Discussion Round 1, Best 22

[stkildathunda]

C'mon mate you know as well as me that Siposs, Stanley & Simpkin aren't best 22

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

C'mon mate you know as well as me that Siposs, Stanley & Simpkin aren't best 22

Haha, And Koschitzke, Blake, Jones are way ahead of them 3 :').
I only had one look at the team and laughed.. Didn't read the preview that page is as useless as they come. Actually surprised Daniel Currie wasn't in the best 22.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Interesting to see White tipped for rising star, particularly since he hasn't been able to resume full training after coming to the club sporting an injury.

 

[The Punter]

How I'm feeling 8/1/13?

Dempster Fisher Geary
Gwilt Simpkin Gilbert
Dal Santo Armitage Montagna
Siposs Riewoldt Stanley
Milne Wilkes Saad
McEvoy Hayes Steven
Schneider Ledger Newnes Ray

 

[SaintLex]

Haha, And Koschitzke, Blake, Jones are way ahead of them 3 :').
I only had one look at the team and laughed.. Didn't read the preview that page is as useless as they come. Actually surprised Daniel Currie wasn't in the best 22.

Daniel Currie is a Sandy B&F superstar! How dare they leave him out!

 

[Saint Bostriots]

Thought I'd go on a different track...

Simpkin Wilkes Wright
Hickey
Dempster Fisher Siposs
Gilbert Steven Geary**
Lee Riewoldt
Saad Stanley Milne
McEvoy Hayes Dal Santo
Armitage Newnes Ross Milera*
*Sub
**Montagna after round 1. Shuffling of a couple players after that.

Hickey as resting ruckman in the backline for the Cox Nic Nats Ryders ect for when they rest foward. Nobody else in the back line can take these guys. Yeah he'll get a few kicked on him and he'll stuff up a couple of times but he'll learn alot. Move back foward when not needed back there.

Half back line + Wright give plenty of run out of the back line with good foot skills and defensive skills (not so much Wright with foot skills just yet).

Gilbert on the wing decreases chances of turnovers that result in goals but will be a hard much up with size and speed on his side. Can also kick a goal.

Mobile foward line with mixture of speed smarts and marking power.

I think there is a good mixture of old and young without going too far in one direction.
My thoughts are for the youngs to get the best learning experience from the older guys so you have to play the young.

 

[hayes]

Never worked in 2012 and he hardly had a Pre-season last year, I wonder if we are going to try Beau Wilkes back again? anyone know if he's been training with the forward or defenders? This is really his first real pre-season with us.

I suggested that a few weeks ago when talking about all the forwards we have now but apparently he's never been upto it in his entire career, so unfortunately I can't see that changing now.

 

[Saint Bostriots]

Wilkes has been given a one year contract to see if he is worth keeping.
If he stuffs his time at stkilda up his career is over as an afl footballer.
There is a massive hole in defence atm which everyone knows.
He would be best to make himself invaluble to the team.
If he had some smarts he would be making that spot his.
He's had a full pre season which should make a difference but his attitude in defence is the thing he must change.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Wilkes has been given a one year contract to see if he is worth keeping.
If he stuffs his time at stkilda up his career is over as an afl footballer.
There is a massive hole in defence atm which everyone knows.
He would be best to make himself invaluble to the team.
If he had some smarts he would be making that spot his.
He's had a full pre season which should make a difference but his attitude in defence is the thing he must change.

He's a pretty good depth forward, he's demonstrated that. If he cant play defense it doesn't mean his career is over.

