Young ledger

[markp]

I have a feeling saints 2010 draft might be a real cracker after quite a few shockers.

I agree.

About time we evened up the, er, ledger.... ouch.

And I'm sure this has been posted before, but it's good viewing....

[Con Gorozidis]

Ledger will be 19 by seasons start. So thats definitely old enough if hes good enough. Could be be in round 1 just on his 19th birthday.

[Animal Enclosure]

Ledger will be 19 by seasons start. So thats definitely old enough if hes good enough. Could be be in round 1 just on his 19th birthday.

Drafting WA kids always has the advantage of them being a year older (or at least 6 months) due to the earlier start to school life.

Most of them have played senior footy in the WAFL too (not sure if Ledger and Cripps have though)

[busso mick]

Ledger will be 19 by seasons start. So thats definitely old enough if hes good enough. Could be be in round 1 just on his 19th birthday.

Drafting WA kids always has the advantage of them being a year older (or at least 6 months) due to the earlier start to school life.

Most of them have played senior footy in the WAFL too (not sure if Ledger and Cripps have though)

I'm sure Cripps has played a handful of league games for East Freo, I think Ledger has only played in the Colts (Under 19).

[busso mick]

Ledger could easily debut in round one with Schneids suspended. Easily. Dont think too many (me included) saw that coming.


Jack Clarke Medalist for best player in WAFL under 18 comp for last season.

http://www.wafootball.com.au/wafl/2243- ... arke-medal


I have a feeling saints 2010 draft might be a real cracker after quite a few shockers.

Although Armo and Lynch and Big Mac all are decent so its really only back 5-7 years ago when we seemed to have a bad run for 3 few years.

We have no players in the 22-25 year age group at all (besides ray, polo and cj who were all mature recruits).

This year could see our first rounders in Armitage(2006), McEvoy(2007) and Lynch(2008) all validate their high selections.

[Animal Enclosure]

Ledger could easily debut in round one with Schneids suspended. Easily. Dont think too many (me included) saw that coming.


Jack Clarke Medalist for best player in WAFL under 18 comp for last season.

http://www.wafootball.com.au/wafl/2243- ... arke-medal


I have a feeling saints 2010 draft might be a real cracker after quite a few shockers.

Although Armo and Lynch and Big Mac all are decent so its really only back 5-7 years ago when we seemed to have a bad run for 3 few years.

We have no players in the 22-25 year age group at all (besides ray, polo and cj who were all mature recruits).

This year could see our first rounders in Armitage(2006), McEvoy(2007) and Lynch(2008) all validate their high selections.

I'm a bit sick of this 'terrible drafting' theory that a lot of supporters seem to have.

We have had a sustained period of good performances (finals every year since 2004 with the exception of 2007 and 3 straight top 4 finishes) as well as a stable mature group of players.

Our coach believes in young players serving an apprenticeship (which the strong performances have the luxury of allowing us) and we now have more coaching resources in player development than we ever have.

Sure there have been a few misses in the early rounds (Howard, trading for Lovett) but EVERY other club has had similar stories.

Personally I'm pretty excited that we have some quality young talent coming through that will compliment our top end talent.

[Con Gorozidis]

Ledger could easily debut in round one with Schneids suspended. Easily. Dont think too many (me included) saw that coming.


Jack Clarke Medalist for best player in WAFL under 18 comp for last season.

http://www.wafootball.com.au/wafl/2243- ... arke-medal


I have a feeling saints 2010 draft might be a real cracker after quite a few shockers.

Although Armo and Lynch and Big Mac all are decent so its really only back 5-7 years ago when we seemed to have a bad run for 3 few years.

We have no players in the 22-25 year age group at all (besides ray, polo and cj who were all mature recruits).

This year could see our first rounders in Armitage(2006), McEvoy(2007) and Lynch(2008) all validate their high selections.

I'm a bit sick of this 'terrible drafting' theory that a lot of supporters seem to have.

We have had a sustained period of good performances (finals every year since 2004 with the exception of 2007 and 3 straight top 4 finishes) as well as a stable mature group of players.

Our coach believes in young players serving an apprenticeship (which the strong performances have the luxury of allowing us) and we now have more coaching resources in player development than we ever have.

