Could ‘ve – Should’ve – But Didn’t = has cost the

[Sainternist]

Love it MarkP. Won't win many friends on here with that. Gotta love reality though.

Oh yeah... I just LOVE IT when reality dawns on me... like a bloody hole in the head.

[Johnny Member]

Not getting cuz was a correct decision......so a couple of better informed folk told me at the time....and even after hindsight has proved them wrong, they are still right....arguing, even when they surely know they're wrong, just to make themselves feel a little bit better about an opportunity obviously lost.....it must f*** with their heads

Cousins was a shadow of the player he was at WCE at Richmond, and according to some very trustworthy people i know, when Cousins met our club for talks he was juiced, still taking illegal drugs and still dodging AFL drug tests (shaving his whole body down).

You only have to read his book and watch his doco to find that out

Richmond were in a far better position to take a risk than we were.

Apart from the risks he wasn't clean we would have had to cart his media circus around all year. Not such a big deal for a team unable to make the finals but a potential distraction for our team.

If we got it so wrong, why didn't the other 14 teams (or call it 13 because we'll omit WCE) fight Richmond for his services? Wasn't he the last guy picked?

My opinion (based on nothing more than gut feeling) is that Lyon wanted him.

Someone else overruled I reckon. I can't for the life of me, understand why he flew over there and presented him with a jumper, then days later we passed on him!

I reckon the coach wanted him.

[FortiusQuoFidelius]

One could also put forward the argument that we could have taken Luke Molan (7) ahead of Nick Dal Santo (13) in 2001, or rather than take Leigh Montagna at 37 we could have taken Ashley Watson (14) Daniel Elstone (20) Rod Crowe (30) Simon O'Keefe (34) or Jarrad Wright (35)

Likewise in 2002 we could have taken any of Josh Willoughby (16) Billy Morrison (17) Alex Gilmour (21) Joshua Krueger (31) Luke Peel (34) Andrew Erikson (47) or Izaak Thomson (50) ahead of SAm Fisher (55)

I'm sure I could go through each year with similar comparisons, but, just like the original post, what will it prove???

SFA!!

FFS get over it!

[Dr Spaceman]

One could also put forward the argument that we could have taken Luke Molan (7) ahead of Nick Dal Santo (13) in 2001, or rather than take Leigh Montagna at 37 we could have taken Ashley Watson (14) Daniel Elstone (20) Rod Crowe (30) Simon O'Keefe (34) or Jarrad Wright (35)

Likewise in 2002 we could have taken any of Josh Willoughby (16) Billy Morrison (17) Alex Gilmour (21) Joshua Krueger (31) Luke Peel (34) Andrew Erikson (47) or Izaak Thomson (50) ahead of SAm Fisher (55)

I'm sure I could go through each year with similar comparisons, but, just like the original post, what will it prove???

SFA!!

FFS get over it!

Why did you have to post this?

It's quite depressing looking at those guys we missed out on

[BigMart]

How exactly could we have taken guys before pick 55 sam fisher.....instead of sam fisher.....that does not make sense

[BigMart]

Joffa

You have dressed up opinion as fact yourself.....

Two things

1) Of course cousins was not as good a player at richmond than at wce....he had a fair way to drop, however to become a poor player, considering he was perhaps the best player in the land in 2005.....and one of the best players in the decade 1997-2006.....his CV is top shelf

At richmond he was a solid performer.....5th in b&f..but he bought more to tje table than 23 touches a game.....his experience, his finishing skills and a big game performer....

So a dud, he was not......he would have strolled into our best 22.

2) do you have any proof cousins was on the (sauce) because during his time at the tigers, he was the most tested footballer in the afl....with no positive returns....but hey, your mate knew....

Your opinion states cuz was a dud with pretty much zero evidence....

My opinion states he was a worthy recruit.....i have a little evidence to turn to.....on 4 fronts

[MCG-Unit]

One could also put forward the argument that we could have taken Luke Molan (7) ahead of Nick Dal Santo (13) in 2001, or rather than take Leigh Montagna at 37 we could have taken Ashley Watson (14) Daniel Elstone (20) Rod Crowe (30) Simon O'Keefe (34) or Jarrad Wright (35)

Likewise in 2002 we could have taken any of Josh Willoughby (16) Billy Morrison (17) Alex Gilmour (21) Joshua Krueger (31) Luke Peel (34) Andrew Erikson (47) or Izaak Thomson (50) ahead of SAm Fisher (55)

I'm sure I could go through each year with similar comparisons, but, just like the original post, what will it prove???

SFA!!

FFS get over it!

How could they have taken those players before their pick was due - not possible is it

[Mr Magic]

How exactly could we have taken guys before pick 55 sam fisher.....instead of sam fisher.....that does not make sense

I believe FQF was making the point that recruiters from other clubs made those selections after our pick but before our next pick in those particular drafts.
ie in 2001 we took X Clarke but could have taken Molan with that pick instead.
Instead of taking Dal Santo we could have taken all those others mentioned.

