Prediction Who's going to be gone before 2024?

Who won't be on the Saints list in 2024?

  • Total voters
    94
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

Ricmel said:
Good exercise. I think with RTB as coach you have to think in terms of the type of players he favors - hard working role players. For me that puts Gresham and Billings firmly on the chopping board with the added bonus that there is probably some limited trade value attached to them.

There will be the usual culls of players just not expected to make it or have gone past their use by date - maybe MacKezie, Highmore, Connolly.
Click to expand...

I don't think its that he favours hard working role players, its more along the lines of , "If you are an ordinary player, i might give you a role to play within your abilities, and you'd better work hard at it ". He really likes his big stars with lots of ability but no team has 22 superstars.
 
SaintsSeptember said:
I don't think its that he favours hard working role players, its more along the lines of , "If you are an ordinary player, i might give you a role to play within your abilities, and you'd better work hard at it ". He really likes his big stars with lots of ability but no team has 22 superstars.
Click to expand...
Some don't have any. ☹
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Current leaderboard here

50+: Connolly (54), Gresham (54), Highmore (50)
45+: McKenzie (48)
40+: Bytel (42), Campbell (42)
35+:
30+: Jones (32)
25+:
20+:
15+: Allison (17), Membrey (17), Billings (16)
10+: Clark (14), Howard (14), Adams (10)
5+: Paton (9), Ross (6)
1+: Sharman (3), Coffield (2), Cordy (2), Hayes (2), Peris (2), Battle (1), Byrnes (1), Hill (1), Stocker (1), Wood (1)
 
bergholt said:
Current leaderboard here

50+: Connolly (54), Gresham (54), Highmore (50)
45+: McKenzie (48)
40+: Bytel (42), Campbell (42)
35+:
30+: Jones (32)
25+:
20+:
15+: Allison (17), Membrey (17), Billings (16)
10+: Clark (14), Howard (14), Adams (10)
5+: Paton (9), Ross (6)
1+: Sharman (3), Coffield (2), Cordy (2), Hayes (2), Peris (2), Battle (1), Byrnes (1), Hill (1), Stocker (1), Wood (1)
Click to expand...

Just saying, if there was a chance i was leaving my job and it was up to me to decide, what a bunch of other people thought wouldn't make a difference.
 
Can't access the poll in this dumb app but here's my Screw Kill Marry:

1- good trade only or keep
3- keep for depth
4- whatever RFA compo we can get
5- keep
6- trade or delist
7- keep
8- trade or keep
9- good trade only or keep
10 - keep
11 ‐ trade or keep
12 ‐ keep
13 ‐ good trade only or keep
14 ‐ keep
15 ‐ trade or delist
16 - keep
17 - keep
18 - keep
19 - good trade only or keep
20 - keep
21 - keep
22 - keep
23 ‐ trade or delist
25 - keep
26 - good trade only or keep
27 - keep
28 - trade or delist
29 - keep
30 - trade or keep
31 - keep
32 - keep
33 - trade or keep
34 - trade or delist
35 - good trade only or keep
36 - delist
37 - trade or delist
38 - delist
39 - keep
40 - keep
41 - keep
42 - keep
43 - keep
44 - keep
45 - keep
47 - keep

Yes, I would trade Steele, Marshall or Sinclair - for absolutely ripping deals that set us up for a decade.

Steele is at the lowest value of his career so not much chance of a good deal in which case he'd stay, pass on his captaincy and work of getting his best form back.

If we got a top shelf proven but not too old ruck to replace him as main ruck plus attractive picks, Marshall could move on. Otherwise he stays and takes brain enhancement medicine to help with disposal efficiency.

Silkclair would attract a decent price and it would have to be v good picks plus developing players with elite ceilings otherwise he stays and is given external leadership coaching.
 
