List Mgmt. 2024 List Mgmt

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is the same clown, using the same system, that ranked Nick Daicos's 41 disposal, 14 clearance game against the Crows on the weekend as only the 21st best player on the ground. Got the 10 coaches votes btw. Roma also got coaches votes on the weekend.

Champion Data. Give me a spell.
Those stats back up the eye test though. Sometimes they are bullshit, sometimes they make sense.

Romas hack ruck clearance kick is ****ing trash, we all know that.
 
A blind kick forward is always 50/50 at best, whereas a clean hand pass to an outside runner will at least provide an inside 50 entry to the advantage of a forward (if executed properly)

That’s why Jackson grabs it out of the ruck, then hand pass it to one of his midfielders running past rather than blazing away. It’s like setting up your team for a better scoring opportunity rather than throwing the ball from half court in basketball (count as a clearance / forward entry but extremely low % if you ask me)

Those dump kicks that worked in our favour, well they are called luck and cannot repeated consistently.. We need a repeatable method rather than relying on luck (long bomb, dump kicks) / others stuffing up (effort based pressure game)
maybe our forwards could play in front or at least at the shoulder -Scrimshaw had no problem reading them
 
Would we have kicked more with a clean stoppage exit though? Cant know so its a bit of a false equivalence exercise.

Theres a time and place, deep F50 entries are good so throw ins and ball ups inside 70 it makes sense, elsewhere, way way less.
Agreed. Definitely a time and place for it and Marshall has probably been going to it a bit too much given the spluttering midfield. But the forwards also need to be setting up better for it since we know Marshall has the ability to win it in that situation.

I think SEN's data guy just chose the wrong week to criticise him for it since it was effective against Freo and one of the few ways we got a score on the board.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I think the suggestion is always to look outside the pathways leagues ala Tom Stewart for Geelong.

The problem is we did that and actually have always been pretty handy in that space. Currently with Wilkie, Camma and Sincs. Where weve cooked it isnt in the creative its in the mundane.

If you take our current 22 and add Bont, Trac and Naughton (or really even just one of them) noting that none of the guys we took instead of them are still on our list and this team looks way way different.

Our issue isnt creativity and finding gems, its getting the good picks right. The last time we really did that we had a huge finals tilt and even in that if we had Hodge or Judd instead of ball were probably two flags richer.

The margins are tiny in the early picks.
2001 was a freak draft, we can't expect that to happen ever again.
We did ok , some teams completely ,made a mess of it.
Look at some of the players picked before DalSanto.

Hawks 1: Hodge, 16:Ladson, 32:Campbell Brown, 36:Sam Mitchell
Saints 2: Ball, 5:Xavier Clarke, 13:Nick Dal Santo, 21:Maguire, 37: Montagna.
Eagles 3: Judd ,6:Sampi, 22:Seaby , 38 Hanson, Rookie: Quinten Lynch
Fremantle 4: Polak, 56: Medhurst Rookie Sandilands
Kangaroos 7: Hale and a lot of poor choices.
Geelong 8 : Bartel, 17:Kelly, 24 Steve Johnson ,40 F/S Ablett , Rookie :Andrew Carazzo
Melbourne : 25: Steven Armstrong. 55 Brad Miller, Rookie : Jamar
Bulldogs : 10: Sam Power, 71: Brian Lake Rookie :Mathew Boyd,
Collingwood: 11: Richard Cole...some spuds 58: Dane Swan Rookie: Podsiadly
Adelaide: 12:Brent Reilly, Rookie Bock Rookie: Rutten
Port : 15:Brooks, at least they got trade value., sucked to be them in 2001.
Essendon: Andrew Welsh ...Who the hell was drafting for them?
Lions : 19: Gram

Its kind of remarkable the quality of some of the players who went later.
The famous first three are not "clearly" the best from that draft.
There are a heap i'd have rather had than Luke Ball.
 
Just on the draft train, jeeeez it makes for some absolutely horrendous reading.

