How good was our drafting and trading in 2006/07 ...

[saintly]

I don't know if there were money constraints stopping us from having Rookies. I seem to recall it was more to do with spending maximum dollars on our list (including veterans) and therefore leaving no 'money for Rookies?

I dont think rookies are in the salary cap.

They don't have to be....

You can spend 100% of your salary cap...

Or you can spend 95%....and even though the 5% is not within the salary cap spend it on rookies instead.




Irrespective of whether you have 6 or 3 rookies....our previous strike rate of rookies coming through as a percentage was dismal.

a club has to take a minimum of 4 rookies this is paid by the afl not the club. This rule was broght in becuase the bulldogs and i believe melbourne could not afford to pay rookies, and so they only picked 1 rookie. in 2006 the rule of the min. of 4 rookies was brought in.

[meher baba]

I think the drafting and trading in 2007 has been terrific: while it is early days, I think the big clean out at the end of last year looks like one of the best list management moves the club has made in a long, long time.

I think 2006 was a bit iffy: and I think that we can attribute it to the turmoil around the sacking of GT. Certainly, I think the recruitment of Birss, M Gardiner (on whom the jury is still out for mine: he looked like he was moving in slow motion in general play on Friday night) and M Clarke and the retention of Ferguson all seemed a bit odd to me. Armitage is looking pretty good now, but so he should be given that he was a #9 draft pick. Howard and Allen have not yet impressed me: to be honest, I reckon Jack Steven and Eljay Connors look more promising from what I've seen of them.

As for all the weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth about the allegedly terrible list management of the past: I think it's an issue that will always divide posters on this forum and we should probably all try to put it behind us.

[Violent Stool]

Our recruitment in 06 was absolutely woeful.

Gardiner, Clarke, Birss etc. were and to date are, terrible.

Allen, Howard, Jones, Geary etc. haven't shown much either. Jones is the only one who looks Ok, but still appears to be yet another guy who can get the nut but then turn it over just as quickly.

Armitage is a legend in the making, and a great pickup at 9. Very happy with him.

This year however, is a different story. Schneider, King, Gardiner and hopefully Dempster too look like fantastic pickups.

To be fair though, Grant Thomas and his crew basically did the same thing in their tenure - picked up some goodies with high draft picks, and picked up depth players (recycled and discarded) aswell. Some worked, and some didn't.

What's happened over 06 and 07 seems almost identicle to the strategy of previous years.

[terry smith rules]

The drafting during the GT period has cost us some much needed depth that we could have used now. It's good to see that it has changed the past couple of years because the draft is very important and should be taken very seriously.

I think we had the depth ,we just had shocking injury runs.

No team has the depth to cope with those sorts of runs.

We drafted to try and win a flag with the window of opportunity we had and it back fired, because of the injuries.

Sydney got away with it, but watch them suffer now.

Depth must have also been affected by things like Hamill with his salary in the cap and then his injuries taking away both cash and a spot. That is nothing against Hamill, just the reality.

fqf

[plugger66]

Our recruitment in 06 was absolutely woeful.

Gardiner, Clarke, Birss etc. were and to date are, terrible.

Allen, Howard, Jones, Geary etc. haven't shown much either. Jones is the only one who looks Ok, but still appears to be yet another guy who can get the nut but then turn it over just as quickly.

Armitage is a legend in the making, and a great pickup at 9. Very happy with him.

This year however, is a different story. Schneider, King, Gardiner and hopefully Dempster too look like fantastic pickups.

To be fair though, Grant Thomas and his crew basically did the same thing in their tenure - picked up some goodies with high draft picks, and picked up depth players (recycled and discarded) aswell. Some worked, and some didn't.

What's happened over 06 and 07 seems almost identicle to the strategy of previous years.

