Who will be closer to playing in finals end of 2016 season? Lions, StK or Melbourne

[cartel]

Think the Dees are a little bit ahead of us to be honest - but then again so they should be, they have been rebuilding for probably about a decade now. Expect them to rise a couple of places. If Goodwin is any good, I'd expect big improvement - I think Roos is holding them back

I think we will be similarly placed to this year, and 2017 will be when we make bigger gains. Still need players with pace and footskills.

Brisbane don't have enough key position talent, but had a terrible injury run last year and have a talented midfield.

 

[Dazb86]

Under the age of 23 at 1 April 2016.

Hogan, Viney, Tyson, Salem, Brayshaw, Petracca, Stretch, Bugg, Kent and Frost, although I really like Harmes.

Name the Saints group of ten that is superior (under the age of 23 at 1 April 2016).

You might rate those guys differently than I do.

Certain Stars - Hogan
Above average with potential to be stars - Brayshaw, Tyson and hopefully Petracca
Average/Above average AFL output - Viney, Salem
Average AFL output - Stretch, Bugg, Kent, Frost, Harmes

St Kilda's 10. Billings, Newmes, Dunstan, Acres, Longer, Bruce, McCartin, Lonie, Weller, Webster

Certain Stars -
Above Average with potential to be stars - Billings, Bruce and hopefully McCartin
Average/Above average - Newmes, Dunstan, Acres, Longer, Lonie
Average Afl output - Weller, Webster

That's how I see it anyway. The Saints also have a few guys that don't quite scrape under your under 23 guidelines like Carlisle, Steven, Roberton and Hickey etc.

 

[cotter101]

How is Beams relevant? Brisbane are just shit and easily have the worst list, coach and club culture out of the three teams. If Carlton weren't Carlton I'd be backing them for the spoon.

Your hate for us is clouding your judgment.

1. Brisbane
2. Saints
3. Melbourne

 

[Dazb86]

And that would be one more than the Saints young'uns who would warrant a tag based on past performance. Tyson should also become a very good player and Viney as well

Fair call I completely forgot about Tyson.

 

[carnthemlions]

After the addition of Carlisle, I think St Kilda is more likely to actually get close to playing finals. But- they're also the team most likely to go backward in 2016 if that makes sense. I don't see Melbourne going anywhere next year(in either direction). We're certainties to improve next season, the question is just to what extent.

 

[Tulip]

Brisbane > Saints >>> Melbourne

Brisbane were hit really hard by injuries this year. They'll surprise a few teams at the Gabba IMO.

Saints are building well. Could be a decent side with a few things going right.

Melbourne are a bit behind the others. I think they are held back by an outdated game plan a little bit as well.

I really don't understand this. We won half a game more than the Saints and three more than the Lions, but not only are we behind both we are significantly backwards?

If we were relying on veterans and there was a natural decline I would understand it, and no that isn't a shot at St Kilda, but we voluntarily delisted our only two players above the age of 29 this season. Its not like we're relying on youth either, with the exception of Hogan who is hardly your regulation young player, with our core being made up of Jones, Vince, Dunn and players in their 4th-7th years. The only two 'young players' that will be getting regular games are Brayshaw and Salem, with Petracca being an unknown quantity at this stage.

I'm not radically optimistic about us jagging a flag any time soon, but how is it that we're going to fall behind these two sides without a whimper going into 2016? The game plan is, I concede, unpopular - but the new coach is committed to a more attacking style and is being given the chance to implement it this season. He's inexperienced and it may backfire, but then the only coach that isn't inexperienced out of the lot of them is Roos who has won a flag and come within a goal of a second one (a stat you can twist both ways, in fairness to Worsfold).

My views on the other two sides are as follows. Brisbane really copped it hard in the injury department, but I'm not too convinced that the guys that went down were all of as much terrible importance as was suggested. Beams and Christensen stayed fit for most of the year, but Rockliff and Hanley didn't with each missing a couple of months, and those four are probably the real creators in the side. Bastinac will probably cover the loss of Redden with similar output, but nobody will cover the loss of one of their better prospects in Aish unless someone like Darcy Gardiner steps it up. Martin is a star, though there is a serious depth issue if he goes down. Walker will help straighten things up, and will probably ease the load on McStay and Close - though none of them are nailed on to be 40 goal a season forwards at any point. Bell will kick goals, Robinson will be good, Andrews and Taylor are both excellent young players, and they have Schache to come in as that pick two.