Since the 2014 draft weven gone

2014
1- McCartin (available around this pick Trac, Brayshaw, DeGoey,
21- Hugh Goddard (availabel Steele, McLean, Maynard, Miller, Neale Bullen)
22- Dan McKenzie
41- Jack Lonie (McGovern, Daniel, Dale, Langdon, Andrews)

2015
18- Gresham (Burton, McKay, Keays, Dunkley)
40- White (Flynn, Harwick, Williams)
49- Rice (Jordan Dawson)

2016
25 - Long (Parfitt, Lipinski, Bolton, Drew, Darcy)
39 - Battle (Im calling this a genuine win so not looking)
56 - Ed Phillips (Lewis, Waterman)

2017
7 - Clark (Naughton, Fogarty, Bailey, Richards, Starcevich, Oscar Allen, Kelly, Balta, Ryan, Taylor, TDK, Fritsch)
8 - Coffield
35- Clavarino (Petty, Pettrucelle, Ballard, Worpel)
46 - Paton (another win)

2018
4 - King (no issues here, there is better around but i still like Max)
41 - Bytel (McInerny,
47 - Parker (Scott, Schultz, Idun)
54 - Hind
67 - Young

Out of those 5 drafts and 19 picks weve only gotten value from 6 of them. Thats woeful.

Steele wasn't available to us mundane clubs.
Lonie was amazing, there was a lot of talk about Daniel before the draft, and why clubs would avoid him, so we avoided him and took someone we should have avoided for exactly the same reason.

Gresham was a pretty good pick without a time machine.

Long was complete and utter bullshit.

Some of those you've used your tardis to go into the future and see who to draft.
 
Steele wasn't available to us mundane clubs.
Lonie was amazing, there was a lot of talk about Daniel before the draft, and why clubs would avoid him, so we avoided him and took someone we should have avoided for exactly the same reason.

Gresham was a pretty good pick without a time machine.

Long was complete and utter bullshit.

Some of those you've used your tardis to go into the future and see who to draft.
Of course i have... thats the whole point of the exercise.

Some werent the "wrong" picks at the time but theyve been proven so over time, some were poor choices at the time. Overall weve missed a shitload more than weve hit.
 
Just on the draft train, jeeeez it makes for some absolutely horrendous reading.

Since the 2014 draft weven gone

2014
1- McCartin (available around this pick Trac, Brayshaw, DeGoey,
21- Hugh Goddard (availabel Steele, McLean, Maynard, Miller, Neale Bullen)
22- Dan McKenzie
41- Jack Lonie (McGovern, Daniel, Dale, Langdon, Andrews)

2015
18- Gresham (Burton, McKay, Keays, Dunkley)
40- White (Flynn, Harwick, Williams)
49- Rice (Jordan Dawson)

2016
25 - Long (Parfitt, Lipinski, Bolton, Drew, Darcy)
39 - Battle (Im calling this a genuine win so not looking)
56 - Ed Phillips (Lewis, Waterman)

2017
7 - Clark (Naughton, Fogarty, Bailey, Richards, Starcevich, Oscar Allen, Kelly, Balta, Ryan, Taylor, TDK, Fritsch)
8 - Coffield
35- Clavarino (Petty, Pettrucelle, Ballard, Worpel)
46 - Paton (another win)

2018
4 - King (no issues here, there is better around but i still like Max)
41 - Bytel (McInerny,
47 - Parker (Scott, Schultz, Idun)
54 - Hind
67 - Young

Out of those 5 drafts and 19 picks weve only gotten value from 6 of them. Thats woeful.
I went back and looked at our drafting for the 2009/10 GF group, blew so many 1st round picks on shit trades/picks it should make you cry
 
Got to love the Carlisle trade.

The whole team was under an ASADA cloud, but instead of being cautious about that, they took the inside word of "She'll be right mate ".

Good player but 65 games for us, quite a few impeded by back issues.
5 seasons, but only ( almost ) 2 full seasons.
 
Just on the draft train, jeeeez it makes for some absolutely horrendous reading.

Since the 2014 draft weven gone

2014
1- McCartin (available around this pick Trac, Brayshaw, DeGoey,
21- Hugh Goddard (availabel Steele, McLean, Maynard, Miller, Neale Bullen)
22- Dan McKenzie
41- Jack Lonie (McGovern, Daniel, Dale, Langdon, Andrews)

2015
18- Gresham (Burton, McKay, Keays, Dunkley)
40- White (Flynn, Harwick, Williams)
49- Rice (Jordan Dawson)

2016
25 - Long (Parfitt, Lipinski, Bolton, Drew, Darcy)
39 - Battle (Im calling this a genuine win so not looking)
56 - Ed Phillips (Lewis, Waterman)

2017
7 - Clark (Naughton, Fogarty, Bailey, Richards, Starcevich, Oscar Allen, Kelly, Balta, Ryan, Taylor, TDK, Fritsch)
8 - Coffield
35- Clavarino (Petty, Pettrucelle, Ballard, Worpel)
46 - Paton (another win)

2018
4 - King (no issues here, there is better around but i still like Max)
41 - Bytel (McInerny,
47 - Parker (Scott, Schultz, Idun)
54 - Hind
67 - Young

Out of those 5 drafts and 19 picks weve only gotten value from 6 of them. Thats woeful.