 

[Defacto]

Wilkes has been given a one year contract to see if he is worth keeping.
If he stuffs his time at stkilda up his career is over as an afl footballer.
There is a massive hole in defence atm which everyone knows.
He would be best to make himself invaluble to the team.
If he had some smarts he would be making that spot his.
He's had a full pre season which should make a difference but his attitude in defence is the thing he must change.

is that official? if so is ledger in the same boat, given he was given a 1 year contract that was announced at the same time as well?

my opinion is wilkes does have pressure on him, but i think he is the perfect depth player. its very hard to keep players as depth. most will want to move on. i think wilkes will be happy at the saints to play what ever role the clubs wants him too. he will be invaluable as depth/if not best 22 over the next 2-3 seasons

 

[Saint Bostriots]

Yeah that was the general feeling when the contracts were done.
I think Ledgers was a two way street.
The whole idea of getting Wilkes was to be a swing man and if that works out then thats great I rate him higher as a foward as well.
What I was trying to say is that if I was on the fringe and I saw a position that I could lock down for 5+ years I would jump at it.

 

[Axcellence]

Thought I'd go on a different track...

Simpkin Wilkes Wright
Hickey
Dempster Fisher Siposs
Gilbert Steven Geary**
Lee Riewoldt
Saad Stanley Milne
McEvoy Hayes Dal Santo
Armitage Newnes Ross Milera*
*Sub
**Montagna after round 1. Shuffling of a couple players after that.

Hickey as resting ruckman in the backline for the Cox Nic Nats Ryders ect for when they rest foward. Nobody else in the back line can take these guys. Yeah he'll get a few kicked on him and he'll stuff up a couple of times but he'll learn alot. Move back foward when not needed back there.

Half back line + Wright give plenty of run out of the back line with good foot skills and defensive skills (not so much Wright with foot skills just yet).

Gilbert on the wing decreases chances of turnovers that result in goals but will be a hard much up with size and speed on his side. Can also kick a goal.

Mobile foward line with mixture of speed smarts and marking power.

I think there is a good mixture of old and young without going too far in one direction.
My thoughts are for the youngs to get the best learning experience from the older guys so you have to play the young.

I think Jones would be in. Geary would take Wright's spot.

 

[SaintsSeptember]

Yeah that was the general feeling when the contracts were done.
I think Ledgers was a two way street.
The whole idea of getting Wilkes was to be a swing man and if that works out then thats great I rate him higher as a foward as well.
What I was trying to say is that if I was on the fringe and I saw a position that I could lock down for 5+ years I would jump at it.

I'd consider that ( under the current conditions ) anyone apart from the few elite would be gone if they stuff up and they are out of contract by the end of next season.

 

[Saint Bostriots]

I think Jones would be in. Geary would take Wright's spot.

I would be disappointed if this was the case.
I think Jones at the moment is depth for any injuries in our midfield. He won't teach the younger players anything that Hayes, Montagna and Dal won't already be teaching them on field. He will be good to learn from in the VFL. I like the bloke but he is just not in future plans.

If you look at the stunted development from our younger guys eg Stanley he is going into his 5th year in the system and has played 21 games for his entire career! All this guy needs is games, yeah his been injured every now and then but he should have been playing along time ago.

Now have a look at Jackson Trengove (Pick 22). He is 197cm, KP, and was taken in the same draft as Stanley (Pick 47).
He has 61 games under his belt and has won a club B&F. I know the club is in a bad place at the moment but he hasn't had great players to guide him, so I think it evens out.

We need to stop playin these 'role players' because they don't win you GF's. And if we play the kids and they don't perform we've got more to choose from.

 

[hayes]

I would be disappointed if this was the case.
I think Jones at the moment is depth for any injuries in our midfield. He won't teach the younger players anything that Hayes, Montagna and Dal won't already be teaching them on field. He will be good to learn from in the VFL. I like the bloke but he is just not in future plans.

If you look at the stunted development from our younger guys eg Stanley he is going into his 5th year in the system and has played 21 games for his entire career! All this guy needs is games, yeah his been injured every now and then but he should have been playing along time ago.

Now have a look at Jackson Trengove (Pick 22). He is 197cm, KP, and was taken in the same draft as Stanley (Pick 47).
He has 61 games under his belt and has won a club B&F. I know the club is in a bad place at the moment but he hasn't had great players to guide him, so I think it evens out.

We need to stop playin these 'role players' because they don't win you GF's. And if we play the kids and they don't perform we've got more to choose from.

