Saints trade rating

[mad saint guy]

they gave us a B yet predicted we'd go even worse next season?
right...

I think just about everyone's bottom four prediction will be Gold Coast, St Kilda, Brisbane and Carlton again.

Gold Coast are royally screwed. Just about a lock for the spoon.

We are relying on a potentially cooked mid to improve us as well as that natural improvement we were counting on this year.

McGovern and Newman will improve Carlton and getting Docherty back is huge. I'd like to think we have them covered but they now have a pretty good group of kids and better veterans than we have. A young core of Cripps, Curnow, Dow, Walsh, Petrevski-Seton, Mackay, Weitering, McGovern and Marchbank is pretty exciting and Murphy, Kruezer, Docherty and Simpson are a solid group of leaders. Where they fall over is that they have no depth and are still carrying an awful lot of plodders on the list.

So I do agree that we should finish ahead of Carlton again but they have the potential to overtake us if they get a good run with injuries. Then most the others around the bottom half of the ladder simply should have us covered. The Bulldogs have a more talented group than us. Essendon have added Shiel and get Daniher back which should see them in the 8. Fremantle have recruited a forward line overnight. North have added 4 best 22 players. Adelaide surely can't get any worse than this year. Port could slide after losing so much outside run but Burton and Mayes are solid recruits and you wouldn't think they'd fall to the bottom four. Brisbane are the others who we could overtake but there certainly seems to be a good vibe about that club and they've got some young stars who are rapidly improving.

My guess for the 2019 ladder would be something like this

1 - Hawthorn
2 - West Coast
3 - Melbourne
4 - Richmond
5 - Collingwood
6 - Essendon
7 - Fremantle
8 - North Melbourne

9 - Geelong
10 - GWS
11 - Sydney
12 - Adelaide
13 - Port Adelaide
14 - Bulldogs
15 - St Kilda
16 - Brisbane
17 - Carlton
18 - Gold Coast

[Joffa Burns]

Mark would be a solid C

Scored a former AA gun who is past his best but should still add value on match day and training.

Second pick up was a fringe player at his club but possesses some qualities we lack being speed and decent kick.

Traded a fringe ruckman.

Most importantly we gave up little for these additions.

Largely irrelevant when it came to any high end talent as the players seek success over extra cash.

Supporters have been hearing about being aggressive in trades and FA from the club, but it’s very hard when your on field season was so poor and there is little upside on the horizon.

[groupie1]

F

No A grader

No significant free agent

Nothing funky

Gave up too much in the Hickey trade

A ridiculous shuffle from 28 to 36 and 46 for some far fetched reason

Watched North Melbourne of all clubs go streets ahead

Essentially didnt deliver on any promise of being super aggressive in this trade period for the second year running and going to leave it up to kids and chance.

Shithouse

North traded themselves out of the draft for a few handy players... I think they f***ed the trade period big time

[st.byron]

We got an elite midfielder set to produce more elite form
We got an upcoming mid gun about to blossom
Our rucks are stronger by having got rid of Hickey
We got the highest draft picks possible

A

Parkey doesn’t realise you’re taking the piss

[samuraisaint]

We couldn't afford to sell the farm to get Shiel anyway, pure and simple. The 'Dogs did to get Boyd and it paid off handsomely, good for them, and the Tigers have a free kick at it with Tom courtesy of their Premiership.
We need to build a team around four or five A graders.
Can't believe the Suns have three picks in the top ten AGAIN - another compromised draft. Sheesh.

[dragit]

Fox Sports gave us a B. Who said D and F?!

Ted right again...and I'm apparantly too positive. Lol.

====================

Brad Johnson’s predicted ladder position: 17th

Nick Dal Santo’s predicted ladder position: 17th

Grade: B

So let me get this straight, we just had a horrendous year winning only 4 games and finishing 16th… and after a really successful trade period and a bunch of players that are talked up as being ready to "take the next step" we are set to finish 17th?

I'm interested to know where we would finish if we'd had a poor trade period?

Baring in mind that Gold Coast have essentially started from scratch - with 8 of their top 10 players from 2015 no longer on the list.

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

For starters, this thread was solely about the trade period and the rating, not a review of the entire club or its 2020 plan or a prediction on our 2019 ladder position or its history from the days at the Junction Oval.

Again, some start rambling on about these things because theg can't accept we had a thereabouts B rating trade period. We had a good trade period.

Ladder predictions are pointless at this time of year also. They should only be taken seriously after the pre season games.

[HitTheBoundary]

List management is looking better.

The delistings were pretty spot on.

Trading was a bit blah but we are on the nose so no one would come.

We have to nail the draft.

[dragit]

We've lost a good ruckmen and now have Longer as our #1…

We've rolled the dice on long term deals for a couple of injury prone players, we have no 2nd rounder next year which could be a very good pick.

We couldn't move on any of the players who we shopped around to improve our poor draft hand.

Having pick 4 doesn't come about through astute management, it's an indictment on a coach and club who have promised finals for 2 years running. One last gasp win less against GC and we would have pick 2 and richo would be sacked already.


C-

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

AFL Website: Rating: 6/10
Another B

[dragit]

AFL Website: Rating: 6/10
Another B

When is 60% a B?

You need help.

[takeaway]

Delisted around one fifth of the list, brought in experience and leadership with Hannebery for reasonable cost, Kent has pace and good around goals, risky but could be a steal as he cost nothing.

Draft position improved, retained pick 4, shrewd trading to get 36 & 46 for 28 in - apparently picks 25-50 are about the same quality, we now have 3 inside 50, plus 36 & 46 will improve due to father/son/academy selections.