We really doing this again?

Why?

The dopes that made all those picks are long gone.

You may as well throw Dalrymple’s selections at the Dogs & Swans up to discuss where he went right & wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
We really doing this again?

Why?

The dopes that made all those picks are long gone.

You may as well throw Dalrymple’s selections at the Dogs & Swans up to discuss where he went right & wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I spent like an hour doing the strike rate on top 5 picks and just had this as I was doing it.

Relax mate.
 
We also kicked at least 2 goals last week directly from him taking it out of the ruck. And considering we only scored 8 goals for the match, that's a significant return.
We only scored 8 goals for the match because of Marshall belting it into the forward line into the arms of a well-prepared Dockers defender instead of doing what most sides do which is to tap it to advantage of a Saints mid who could then pass it to other Saints players until it got to the forward line.

It worked twice and didn't work many more times. Its a shit strategy.
 
We only scored 8 goals for the match because of Marshall belting it into the forward line into the arms of a well-prepared Dockers defender instead of doing what most sides do which is to tap it to advantage of a Saints mid who could then pass it to other Saints players until it got to the forward line.

It worked twice and didn't work many more times. Its a s**t strategy.

I think you need to think clearly about the alternatives, though.
  1. Handball to a running player: This is possible, yes, but it assumes that: a) There is a player available to pass to. b) Marshall can see and hit the target without being intercepted in close quarters. c) The receiving player won't be immediately tackled or fail to achieve an effective clearance.
This isn't always a better option, but I think he might take it if available.
  1. Hit-out to advantage: The chances of Marshall winning this are only 24% (?), based on his stats. And that's only if he wins the hit-out, which happens about 48% of the time. Even then a hit-out to advantage doesn't guarantee our player will collect the ball or create a clearance.
  2. Opposition wins the hit-out: In this case, we probably have less than a 50% chance of winning the clearance, given the quality of our midfield. There's also a good chance that the opposition clearance will be a high-quality one, like from Harley Reid. I'd much rather have a poor clearance from Marshall go our way than a Harley Reid type clearance to the opposition.
I believe that a guaranteed clearance to a 50/50 contest is, statistically, better than the above options. Of course, if we had more class around the ball, that would change things.

Finally, we're only getting upset about the hack kicks because we can't win the post-clearance contest. That's not Marshall's fault; it's a structural and player issue up field.

That's just my opinion, but I'm keen to hear your thoughts.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)


WHERE DO THE SAINTS FISH FROM HERE?

Question marks continue to be asked of St Kilda at the trade table come the end of 2024, with pundits now unsure of where to next for the club.

Speaking on Fox Footy’s Midweek Tackle, Herald Sun journalists Jon Ralph and Jay Clark dissected their current state of play, and alluded to the monetary war chest they have building.

“They’re casting their net far and wide, they’ve said they’re going to make players rich,” Ralph begun by saying.

“Right now they’ve been told by Hugh McCluggage’s management that he’s going to stay in Brisbane – he’s not interested in coming to St Kilda.

“Every side with an available free agent has got the cap space to try and pay those free agents.

Elliot Yeo, cross that off the list – very, very keen to stay in (Perth).”

With two high-profile players seemingly off the market, the next step for the Saints is unclear despite their cash t splash, with their eyes forced to be shifted a little more left-field.

Tyson Stengle is someone who has been offered a longer term than he currently has got, but very similar money; so I would imagine they might offer him a bigger deal – what does that mean, Geelong pays more, he still stays,” Ralph continued.

“Cam Zurhaar, they haven’t been linked to him, but do you start getting desperate? There’s no easy answers for the Saints.”

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Jon Ralph is a moron and a campaigner.

Everything in that article is skewed towards making the Saints look even less desirable than they are: "He’s not interested in coming to St Kilda." Maybe, maybe he’s not interested in going anywhere. And why tf would we chase Cam Zuurhar? Is he a midfielder? Can he take us further than the forwards we have? Possibly only in the short term.

Why should we start getting desperate, as he says we should? We are working things out, our list is developing, we're in a hole but it's not going to improve with desperate grabs at any free agent who may be available.