The same applied in 2003 when we could have taken, with our earlier pick, all those other players before we chose Sam Fisher.

He seems to be implying that this 'science' of drafting throws up mistakes from all recruiters. Players taken with earlier picks that end up being 'wasted'.
Maybe the 'science' of drafting wasn't/isn't as accurate as some of the harry hindsights make it out to be?



I could argue in hindsight that we had a shocker in the 2001 draft
We took Ball instead of Judd
We took X Clarke instead of Bartel

In hindsight how good would we have been with a midfield rotation during the decade of:-
Harvey
Hayes
Judd
Bartel
Dal Santo
Montagna
Burke
Thompson
Powell
and whoever else we had.

There were 12 picks before Dal Santo - did every other Club pick badly?
How many Clubs went past Bartel before Geelong took him?
Did Hawthorn err by taking Hodge over Judd?
Did Hawthorn err by taking Roughead before eventually taking Franklin?
Did Richmond err by taking Tambling instead of Franklin?
Did Richmond err by taking Fiora instead of Pavlich
Did Collingwood err by taking Fraser with their first pick?
Did Melbourne err by taking Watts instead of Natanui?
Did everyone err by not taking Selwood before Geelong snared him?

Recruiters at all clubs can only make selections based on the knowledge they have learned about the individuals in the draft and the requirements of their clubs' list management.

To second guess them in hindsight is akin, IMO, to complaining that you took the wrong tattslotto numbers after they've been drawn.
If you knew how the players were going to turn out you'd get it correct 100% of the time.

[stevie]

From memory, Dal was sick at draft camp and didn't perform well in certain tests.

If he was the real Dal that is...

[Mr Magic]

From memory, Dal was sick at draft camp and didn't perform well in certain tests.

If he was the real Dal that is...

But according to this 'hindsight' philosophy, the recruiters at all the clubs that failed to select him before we did should have known he was going to be a 'gun' and selected him.

That's seemingly the philosophy behind this particular OP and our failure to select Darling.

Recruiters should always ignore what they know/see and select on hindsight.
Unless of course their picks turn out ok - then they are 'gun' recruiters.

[plugger66]

From memory, Dal was sick at draft camp and didn't perform well in certain tests.

If he was the real Dal that is...

But according to this 'hindsight' philosophy, the recruiters at all the clubs that failed to select him before we did should have known he was going to be a 'gun' and selected him.

That's seemingly the philosophy behind this particular OP and our failure to select Darling.

Recruiters should always ignore what they know/see and select on hindsight.
Unless of course their picks turn out ok - then they are 'gun' recruiters.

And for every Jack Darling there is a Lawrence Angwin. The funny thing about Darling is no one not even him would know how he would go away from Perth.

[BigMart]

Not sure it would change a thing

Football is the same shape, oval is made of grass.....opponents are the same(bar wce)...

He may embrace the state......More to do with his leadership, club culture, and coaching.....donyou doubt ours plugger??

Hundreds of kida have moved interstate in league footy and performed....

i think when you analyse a draft

Take out of the equation players names and look purely at perfromance
5 picks and 3 rookies
What i consider successful
1 a grader......200+ gamer........10 year player
2 b graders.....100+ gamer........5-10 year
1 c grader......50 gamer............3-5 year
1 failure.......delist after 2-3 years

If trades are involved
For a successful
The player picked

[plugger66]

Not sure it would change a thing

Football is the same shape, oval is made of grass.....opponents are the same(bar wce)...

He may embrace the state......More to do with his leadership, club culture, and coaching.....donyou doubt ours plugger??

Hundreds of kida have moved interstate in league footy and performed....

i think when you analyse a draft

Take out of the equation players names and look purely at perfromance
5 picks and 3 rookies
What i consider successful
1 a grader......200+ gamer........10 year player
2 b graders.....100+ gamer........5-10 year
1 c grader......50 gamer............3-5 year
1 failure.......delist after 2-3 years

If trades are involved
For a successful
The player picked

I trust our leadership group but that doesnt mean people can stuff up. Darling had issues so he is different to most kids that come over. Who knows what would have happened. As for what you consider a successful draft i would suggest a club would only get a draft like that about once every 5-10 years so there have been a lot of unsuccessful drafts by all the clubs. Also surely the pick numbers make a difference. For example it would have been hard for us to stuff up in 2000 and 2001 where as it would be much easier to stuff up in 2009 and 2010.

[BigMart]

As i was saying.....player picked should replace the output of the player replaced

If we pick up a player for a pick....there worth is just added to the drafted kids...they just become that pick...

If we get A priority pick you would hope for another a grader...