Have to agree. Allen was injured for most of the year but after missing 16 weeks surely he should have been good enough to go straight into the ones. Geary in his first season this year when he allowed to play probably will not be good enough to win the rising star. We had about 9 picks in 2006 why arent 7-8 regular ones players now after all it has been one season of football.

[CURLY]

Our recruitment in 06 was absolutely woeful.

Gardiner, Clarke, Birss etc. were and to date are, terrible.

Allen, Howard, Jones, Geary etc. haven't shown much either. Jones is the only one who looks Ok, but still appears to be yet another guy who can get the nut but then turn it over just as quickly.

Armitage is a legend in the making, and a great pickup at 9. Very happy with him.

This year however, is a different story. Schneider, King, Gardiner and hopefully Dempster too look like fantastic pickups.

To be fair though, Grant Thomas and his crew basically did the same thing in their tenure - picked up some goodies with high draft picks, and picked up depth players (recycled and discarded) aswell. Some worked, and some didn't.

What's happened over 06 and 07 seems almost identicle to the strategy of previous years.

Have to agree. Allen was injured for most of the year but after missing 16 weeks surely he should have been good enough to go straight into the ones. Geary in his first season this year when he allowed to play probably will not be good enough to win the rising star. We had about 9 picks in 2006 why arent 7-8 regular ones players now after all it has been one season of football.

Also have to agree in fact why wasnt Allen cut from the list as soon as he was injured? If he cant carry a dislocated elbow into a game he wont make the grade.

[hAyES]

Don't know why people are so high on Allen because he hasn't really showed me anything. I don't think I've seen him take a contested mark yet.

[Animal Enclosure]

Yeah Allen should be outmarking Mal Michael easily at this stage of his career.

[Violent Stool]

Hang on, hang on.

Let's be fair. The thread is about how great our recruiting was in 06.

There's nothing to suggest it was at all.

Granted we can't write off youngsters recruited in 06 just yet, but there's a hell of alot of 'ifs' and 'maybes' in regards to them being any good. I don't expect them to be stars just yet, particularly Allen due to his injuries. But if we're talking about our brilliant 06 recruiting, we're clearly wearing some very heavily rose coloured glasses at this stage.

[saintlee]

if we're talking about our brilliant 06 recruiting, we're clearly wearing some very heavily rose coloured glasses at this stage.

Key point here......not enough evidence to claim brilliant recruiting yet.....

[Animal Enclosure]

I think the original post was pointing out that the recruiting in 06 has had a pretty good strike rate thus far in players that could be in our best side (Geary, Armitage, M.Gardiner) and those who could potentially be able back ups.

While some posters have gone a little over the top, that is the right of every fan who sees a young guy play & gets excited at the prospect of seeing him improve.

There's always plenty of nay sayers and negative nellys around to shoot players down. It's refreshing to hear supporters say that they are excited with a new wave of kids coming through.

[plugger66]

Hang on, hang on.

Let's be fair. The thread is about how great our recruiting was in 06.

There's nothing to suggest it was at all.

Granted we can't write off youngsters recruited in 06 just yet, but there's a hell of alot of 'ifs' and 'maybes' in regards to them being any good. I don't expect them to be stars just yet, particularly Allen due to his injuries. But if we're talking about our brilliant 06 recruiting, we're clearly wearing some very heavily rose coloured glasses at this stage.

Fair enough then.

[saintsRrising]

a club has to take a minimum of 4 rookies this is paid by the afl not the club. This rule was broght in becuase the bulldogs and i believe melbourne could not afford to pay rookies, and so they only picked 1 rookie. in 2006 the rule of the min. of 4 rookies was brought in.

My comment was not about the the here and now (or even 2007)....but rather the period under GT when the rules you state did not apply.

My point was that we could have used some of our $$$$$ to pay rookies.

[plugger66]

a club has to take a minimum of 4 rookies this is paid by the afl not the club. This rule was broght in becuase the bulldogs and i believe melbourne could not afford to pay rookies, and so they only picked 1 rookie. in 2006 the rule of the min. of 4 rookies was brought in.

