Are the Saints about to become the next "port"

[blaze036]

You would have seen Tommy Walsh as BOG against your lot with a match winning six goals then?

Hmm yea good point... i guess this proofs saints youth is good.

Can we get serious, who actually has the worst youth in the AFL?? saints fans wont answer but surely most neutral supporters say saint kilda. Its been argued for a while, with little facts apart from i havnt seen enough VFL

 

[magpie90]

I still think the Saints have a lot to offer. Their top 6 are as good as anyones, however, where they have fallen down is the bottom 6. That bottom 6 in the top 4 clubs this year have been kids they have gotten game time into during the last 3 yrs. Yes St Kilda may have blooded more debutants than others but the fact remains that there weren' many who left an impact. I feel with a new coach coming in they will be forced to draft and play kids. This is the best thing for the club as Ross has been using recycled players. I think the real worry for the Saints is in a few yrs time you will be losing a large number of experienced players at once and there are not too many kids who have shown they are ready to take over the mantle. There is a major gulf of the 21-25 yr old players on the list playing good football. I am not a Collingwood troll trying to come out and back the saints. I am a football lover who likes to analyse how clubs are going. Would be interested in saints supporters opinions of that. A question. Will this current list win a premiership in the next 4 years?

 

[blaze036]

Could you provide more detail about St Kilda's young players and your assessment of them based on your (extensive) experience of watching them?

(And it's St Kilda, not saint kilda.)

God this is ridiculous. Do u argue that saints youth is not in the worst 3 in the league? Because thats what im saying not that im an expert on saints youth. U seem quick to point out that im not an expert on ur youth but ignore the bigger question of how good ur youth actually is relative to the rest of the comp (which is the only important part).

 

[Pykie]

They have some good young kids.


They don't have anywhere near the depth of some other teams though, and some of the ones they do have, wont make it imo.


But thats the circle of the AFL and the draft.....


They've been up for the last 8 years, traded away alot of their mid picks, they're due for a decent spell down the bottom in the next few years..

 

[cartel]

I don't know how good St Kilda's young players are compared to the rest of the league, because they are largely untried and I haven't regularly watched enough of other team's young players, besides those who get played in the AFL.

Based on what I've seen of St Kilda's young players, I think there is reason to view them more optimistically from what you described initially as "worst in the league (no exaggeration)" to then softening to "bottom 3".

You are an illiterate flog, and I look forward to the detailed player by player assessment of St Kilda's youth.

 

[blaze036]

You are an illiterate flog, and I look forward to the detailed player by player assessment of St Kilda's youth.

You attack people for having a negative view of ur teams youth

All saints fans here just starting the insults and the cope out that they havnt been tried yet instead of accepting what everyone knows about their list (very good older players, middle band and young players are largely not good)

 

[r_boy]

St.Kilda fans listing off 3 or 4 young players only works against you. Teams like the Suns, Eagles, North, Tiges, Dees and soon to be Giants can list off 12 or 13 easily. Like Pykie said there's probably a bit of quality there but there's little quantity.

 

[markm106]

I thought saints were a really good chance for the flag this year. Did not think reiwoldt would have the year he had. I know fisher said they could do a Geelong next year but I can't see it.
Saints need to look to the future and I don't think the young players are that good. I believe they should look at a Goddard trade this year. If he goes next year they won't likely get as good compo as one of the 17yo.
Whilst the top 6 or so are good they could still make finals next year. I feel they may drop away after that and I can see some tough times ahead.

 

[simba_]

we have better young kids than st k..

 

[goodie23]

St.Kilda fans listing off 3 or 4 young players only works against you. Teams like the Suns, Eagles, North, Tiges, Dees and soon to be Giants can list off 12 or 13 easily. Like Pykie said there's probably a bit of quality there but there's little quantity.

With the exception of the Eagles, none of those teams made the finals so that's not an accurate yardstick. Thomas and Lyon both focused on putting together a team based around the 2000-2002 drafts, as a result it's hard to get a read on our younger players as that's where the majority of our core is from.

The dirty 'p' word is used to describe a lot of our younger players, and with the little game time they've had it's hard to know where they're at. Do we have many proven performers under 25? No. But how many Saints players under 25 had the kind of crack at the top level that their peers at the 'the Suns, Eagles, North, Tiges, Dees and soon to be Giants' had?

18 players currently on our list under 25, plus the five strong rookie list (four would be more accurate, as Eddy's already been cut). McEvoy and Steven are the standouts. Armitage and Geary will continue to get games, probably won't become A graders but they'll contribute. Early indications are we slayed last year's draft, Siposs, Ledger and Cripps all looked great in the couple of games they had this year, Crocker looked like a winner at VFL level before doing his shoulder, plus NSW scholarship project Jackson Ferguson on the rookie list has garnered some pretty solid wraps.

