St Kilda draft picks

[Gilbo19]

GoGrammyGo is a better reference is it? there is really no need to get personal though, who cares about our locations it's really irrelevant and nobody seems to care but you...

As a whole the entry into the forward line was deplorable, Hayes' entries were not as good as they have been...

If Goddard is not fit enough to be playing the the backline then chances are he will be playing with the twos...
HF: Goddard (inj.) Roo Schneider
FF: Milne Kosi Gehrig
I hate to break it to you but that is shit, too many stationary talls...

Sweeny's ok game wasn't that ok, 8 touches, 2 marks and a behind don't seem that great to me....

Wood will play many games I agree, he is an ordinary young ruckman in a terrible team for rucks, Guy Richards also played in a prelim final this year, you still wouldn't want to see him in a st.kilda jumper... Collingwood gave up pick 14 for him, we would have had to have given up pick 9!! would you have been willing to give that up for an ordinary ruckman?!?!?

Do you honestly believe that we could have gotten anything better than Van Rheenan with the last pick in the rookie draft?, we were going to have 7 rookies this year either way so don't worry about money, it's irrelevant...

What the hell are you talking about St.Kilda chasing Cox?!?!, you completely missed the point as usual, He didn't come good over night, he just showed something so West Coast showed faith in him and that paid off, that is what we need to do with Van Rheenan and hope that he could become a servicable ruckman...

 

[Gilbo19]

WE HAVE TOO MANY RUCKMEN ON OUR LIST, AND VAN RHEENAN IS SO FAR DOWN THE PECKING ORDER I'M THINKING YOU'RE A RELATIVE.

They are like 1 or 2 years under 30, like it makes a difference...
As for our list of ruckman...
Gardiner - Let's be serious he has 2 years left MAXIMUM!!
King - Same as Gardiner, just isn't going to be around for long enough
Rix - Lucky to still be on the list, wont play a single game in '08
McEvoy - Young with potential a few years away yet
Van Rheenan - Same as McEvoy

Others you may have been considering...
Koschitzke - Not a ruckman, not at all, he is a below average ruckman, but a far above average forward, where would you rather him?!?!
Blake - Will be lucky to see any game time in '08 is a backup ruckman at best, is also getting older.
Maguire - Played junior footy in the ruck, spent some time in '07 in the ruck but he clearly isn't a ruckman.

It's fine to have a lot of ruckman but if they're all crap you are still going to want to go and get a good one...

 

[Squizz]

Ah, there's the difference - Kosi. Good ruckman who can go forward and kick goals in purple patches. Hasn't really played many consecutive games at FF but you've locked him in ahead of time (but you won't let me get Allen into the team at all!!!).

And with your last point that's what I'm saying - Van Rheenan isn't showing enough to suggest he'll make it, so why not move on?

And don't cry about personal references - you give it and don't take it?

 

[Modra93]

Squiz, your arguments are weak. Not to mention you didnt have a comment back for 2 of my comments.

Its obvious you have issues with Gehrig. Get over it.

We have to many rucks if you consider Blake to be one. IMO this should be our rucks in order of preference..

King
Gardiner
Koschitzke
Rix
McEvoy
Van Rheenan

2 of which are near the end of there career. 1 which is suited more as a forward, 1 backup at best and 2 developing. This is a good setup.

What other issues do you ahve with the club Squizzy? Im sure a picky person like you has quite a few more.

 

[Squizz]

If you read BigFooty, you'll see plenty of positive comments from me. Just unfortunately not when you two (and the two Geelong supporters) make comments.

I think one of your comments was "Wood is good"? Didn't think that needed a response. Only reading the rest very very quickly.

 

[Modra93]

Ah, there's the difference - Kosi. Good ruckman who can go forward and kick goals in purple patches. Hasn't really played many consecutive games at FF but you've locked him in ahead of time (but you won't let me get Allen into the team at all!!!).

Good forward who can play ruck as well I think you mean

And with your last point that's what I'm saying - Van Rheenan isn't showing enough to suggest he'll make it, so why not move on?

That will be decided at the end of next year. If he has shown enough, which I'm sure every Stkilda supporter will be hoping he will either get promoted or rerookied. This is how the rookie system works Squizzy. If you need more explaination PM me.. I can go into basic steps just for you as you are obviously having a lot of difficulty with it.

 

[Gilbo19]

Ah, there's the difference - Kosi. Good ruckman who can go forward and kick goals in purple patches. Hasn't really played many consecutive games at FF but you've locked him in ahead of time (but you won't let me get Allen into the team at all!!!).

And with your last point that's what I'm saying - Van Rheenan isn't showing enough to suggest he'll make it, so why not move on?