Sure there have been a few misses in the early rounds (Howard, trading for Lovett) but EVERY other club has had similar stories.

Personally I'm pretty excited that we have some quality young talent coming through that will compliment our top end talent.

I think the theory holds that we had some poor recruiting 5-7 years ago and this can be displayed by looking down our list for those aged 22-25 (So the 2004-2006 drafts). We have 5 players on our list in this age group. 4 of which have been mature age recruits (gamble, ray, cj, polo) - only one - mini has lasted as a direct saints recruit/draftee. So I think that would add certain data to the fact that those were very poor recruiting years. 1 semi successful draftee from 3 drafts is not a good outcome.

I dont think its any accident that the coach + list managers have deliberately recruited those 4 players to shore up our list in that important age group. No accident at all.

But since Ross has arrived - i think we have done well. Above average.

[plugger66]

Ledger could easily debut in round one with Schneids suspended. Easily. Dont think too many (me included) saw that coming.


Jack Clarke Medalist for best player in WAFL under 18 comp for last season.

http://www.wafootball.com.au/wafl/2243- ... arke-medal


I have a feeling saints 2010 draft might be a real cracker after quite a few shockers.

Although Armo and Lynch and Big Mac all are decent so its really only back 5-7 years ago when we seemed to have a bad run for 3 few years.

We have no players in the 22-25 year age group at all (besides ray, polo and cj who were all mature recruits).

This year could see our first rounders in Armitage(2006), McEvoy(2007) and Lynch(2008) all validate their high selections.

I'm a bit sick of this 'terrible drafting' theory that a lot of supporters seem to have.

We have had a sustained period of good performances (finals every year since 2004 with the exception of 2007 and 3 straight top 4 finishes) as well as a stable mature group of players.

Our coach believes in young players serving an apprenticeship (which the strong performances have the luxury of allowing us) and we now have more coaching resources in player development than we ever have.

Sure there have been a few misses in the early rounds (Howard, trading for Lovett) but EVERY other club has had similar stories.

Personally I'm pretty excited that we have some quality young talent coming through that will compliment our top end talent.

I think the theory holds that we had some poor recruiting 5-7 years ago and this can be displayed by looking down our list for those aged 22-25 (So the 2003-2005 drafts). We have 5 players on our list in this age group. 4 of which have been mature age recruits (gamble, ray, cj, polo) - only one - mini has lasted as a direct saints recruit/draftee. So I think that would add certain data to the fact that those were very poor recruiting years. 1 semi successful draftee from 3 drafts is not a good outcome.

I dont think its any accident that the coach + list managers have deliberately recruited those 4 players to shore up our list in that important age group. No accident at all.

But since Ross has arrived - i think we have done well. Above average.

What draft picks have been good since RL arrived?

[BAM! (shhhh)]

I'm a bit sick of this 'terrible drafting' theory that a lot of supporters seem to have.

We have had a sustained period of good performances (finals every year since 2004 with the exception of 2007 and 3 straight top 4 finishes) as well as a stable mature group of players.

Our coach believes in young players serving an apprenticeship (which the strong performances have the luxury of allowing us) and we now have more coaching resources in player development than we ever have.

Sure there have been a few misses in the early rounds (Howard, trading for Lovett) but EVERY other club has had similar stories.

Personally I'm pretty excited that we have some quality young talent coming through that will compliment our top end talent.

I think the theory holds that we had some poor recruiting 5-7 years ago and this can be displayed by looking down our list for those aged 22-25 (So the 2003-2005 drafts). We have 5 players on our list in this age group. 4 of which have been mature age recruits (gamble, ray, cj, polo) - only one - mini has lasted as a direct saints recruit/draftee. So I think that would add certain data to the fact that those were very poor recruiting years. 1 semi successful draftee from 3 drafts is not a good outcome.

I dont think its any accident that the coach + list managers have deliberately recruited those 4 players to shore up our list in that important age group. No accident at all.

But since Ross has arrived - i think we have done well. Above average.

Between 2003 and 2005 the Saints drafted 5 players currently in the best 22: Raphael Clarke, Sam Fisher, Andrew McQualter, James Gwilt and Sam Gilbert.

It's no 2001, but neither is it as bad as once thought, or as reputation often has it.

