I've gotta disagree with a lot of this. For the first time in a few years it feels like there is a clear strategy put in place with our list and where we are heading.That's a good analysis, but keen to see what other Saints fans think of this year's trade period for them. As an outsider (who admittedly doesn't have a good understanding of the Saints overall list), the short and long term strategy employed by the Saints doesn't seem very clear. Looking at the trades:
Howard was a good get. Perhaps paid a little to much for a player Port told to look elsewhere, but did what needed to be done to get the deal done. But this is offset by the loss of Bruce, who I think was let go too cheaply. Overall, seems a gain for the backline offset by a loss in the forward line, for not much change overall.
Jones was a good get and didn't pay much for him. Somewhat offset by the loss of Stevens and Acres, who both were let go too cheaply, but overall a gain to the Saints there.
Ryder is cooked IMO, but still probably good depth.
Butler is probably a good pick up for a fairly low price, but not automatic best 22.
Hill is a great get and clearly the difference in the trades that will see improvement for the Saints, but the cost was very high.
Overall, it seems that the Saints paid a lot for the ins and didn't get enough for the outs. So, whilst they have definitely improved their list, it has come at a high cost. Their first two picks this year now come at 51 & 82 and next year they have no 2nd or 3rd rounder.
To me this seems more of a strategy that would be employed by a team that finished well in the 8 and were looking to take that next step to challenging for the flag.
But the Saints finished 14th, so the likely improvements are probably only going to have them pushing for the 8. Not clear where that next step will come from when they have no picks to speak of this year to come through in 2-3 years. And have little left next year for either more trades or draft picks.
Anyway, genuinely interested to hear from Saints fans (and others) on whether they think this year's strategy will ultimately lead to them challenging for a flag in the next ~5 years.
We've been hitting the draft for quite a few years but until the last 24 months our list has looked extremely unbalanced.
Nathan Brown came onto our list 3 year ago to support Carlisle as a stop gap. Unfortunately we haven't been able to find anyone to take his place until now. Last year we had a few injuries and Josh Battle was forced to play back. He had a break out year and was terrific, but he's very similar to Carlisle, not an amazing defender but can take a good mark and use the footy well. Howard is a much better fit down there for us. In terms of the price I'm not sure how you can think we over paid there. The chances of getting a better player at 18 are slim and we had the added bonus of upgrading 12 to 10 which played a huge part in the Hill deal.
In the 2017 we were by far the slowest side in the comp. We had a one paced midfield full of solid citizens with little hurt factor so it's been a clear plan to add pace around the ground and give us a better mix which explains why we went for Hill, Jones and Butler.
Hill I can admit we paid a big price for, but I think most agree he is going to make a big difference. The overall price looks high when looking at that trade alone, but when you think that we only started off with 6 and were able to split that pick to also get Howard, that's a good deal. I was surprised to see the 4th rounder and Acres added to the deal but at the end of the day its a late pick
and Acres would have been plating VFL unless we had injuries. Jones for 32 is cheap as is Butler for 56.
Ryder was basically free and he will hopefully help Marshall with a chop out and also allow him to go forward more than he has been. He was drafted as a forward and if he can start kicking more goals on top of what he does around the ground he'll become one of the most dangerous players in the comp. Ryder is only a stop gap if we want to continue playing 2 rucks obviously.
In terms of the ages, Jones, Butler and Howard are all 24 and under which suits our age profile nicely. Hill at 26 gives us some much needed quality where we mostly have solid citizens and takes the pressure off our younger guys. We see most of our top end talent in the 23 and under bracket so we should see improvement over the next couple of seasons.
In terms of the outs, well we all know about Steven. I was gutted we couldn't get more for him there but our hamds were tied.
Bruce makes sense when see that we have Max King coming through and the option to swing Battle forward (drafted as a forward) again now that we have another decent back. There was no way we were fitting all of Membrey, King, Battle and Bruce forward and that's before we have two rucks. We would have liked to have got more for him but in the end we got a pick that got us Jones as well as a much needed draft pick on top.
As Lethlean said this morning, sometimes you have to lose a trade or two to have a win overall. I think they played it terrifically in the end.
In terms of whether we will be challenging for a flag in a few years, I think we are building a list now where we are least giving ourselves a chance to do something, but it will come down coaching and how we perform off field as much as anything. I think it's fair to say that we had some major issues developing players for a few years. I'm much more confident with the team we are building off the ground. If we can get some quality development into guys like King, Clark, Gresham, Battle, Coffield, Marshall etc I think we'll be on the right track.
I'm really happy with our key position stocks and our outside mids, but we still need to add to the engine room I think.