 

[Plugger35]

You attack people for having a negative view of ur teams youth

All saints fans here just starting the insults and the cope out that they havnt been tried yet instead of accepting what everyone knows about their list (very good older players, middle band and young players are largely not good)

What do you expect St Kilda supporters to do when you start a ridiculous, uninformed thread like this? We have a number of good young players on our list, not just Steven. McEvoy, Armitage, Geary, Cripps, Ledger, Siposs, Stanley, Winmar and Lynch have all shown plenty of promise and should develop into good AFL players.

You're trying to paint the most pessimistic outlook possible for St Kilda which no doubt you and many other people hope will come true. The reality is our future isn't anywhere near as bleak as you make it. I still think we have a realistic chance of challenging for a flag for another year or two with our current list. We may need a bit of a rebuild after that but I don't see us bottoming out to the extent that Port has.

 

[Pykie]

With the exception of the Eagles, none of those teams made the finals so that's not an accurate yardstick. Thomas and Lyon both focused on putting together a team based around the 2000-2002 drafts, as a result it's hard to get a read on our younger players as that's where the majority of our core is from.

The dirty 'p' word is used to describe a lot of our younger players, and with the little game time they've had it's hard to know where they're at. Do we have many proven performers under 25? No. But how many Saints players under 25 had the kind of crack at the top level that their peers at the 'the Suns, Eagles, North, Tiges, Dees and soon to be Giants' had?

18 players currently on our list under 25, plus the five strong rookie list (four would be more accurate, as Eddy's already been cut). McEvoy and Steven are the standouts. Armitage and Geary will continue to get games, probably won't become A graders but they'll contribute. Early indications are we slayed last year's draft, Siposs, Ledger and Cripps all looked great in the couple of games they had this year, Crocker looked like a winner at VFL level before doing his shoulder, plus NSW scholarship project Jackson Ferguson on the rookie list has garnered some pretty solid wraps.

I don't see it as a slight on St Kilda, like alot of the other cynical posters on here.


They had their chance, made a fair dip at it, and just fell short..... like 50% of the "other" sides throughout history.

It's the natural cycle of the comp.

McEvoy and Steven are future leaders of the club, Cripps will be a permanent fixture next year, I liked Crocker as a junior, and Armitage and Geary will be solid players down the track for certain imo.


You lack serious KPP depth to take over from Riewoldt, Kosi, Fisher etc down the track, and need to get them in ASAP, I don't think Walsh and Stanley will make it, but thats just my personal opinion.


I also don't buy the whole "didn't get the chances" of the other sides, Geelong and Collingwood haven't had problems blooding young players, I subscribe to the theory "your young enough if your good enough", I don't think alot of the draft picks in the last few years have been good enough tbh...

 

[Barry_Badrinath]

With the exception of the Eagles, none of those teams made the finals so that's not an accurate yardstick. Thomas and Lyon both focused on putting together a team based around the 2000-2002 drafts, as a result it's hard to get a read on our younger players as that's where the majority of our core is from.

The dirty 'p' word is used to describe a lot of our younger players, and with the little game time they've had it's hard to know where they're at. Do we have many proven performers under 25? No. But how many Saints players under 25 had the kind of crack at the top level that their peers at the 'the Suns, Eagles, North, Tiges, Dees and soon to be Giants' had?

I think the problem is that because there are a couple of pretty average/terrible players like Ray/Polo/Koschitzke in side these kids do have the oppurtunity to break into the side, but haven't yet.

Even if 3 or 4 of these "unproven" players do come on it still wouldn't be enough once the older brigade start to retire/decline.

 

[Hellgood]

Good players can come from anywhere. If the Saints have a bit of luck in the drafts, they have the guns to slot them in around and they develop pretty damn quickly. Things happen fast in footy, just because teams have 10 first round draft picks in their team, if they have nothing around them they generally don't develop as well. Just look at Melbourne the last few years, Carlton a bit before that, Richmond at about the same time.

 

[liam_13]

I wouldn't be surprised to see St Kilda win a couple of wooden spoons in the near future.
In fact, I'm predicting them to be bottom 4 in 2012.

However, I also wouldn't be surprised to see them do a Sydney, and hang around the top 8 for who knows how many years.