[Con Gorozidis]

I'm a bit sick of this 'terrible drafting' theory that a lot of supporters seem to have.

We have had a sustained period of good performances (finals every year since 2004 with the exception of 2007 and 3 straight top 4 finishes) as well as a stable mature group of players.

Our coach believes in young players serving an apprenticeship (which the strong performances have the luxury of allowing us) and we now have more coaching resources in player development than we ever have.

Sure there have been a few misses in the early rounds (Howard, trading for Lovett) but EVERY other club has had similar stories.

Personally I'm pretty excited that we have some quality young talent coming through that will compliment our top end talent.

I think the theory holds that we had some poor recruiting 5-7 years ago and this can be displayed by looking down our list for those aged 22-25 (So the 2003-2005 drafts). We have 5 players on our list in this age group. 4 of which have been mature age recruits (gamble, ray, cj, polo) - only one - mini has lasted as a direct saints recruit/draftee. So I think that would add certain data to the fact that those were very poor recruiting years. 1 semi successful draftee from 3 drafts is not a good outcome.

I dont think its any accident that the coach + list managers have deliberately recruited those 4 players to shore up our list in that important age group. No accident at all.

But since Ross has arrived - i think we have done well. Above average.

Between 2003 and 2005 the Saints drafted 5 players currently in the best 22: Raphael Clarke, Sam Fisher, Andrew McQualter, James Gwilt and Sam Gilbert.

It's no 2001, but neither is it as bad as once thought, or as reputation often has it.

S Fisher is 28 years old. No one on our current list debuted in 2006 at the Saints. Im referring to the group aged 22-25. So must be the 2004-2006 drafts where we sucked. Quick scan at those 3 draft leave 3 players - Mini, Gilbo and Armo still on the list. So 3 from probably 10 i guess. But yes point taken. We havent really done that bad after all. If we win it this year we will look geniuses!

[BAM! (shhhh)]

I think the theory holds that we had some poor recruiting 5-7 years ago and this can be displayed by looking down our list for those aged 22-25 (So the 2003-2005 drafts). We have 5 players on our list in this age group. 4 of which have been mature age recruits (gamble, ray, cj, polo) - only one - mini has lasted as a direct saints recruit/draftee. So I think that would add certain data to the fact that those were very poor recruiting years. 1 semi successful draftee from 3 drafts is not a good outcome.

I dont think its any accident that the coach + list managers have deliberately recruited those 4 players to shore up our list in that important age group. No accident at all.

But since Ross has arrived - i think we have done well. Above average.

Between 2003 and 2005 the Saints drafted 5 players currently in the best 22: Raphael Clarke, Sam Fisher, Andrew McQualter, James Gwilt and Sam Gilbert.

It's no 2001, but neither is it as bad as once thought, or as reputation often has it.

S Fisher is 28 years old. No one on our current list debuted in 2006 at the Saints. Im referring to the group aged 22-25. So must be the 2004-2006 drafts where we sucked. Quick scan at those 3 draft leave 3 players - Mini, Gilbo and Armo still on the list. So 3 from probably 10 i guess. But yes point taken. We havent really done that bad after all. If we win it this year we will look geniuses!

2006 we took Armo, Howard and re-drafted Feguson. Yeah, that's pretty filthy, and I'm a believer in Armo.

In the end, it's the relative judgement of "poor recruiting" I disagree with. While we didn't get lots of players, I think time has shown that because there weren't lots of players to get. Rather than Sam Fisher not being counted, I think Sam Fisher - an All Australian - being drafted at 22 shows that the best player is the best player, not the youngest.

I agree we needed to pick up players ala Ray to fill in a void that is bound to emerge later... but I think from the kids available in retrospect, pinning it on the recruiters is tough. They did okay.

[saintsRrising]

2006 we took Armo, Howard and re-drafted Feguson. Yeah, that's pretty filthy, and I'm a believer in Armo.

.

Based on the knowledge that was about at the time, there was nothing that wrong about taking Armo where we did. It was a fair and reasonable pick.

Now Howard......that is another story...

[BigMart]

Most people had us pinned for Albert proud at pick #9 in 2006.....could've been worse.....

Some reason we were on a gippsland/queens land recruitfest, with 80% of our recruits coming from there....

