandermeer, Dale and more young talent to really take their positions by the scruff of the neck and make them their own. Limiting Bevo's ridiculous coaching moves can also help out too.

To conclude, my opinion is that the dogs have a much higher ceiling that the saints, but I'm not as confident that the Dogs will finish higher on the ladder due to the aforementioned.
Click to expand...
Hard to argue too much with all that, but one thing I do strongly disagree with is your omission of Gresham from our top tier group- especially if he does go back to playing much more forward again, as Ratts wants him to- and especially if you include Wallis in that Bulldogs group.

Gresh hasn't been as good since he moved to playing mainly midfield for the last two seasons (largely due to lack of tank last year and then two significant injuries this year), but when he was playing mainly forward prior to that, he was well on track for "elite status" in that role.

Here is a stat comparison between Wallis of this year and Gresh in his last year playing mostly forward, but a fair bit midfield:

Mitchell Wallis and Jade Gresham AFL Stats Comparison

Mitchell Wallis and Jade Gresham AFL Stats Comparison.
www.footywire.com

As you can see, despite kicking more goals, Gresh averaged almost twice as many disposals, 12 times more clearances, triple the inside-50's, gained almost triple the meterage, etc., despite being just 20yo for all bar the last game that season (v Wallis being 27yo this season).

Granted the games were 20% longer that year, but again, Gresh was just a kid then, too.

Looked primed for a real breakout year prior to a 10 week injury in our R1 loss this year, then started to get rolling again in his last 6 games (Brownlow votes in 3 of them), before a back injury ended his season after R11.

In the full games he played for us this year we went 7-3. In the 9 he didn't we went 4-5.

Billings to a lesser extent also has matchwinning abilities. Goes especially well in contract years (11 Brownlow votes in each of 2017 and 2019) and is eligible for FA next year, so after a meh season this year, is due again!
 
Last edited:
aussierulesrules said:
Hard to argue too much with all that, but one thing I do strongly disagree with is your omission of Gresham from our top tier group- especially if he does go back to playing much more forward again, as Ratts wants him to- and especially if you include Wallis in that Bulldogs group.

Gresh hasn't been as good since he moved to playing mainly midfield for the last two seasons (largely due to lack of tank last year and then two significant injuries this year), but when he was playing mainly forward prior to that, he was well on track for "elite status" in that role.

Here is a stat comparison between Wallis of this year and Gresh in his last year playing mostly forward, but a fair bit midfield:

Mitchell Wallis and Jade Gresham AFL Stats Comparison

Mitchell Wallis and Jade Gresham AFL Stats Comparison.
www.footywire.com

As you can see, despite kicking more goals, Gresh averaged almost twice as many disposals, 12 times more clearances, triple the inside-50's, gained almost triple the meterage, etc., despite being just 20yo for all bar the last game that season (v Wallis being 27yo this season).

Granted the games were 20% longer that year, but again, Gresh was just a kid then, too.

Looked primed for a real breakout year prior to a 10 week injury in our R1 loss this year, then started to get rolling again in his last 6 games (Brownlow votes in 3 of them), before a back injury ended his season after R11.

In the full games he played for us this year we went 7-3. In the 9 he didn't we went 4-5.

Billings to a lesser extent also has matchwinning abilities. Goes especially well in contract years (11 Brownlow votes in each of 2017 and 2019) and is eligible for FA next year, so after a meh season this year, is due again!
Click to expand...
Fair point. I included Wallis as he was talked about as potential AA this year and was unlucky not to be named in the squad. I think it’s valid to have Gresham placed in that discussion.
 
I think both teams will be in the 5-8 bracket again.

Saints desperately need another 1 or 2 players to do a Steele, eg make the step from good players to AA level. King our best long term prospect.

Dogs need more out of their forward line, no use having great midfield if the forwards don't finish the job.

It'll come down to which team clicks, which players develop and who has a good run with injury.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Deadly Assassin
  • Poll
Moved Thread Barry Hall - is he remembered as a Saint, Swan or Bulldog?
Replies
13
Views
1K
Ekomaira
Ekomaira
Black Haze
  • Poll
Luke Ball - is he remembered more as a Saint or Magpie?
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
Pistol Night
Pistol Night
Taper
  • Poll
Fraser Gehrig - do you remember him more as an Eagle or Saint?
Replies
11
Views
835
Thrawn
Thrawn
PonsfordMagpie
  • Poll
Melbourne (2021) vs Geelong (2022)
Replies
8
Views
1K
Falcon3518
Falcon3518
Deadly Assassin
  • Poll
Moved Thread Tony Lockett - is he remembered as a Saint or Swan?
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
MF
MF
RedWhite&Blue
  • Poll
Nathan Brown - is he remembered as a Bulldog or Tiger?
Replies
14
Views
1K
sobrave
sobrave
Young Gun #6
  • Poll
Walsh v Rozee v Butters v Smith
2 3 4 5
Replies
101
Views
6K
adammania9
adammania9
Back
Top