They look like a neat side on the up, but there's a bit of a dearth of young players of real quality coming through - and there are genuine question marks over the coaching and captaincy from both a results and cultural point of view. Whether they're right is another matter. but they'd want to prove their doubters wrong.

St Kilda looks a side with better young prospects, although you'd really have to have your head in the sand to suggest that their older players don't have a significant impact on results. They got them over the line against us in rd 13, but can 32 year olds teach 19 year olds composure and expect it to stick in teh short-term? Bruce kicked 50, Armitage and Steven both cemented themselves as very good extractors/accumulators, Dunstan has come straight in, Billings and Lonie know their way around like players that have been at the level for much longer, Carlisle looms as an excellent FB option etc. etc. There's a lot to be optimistic about, but I think the issue with how people rate the Saints is that a lot of their players get bunched together into groups. Ie. Billings/Dunstan/Acres as stars of the future when the latter hasn't shown much at AFL level, or McCartin/Goddard being a CHB/CHF combination for the future when neither has yet had enough time to produce enough of worth. Part of the issue with having brilliant players like Roo, Joey, Fisher and Dempster is that they simply can't be replaced seamlessly on the field or, in particular, off it. They can impart their wisdom for as long as they like, but there are no guarantees in this game aside from the what we already know.

St Kilda fans have every reason to be buoyed about their side, but I don't think too many of their young players have proven themselves able to put it altogether yet for one reason or another. That's not a criticism, just a word of caution from my perspective.

 

[Gosha]

St Kilda


Melbourne
Brisbane

 

[Trav 20]

You might rate those guys differently than I do.

Certain Stars - Hogan
Above average with potential to be stars - Brayshaw, Tyson and hopefully Petracca
Average/Above average AFL output - Viney, Salem
Average AFL output - Stretch, Bugg, Kent, Frost, Harmes

St Kilda's 10. Billings, Newnes, Dunstan, Acres, Longer, Bruce, McCartin, Lonie, Weller, Webster

Certain Stars -
Above Average with potential to be stars - Billings, Bruce and hopefully McCartin
Average/Above average - Newnes, Dunstan, Acres, Longer, Lonie
Average Afl output - Weller, Webster

That's how I see it anyway. The Saints also have a few guys that don't quite scrape under your under 23 guidelines like Carlisle, Steven, Roberton and Hickey etc.

Viney and Salem absolutely have the potential to be stars.

You include Bruce, who is already 23. We have McDonald, Gawn and vandenBerg, who are 23. So take Bruce out of your "Above Average with potential to be stars". That puts Hogan, Brayshaw, Tyson and Petracca (by your judgment) up against Billings and McCartin as top shelf talent.

You say that Carlisle, Steven and Roberton just miss the guideline. Carlisle and Roberton are 24 and Steven is 25.

Even a St.Kilda supporter in a post above yours admits our youth are "ahead".

Don't apply for the position of opposition analyst.

 

[aussierulesrules]

Fair call I completely forgot about Tyson.

I think you also forgot the guy on my left here, just quietly!

St Kilda's 10. Billings, Newmes, Dunstan, Acres, Longer, Bruce, McCartin, Lonie, Weller, Webster

There are apparently some at St Kilda who rate him higher than Paddy. I reckon he's equally as talented and versatile as Carlisle (but with much more leadership potential) and Essendon just got the equivalent of pick 5 for Jake.

 

[Periphery]

You might rate those guys differently than I do.

Certain Stars - Hogan
Above average with potential to be stars - Brayshaw, Tyson and hopefully Petracca
Average/Above average AFL output - Viney, Salem
Average AFL output - Stretch, Bugg, Kent, Frost, Harmes

St Kilda's 10. Billings, Newmes, Dunstan, Acres, Longer, Bruce, McCartin, Lonie, Weller, Webster

Certain Stars -
Above Average with potential to be stars - Billings, Bruce and hopefully McCartin
Average/Above average - Newmes, Dunstan, Acres, Longer, Lonie
Average Afl output - Weller, Webster

That's how I see it anyway. The Saints also have a few guys that don't quite scrape under your under 23 guidelines like Carlisle, Steven, Roberton and Hickey etc.