2004-2006 not great periods....

My judgement......never trade a FRP, under any circumstances....often trade a second rounder for a good fit player....and a later pick if a bargain comes up.....other wise draft.....use TAC cup for blue chip...Wafl, sanfl, tas, in search for a lower bargain/and rookie...

[Con Gorozidis]

Most people had us pinned for Albert proud at pick #9 in 2006.....could've been worse.....

Some reason we were on a gippsland/queens land recruitfest, with 80% of our recruits coming from there....

2004-2006 not great periods....

My judgement......never trade a FRP, under any circumstances....often trade a second rounder for a good fit player....and a later pick if a bargain comes up.....other wise draft.....use TAC cup for blue chip...Wafl, sanfl, tas, in search for a lower bargain/and rookie...

good calls bigmart. although wa creamed the national title in 2009 so still some ok blue chips over west. seems our recruiters are obsessed with the west atm. might just work too.

winmar, cripps, ledger and andreoli.

but after the lovett, watts and brooks case studies. i agree. never ever trade an FRP.

[saintspremiers]

what about Gwilt?

The last smokey from GT.

....and he's now in the star category.

amazing!

[Con Gorozidis]

Ledger will be 19 by seasons start. So thats definitely old enough if hes good enough. Could be be in round 1 just on his 19th birthday.

Drafting WA kids always has the advantage of them being a year older (or at least 6 months) due to the earlier start to school life.

Most of them have played senior footy in the WAFL too (not sure if Ledger and Cripps have though)

or later start to school life? i.e they finish school older?

[Con Gorozidis]

what about Gwilt?

The last smokey from GT.

....and he's now in the star category.

amazing!

Gwilt has to go down as one of great all time draft picks in the whole afl. love him. quick check hes only 24. Drafted in 2004. Debuted when he was only 18. Hes going to carve them up the next 3 years.

although i fear we have ruined this thread. lets get back to the OP. Ledger goes off!. Love the bloke. Cant believe he got through to 59.

[SaintPav]

what about Gwilt?

The last smokey from GT.

....and he's now in the star category.

amazing!

Gwilt has to go down as one of great all time draft picks in the whole afl. love him. quick check hes only 24. Drafted in 2004. Debuted when he was only 18. Hes going to carve them up the next 3 years.

although i fear we have ruined this thread. lets get back to the OP. Ledger goes off!. Love the bloke. Cant believe he got through to 59.

Jimmy needs to back up this year....

[Animal Enclosure]

[What draft picks have been good since RL arrived?

Which picks have been proven to be not good?

As I posted above, if you consider 1st, 2nd & 3rd round picks (outside of Brad Howard) has our drafting been as terrible as some people love stating?

I'm a big believer in giving young guys the time to prove themselves.

BJ is an obvious example of a bloke who developed slowly but surely into the superstar that he is today. Plenty of supporters totally wrote him off circa 2006-2007 and were carrying on that we should have taken Daniel Wells or even Salopek!

Armo has struggled to firstly adapt to the demands of elite footy, then struggled to get a game behind a strong midfield and then has suffered injury problems. The bloke has serious talent & given a decent run injury wise, should become a permanent AFL player this season.

McEvoy has shown plenty & has developed quite quickly for a young ruckman (every year his improvement has been signficant IMO).

Lynch is another young tall that people have been impatient with... his NAB Cup form suggests that he just to get 20-30 games under his belt and he has the talent.

Stanley has already surpassed my expectations for a 3rd year 200cm+ player. Once again, 20-30+ games will see him start to show how much talent he does have.

I fully expect Jack Steven to have a breakout year this season. His pre-season hiccup will hopefully be the kick in the pants that sees him understand what is required to be a best 22 player.

Al Smith looks ready to go.

The new crew of Ledger, Crocker and Cripps look to give us some real talent and excitement in the next few years.

It really disappoints me to hear our supporters carry on that our kids are duds when indications are to the contrary. There's enough opposition supporters and media 'experts' that are happy to dig the boots in without our own supporters bagging a kid that they have NEVER SEEN PLAY!

[BAM! (shhhh)]

2006 we took Armo, Howard and re-drafted Feguson. Yeah, that's pretty filthy, and I'm a believer in Armo.

.