B-

If we had nabbed Shiel - C+, as the way it panned out with GWS ending up having enough cap space to retain Shiel - they therefore refused to budge and Dildoro had to give 2 first rounders, too much for Shiel. Glad he didn't nominate us as it turned out. There was pain in Dildoro's face when he was interviewed - good to see.

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

Great post Takeaway.

[SydneySainter]

The rating of 6/10 was pretty apt. Not bad, not good, just average.

Brought two players cheaply (one of who is on a big contract though) who should at least improve our list a little and if they get their body right, could be a steal. But that's a very big if!

But, was this enough to justify more talks of "aggressive" trading? We still didn't land a genuine A-grader to help our deficiency of star talent, especially in the midfield and our inability to land star players, despite our ability to outbid most other rivals is becoming a real problem.

Despite what Finnis and co. have tried to tell us, we are not a destination club by any stretch.

Therefore, relatively average result.

[desertsaint]

AFL Website: Rating: 6/10
Another B

again i would've loved you as a teacher.

[cwrcyn]

The trend of players only wanting to go to clubs higher on the ladder is growing yearly. When you're near the bottom, you're up against it. Pretty simple. So, our trade period has to put within that context. No point ranting and raving at our performance during trade period. The fact is, we did the best we could under the circumstances. Our current fate can be traced back to the last years of Ross Lyon, and the wreckage left by Chris Pelchen, not by the past three or four years.

[saynta]

I will stick with a B.

Got a former AA player for a net cost of 200 grand per year and a goal kicking mid/forward for next to nothing.

Plus we got back into rounds 2 and 3 of the draft.

Didn't lose anyone of value after being told Billings, Steven, Acres and Gresham all wanted out.

Put that up against all the players wanting out of the other 17 clubs and we can't be all that bad.

[ss1986]

In isolation, our trading might be good enough for a B- or C rating.

You need to consider it in the broader context of what we WANTED and NEEDED to do.

To that end, it's a complete and utter failure, no matter what the Plant says.

[SydneySainter]

The trend of players only wanting to go to clubs higher on the ladder is growing yearly. When you're near the bottom, you're up against it. Pretty simple. So, our trade period has to put within that context. No point ranting and raving at our performance during trade period. The fact is, we did the best we could under the circumstances. Our current fate can be traced back to the last years of Ross Lyon, and the wreckage left by Chris Pelchen, not by the past three or four years.

I agree with the most part, except for the last three to four years.

Re-signing Richo in 2016 has also played a part and earlier this year when Finnis declared that we were a destination club just shows the nativity and arrogance of the club as to where they thought they were at.

[Scollop]

For starters, this thread was solely about the trade period and the rating, not a review of the entire club or its 2020 plan or a prediction on our 2019 ladder position or its history from the days at the Junction Oval.

Again, some start rambling on about these things because theg can't accept we had a thereabouts B rating trade period. We had a good trade period.

Ladder predictions are pointless at this time of year also. They should only be taken seriously after the pre season games.

Hey wayne,

Can yo do a thread about the health of the grass on the oval at Moorabbin

Promise not to talk about ladder position this year or next year and just focus on the look of the lawn

The club is sweeping this year's rubbish finish under the carpet and hoping that we become competitive again in 2019, but Stuv's worst fears will be realised around mid season when the club announces a full rebuild. Maybe we should take Max King

[Shaggy]

In isolation, our trading might be good enough for a B- or C rating.

You need to consider it in the broader context of what we WANTED and NEEDED to do.

To that end, it's a complete and utter failure, no matter what the Plant says.

We needed to keep pick 4 and he needs to be a champion.

Wingard is not a champion. Last year you were banging on about Watts.

Generally our best players have come from the draft and this year's draft at the top end is considered special.

[dragit]

So, our trade period has to put within that context.

Our current fate can be traced back to the last years of Ross Lyon, and the wreckage left by Chris Pelchen, not by the past three or four years.

The most important context is how we've done compared to the other clubs, particularly ones around us on the ladder.

Blaming Ross Lyon and pelchan for our 2018 trade period is just sad TBH. Nearing a decade since Ross had any say on our list.

[chico2001]

At this stage I will rate it as a D.

Hannebery will take the tagger which will free up Jack Steven to have a free run for 60% of a game.

Not convinced about Kent and pick 4 was ours because we finished 16th. Lethlean didn't get pick 4 for us, we earnt that pick by winning 4 games FFS. Whatever they do with this pick, he or they will have to end up being very good very players- no excuses.

Ruck stocks have not improved, all we did was save some money by releasing Hickey. The jury is still out on his ability compared to Longers.

Got rid of some coaches including one who was AFL assistant coach of the year in 2016 I think from memory and he was snapped up in 20 minutes by a finals club.


Don't compare to other clubs, look at us right here and right now....a D.....all the way.

[ss1986]

In isolation, our trading might be good enough for a B- or C rating.

You need to consider it in the broader context of what we WANTED and NEEDED to do.

To that end, it's a complete and utter failure, no matter what the Plant says.

We needed to keep pick 4 and he needs to be a champion.

Wingard is not a champion. Last year you were banging on about Watts.

Generally our best players have come from the draft and this year's draft at the top end is considered special.

Last year I WAS banging on about Jack Watts. And I still believe that he would have been a more than adequate player to help us transition between half back and half forward.

[chico2001]

Have got some extra picks but they are way back and no real indicator of what you will get. The club needed to be smarter and get a couple of GOPs from finals clubs. Just one more would have kept the wolves at bay. It may still happen!!!