Even the money aspect they manage to make us look like some classless loose schemer, clueless throwing money at whatever sparkles.

Desperate? Pah! Screenshot_20240522_101754_Ecosia.jpg
 

WHERE DO THE SAINTS FISH FROM HERE?

Question marks continue to be asked of St Kilda at the trade table come the end of 2024, with pundits now unsure of where to next for the club.

Speaking on Fox Footy’s Midweek Tackle, Herald Sun journalists Jon Ralph and Jay Clark dissected their current state of play, and alluded to the monetary war chest they have building.

“They’re casting their net far and wide, they’ve said they’re going to make players rich,” Ralph begun by saying.

“Right now they’ve been told by Hugh McCluggage’s management that he’s going to stay in Brisbane – he’s not interested in coming to St Kilda.

“Every side with an available free agent has got the cap space to try and pay those free agents.

“Elliot Yeo, cross that off the list – very, very keen to stay in (Perth).”

With two high-profile players seemingly off the market, the next step for the Saints is unclear despite their cash t splash, with their eyes forced to be shifted a little more left-field.

“Tyson Stengle is someone who has been offered a longer term than he currently has got, but very similar money; so I would imagine they might offer him a bigger deal – what does that mean, Geelong pays more, he still stays,” Ralph continued.

“Cam Zurhaar, they haven’t been linked to him, but do you start getting desperate? There’s no easy answers for the Saints.”

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Jon Ralph is a moron and a campaigner.

Everything in that article is skewed towards making the Saints look even less desirable than they are: "He’s not interested in coming to St Kilda." Maybe, maybe he’s not interested in going anywhere. And why tf would we chase Cam Zuurhar? Is he a midfielder? Can he take us further than the forwards we have? Possibly only in the short term.

Why should we start getting desperate, as he says we should? We are working things out, our list is developing, we're in a hole but it's not going to improve with desperate grabs at any free agent who may be available.

Even the money aspect they manage to make us look like some classless loose schemer, clueless throwing money at whatever sparkles.

Desperate? Pah!View attachment 1997007
Gone a bit early wouldn’t you think. With still 18 month before he is out of contract I think we have time to turn it around.
 
I think you need to think clearly about the alternatives, though.
  1. Handball to a running player: This is possible, yes, but it assumes that: a) There is a player available to pass to. b) Marshall can see and hit the target without being intercepted in close quarters. c) The receiving player won't be immediately tackled or fail to achieve an effective clearance.
This isn't always a better option, but I think he might take it if available.
  1. Hit-out to advantage: The chances of Marshall winning this are only 24% (?), based on his stats. And that's only if he wins the hit-out, which happens about 48% of the time. Even then a hit-out to advantage doesn't guarantee our player will collect the ball or create a clearance.
  2. Opposition wins the hit-out: In this case, we probably have less than a 50% chance of winning the clearance, given the quality of our midfield. There's also a good chance that the opposition clearance will be a high-quality one, like from Harley Reid. I'd much rather have a poor clearance from Marshall go our way than a Harley Reid type clearance to the opposition.
I believe that a guaranteed clearance to a 50/50 contest is, statistically, better than the above options. Of course, if we had more class around the ball, that would change things.

Finally, we're only getting upset about the hack kicks because we can't win the post-clearance contest. That's not Marshall's fault; it's a structural and player issue up field.

That's just my opinion, but I'm keen to hear your thoughts.
I’d say a decent clearing kick to a 50/50 in our forward 50 is a better option than most but thats not what we get.

A hack 20m kick to a structured defence is getting retained about 10% of the time if we’re lucky.

It also is his fault if that’s not how we’re structured and it sure doesn’t look like that’s what we’re structured for. Our forwards rarely start in front and usually are looking to get out the back not hitting up at the ball.

Again, Roma doing those kicks within about 60-70 from goal, go for it, deep 50 entry. Good set up.

Anywhere else, unless it’s late in a quarter and we’ve got numbers stop doing it. Turnovers around centre or back half kill us.
 
I’d say a decent clearing kick to a 50/50 in our forward 50 is a better option than most but thats not what we get.

A hack 20m kick to a structured defence is getting retained about 10% of the time if we’re lucky.

It also is his fault if that’s not how we’re structured and it sure doesn’t look like that’s what we’re structured for. Our forwards rarely start in front and usually are looking to get out the back not hitting up at the ball.

