Jack McCrae

[B.M]

I’d rather take his Salary and give up FA

The money means nothing to us, we have the second most money to spend in the AFL

[The_Dud]

I’d rather take his Salary and give up FA

The money means nothing to us, we have the second most money to spend in the AFL

*except for Battle

[saintsRrising]

None

Why?

Because by taking on his full contract we get him for peanuts. It becomes a salary dump for the Doggies.

If the Doggies have to pay him out, or pay part of his salary, then the pick we have to give them becomes a much more costly affair.

We have heaps of salary cap that has to be spent.

We use it on MacRae for three years, and then we have the money to pay our new draftees when they will be up for new contracts.

[Scollop]

We have heaps of salary cap that has to be spent.

We use it on MacRae for three years

I get it. The accountant has taken over the club (i.e SOS and his calculator). Seems little regard to whether Mcrae is going to give value for money in year 1...or if you get any decent output in year 2 or 3 of that contract.

Also, Ross Lyon's accountant will be happy if we make 8th or 9th spot in 2025, because I'm guessing the 'career' coach will get an extension.

[Scollop]

We have heaps of salary cap that has to be spent.

Spend it on Steele, Wilkie, Marshall and Sinclair.

If you're that desperate to spend TPP give it to these guys who deserve it

[B.M]

Battle wanted to leave

He had a massive contract offer from the saints

Did you want to offer him 1.2-1.5
That’s top 20 in the AFL money

He’s not even top 5 at StK

[Sanctorum]

Crikey Scollop, correct me if I'm wrong but I'm starting to get the distinct impression that you don't agree with St Kilda recruiting Jack Macrae!

Just to ease your mind, look at it this way, he is merely replacing another ageing midfielder in Brad Crouch, which should have not the slightest impact on the prospects of the exciting youngsters vying for midfield spots in 2025 and beyond.

This debate is a molehill, not a mountain........

I'm not saying that there's zero possibility that there will be some positives* in bringing him across, but I seriously see it as a cop out from recruiters and our list managers.

They're playing it safe and trying to stay afloat instead of sticking to a longer term strategy that totally ignores where you finish on the ladder. They're trying to stay competitive around 7th-12th on the ladder instead of building the list for the longer term.

I get it. It's people's careers at stake and they're desperate. I just don't see Mcrae having an impact for more than 12 months. I'm dead against bringing in a 30 year old on a 3 year contract (unless he's in super form or he's a superstar of the game).

* It would be interesting to put up a list of the pros and cons. e.g some Pros. 1. He wants to come to us. 2. He is experienced and he's generally shown good durability. 3. He's not currently injured so could have a very good start to 2025. 4. He brings across valuable footy ip from another club. 5. He seems to be a decent person

e.g. some Cons: 1. Leg speed. 2. Best footy is past him. 3. Older players and especially inside mids tend to drop off in form dramatically. 3. His age could mean once he starts sustaining injuries, they're harder for older blokes to recover from. 4. He takes a spot on the list that could have gone on a rookie who is picked up by another club and potentially becomes a good long term asset. 5. He takes time away from the middle for our guys like Clark, Windhager, Dow and others who showed very good signs in 2024.

As you know Scollop, initially I was not at all in favour of Macrae coming to St Kilda, but if we had known at the time that Brad Crouch was going to quit footy because of his chronic knee problem, then that made a lot of sense to replace him with someone of the same, if not better, calibre, bearing in mind that Macrae is a big unit at 192 cm.

There certainly are a lot of pros and cons about Macrae, but I fundamentally disagree with the notion that you are so adamant about :

They're playing it safe and trying to stay afloat instead of sticking to a longer term strategy that totally ignores where you finish on the ladder. They're trying to stay competitive around 7th-12th on the ladder instead of building the list for the longer term.

That's simply not the case at all, because wouldn't you agree that it's a positive thing to have someone with Macrae's experience help develop the midfield craft of the younger players. Nor will this in any way alter the long term list development strategy enunciated by the club.

All of the long term successful teams have more than one old gun to marshall their midfield forces, St Kilda has just one in Jack Steele.

I also dispute your belief that this decision is a cop out by the recruiters and list managers.

The highly regarded Simon Dalrymple was brought in at the start of this season as a fresh face "talent identification and player movement manager", following many years at a number of clubs. At Western Oval he was a key figure in the development of the Footscray list leading up to their 2016 premiership.

I'm quite confident that overall Macrae is a positive addition to the St Kilda list.

[magnifisaint]

Battle wanted to leave

He had a massive contract offer from the saints

Did you want to offer him 1.2-1.5
That’s top 20 in the AFL money

He’s not even top 5 at StK

I'd much rather have Barrass. What are Hawthorn going to pay him given they are paying Battle 900k a year.