And don't cry about personal references - you give it and don't take it?

Van Rheenan isn't showing anything time to move on?!?! He is like 19 years old!!, jeez, what on earth were the kangaroos thinking keeping McIntosh for so long?!?!

And I did take your personal references, I just don't care what you think so I thought that we should get back to footy...

As for Kosi he played most of his footy this year in the forward line....

 

[Squizz]

McIntosh wasn't playing in the VFL reserves for weeks on end.

Geez Kosi got alot of hitouts in the forward line! I don't think so - he was in the ruck the bulk of the year going forward. Who was in the ruck then if he wasn't (surely not just the much maligned Rix)?

 

[Gilbo19]

McIntosh wasn't playing in the VFL reserves for weeks on end.

Geez Kosi got alot of hitouts in the forward line! I don't think so - he was in the ruck the bulk of the year going forward. Who was in the ruck then if he wasn't (surely not just the much maligned Rix)?

McIntosh was a first round draft pick not a rookie, you have to remember rookies arne't expected to come good, if they do it is a bonus, nobody will build their teams around rookies.

Have you already forgotten Matthew Clarke?
There was him, Rix, Blake....

Rank Name Games Average 1 Matthew Clarke 10 14.10 2 Michael Rix 17 12.12 3 Justin Koschitzke 19 8.16
Compare that to Ottens' year average of 19
Kosi is wasted in the ruck, absolutely wasted...
Where else would you suggest we play him, send him back to CHB?!?

 

[Squizz]

McIntosh was a first round draft pick not a rookie, you have to remember rookies arne't expected to come good, if they do it is a bonus, nobody will build their teams around rookies.

Have you already forgotten Matthew Clarke?
There was him, Rix, Blake....

Rank Name Games Average 1 Matthew Clarke 10 14.10 2 Michael Rix 17 12.12 3 Justin Koschitzke 19 8.16
Compare that to Ottens' year average of 19
Kosi is wasted in the ruck, absolutely wasted...
Where else would you suggest we play him, send him back to CHB?!?

Thanks a lot - I was trying to forget Matthew Clarke. I'm amazed he played 10 games. 18 marks for the season, no goals (or scores), and less hit outs than Koschitszke.

Agree with Grant Thomas on this one - Kosi can be a very good ruckman.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Agree with Grant Thomas on this one - Kosi can be a very good ruckman.

Grant Thomas had no idea when it came to ruckman and rucking in general, being tall a good kick and good mark a ruckman does not make, (makes for a good Full Forward though).

Rucking requires a variety of different skills that don't come naturally to Kosi, Kosi will be a great Full Forward but will only every be a average at best ruckman.

 

[MilneyLoves2Snap]

Re: stkilda draft picks

Yes I agree with you on Arrowsmith..very disappointing

he got rookied...

 

[Kildonan]

Grant Thomas had no idea when it came to ruckman and rucking in general, being tall a good kick and good mark a ruckman does not make, (makes for a good Full Forward though).

Rucking requires a variety of different skills that don't come naturally to Kosi, Kosi will be a great Full Forward but will only every be a average at best ruckman.

I don't want to perpetuate this argument, but GT did actually hold good ruckmen in high esteem. He simply had no truck for a specialist ruckman that wasn't able to contribute after the actual rucking contest was over.

His philosophy was based on the recognition that a team with 18 players will have an advantage over a team with 17 players and a ruckman who is just taking up space.
This philosophy may well have been formulated when we had Trent Knobel playing for us. He was a competent ruckman but a gumbie on the field - a liability who rarely did more than get in the way of other players once the ruck contest was over.

GT did not have a good ruckman available to him (although he did chase a few) so was prepared to use a player or players (not recognised ruckmen) who could compete on the field rather than give the opposition a numerical advantage.

This was a practical compromise based on the non-availablity of a good ruckman.

 

[St DAC]

Isn't it amazing that no matter how many times this explanation of GT's ruck mantra is said (and GT himself explains it this way) the myth that he "doesn't rate ruckmen" perpetuates?

If you asked any footy follower (other that a Saint, and not even all of us) they would tell you it's "common knowledge" GT doesn't rate ruckmen.

But the press have repeated that phrase ad nauseum and like many things, if repeated often enough tend to become accepted truth no matter their merit.

 

[Squizz]

Someone might need to refute that Grant Thomas said to Rix (on getting drafted) something like "Don't get too excited - you won't get a game".

I understand that Rix doesn't get nearly enough around the ground (getting better IMO), and that Thomas might have believed that it was better for Kosi to be 40/60 at the centre bounce but then be damaging around the ground.

Having said this, Brooks, Ackland and Rix were all recruits under his watch.