My comment was not about the the here and now (or even 2007)....but rather the period under GT when the rules you state did not apply.

My point was that we could have used some of our $$$$$ to pay rookies.

But we were on 100% when we were succesful and earlier when we were crap the club wanted to keep it to 95% so he had no where to move.

[congorozides]

The season hasnt even started. As fas as I am concerned John Beveridge should be shot. You guys have short memories.
Im not forgiving him for Fergus Watts, Barry Brooks, Mcqualtar, Fiona and Raph Clarke just yet. All high pics. All duds.

[Solar]

The season hasnt even started. As fas as I am concerned John Beveridge should be shot. You guys have short memories.
Im not forgiving him for Fergus Watts, Barry Brooks, Mcqualtar, Fiona and Raph Clarke just yet. All high pics. All duds.

ok a couple of things

fioras name is fiora, seriously calling him fiona is dumbing pandering to the tiger supporter inside you. Also Bevo didn't pick him from the draft, he was all we culd get from black being a money hungry lieing SOB. So not sure where you are coming from with that one.

Fergus watts and brooks were both traded for, so once again am I missing something.

Mcqualter looks like a miss and there is a big question mark over raph clarke.

But I will throw you gilbert, Sam Fisher, leigh Fisher, joey as all good selections, most late selections as well.

[saintly]

The season hasnt even started. As fas as I am concerned John Beveridge should be shot. You guys have short memories.
Im not forgiving him for Fergus Watts, Barry Brooks, Mcqualtar, Fiona and Raph Clarke just yet. All high pics. All duds.

watts, brooks, mcgough, fiora, were not picked by beverdge. they were picked by GT. Assumably GT thought all of the above except for raph clarke were better then picking new guys.

Raph was pcked by Beveridge . how much influence that was put on him because X was there i don't know.

[plugger66]

The season hasnt even started. As fas as I am concerned John Beveridge should be shot. You guys have short memories.
Im not forgiving him for Fergus Watts, Barry Brooks, Mcqualtar, Fiona and Raph Clarke just yet. All high pics. All duds.

watts, brooks, mcqualter, fiora, were not picked by beverdge. they were picked by GT. Assumably GT thought all of the above except for raph clarke were better then picking new guys.

Raph was pcked by Beveridge . how much influence that was put on him because X was there i don't know.

I dont think GT had anything to do with Mini and Brooks would have been suggested by Bevo and Rendall. Not sure on Watts and Fiora as solar said was because Black wanted back to freo.

[Violent Stool]

Some of our recycled and discarded recruits were quite instrumental in some good seasons for us.

Guerra and Ackland come to mind. Then they were hopeless within 12 months.

Hopefully the new batch of discards can sustain some good form.

[saintly]

The season hasnt even started. As fas as I am concerned John Beveridge should be shot. You guys have short memories.
Im not forgiving him for Fergus Watts, Barry Brooks, Mcqualtar, Fiona and Raph Clarke just yet. All high pics. All duds.

watts, brooks, mcqualter, fiora, were not picked by beverdge. they were picked by GT. Assumably GT thought all of the above except for raph clarke were better then picking new guys.

Raph was pcked by Beveridge . how much influence that was put on him because X was there i don't know.

I dont think GT had anything to do with Mini and Brooks would have been suggested by Bevo and Rendall. Not sure on Watts and Fiora as solar said was because Black wanted back to freo.

sorry you're right re mini and fiora. mini was beveridge, i actually meant to write mcgough and instead wrote mcqualter. Fiora was a get something rather than nothing job

[Violent Stool]

watts, brooks, mcgough, fiora, were not picked by beverdge. they were picked by GT. Assumably GT thought all of the above except for raph clarke were better then picking new guys.

Raph was pcked by Beveridge . how much influence that was put on him because X was there i don't know.