Trade: Gresham, Howard
Trade for fringe players or delist: Billings, Bytel, Jones
Delist: Campbell, Connolly, McKenzie

We have a few rookies to promote and 3-4 picks in the draft, one spot for SSP and one for MSD.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

austinnn said:
Can't access the poll in this dumb app but here's my Screw Kill Marry:

1- good trade only or keep
3- keep for depth
4- whatever RFA compo we can get
5- keep
6- trade or delist
7- keep
8- trade or keep
9- good trade only or keep
10 - keep
11 ‐ trade or keep
12 ‐ keep
13 ‐ good trade only or keep
14 ‐ keep
15 ‐ trade or delist
16 - keep
17 - keep
18 - keep
19 - good trade only or keep
20 - keep
21 - keep
22 - keep
23 ‐ trade or delist
25 - keep
26 - good trade only or keep
27 - keep
28 - trade or delist
29 - keep
30 - trade or keep
31 - keep
32 - keep
33 - trade or keep
34 - trade or delist
35 - good trade only or keep
36 - delist
37 - trade or delist
38 - delist
39 - keep
40 - keep
41 - keep
42 - keep
43 - keep
44 - keep
45 - keep
47 - keep

Yes, I would trade Steele, Marshall or Sinclair - for absolutely ripping deals that set us up for a decade.

Steele is at the lowest value of his career so not much chance of a good deal in which case he'd stay, pass on his captaincy and work of getting his best form back.

If we got a top shelf proven but not too old ruck to replace him as main ruck plus attractive picks, Marshall could move on. Otherwise he stays and takes brain enhancement medicine to help with disposal efficiency.

Silkclair would attract a decent price and it would have to be v good picks plus developing players with elite ceilings otherwise he stays and is given external leadership coaching.
Click to expand...

That looks like a bottom out recipe. I think we want to rebuild on the fly like Port seem to be able to do. I can't see us cutting out feet off.
 
Remboy said:
As much as I like DMac he’s been injured for the last three years. Can’t see the point of keeping him.
Click to expand...


To me it's the calf that gets so many players. Pretty rare for guys to get right after they start to regularly go. It's the old man's career ender.
 
No point in sliding deck chairs around coz we're frustrated. Most of the guys people want to delist we will either get nothing for or a late 2nd or later pick with the exception of Gresh who may get us a late 1st rounder if we're very lucky.

If we lose Gresh, Connoly, Highmore, Dmack, Jones we probably only get a decent pick for Gresh. That would realistically leave us with 3 or 4 decent picks to have a crack at the draft, but we'll have 5 list spots to fill. From there we'd be looking at delisted free agents to fill the remaining spot
 
gringo2011 said:
To me it's the calf that gets so many players. Pretty rare for guys to get right after they start to regularly go. It's the old man's career ender.
Click to expand...

McKenzie was never robust i don't think.
He played his best footy last year , and pretty good the year before , 24 games in the two years.
He played 15 games the year before that, his most durable season.

The AFL should have let him share the list spot with Hannebury.
 
Ill
Add Hunter clark to this list
 
gringo2011 said:
That looks like a bottom out recipe. I think we want to rebuild on the fly like Port seem to be able to do. I can't see us cutting out feet off.
Click to expand...

It's hard to know what to do. We've tried rebuild through the draft (2012 - 2017), tried buying in some top end (Jones, Hill, Crouch) and tried holding on to players with potential. Port can do it because they are a well run club with a good identification and development program. St Kilda does not have that, any approach is a crap shoot.

Put a circle around King, Owens, Wilkie, NWM, Coffield, Sinclair, Marshall, Phillipou, Crouch, Steele, untrieds. For me just about everyone else is potentially on the table. If another club needs something we have - see what we can get.
 
Ricmel said:
It's hard to know what to do. We've tried rebuild through the draft (2012 - 2017), tried buying in some top end (Jones, Hill, Crouch) and tried holding on to players with potential. Port can do it because they are a well run club with a good identification and development program. St Kilda does not have that, any approach is a crap shoot.

Put a circle around King, Owens, Wilkie, NWM, Coffield, Sinclair, Marshall, Phillipou, Crouch, Steele, untrieds. For me just about everyone else is potentially on the table. If another club needs something we have - see what we can get.
Click to expand...

The Richo-build was doomed to failure because we kept getting spooked by outside influences and avoided actual development, the fact that NONE of the players from that era have come on is indicative enough. I've actually changed my way of thinking now that if we took Petracca and Bont instead, Bont would be a 2nd ruck half forward scrubber and Petracca would be on a cooking show somewhere after never getting his body right due to shocking conditioning while Billings would be Stevie J crossed with Nick Dal Santo for the Dogs.