Unfortunately, teams could get a run on against us by having a dominant tap ruckman or good set plays. Gardi and King in the ruck (with support from Kosi) go a long way towards addressing this.

Sorry for the perpetuation StKildonan - couldn't help it.

 

[sammm]

I don't want to perpetuate this argument, but GT did actually hold good ruckmen in high esteem. He simply had no truck for a specialist ruckman that wasn't able to contribute after the actual rucking contest was over.

His philosophy was based on the recognition that a team with 18 players will have an advantage over a team with 17 players and a ruckman who is just taking up space.
This philosophy may well have been formulated when we had Trent Knobel playing for us. He was a competent ruckman but a gumbie on the field - a liability who rarely did more than get in the way of other players once the ruck contest was over.

GT did not have a good ruckman available to him (although he did chase a few) so was prepared to use a player or players (not recognised ruckmen) who could compete on the field rather than give the opposition a numerical advantage.

This was a practical compromise based on the non-availablity of a good ruckman.

i don't want to continue the arguement either. youre right on one thing,

GT stated that he held ruckmen in high esteem but only for ones that gcould do something else besides ruck eg Cox.

However, the problem GT had was he wanted a Cox type person and when he couldn't get him, he got very little. didn't try and develop his own ruckmen, just tried to pinch others. did not have a ruck coach except rendell who also was assistant coach and operations manager.

so now that he has left, we have 2 developing ruckmen, and a ruck coach in simon maddon! much better than GT's way. of trying to reach for the sky and get bombed out left with knoble or ackland.

oh yeah we got rix in GT's last year, that becuase a) GT was losing the battle of no ruckmen, rix didnot get a game until half way through the year, when everone was pleading for him to have a go.

 

[DanA]

I don't want to perpetuate this argument, but GT did actually hold good ruckmen in high esteem. He simply had no truck for a specialist ruckman that wasn't able to contribute after the actual rucking contest was over.

His philosophy was based on the recognition that a team with 18 players will have an advantage over a team with 17 players and a ruckman who is just taking up space.
This philosophy may well have been formulated when we had Trent Knobel playing for us. He was a competent ruckman but a gumbie on the field - a liability who rarely did more than get in the way of other players once the ruck contest was over.

GT did not have a good ruckman available to him (although he did chase a few) so was prepared to use a player or players (not recognised ruckmen) who could compete on the field rather than give the opposition a numerical advantage.

This was a practical compromise based on the non-availablity of a good ruckman.

I don't really consider that rating a ruckmen though. He only rates ruckmen if they are good players so really he only rates good players. Gee that is not really insightful when you look at it.

The even bigger problem though is if he doesn't rate ruckmen then he is undervalue the importance of stoppages and in particular goals from stoppages.

In 2007 Geelong was easily the best team for goals from stoppages
In 2006 Sydney was easily the best team for goals from stoppages
In 2005 Sydney was the best closely followed by Westcoast

Every Geelong supporter remembers Nick Davis' goal from a stoppage in the finals. Fact of the matter that was created by the ruckmen who was up against Cam Mooney!

I think Grant Thomas did underate the importance of ruckwork and their work at stoppages. Sure every team would love Dean Cox but I still think the media have picked up on Thomas having a veiw of that is flawed. I think his practical comprimises were a mistake.

 

[Modra93]

I don't really consider that rating a ruckmen though. He only rates ruckmen if they are good players so really he only rates good players. Gee that is not really insightful when you look at it.

The even bigger problem though is if he doesn't rate ruckmen then he is undervalue the importance of stoppages and in particular goals from stoppages.

In 2007 Geelong was easily the best team for goals from stoppages
In 2006 Sydney was easily the best team for goals from stoppages
In 2005 Sydney was the best closely followed by Westcoast

Every Geelong supporter remembers Nick Davis' goal from a stoppage in the finals. Fact of the matter that was created by the ruckmen who was up against Cam Mooney!

I think Grant Thomas did underate the importance of ruckwork and their work at stoppages. Sure every team would love Dean Cox but I still think the media have picked up on Thomas having a veiw of that is flawed. I think his practical comprimises were a mistake.

Is there some stats to back this up or not?

Because the way I see it, it would be hard for Sydney to lead the league in goals from stoppages when they kick so limited goals in total.

 

[DanA]

Is there some stats to back this up or not?

Because the way I see it, it would be hard for Sydney to lead the league in goals from stoppages when they kick so limited goals in total.

Yes the 2006 & 2007 AFL prospectus listed it while I saw it reported in the footy record regarding the cats (possibly the GF record). From memory the Eagles had a better ratio but due to Sydney's massive number of stoppages they came out on top in terms of absolute.