Your list doesn't work for the arbitrary date Trav set for the age restriction.

Newnes, Weller and Bruce are all already over 23 or will be by April 1 2016.

My list of 10 would be:
Billings, Dunstan, Acres, Longer, McKenzie, Sinclair, Webster, McCartin, Lonie, Goddard.

Players that missed out: Freeman, Membrey, Minchington, Ross, Templeton.

As for your ratings: I think you significantly underrate Billings and Webster.

Overall, I think the Saints have much better overall depth throughout the list than the Dees.

Viney and Salem absolutely have the potential to be stars.

You include Bruce, who is already 23. We have McDonald, Gawn and vandenBerg, who are 23. So take Bruce out of your "Above Average with potential to be stars". That puts Hogan, Brayshaw, Tyson and Petracca (by your judgment) up against Billings and McCartin as top shelf talent.

You say that Carlisle, Steven and Roberton just miss the guideline. Carlisle and Roberton are 24 and Steven is 25.

Even a St.Kilda supporter in a post above yours admits our youth are "ahead".

Don't apply for the position of opposition analyst.

How long have the Dees been rebuilding? How long have the Saints?

 

[Trav 20]

How long have the Dees been rebuilding? How long have the Saints?

Absolutely. I agree we've stuffed up time after time after time.

We should be ahead when one considers our draft picks. And we are in our quality core youth.

I just get sick of opposition supporters love in with the Saints youth when I fervently believe ours are superior. As they should be.

Although I don't agree with your "overall depth" comment. Your senior players are far better, but you must concede the time clock is ticking.

 

[aussierulesrules]

The thing that will largely determine how we go next year is how our group of 4 from the top 20 of the 2013 draft (one of the strongest of all time, by the looks of it) go. Largely due to injuries (and the fact Freeman wasn't at our club) we really didn't get a lot out of any of them last season, but if they all have a good preseason and are relatively injury free next year they all have the potential to really make an impact, after a 3rd preseason.

Billings averaged 20 possies per game last year, in spite of the fact he was playing almost exclusively forward and was playing with a foot stress injury and then he didn't play from round 9 onwards. He practically won a game off his own boot for us against WB (kicked 3 in the last, missed three more!) and is class personified. If he has a full enough preseason and is injury free, expect to see a lot more of him in the midfield. Even though he had been playing injured, we really missed his class and skill when he was out.

Dunstan started terrifically well in 2014 and was looking like being (by say 2016) every bit as good as say Tyson has ended up being for Melbourne, but his form has dropped right off since he injured his shoulder about 2/3 of the way through his first season and he played what may have been the whole season this year with a serious amount of pain and loss of mobility in his arm, as a result of that ongoing injury. Apparently he's just had a full reco on it and they found that something was pinching a nerve, or whatever, so hopefully he'll feel and play a lot better next year as a result of that very successful surgery. It shows how tough he is that he played with it for so much of 2014 and again this year.

Acres is also very talented and at 190cm could be our "tall mid" going forward. He has class and poise and has exceptional long distance running genes, plus decent speed. He knows how to find the ball and he can play forward, midfield and in defence and is also very strong overhead. He kept having niggling injuries at inopportune times this year though, which significantly reduced his chances of playing a decent number of games in a row for us. Really looking forward to seeing how he goes with a injury-free run. He has something special about him.

Then there's Freeman, who went top 10 in one of the strongest drafts for a reason. The main part of that reason is that he's a "running machine" with both seriously elite speed and also a big tank, which is very rare. Like a faster, fitter bigger version of Jack Steven, or Luke Shuey. Word is that we're very confident that his hammies will be no major concern going forward and that he doesn't need to change his running gait, or anything like that. Given his running abilities, he could already be one of the fittest on our list by the start of next season and as such could make an immediate impact. More midfield speed is something we could definitely do with.

We could easily enough go from not having gotten much from that group this year to getting an awful lot from them next year and if the older group are still chugging along as per usual, those 4 alone could make a hell of a difference to our team.

 

[Harris Specter]

Brisbane will easily account for these average sides like Saints and Melbourne next year. Expecting Bulldogs to fall back sharply down the ladder too.