I still think we need to actually keep going to the draft because if you look at every top line star in the league at least 80% of them are at their drafted club, they're rarely traded commodities. Trade out any of the scrubbers and keep churning the list while we have a coaching team and footy department who will embed the right attitudes and structures.

The only thing that irks me is that Riewoldt and Montagna were at the club until 2017, Lenny until 2014 and plenty more of the 09-10 era until that point, where was the on-field leadership showing the young guys how to go about it even if the coaches were useless?
 
Ricmel said:
It's hard to know what to do. We've tried rebuild through the draft (2012 - 2017), tried buying in some top end (Jones, Hill, Crouch) and tried holding on to players with potential. Port can do it because they are a well run club with a good identification and development program. St Kilda does not have that, any approach is a crap shoot.

Put a circle around King, Owens, Wilkie, NWM, Coffield, Sinclair, Marshall, Phillipou, Crouch, Steele, untrieds. For me just about everyone else is potentially on the table. If another club needs something we have - see what we can get.
Click to expand...

So just keep the cycle on repeat forever? We need the staff if they don't have them otherwise you just perpetuate the rebuild cycle forever. Good list management is about stockpiling talent. Collingwood have a very experienced list with only really good kids able to break in and a lot of really well chosen additions from other clubs.

We have a handful of regular players that were on our 2017 list. We have pretty much fully rebuilt the list since then and a lot of older players are not at the same level as the older Collingwood players.

We look more like Collingwood minus the elite experienced core and until we can create that level we will be a middler to bottom side. We look much more like North Melbourne on paper than Collingwood but they have more very young players that they are pumping games into. We didn't draft when they were because Lethlean traded out players for loose change and paid huge overs to bring in our mid generation that we'd stuffed up before he arrived.

We now have a weird list profile and still need to keep bringing in quality. The good news is that sides can still get into challenge mode early if they get things right.
 
Murraj1966 said:
The Richo-build was doomed to failure because we kept getting spooked by outside influences and avoided actual development, the fact that NONE of the players from that era have come on is indicative enough. I've actually changed my way of thinking now that if we took Petracca and Bont instead, Bont would be a 2nd ruck half forward scrubber and Petracca would be on a cooking show somewhere after never getting his body right due to shocking conditioning while Billings would be Stevie J crossed with Nick Dal Santo for the Dogs.

I still think we need to actually keep going to the draft because if you look at every top line star in the league at least 80% of them are at their drafted club, they're rarely traded commodities. Trade out any of the scrubbers and keep churning the list while we have a coaching team and footy department who will embed the right attitudes and structures.

The only thing that irks me is that Riewoldt and Montagna were at the club until 2017, Lenny until 2014 and plenty more of the 09-10 era until that point, where was the on-field leadership showing the young guys how to go about it even if the coaches were useless?
Click to expand...


Petracca did it at a shit Melbourne and Bont in a rebuilding Dogs. Hawks took O'Rourke and everyone thought that in a good system he'd blossom. Injury didn't help but at the end of the day Melbourne blew heaps of drafts as did the Tigers and both turned it around. I put up how Melbourne and Collingwood made out like bandits in the year we took Paddy. They ended up with multiple near elite talent. Same as Hawks, they did most of their three peat build over a few drafts.

At the end of the day we just didn't care about performance and just wanted to save money by not investing in the future. If they weren't aware that Trout seemed to be struggling at his job it says what their priorities were under Finnis. He was a champion of austerity. He wanted to pay down Moorabin quickly so closed the purse strings. Under Ratts we spent more but in a way that had zero focus. Guys like Lethlean who had no experience were given big money for ill defined roles with no experience. He got jobs for his mates regardless of their skill sets.
 
gringo2011 said:
Petracca did it at a s**t Melbourne and Bont in a rebuilding Dogs. Hawks took O'Rourke and everyone thought that in a good system he'd blossom. Injury didn't help but at the end of the day Melbourne blew heaps of drafts as did the Tigers and both turned it around. I put up how Melbourne and Collingwood made out like bandits in the year we took Paddy. They ended up with multiple near elite talent. Same as Hawks, they did most of their three peat build over a few drafts.