Perfectly put. We can't afford to play the GOP anymore, it's time we turned this depth into quality AFL players and you can't do that with them rotting in the VFL. I do think Watters will favour the young players again after seeing the light before the Geelong game by dropping Jones, and then during it by subbing Kosi off halfway through. There's still going to be competition for spots, but it will be between each other.

 

[L_W_P]

So does anyone realistically see us playing 2 ruckmen with McEvoy and Hickey rotating forward?

Play Simpkin at FB, Stanley at CHB, Lee at FF, Roo at CHF and Hickey/McEvoy in a pocket?

 

[adambrown]

So does anyone realistically see us playing 2 ruckmen with McEvoy and Hickey rotating forward?

Play Simpkin at FB, Stanley at CHB, Lee at FF, Roo at CHF and Hickey/McEvoy in a pocket?

would not be surprised at all if the goal to goal line looks like that during the year and I'm all for it, not 100%on Stanley at CHB but i think the saints will try him there.

 

[Manimal_Dunstan]

So does anyone realistically see us playing 2 ruckmen with McEvoy and Hickey rotating forward?

Play Simpkin at FB, Stanley at CHB, Lee at FF, Roo at CHF and Hickey/McEvoy in a pocket?

Wouldn't surprise me to see us try and Eagles type forward line. They usually played Kennedy, Darling, Lynch (Now gone) and 1 of Nic Nat/Cox up forward. But seriously i don't see us playing Stanley at CHB or FB tbh.. He play forward happy to be shown wrong but yeah i don't see it happening.

 

[aussierulesrules]

So does anyone realistically see us playing 2 ruckmen with McEvoy and Hickey rotating forward?

That is certainly a very interesting question and that article the other day suggested that Hickey was likely to play most games (although I'm not sure how reliable that one was) and I was told just after we got him that we were wanting him to play most games (although that seemed to be dependent on whether Rhys was able to play more than a few games in a row), but I'm just not sure I see him being picked ahead of all of Kosi, Wilkes and Lee, unless of course Rhys does play down back, meaning that there is a spot for one more of those three.

The thinking ought to be pretty clear by the last couple of rounds of the NAB Cup though and competition for spots in the key forward posts ought to be white hot, which is what we want. No more carrying anyone who is out of form (hopefully- please!).

Wouldn't surprise me to see us try and Eagles type forward line. They usually played Kennedy, Darling, Lynch (Now gone) and 1 of Nic Nat/Cox up forward.

I wouldn't be opposed to seeing us give that a crack. It has worked well for WC (although they do play on a bigger ground). Both Mac and Hickey are outstanding overhead, although if Rhys is up to rucking he is likely to be a better option up forward than Hickey.

Loving the options though.

 

[stkildathunda]

Carlton have shown that playing 3 rucks never works. Ruckman arent forwards and you cant rely on them to kick goals!!

McEvoy, Stanley & Hickey are ruckman, not pinch-hitting ruckman so the West Coast type strategy doesnt work as they use actual forwards

 

[hayes]

I can't see it. I think we'll go with three talls with one providing ruck relief (Stanley) with Macca pushing back to help our defense. No point loading up the forward line when our defense is getting scored on at will with the ball going down there like an avalanche, and that means one or two of Milne, Saad, Milera and Schneider miss out which I can't see happening. I think Hickey only comes in if one of Macca or Stanley are injured.

Isn't it nice to have these options though instead of "if Macca goes down we're screwed".

 

[Persevering Saint]

Totally agree with Hayes' assessment there. And against WC is a great example: I think the best hope we have of stopping Cox when he goes forward is to have Macca right there with him - and at the same time, Nat and Stanley fight the battle in the air at the ruck.

 

[aussierulesrules]

I can't see it. I think we'll go with three talls with one providing ruck relief (Stanley) with Macca pushing back to help our defense. No point loading up the forward line when our defense is getting scored on at will with the ball going down there like an avalanche, and that means one or two of Milne, Saad, Milera and Schneider miss out which I can't see happening. I think Hickey only comes in if one of Macca or Stanley are injured.