 

[maxmustard]

My best guess is

1- Saints - They have a few older guns but I liked how they played last season. Exciting to watch and their basic skills are definitely better than us and Brisbane. Actually beat us twice - belted us once and deserved to win the one we threw away after pinching the lead.

2 Melbourne - Slowly improved beyond a total farce side but still played some rank stuff. Every few weeks though we played pretty good footy then would follow it up with garbage. Has to improve next season mainly for my sake. Hogan hype too and all that. Jack Watts.

3 Brisbane - Has no forward line really and the games I watched I couldn't tell what their game plan was. When you can't see what your team is trying to even do its a worry (cough cough Neeld). Plus side I really rate their midfield, have a good ruckman in SME I don't think their list should be in spoon territory. Coach appears shithouse though so least likely of 3 IMO.

 

[ShooterMcGavin8]

Lions and Demons have tough fixtures for lower ranked teams

1. Saints

Tie. Brisbane - Melbourne

 

[aussierulesrules]

My best guess is

1- Saints - They have a few older guns but I liked how they played last season. Exciting to watch and their basic skills are definitely better than us and Brisbane.

Except when kicking for goal! I'd hate to know how many times last year we were either well on top for a chunk of the game, or at least highly competitive with a genuinely good side, but then kicked 1 goal 6 during that period (we did that a number of times), or 2 goals 8, or once we even went 3 goals 13 for about a half! Our conversion alone cost us wins, especially against North late in the year down in Tassie, when we dominated the first half, but only led by 20 at half time, when it so easily could have been 50 or more and they overran us in the 2nd half, because we left the door wide open.

If we stayed the same in all other areas but just kicked for goal like an average team we could win 3 more games next year (we lost 3 this year by under 10 points, plus that North one and the Geelong draw).

 

[Saintt]

We have a much better draw than Melbourne which will be the difference IMO.

 

[Dazb86]

Viney and Salem absolutely have the potential to be stars.

You include Bruce, who is already 23. We have McDonald, Gawn and vandenBerg, who are 23. So take Bruce out of your "Above Average with potential to be stars". That puts Hogan, Brayshaw, Tyson and Petracca (by your judgment) up against Billings and McCartin as top shelf talent.

You say that Carlisle, Steven and Roberton just miss the guideline. Carlisle and Roberton are 24 and Steven is 25.

Even a St.Kilda supporter in a post above yours admits our youth are "ahead".

Don't apply for the position of opposition analyst.

Disagree with Viney and Salem becoming stars. Both will
probably be average/above average players who have the odd day out. As a comparison from my own side I'd have Wallis and Johannisen on the same catergory as those two.

Mate I just did it from birth dates in 92 and over. I'm not that invested in this thread to pick out who was born after April.

Just seems like you rate your players higher than I do. That's fair enough. I'm sure we'd disagree about Bulldogs players.

 

[TwentyNine]

Saints could make finals next year (though probably not), after that it's fairly even, Brisbane arguably have more talent on the list, but don't have it spread well over the ground. I'd say both clubs are 2-3 year away minimum unless some drastic moves are made.

 

[gavaniacono]

In the interests of good coaching and good exciting footy, let's hope it's the saints.

 

[pOleK]

Melbourne's young midfielders have shown significantly more than the Saints in my opinion and they still have Petracca to come into that, add to that a couple of top ten picks this year and I think the depth is getting there.

If good midfield depth is what makes a good side great, then why are we not mentioned to increase like a side of Melbourne.

I really don't understand this. We won half a game more than the Saints and three more than the Lions, but not only are we behind both we are significantly backwards?

If we were relying on veterans and there was a natural decline I would understand it, and no that isn't a shot at St Kilda, but we voluntarily delisted our only two players above the age of 29 this season. Its not like we're relying on youth either, with the exception of Hogan who is hardly your regulation young player, with our core being made up of Jones, Vince, Dunn and players in their 4th-7th years. The only two 'young players' that will be getting regular games are Brayshaw and Salem, with Petracca being an unknown quantity at this stage.

I'm not radically optimistic about us jagging a flag any time soon, but how is it that we're going to fall behind these two sides without a whimper going into 2016? The game plan is, I concede, unpopular - but the new coach is committed to a more attacking style and is being given the chance to implement it this season. He's inexperienced and it may backfire, but then the only coach that isn't inexperienced out of the lot of them is Roos who has won a flag and come within a goal of a second one (a stat you can twist both ways, in fairness to Worsfold).