[SAINT-LEE]

I’d rather take his Salary and give up FA

The money means nothing to us, we have the second most money to spend in the AFL

*except for Battle

He was a B grade player, good, needed and valued. We offered what we reckon he's worth but to prove we wanted him to stay we increased our bid more than the Hawks. It's called negotiations.

Stop trying to present Battle as a victim. If he wanted to stay he would have, he thinks he will get a grand final elsewhere. So be it.

[SinCitySainter]

If, as is currently being reported, the Dogs want pick 24 for Macrae, we should be distancing ourselves from the deal straight away.
Let Macrae know that we are willing to deal for him but not for silly draft capital which would hinder our future.
Macrae should be worth no more than a third rounder to a club in our position.
I personally wouldn't do it for that either but that is just my opinion.

[Moods]

Jack McRae is apparently a great bloke, a great trainer and has been in 3-4 AA teams ( I’m too lazy to google) but he is an elite player. Yes, he’s old, but if it costs us very little in terms of draft picks then I have come around to the idea. Crouch gone and Ross, we need a tough quality mid to help out on the inside. It’s a tick from me

[B.M]

Future pick

Do not trade out of this draft at all

[Teflon]

Only deadbeat brain dead flogs don’t get the McRae move it’s a superb move by the club
You need experience around kids or you end up like North
We have some real dumb twits on this site
We’ll pay McRae full salary (probably front end it) and give kick 43 ….where do I sign ??
Bevo has stuffed him around playing on a HFF…he ain’t that - he’s an inside mid specialist who is decent overhead and has a neat kick into fwd 50
Durable with probably another 3 years in him
He replaces a Crouch or Ross and takes some heat off Steel
It’s a no brainer except for the regular smooth brained on here…

[Scollop]

Durable with probably another 3 years in him

Teflon has been posting all year about how important it was for the team to keep playing the kids...."get that top 5 draft pick"... at one stage he wanted a total clean out. "Trade the lot of 'em"

Now all of a sudden he thinks it's a superb move to bring in a 30 year old... classic brown nose behaviour Good strategy you say Teflon ... Why stop at one 30 year old? Let's bring in a few of them

We are not fkn North Melbourne. Hunter Clark is into his 7th year of football. We have Hill, Wood, Marshall and Steele in the middle along with Zak Jones.

You need emerging leaders. Hawthorn exported their 30 year olds from their engine room to fast track the development of Worpel, Day, Nash and Newcombe...they didn't import a 30 year old who was struggling to keep his spot in the seniors.

We already have enough leaders in all parts of the ground.

Laughable that St Kilda...who scraped into finals 2023 and was knocked out first week...then finishes 12th in 2024...AND is looking to recruit a bloke that might have 2-3 years of footy left.

Here's the key thing to remember about the footballer we want to bring in for 2025. Mcrae in 2024 was a shadow of the player from 2023 and no where near his AA form. That's who we're recruiting. Not the All Australian from 2019, or 2020 or 2021.

I personally don't think we are ready to be a contender. I think if you keep sacrificing the future for the now, you're destined to stay irrelevant as a football club for a long time to come.

[B.M]

Losing like North and WC and Rich this season

Is how you become irrelevant

Winning 11 games is nor irrelevant

Can’t just play kids, they get flogged when that happens

Do you think 31yo Brad Hill should’ve got a 3 year deal? - he was underwhelming this season

[Scollop]

Losing like North and WC and Rich this season

Is how you become irrelevant

Winning 11 games is nor irrelevant

Can’t just play kids, they get flogged when that happens

Do you think 31yo Brad Hill should’ve got a 3 year deal? - he was underwhelming this season

re Hill. No! 3 years is not prudent imo. Hill started the year strongly, but his influence seemed to fade significantly towards the second half of the year. I hope he was carrying an injury because as you say...he was underwhelming
https://www.saintsational.net/viewtopic ... 6#p2070996

You become irrelevant by being the only team to NOT win a Premiership in over 50 years. AND struggling to move up the ladder and sustain consecutive finals appearances in the last decade.

Hawks lost their first 5 games and then at round 15...they were 8 wins 7 losses. They wouldn't have improved and made finals this year if Tom Mitchell, Jaeger O'Meara and Liam Sheils were still on their list.

At the start of the 2024 season, Brad Crouch and Seb Ross were considered integral to our midfield mix. Preseason training and strategies would have largely been planned to use these 2 experienced players. Brad played in rd 1. We lost. Seb played in 13 of our first 15 matches. By round 15, St Kilda were 5 wins and 10 losses.