It does make you wonder though, like with what you said about how we didn't give up pick 12 to have Lee playing in the VFL (especially long term), did we really give up pick 13 for Hickey (and Hickey actually cost us more than Lee, as we got less in the "package" with him than we did with Lee), just to have him playing in the VFL long term?

I realise that with him he is probably going to need more time to learn the game and develop than Lee (who has been playing it all his life, as far as I'm aware) and so it won't do him any harm to say spend the year mostly in the VFL, but then what?

Mac and Rhys are 23 and 21 respectively and are hopefully 8-10 years away from retiring, so what happens when Hickey is fully ready to go, in say 12 months time, if not sooner? Did we really give up pick 13 for someone who is pretty much just going to be "back-up", in case of injury, long term, or are the club actually planning on playing all 3, if not immediately, then as soon as we feel Hickey is ready?

I would bet that if we just wanted someone as back-up then we would have surely just gotten say Daniel Currie, at pick 60 in the ND (where North ended up getting him, I think), rather than spend up big on someone expensive like Tom. So I would think we were planning on playing him, pretty much from the start (which is what I was told the plans were). Our thoughts may have changed since then, but given that Rhys could very easily just play purely as a "KPP" (which he has apparently been groomed to do for a couple of years now) it wouldn't be that much of a shock to have all 3 of them playing, before too long, especially if Rhys does play some sort of role down back, freeing up a spot in the front half.

It may just be that we want to have a really strong ruck combination, a la West Coast, and as such, want both Hickey and Mac playing and Rhys playing perma KP, unless of course we're concerned that the new ruck rules are going to hurt Mac and that Hickey is going to be good enough to overtake him in a couple of years, like Goldstein did to MacIntosh at North?

 

[SaintsSeptember]

It does make you wonder though, like with what you said about how we didn't give up pick 12 to have Lee playing in the VFL (especially long term), did we really give up pick 13 for Hickey (and Hickey actually cost us more than Lee, as we got less in the "package" with him than we did with Lee), just to have him playing in the VFL long term?

I realise that with him he is probably going to need more time to learn the game and develop than Lee (who has been playing it all his life, as far as I'm aware) and so it won't do him any harm to say spend the year mostly in the VFL, but then what?

Mac and Rhys are 23 and 21 respectively and are hopefully 8-10 years away from retiring, so what happens when Hickey is fully ready to go, in say 12 months time, if not sooner? Did we really give up pick 13 for someone who is pretty much just going to be "back-up", in case of injury, long term, or are the club actually planning on playing all 3, if not immediately, then as soon as we feel Hickey is ready?

I would bet that if we just wanted someone as back-up then we would have surely just gotten say Daniel Currie, at pick 60 in the ND (where North ended up getting him, I think), rather than spend up big on someone expensive like Tom. So I would think we were planning on playing him, pretty much from the start (which is what I was told the plans were). Our thoughts may have changed since then, but given that Rhys could very easily just play purely as a "KPP" (which he has apparently been groomed to do for a couple of years now) it wouldn't be that much of a shock to have all 3 of them playing, before too long, especially if Rhys does play some sort of role down back, freeing up a spot in the front half.

It may just be that we want to have a really strong ruck combination, a la West Coast, and as such, want both Hickey and Mac playing and Rhys playing perma KP, unless of course we're concerned that the new ruck rules are going to hurt Mac and that Hickey is going to be good enough to overtake him in a couple of years, like Goldstein did to MacIntosh at North?

The way I see it, Pelch, Elshaug and co are investing in the future. Currie in thee years time may not be worth much.
If both of Stanley/Hickey make the grade you may find that we have a ruckman to trade that is still worth pick 13.
If they arent great they may still be worth something. ( Brent Renouf was pick 24 and was eventually traded for pick 33 ).
Its the difference between the current way the club is thinking and the way Lyon burnt his bridges.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Yep, that's a possibility as well.