Preview Round 23, 2023: St.Kilda v Geelong - Marvel Stadium, Saturday 19th August, 7:25PM AEST *HIGGINS 100TH*

Who Wins?

  • Saints

    Votes: 37 77.1%
  • Cats

    Votes: 11 22.9%

  • Total voters
    48

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
So Richmond should strike it from its premierships? Why did it suit us more than others? The shorter season may have, but we played well that season, beat Adelaide teams twice in a week in Adelaide, won against a bunch of good teams.

I know it suits the narrative of some, but there is no evidence it suited us more than others, it suited nobody.
I agree. I think our performances that year showed that we handled hub life better than most clubs. Pretty odd for a club that so many like to say is mentally weak.
 
So Richmond should strike it from its premierships? Why did it suit us more than others? The shorter season may have, but we played well that season, beat Adelaide teams twice in a week in Adelaide, won against a bunch of good teams.

I know it suits the narrative of some, but there is no evidence it suited us more than others, it suited nobody.


Younger players shorter games, we got a prime spot in Noosa, young list didn't have young families to miss out on etc. Short season left run in their legs. We also were used to not getting energy from crowd noise.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I think Wilkie is listed at about 191. I was shocked!
I think there is a general tendency amongst the BF community to throw stats around on players that renders them meaningless, and height is the main offender in this instance. We have an Australian tendency to think weight in metric (kg's) and height in the old school imperial feet and inches, except when we type and we default to the easier metric of cm's which is what is listed online. I think people then don't correlate the two and the metric cm's seems to lose meaning. People say "so and so is only 193cm's!" and seem to disregard that it is six foot four inches in the old money. I realise humans and AFL players are getting larger, but 6'4" is not a small bloke.

The difference from a guy of 193 to 196 is one inch in height (just over) and I think that gets cast as being far more important than it is. Stating the obvious, people are different and a heavy-set guy with average reach for his height at 193cm may be able to be covered off very well by a long-limbed guy of 188cm who has an above average reach for his height.

Height is important for key positions, but it is not the only thing, and a few centimetres is not the be all and end all.
 
The other issue with mature top ups, is that we are constantly needing to replace them.
Cordy hasn't got a lot of years left, we can "hope" that Van Es or Adams works out.
Wood hasn't got a lot of years left, we can "hope" that Sharman or someone can play that role.

Just means you are constantly using energy to chase the same positions.
 
We split the pick with GWS and didn't have to trade them out. There are all kinds of scenarios that don't involve loading up with GOPs for a lot of capital.Would still have Acres too. Also had less picks from acquiring Hanners and chasing a bunch of ordinary older players at the draft instead of kids that we delisted quickly. That period of trades and drafting was absolute s**t with not much to show for any of it. If Hunter and Coff are busts it was diabolical.


Toce has been very good since taking over. Has hit more than he missed so far.

Split the picks because we were trying to do both the Howard trade and the Hill trade. No trades, no pick splitting.
 
Looking at the 2019 draft, if we had accepted no trades during that 2019 post-season trade period, we would have not acquired Howard, Ryder, Hill, Zac Jones and Butler. We would have kept Josh Bruce (who was under contract for 2020).

For all that, we would have kept... pick 6. That's it. We had traded out of every other round in 2018. We picked Ryan Byrnes with a pick acquired in 2018. Likely the late pick kept used on Leo Connolly would have been slightly better and used to pick ... Leo Connolly.

So one young player. One.

Anyway, how do we all think the boys will go tomorrow night?
And imagine if that single player was Fischer McAsey who has now retired.

As for Saturday night, I think we'll win quite comfortably. Geelong struggling, we've started to get our mojo back.

Finals beckon - which may not please some on here.

Personally I'm looking forward to seeing Hill on one wing of the MCG and Wood on the other.
 
I think there is a general tendency amongst the BF community to throw stats around on players that renders them meaningless, and height is the main offender in this instance. We have an Australian tendency to think weight in metric (kg's) and height in the old school imperial feet and inches, except when we type and we default to the easier metric of cm's which is what is listed online. I think people then don't correlate the two and the metric cm's seems to lose meaning. People say "so and so is only 193cm's!" and seem to disregard that it is six foot four inches in the old money. I realise humans and AFL players are getting larger, but 6'4" is not a small bloke.

The difference from a guy of 193 to 196 is one inch in height (just over) and I think that gets cast as being far more important than it is. Stating the obvious, people are different and a heavy-set guy with average reach for his height at 193cm may be able to be covered off very well by a long-limbed guy of 188cm who has an above average reach for his height.

Height is important for key positions, but it is not the only thing, and a few centimetres is not the be all and end all.
LongShortLegsManExperiment.png
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

The other issue with mature top ups, is that we are constantly needing to replace them.
Cordy hasn't got a lot of years left, we can "hope" that Van Es or Adams works out.
Wood hasn't got a lot of years left, we can "hope" that Sharman or someone can play that role.

Just means you are constantly using energy to chase the same positions.
Cordy will be 27 late October and has played 129 games. No reason a big man couldn't play into his early 30's.
 
I think there is a general tendency amongst the BF community to throw stats around on players that renders them meaningless, and height is the main offender in this instance. We have an Australian tendency to think weight in metric (kg's) and height in the old school imperial feet and inches, except when we type and we default to the easier metric of cm's which is what is listed online. I think people then don't correlate the two and the metric cm's seems to lose meaning. People say "so and so is only 193cm's!" and seem to disregard that it is six foot four inches in the old money. I realise humans and AFL players are getting larger, but 6'4" is not a small bloke.

The difference from a guy of 193 to 196 is one inch in height (just over) and I think that gets cast as being far more important than it is. Stating the obvious, people are different and a heavy-set guy with average reach for his height at 193cm may be able to be covered off very well by a long-limbed guy of 188cm who has an above average reach for his height.

Height is important for key positions, but it is not the only thing, and a few centimetres is not the be all and end all.


Very few of the best defenders are super tall. Harris Andrews is probably the only one that isn't just a gorilla stopper. McKay is pretty neat for a big guy too.
 
I used to say verses as a kid 😅


It's a homophone, that's a correct way to say it. Versus is legitimate English, verse is from a song or poem not a challenge. You can't "verse" someone but you can definitely have Collingwood versus Carlton.
 
Split the picks because we were trying to do both the Howard trade and the Hill trade. No trades, no pick splitting.

Impossible to know that. GWS might have approached us. Anyone that needs to justify that era of drafting as a win for the Saints obviously isn't ready to process the carnage we caused ourselves. It's years ago and the rebuild is still going when we'd topped up to challenge.
 
Annoying that the purple guy had a go at Miers in his column today. Hopefully the guy doesn't respond by coming out and kicking a bag tomorrow.


He's having a good season, don't know why he's going hard at him.
 
Younger players shorter games, we got a prime spot in Noosa, young list didn't have young families to miss out on etc. Short season left run in their legs. We also were used to not getting energy from crowd noise.
Anyway symbolically if we are in the Premiership business, symbolically this is the biggest game in over a decade. A game we can look back on and say that was the clear defining game
 
And imagine if that single player was Fischer McAsey who has now retired.

As for Saturday night, I think we'll win quite comfortably. Geelong struggling, we've started to get our mojo back.

Finals beckon - which may not please some on here.

Personally I'm looking forward to seeing Hill on one wing of the MCG and Wood on the other.


And imagine it wasn't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top