They are the team I'm least sure about, for these reasons:
-Will Riewoldt capture his best form?
-Will Hayes and Gwilt make successful comebacks?
-How long can Milne keep up his outstanding goal kicking record?
-Will players like Dempster, Peake, Ray and Clarke continue to win their individual one-on-one battles, ensuring players supporters consider to be duds, to be good players?
-Will Stanley/Walsh/Winmar/Ledger/Sipposs/Lynch come on quickly and replace retiring/injured players?
-How long can Goddard, Dal Santo and Fisher be genuine A-graders?
-Will the new coach implement a rebuild or will he try to keep them up in the top 8?
-How good can Gilbert/Schneider/Armitage/McEvoy be? McEvoy is basically a guarantee to be an A-grader, Schneider is also very good, but can Armitage and Gilbert be very good or just role players?
-What's their recruiting to be like in the next couple of years? Good?

If there are more no's then yes's, most likely I will be correct in 2012.
If there are more yes's then no's, most likely I will be very wrong.

To hard to say, but that's why I'm going out on a limb and making a big prediction.

edit: That's not without injuries/the draw etc

 

[goodie23]

I don't see it as a slight on St Kilda, like alot of the other cynical posters on here.


They had their chance, made a fair dip at it, and just fell short..... like 50% of the "other" sides throughout history.

It's the natural cycle of the comp.

McEvoy and Steven are future leaders of the club, Cripps will be a permanent fixture next year, I liked Crocker as a junior, and Armitage and Geary will be solid players down the track for certain imo.


You lack serious KPP depth to take over from Riewoldt, Kosi, Fisher etc down the track, and need to get them in ASAP, I don't think Walsh and Stanley will make it, but thats just my personal opinion.


I also don't buy the whole "didn't get the chances" of the other sides, Geelong and Collingwood haven't had problems blooding young players, I subscribe to the theory "your young enough if your good enough", I don't think alot of the draft picks in the last few years have been good enough tbh...

Problem is we gambled almost entirely on the 2008 draft as a long-term KPP fix (Lynch, Stanley and Cahill, plus Gaertner in the rookie draft) and right now it doesn't look good. 07 we didn't take any, 10 we only took Johnson late and rookied Archer and the only one we got last year was Ferguson as a NSW scholarship rookie.

You may subscribe to that theory, the evidence says Ross Lyon didn't. It's interesting to look at this year, our breakouts in Steven and McEvoy were both drafted in Lyon's first draft in 2007 while the 2010 draftees who did get a crack and shine (Ledger, Cripps and Siposs) all broke down injured.

 

[Rustyspoon54]

I also don't buy the whole "didn't get the chances" of the other sides, Geelong and Collingwood haven't had problems blooding young players, I subscribe to the theory "your young enough if your good enough", I don't think alot of the draft picks in the last few years have been good enough tbh...

It doesn't have anything to do with how good they are, it is simply a fact that they didnt get played when they should have. When the saints were something like1-5, ross comes in and says he is going to start playing the kids, which he does for a bit (although when he did play them they were usually in non important roles or the subs and didnt get a huge shot), however a few sustained injuries and then when the saints won a few on the trot, the kids were no longer selected and more established players were brought back in.

There is quite a bit of promise there, they really do just need a shot, personally i'm a big fan of siposs, kid has a beautiful kick on him.

 

[The Donners]

Things can change very quickly. I hope Roo can get back to his best but having seen Lloyd have his hammy ripped off the bone and never return to his best and Richardson having to retire from it, all you can do is hope.

If Hayes can come back to fitness in his first season back, the Saints could be there or there abouts for the next couple of seasons. Every team in the competition has their cycle, good or bad, it MAY be St. Kilda's bad cycle in a couple of years.

It wasn't that long ago Collingwood finished 3 years in a row in the bottom 4.

 

[Pykie]

It doesn't have anything to do with how good they are, it is simply a fact that they didnt get played when they should have. When the saints were something like1-5, ross comes in and says he is going to start playing the kids, which he does for a bit (although when he did play them they were usually in non important roles or the subs and didnt get a huge shot), however a few sustained injuries and then when the saints won a few on the trot, the kids were no longer selected and more established players were brought back in.

There is quite a bit of promise there, they really do just need a shot, personally i'm a big fan of siposs, kid has a beautiful kick on him.

Again, I don't agree with most of that, but it's your club and your opinon.

Lyon played the likes of Steven, McEvoy, Geary, Siposs, Armitage (this year, but still sporadically enough in the last few seasons to suggest he was in your best 25), Gilbert & Gwilt (when he first came to the club). He even gave Eddy extended stints as a young player.

I think Lyon was prepared to play the young players.


The likes of Lynch, Stanley, Smith, Heyne etc just havent been good enough to warrant selection.