Again, Roma doing those kicks within about 60-70 from goal, go for it, deep 50 entry. Good set up.

Anywhere else, unless it’s late in a quarter and we’ve got numbers stop doing it. Turnovers around centre or back half kill us.

Marshall has had to adapt his game because of our lack of midfield quality. He is not the strongest tap ruckman but he can make a contest most of the time, its just he has NO ONE reading the ball of the hands. Even Steele seems more concerned with stopping the opposition having run away clearances than actually winning the ball himself.
 
We only scored 8 goals for the match because of Marshall belting it into the forward line into the arms of a well-prepared Dockers defender instead of doing what most sides do which is to tap it to advantage of a Saints mid who could then pass it to other Saints players until it got to the forward line.

It worked twice and didn't work many more times. Its a s**t strategy.
yeah like zac jones and seb ross hit their target every time and sam gilbert before them,i really dont mind the dump kick personally,its at least gaining 30 or so meters
 
yeah like zac jones and seb ross hit their target every time and sam gilbert before them,i really dont mind the dump kick personally,its at least gaining 30 or so meters
Every single one of those players you've listed has been cursed by hundreds of thousands of Saints fans over their career for their dumb play that have cost us goals and games.

Opposition set up for that dump kick and can't believe we'd be so careless, but we always have been. I hate it. Who cares if we gain 30 metres when it gets turned over and comes straight back down our throats afterwards?

Only time it is worth it is if we have a forward line that marks everything and immense pressure in the F50.

It worked for Burkey and Harves cos they had Loewe, Hall, Heatley and Spida marking everything. It worked for Lenny and Ball cos they had Roo, Kosi and G-Train getting their hands on it and Milne crumbling any spills.

It doesn't work now.
 
yeah like zac jones and seb ross hit their target every time and sam gilbert before them,i really dont mind the dump kick personally,its at least gaining 30 or so meters


Richmond were good at dump kicking but they had lots of smalls that could lock the ball inside 50 once it got there. It's a fine strategy as long as it can be held in or at least result in a ball up closer to your scoring end.
 
Every single one of those players you've listed has been cursed by hundreds of thousands of Saints fans over their career for their dumb play that have cost us goals and games.

Opposition set up for that dump kick and can't believe we'd be so careless, but we always have been. I hate it. Who cares if we gain 30 metres when it gets turned over and comes straight back down our throats afterwards?

Only time it is worth it is if we have a forward line that marks everything and immense pressure in the F50.

It worked for Burkey and Harves cos they had Loewe, Hall, Heatley and Spida marking everything. It worked for Lenny and Ball cos they had Roo, Kosi and G-Train getting their hands on it and Milne crumbling any spills.

It doesn't work now.


It's also part of modern footy. I have mates that follow other clubs that complain about their players doing them too. If your side is winning the complaints go quiet.
 
I’d say a decent clearing kick to a 50/50 in our forward 50 is a better option than most but thats not what we get.

A hack 20m kick to a structured defence is getting retained about 10% of the time if we’re lucky.

It also is his fault if that’s not how we’re structured and it sure doesn’t look like that’s what we’re structured for. Our forwards rarely start in front and usually are looking to get out the back not hitting up at the ball.

Again, Roma doing those kicks within about 60-70 from goal, go for it, deep 50 entry. Good set up.

Anywhere else, unless it’s late in a quarter and we’ve got numbers stop doing it. Turnovers around centre or back half kill us.

Probably agree on this to a point.

Maybe he needs to be a little more selective. I don't believe those 10-20m kicks are intentional but rather because he's being dragged off the kick and has 2-3 players hanging off him. In those instances I would say he should not attempt the clearing kick unless like you said we have numbers and good reason to go for the territory.
 
Last edited:
Probably agree on this to a point.

Maybe he needs to be a little more selective. I don't believe those 10-20m kicks are intentional but rather because he's being dragged off the kick and has 2-3 players hanging off him. In those instances I would say he should not attempt the clearing kick unless like you said we have numbers and good reason to go for the territory.


I'd say the biggest issue is that he's the only one regularly winning clearance because Steele is pretty much a lone hand at the moment. Sides can sit two players on him if they want knowing that our second tier mids aren't going to get on top of them. Marshall doesn't really have anyone to feed. Handballing to a well covered Steele or and inexperienced Windhager is probably lower or as low percentage as dump kicking. At least having the ball 60 meters out from our attacking goal is slowing them down and allowing us to set up our defence if it does turn over.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top