Based on the knowledge that was about at the time, there was nothing that wrong about taking Armo where we did. It was a fair and reasonable pick.

Now Howard......that is another story...

When we get to look in retrospect the view has to change though, and Howard is a perfect case in point.

After picking up Sam Fisher and Jimmy Gwilt with late picks, that earns enough rope to take a smokey in the 2nd (I never buy into "insider talk" about a guy being available later). That's Brad Howard. Turns out that's using the rope... but when you see Howard kicking around the V, you can see what was hoped, it just wasn't close.

At this stage you judge '06 on results, and the results of '06 are awful, with a total of 34 games garnered from 3 picks with only 1 player left on the list... battling to make the 22. However, the results of '06 are SO bad, that you probably get a better view of actual performance by judging '06 an outlier. The only caveat that probably does remain is that at the time of the '06 draft, Ross Lyon had only been in the main seat for about 5 minutes.

Looking at other 3 year periods: 03-05, or 07-09 leave you with the impression that the Saints are/were challenged to pick players that would have an immediate impact, but managed to extract some value... which we continue to benefit from.

Over the course of the decade, a number of different philosphies have been applied to recruitment at the Saints. While I think the one we've got now is probably the best we've seen, we ought to recognise that's true across the league. If there's one thing the current approach should have taught, it's that many wrote off the 03-05 drafts FAR too soon. We probably only truly will be able to START to judge '07 by the end of the year.

[saintsRrising]

When we get to look in retrospect the view has to change though, and Howard is a perfect case in point.

After picking up Sam Fisher and Jimmy Gwilt with late picks, that earns enough rope to take a smokey in the 2nd ...... That's Brad Howard. .

Have to disagree.

Fisher and Gwilt are both great examples of players taken at about the right level as both were players with a higher degree of risk. Both were talented, but both needed to ramp up their development....and both were great examples of how to go about trying players with promise, but who are also rskier. Take them late.

Fisher was late to Football as he initiall chose gave golf.

With Gwilt he was playing in a lesser comp...was looking at cricket and was not too serious about a football carreer.

Howard was a bit like a punter who has a long-shot come home, where the punter starts to think he is invlaiable and loses sight of the true odds.

Getting a roughie right...is just that...and should not be taken as licence to start betting against the odds (I say that as any player is off course a punt).

Stanley is the latest example of a Gwilt/Fisher pick. Shows great promise...and we all hope he will be a beauty...but he may not be.

Howard should never ahve beena 2nd round pick...and whatever evaluationwas made at the time it was wrong. Not because he did not develop intoa player...but ecause he was clearly flawed at the time and needed massive development, which should always = a late or rookie pick.

[samoht]

Stanley just needs to develop some essential core body strength to go with his rare athletic ability (rare for a 200cm tall anyway ) and he could be anything.

Once he gets more competitive body on body -he'll take it to a whole new level.

[borderbarry]

Before suggesting Ledger play in Round One, we need to have a look at the other two that were taken before him first, as both may be playing against Essendon.

[samoht]

Ledger is going to be a gun.. has attitude, pace , determination, uses both sides of his body and is comfortable as both an inside and outside player.
Has too many strings to his bow - not to succeed.
Height may be his only (small) issue - how tall is he ?

Crocker got more game time I think than Cripps... and displayed his long kicking.

Cripps got about 5 quick possessions in a matter of minutes in the first quarter (against either Brisbane or Essendon?) .. but didn't get much more game time.
He looked to be comfortable at AFL level .. has a quick reaction time..

[Con Gorozidis]

Ledger is going to be a gun.. has attitude, pace , determination, uses both sides of his body and is comfortable as both an inside and outside player.
Has too many strings to his bow - not to succeed.
Height may be his only (small) issue - how tall is he ?

Crocker got more game time I think than Cripps... and displayed his long kicking.

Cripps got about 5 quick possessions in a matter of minutes in the first quarter (against either Brisbane or Essendon?) .. but didn't get much more game time.
He looked to be comfortable at AFL level .. has a quick reaction time..

ledger 178. but hes tall compared with jarryd blair . not sure height matters if u are quick,smart,strong and skillful enough. ledge looks like he has enough attributes to compensate for his height.

round one DEBUUUUUUUUT!