 

[The Donners]

It doesn't have anything to do with how good they are, it is simply a fact that they didnt get played when they should have. When the saints were something like1-5, ross comes in and says he is going to start playing the kids, which he does for a bit (although when he did play them they were usually in non important roles or the subs and didnt get a huge shot), however a few sustained injuries and then when the saints won a few on the trot, the kids were no longer selected and more established players were brought back in.

There is quite a bit of promise there, they really do just need a shot, personally i'm a big fan of siposs, kid has a beautiful kick on him.

Yeah, I like the look of Siposs too. He's probably not the kind of guy you can build a team around which is what I think the OP is trying to say in the absence of Riewoldt etc. (nearing the end of their careers).

 

[r_boy]

With the exception of the Eagles, none of those teams made the finals so that's not an accurate yardstick. Thomas and Lyon both focused on putting together a team based around the 2000-2002 drafts, as a result it's hard to get a read on our younger players as that's where the majority of our core is from.

Don't see how making finals has anything to do with youth quality and quantity.

The dirty 'p' word is used to describe a lot of our younger players, and with the little game time they've had it's hard to know where they're at. Do we have many proven performers under 25? No. But how many Saints players under 25 had the kind of crack at the top level that their peers at the 'the Suns, Eagles, North, Tiges, Dees and soon to be Giants' had?

Yeh not many. Just more evidence of how far behind the Saints are if they're going for a rebuild.

18 players currently on our list under 25, plus the five strong rookie list (four would be more accurate, as Eddy's already been cut). McEvoy and Steven are the standouts. Armitage and Geary will continue to get games, probably won't become A graders but they'll contribute. Early indications are we slayed last year's draft, Siposs, Ledger and Cripps all looked great in the couple of games they had this year, Crocker looked like a winner at VFL level before doing his shoulder, plus NSW scholarship project Jackson Ferguson on the rookie list has garnered some pretty solid wraps

18 under 25. That sounds below average.

Like I said, no point listing off a few names when other teams can list off heaps more with more promise.

 

[Axcellence]

I wouldn't be surprised to see St Kilda win a couple of wooden spoons in the near future.
In fact, I'm predicting them to be bottom 4 in 2012.

However, I also wouldn't be surprised to see them do a Sydney, and hang around the top 8 for who knows how many years.

Wow, you are really putting yourself out there, aren't you.

 

[L_W_P]

Again, I don't agree with most of that, but it's your club and your opinon.

Lyon played the likes of Steven, McEvoy, Geary, Siposs, Armitage (this year, but still sporadically enough in the last few seasons to suggest he was in your best 25), Gilbert & Gwilt (when he first came to the club). He even gave Eddy extended stints as a young player.

I think Lyon was prepared to play the young players.


The likes of Lynch, Stanley, Smith, Heyne etc just havent been good enough to warrant selection.

Just want to highlight these 2 guys.

Both of them were given games but most Saints fans would argue that they were played in positions that didn't help them make an impact at AFL level.

Armitage is a grunt mid who can snag a goal now and then. He plays the same role that Luke Ball does at the Pies and we've always seen him as such. Unfortunately Lyon saw him as more of a forward who can pinch hit in the centre if needed. This cut down on his possesions and tackles and he was left to look like an average player.

Lynch was treated even worse. He almost won Sandringham's BnF playing across half back but he was played as a leading forward in the AFL. When Gilbert was struggling we were all screaming for Lynch to be brought in across half back. He could be end up the next Sam Fisher.

Hopefully the new coach sees this and keeps them on

I do agree though that the rest of our kids are still unknown. Not good or bad, simply unknown.

 

[Falchoon]

Cripps>>>>Franklin

Cripps 1.75 goals per game in 41% game time

25 games at 100% game time = 107 goals

Franklin 3.73 goals per game in 94% game time

25 games at 100% game time = 99 goals


Cripps >>>>>>> all

 

[goodie23]

Don't see how making finals has anything to do with youth quality and quantity.

Of course you don't. Teams not making the finals are more likely to pursue youth policies, there's quantity. Through weight of numbers and superior draft picks, they're more likely to find quality.

Yeh not many. Just more evidence of how far behind the Saints are if they're going for a rebuild.

We haven't been going for a rebuild.

18 under 25. That sounds below average.

Like I said, no point listing off a few names when other teams can list off heaps more with more promise.

It is, due largely to our experienced core and Lyon's recycling policies. It's still enough to fill a football team though, plus there's however many who come in this year.

And those teams haven't been in contention, as such have been content to live with promise. Promise and potential are nothing until they're realised.