Our kids stepped up and it seems we did not need the oldies. In fact the team performed better without them once the midfield group was settled and once they knew their roles. Clark and Dow accepted responsibility and performed admirably.

What annoys me is generalisation and cliches. We need to stick to specifics and acknowledge not only the fact that Mcrae has dropped off in pace and dropped off in output and influence, but we also must acknowledge our current listed players.

I'm confident that the midfield group will keep improving. Especially with Windy getting a clear run injury free

[Scollop]

B.M,

Let's assume we've recruited Mcrae and both Mcrae and Marcus Windhager are fit and healthy at the start of 2025.

Who would you prefer getting a dominant midfield role?

Personally, I think it's vital for Windy's development that he is given opportunity to practice his craft as a mid. He's not just a run with tagger imo, although we've seen how competent he is in this role. I don't believe we've seen his full potential as far as his ability to win clearances.

[Sanctorum]

B.M,

Let's assume we've recruited Mcrae and both Mcrae and Marcus Windhager are fit and healthy at the start of 2025.

Who would you prefer getting a dominant midfield role?

Personally, I think it's vital for Windy's development that he is given opportunity to practice his craft as a mid. He's not just a run with tagger imo, although we've seen how competent he is in this role. I don't believe we've seen his full potential as far as his ability to win clearances.

You personify the proverbial "old dog witb a bone" on this topic Scollop

You can rave on about this for the rest of the off season but fact is that Jack Macrae will be wearing the RWB jumper in 2025, so maybe you should do what all old dogs do, bury this well-chewed bone and dig it back up if your dire predictions turn out to be true!

You will either be proved right or wrong, it should make for an interesting byplay next season....can't wait!

[B.M]

Whoever is playing better

[takeaway]

Losing like North and WC and Rich this season

Is how you become irrelevant

Winning 11 games is nor irrelevant

Can’t just play kids, they get flogged when that happens

Do you think 31yo Brad Hill should’ve got a 3 year deal? - he was underwhelming this season

re Hill. No! 3 years is not prudent imo. Hill started the year strongly, but his influence seemed to fade significantly towards the second half of the year. I hope he was carrying an injury because as you say...he was underwhelming
https://www.saintsational.net/viewtopic ... 6#p2070996

You become irrelevant by being the only team to NOT win a Premiership in over 50 years. AND struggling to move up the ladder and sustain consecutive finals appearances in the last decade.

Hawks lost their first 5 games and then at round 15...they were 8 wins 7 losses. They wouldn't have improved and made finals this year if Tom Mitchell, Jaeger O'Meara and Liam Sheils were still on their list.

At the start of the 2024 season, Brad Crouch and Seb Ross were considered integral to our midfield mix. Preseason training and strategies would have largely been planned to use these 2 experienced players. Brad played in rd 1. We lost. Seb played in 13 of our first 15 matches. By round 15, St Kilda were 5 wins and 10 losses.

Our kids stepped up and it seems we did not need the oldies. In fact the team performed better without them once the midfield group was settled and once they knew their roles. Clark and Dow accepted responsibility and performed admirably.

What annoys me is generalisation and cliches. We need to stick to specifics and acknowledge not only the fact that Mcrae has dropped off in pace and dropped off in output and influence, but we also must acknowledge our current listed players.

I'm confident that the midfield group will keep improving. Especially with Windy getting a clear run injury free

So you don't want Macrae who you believe is too old and has dropped off the pace, yet your plan is to aim to contend in 3-4 years, when our current best players - Sinclair, Marshall, Steele, Wilkie will be older than Macrae is now, and more likely than not past their best?

Doesn't make sense. Or are you arguing to do a Hawthorn, and trade out one or two of the players mentioned while they have draft value, and get some more young players?

We've lost a couple of experienced midfielders, and imo Macrae will help not hinder the developing younger players - who will get games if they are good enough. Maybe your real concern is Macrae may take Dow's spot?

[B.M]

Our midfield is our weakness - as Ross consistently says

Admirable performances don’t get it done

[bigcarl]

On reflection, I’m happy with the addition of McRae if he comes. He will immediately make our midfield better.

We need to be very careful, though, that we don’t lose an up-and-comer who wants to move on citing lack of opportunity. The rule has to be that form and merit gets games. Selection integrity.

[Rubyjo]

With the McCrae inclusion we immediately become tougher and harder to move off the ball. Great inclusion for a couple of years.

[Yorkeys]

Dunkley to the Lions is working. How were Jack Mc and Josh D rated against each other? Similar?

[Scollop]

Dunkley to the Lions is working. How were Jack Mc and Josh D rated against each other? Similar?

Dunkley did the defending and took the tough roles where he was responsible for a player. Mcrae looked after Mcrae and tallied up possessions.