My views on the other two sides are as follows. Brisbane really copped it hard in the injury department, but I'm not too convinced that the guys that went down were all of as much terrible importance as was suggested. Beams and Christensen stayed fit for most of the year, but Rockliff and Hanley didn't with each missing a couple of months, and those four are probably the real creators in the side. Bastinac will probably cover the loss of Redden with similar output, but nobody will cover the loss of one of their better prospects in Aish unless someone like Darcy Gardiner steps it up. Martin is a star, though there is a serious depth issue if he goes down. Walker will help straighten things up, and will probably ease the load on McStay and Close - though none of them are nailed on to be 40 goal a season forwards at any point. Bell will kick goals, Robinson will be good, Andrews and Taylor are both excellent young players, and they have Schache to come in as that pick two.

They look like a neat side on the up, but there's a bit of a dearth of young players of real quality coming through - and there are genuine question marks over the coaching and captaincy from both a results and cultural point of view. Whether they're right is another matter. but they'd want to prove their doubters wrong.

St Kilda looks a side with better young prospects, although you'd really have to have your head in the sand to suggest that their older players don't have a significant impact on results. They got them over the line against us in rd 13, but can 32 year olds teach 19 year olds composure and expect it to stick in teh short-term? Bruce kicked 50, Armitage and Steven both cemented themselves as very good extractors/accumulators, Dunstan has come straight in, Billings and Lonie know their way around like players that have been at the level for much longer, Carlisle looms as an excellent FB option etc. etc. There's a lot to be optimistic about, but I think the issue with how people rate the Saints is that a lot of their players get bunched together into groups. Ie. Billings/Dunstan/Acres as stars of the future when the latter hasn't shown much at AFL level, or McCartin/Goddard being a CHB/CHF combination for the future when neither has yet had enough time to produce enough of worth. Part of the issue with having brilliant players like Roo, Joey, Fisher and Dempster is that they simply can't be replaced seamlessly on the field or, in particular, off it. They can impart their wisdom for as long as they like, but there are no guarantees in this game aside from the what we already know.

St Kilda fans have every reason to be buoyed about their side, but I don't think too many of their young players have proven themselves able to put it altogether yet for one reason or another. That's not a criticism, just a word of caution from my perspective.

Bit hard for someone like Gardiner to step it up to fill a void in Aish when both players play a different position.

 

[Tulip]

Disagree with Viney and Salem becoming stars. Both will
probably be average/above average players who have the odd day out. As a comparison from my own side I'd have Wallis and Johannisen on the same catergory as those two.

Mate I just did it from birth dates in 92 and over. I'm not that invested in this thread to pick out who was born after April.

Just seems like you rate your players higher than I do. That's fair enough. I'm sure we'd disagree about Bulldogs players.

You're welcome to your opinion, but I'm absolutely begging you to do some research before you state it. Please watch these two play a couple of games.

 

[TwentyNine]

Disagree with Viney and Salem becoming stars. Both will
probably be average/above average players who have the odd day out.

I suspect you are going to be enormously surprised in the space of the next 3-5 years.

 

[gillo94]

Viney and Salem absolutely have the potential to be stars.

You include Bruce, who is already 23. We have McDonald, Gawn and vandenBerg, who are 23. So take Bruce out of your "Above Average with potential to be stars". That puts Hogan, Brayshaw, Tyson and Petracca (by your judgment) up against Billings and McCartin as top shelf talent.

You say that Carlisle, Steven and Roberton just miss the guideline. Carlisle and Roberton are 24 and Steven is 25.

Even a St.Kilda supporter in a post above yours admits our youth are "ahead".

Don't apply for the position of opposition analyst.

Salem is the question mark. Didn't really impress great deal in his second year. Is a skilful mid-forward so hopefully can step up next season

 

[Dazb86]

I suspect you are going to be enormously surprised in the space of the next 3-5 years.

I hope so. Just don't see it at the moment. Salem was showing glimpses of it last pre-season with good ball use. Vineys best attribute is his grit and determination. Think he's pretty vanilla outside of that.

Don't get me wrong I think they'll both have long careers and will be solid players. Just don't see the star factor.

*I should clarify by saying stars I mean players capable of multiple All Australian gigs.