Based on the outputs of Brooks, Mini and some other draftees we've had over the years, he may have been right.

[Armoooo]

watts, brooks, mcgough, fiora, were not picked by beverdge. they were picked by GT. Assumably GT thought all of the above except for raph clarke were better then picking new guys.

Raph was pcked by Beveridge . how much influence that was put on him because X was there i don't know.

Based on the outputs of Brooks, Mini and some other draftees we've had over the years, he may have been right.

Again we did not draft Brooks...
If our drafting is so bad have a look at our recent history...
Ball 2, Xavier 5, Dal 13, Maguire 21, Montagna 37, S.Fisher 54?, Gilbert 31, Armitage 9, Geary, Attard, Eddy, Jones All rookies... Our efforts hav been just as good as any other clubs which is saying something considering the amount of money that was being spent...

[plugger66]

watts, brooks, mcgough, fiora, were not picked by beverdge. they were picked by GT. Assumably GT thought all of the above except for raph clarke were better then picking new guys.

Raph was pcked by Beveridge . how much influence that was put on him because X was there i don't know.

Based on the outputs of Brooks, Mini and some other draftees we've had over the years, he may have been right.

Again we did not draft Brooks...
If our drafting is so bad have a look at our recent history...
Ball 2, Xavier 5, Dal 13, Maguire 21, Montagna 37, S.Fisher 54?, Gilbert 31, Armitage 9, Geary, Attard, Eddy, Jones All rookies... Our efforts hav been just as good as any other clubs which is saying something considering the amount of money that was being spent...

It has been good but you could say Bally isnt the greatest draft when we could have had Judd and X still hasnt proven to be a number 5 pick in a great draft. Dal, Joey and chips are huge pickups.

[Violent Stool]

Again we did not draft Brooks...

No, but he was drafted.

My point was that just because we 'pick up a kid' in the draft doesn't mean they'll be any good.

Taking a punt on a discard or a recycled player who has already been drafted and developed by someone else, isn't always such a bad idea.

Hopefully Lyon has more luck.

[saintsRrising]

But we were on 100% when we were successful and earlier when we were crap the club wanted to keep it to 95% so he had no where to move.

Odd...we were told the great GT was the contract king......how great he was at keeping the list together...blah blah blah...

The reality is that GT as coach was gifted a list with huge potential talent...the best I have seen at the Saints.

Thanks to the good fortune of finishing low in a period of priority picks, the Blues losing picks due to cheating and the Blight effect attracting star and good players to the club to boost depth, we suddenly had a superb list.

Post Waldon GT was left to his own devices to manage the list and it soon fell started to fall into disrepair.

He squandered draft picks for trades which in the main were wasted picks. now yes they may have worked out....but they did not....and at the end of the day that is what counted. He made the wrong call time after time...and got way more wring than right.

He chose to put all his eggs in the one basket as he thought he was already there........tried to top up, but mainly chose duds. He chose to not adequately develop rookies etc etc.....

The result being that in terms of "potential" talent the list in fact started going backwards as soon as GT assumed responsibility for the list management.

Most people that win huge lotteries squander their wealth...and Gt was no different. He had "riches" and squandered it.....and left the list in worse state in terms of "potential" talent than when he left.

He did not add player value ,,,,but rather devalued the list.




Whether he in fact transferred complete decision making or not to JB is just a crock....if he did so it was still his decision to do so and he needs to stand by the players selected under his watch.

Personally I greatly doubt that all the trades were JB's doing....and if they were you would have to ask why as JB is on record as saying that he watch little AFL.

Also the crock that GT 'tried" to get a good ruckman is just that..a crock. Fact is that he never secured or developed a good ruckman.


No one should be assessed by one trade.

But the facts are that under GT's watch that our overall trades were poor.

Under his watch the list was devalued and serious flaws developed:

*ruck division was put in disrepair
*a great midfield fell into neglect with a failure to source new blood
*as trend we gained slow players