At the end of the day we just didn't care about performance and just wanted to save money by not investing in the future. If they weren't aware that Trout seemed to be struggling at his job it says what their priorities were under Finnis. He was a champion of austerity. He wanted to pay down Moorabin quickly so closed the purse strings. Under Ratts we spent more but in a way that had zero focus. Guys like Lethlean who had no experience were given big money for ill defined roles with no experience. He got jobs for his mates regardless of their skill sets.
Click to expand...
You’re blaming the wrong guy.
The debt was not due to Moorabbin, it was due to Seaford.
We blew $10mill on that joint.
$10mill we had to borrow.
Moorabbin has been paid for by donations and government funding.
Finnis was paying down the debt the idiot Frazer created.
Blame Frazer, everything that has happened over the last decade can be traced back to that spud.
 
sunny3193 said:
You’re blaming the wrong guy.
The debt was not due to Moorabbin, it was due to Seaford.
We blew $10mill on that joint.
$10mill we had to borrow.
Moorabbin has been paid for by donations and government funding.
Finnis was paying down the debt the idiot Frazer created.
Blame Frazer, everything that has happened over the last decade can be traced back to that spud.
Click to expand...


Still hamstrung our FD spending regardless. We were paying to abandon Seaford. Seaford was shit but I rather have been good there than spend 12 years being starved of quality FD staffing. The princesses that hated it were long gone before we got back to Moorabin. It could be years of missing finals still due to it. If you're flying on field it's a lot easier to get money to move.
 
gringo2011 said:
Still hamstrung our FD spending regardless. We were paying to abandon Seaford. Seaford was s**t but I rather have been good there than spend 12 years being starved of quality FD staffing. The princesses that hated it were long gone before we got back to Moorabin. It could be years of missing finals still due to it. If you're flying on field it's a lot easier to get money to move.
Click to expand...
Not arguing with your last thought.
I have a different view about Finnis, understanding that no CEO is perfect.
But he was just as hamstrung by Frazer as the rest of the crew.
If we are to be critical about Finnis and his $ focus, we need to put that into the context of the environment that he was gifted.
The problem with getting to that point where your last thought is reality is he had to rebuild a broken business.
Flying on the field is fine but 2009/2010 proved that success is transient and your business needs to be robust to meet more difficult times.
I suppose that’s more my point, we were broken in 2014.
Financially and spiritually.
Our flying on the field period was gone.
Choices were made to secure the business, then secure the long term future of the business.
Finnis did an amazing job to achieve both.
Particularly as he kept us relatively competitive over his tenure.
But now we are at that point where we need to address the areas we did not, could not, address earlier because we were focused on survival.
The areas that are of greatest, and consistent, importance to you.
That’s one reason why people are finding this year so frustrating.
We are still dealing with the effects of shoddy amateurs from more than a decade ago.
The upside is that decisions made over the last few years are still to bear fruit.
We have a development group that are professional.
We have adults in charge of the football, culture and standards.
As you have quite clearly stated, at a minimum RTB is forcing professionalism upon team, infrastructure and players.
What he cannot gift us is patience.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Prediction Who's going to be gone before 2024?

Similar threads

bergholt
  • Poll
Prediction Who will be off the list before 2025 starts?
2 3 4 5
Replies
100
Views
7K
Armitage2Riewoldt
Armitage2Riewoldt
Winmar2Lockett
News Lethers Gone
12 13 14 15 16
Replies
380
Views
19K
gringo2011
gringo2011
Hubnester
  • Locked
Votes Round 13, 2024: St.Kilda v Gold Coast
Replies
6
Views
531
The Punter
The Punter
austinnn
Prediction The Saints' Fans' Go Hard Go Early 2024 Prediction Thread
2
Replies
32
Views
4K
Ads734
A
Hubnester
Autopsy Round 13, 2024: St.Kilda v Gold Coast: #GrabGate2024
23 24 25 26 27
Replies
662
Views
20K
gringo2011
gringo2011
S
List Mgmt. 2024 Trade Thread - No.3
143 144 145 146 147
Replies
4K
Views
153K
Joffaboy
Joffaboy
bergholt
  • Poll
Prediction Predict the 2024 B&F
Replies
14
Views
804
Savage Kent
Savage Kent
Back
Top