You hope for one of your rookies to be upgraded to the senior list......every three years to snare a b grader or above is a bonus
2001 (priority pick)
A grader*2........dal santo...montagna
B graders *2.......ball.....clarke
C grader ........ Maguire
Fail ...... Houlihan

Rookies.......Dicketts, schwarze, jones....all fail, schwarze close

Overall.....succesful draft

Forget draft positions and names.....look at what we got and how they performed

2003
A garder.....fisher
B grader......clarke.....gram
C grade......guerra
Fail.......callaghan

Rookies....fitzner fail, stone upgraded for LTI and delisted....

Overall.....successful

[BigMart]

2002
A grader......goddard
B grader......none
C graders.......penny....l.fisher

Everitt for brooks and ferguson........fail

Rookies.....murray upgraded, barham failed

Overall.....below average draft

However......injuries to penny, l.fisher and to a lesser extent ferguson played a huge role

[BigMart]

We know my thoughts on the 09 draft.....a debarcle

difficult to analyse drafts over the last 4 seasons for obvious reasons, but gut feel

07.......successful....schnieder, mcevoy, dempster, steven....good gets
08.......below average....depends a bit on stanley
06.....below average, no a grader....but jones a real bonus...allen unlucky
10......successful...i think ledger will be the a grader, siposs will determine the exact success...cripps looks handy

04 & 05
The drafting of mcgough (43) rix (49) ackland (33) watts (17) all recycled did not really worked

Watts was a bit unfortunate...acland was not a total failure..

[bobmurray]

Could ‘ve – Should’ve – But Didn’t = has cost the SAINTS dearly !

I thought I would go through the process of looking at the SAINTS drafting and list management over the past 5 years and to be honest it is nothing short of abysmal! The more you look at it the more embarrassing it becomes – I can’t believe how the people involved in these decisions are still at the club?

2006 National Draft
#9 David Armitage St Kilda = 45 games 25 goals
#10 Nathan Brown Collingwood = 50 games KPP GF winning team
#12 James Frawley Melbourne = 77 games KPP All Aus selection
#13 Jack Riewoldt = 85 games 185 goals Coleman Medal winner

#27 Brad Howard St Kilda = 2 games
#28 Chris DAWES Collingwood = 43 games GF winning FF
#29 Eric McKenzie WCE = 50 games KPP backmen
#37 Todd Goldstein NM = 54 games exceptional ruckman

2006 Rookie Draft
#9 Clint Jones St Kilda = 91 games (good selection)
#25 Luke Van Rheenen St Kilda = 0 games no longer on list
#26 Brent McCaffer Collingwood = 30 games still on senior list
#27 Jarrod Harbrow GCS = 87 games & attracted WB good trade selections

NOTE: From a list management perspective we were looking for midfielders and obviously overlooked some excellent KPP talent in the national draft. The poor list management continues…

Poor draft!


2007 National Draft
#9 Ben McEvoy Stkilda = 47 games developing ruckman
#10 Patrick Dangerfield Adelaide = 59 games 70 goals Rising Star
#12 Cyril Rioli Hawthorn = 76 games 90 goals
#42 Jack Steven St Kilda = 24 games (good selection)
#70 Eljay Connors St Kilda = 0 games (wasted senior list position)

2007 Rookie Draft
#8 Glen CHIVERS St Kilda = 0 games delisted
#24 Luke Miles St Kilda = 2 games delisted
#25 Jared Petrenko Adelaide = 30 games still small forward
#40 Ed Curnow Carlton = 12 games still on list

NOTE: From a list management perspective again we overlooked best available to fill our needs and took McEvoy at #9. I would have taken Dangerfield or Rioli at #9 and got a ruckman with a later pick. McEvoy will be good but will he ever be the value of a goal kicking mid I very much doubt it.

Average daft!


2008 National Draft
#13 Tom LYNCH St Kilda = 5 games
#18 Luke Shuey WCE = 23 games this year’s Rising Star.
#29 Dayne Beams Collingwood = 52 games 52 goals & GF player
#74 Paul CAHILL St Kilda = 0 games likely to be delisted.
#75 Shane Savage Hawthorn = 18 games hard at it forward.

2008 Rookie Draft
#13 Zac Dawson St Kilda = 76 games (Brown or McKenzie ?)
#29 Tom Simpkin St Kilda = 2 games still developing
#58 Steven Gaertner St Kilda = 0 games delisted
#69 Lachlan Keeffe Collingwood = 4 games developing tall forward
#71 Ross Tungatulum St Kilda = 0 games delisted
#81 Matt Suckling Hawthorn = 21 games (elite kicking skills)

NOTE: From a list management perspective why didn’t the Saints look at McKenzie or the Brown twins the previous year. Tom Lynch will never be the player Shuey or Beams have already become.

Poor draft!


2009 National Draft = it still hurts!
#16 Andrew Lovett St Kilda = 0 games (trade cost approx 500k)
#20 Nathan Fyfe Freo = 35 games (next superstar from west)
#21 Ryan Bastinac NM = 30 games (highly valued mid)
#30 Luke Ball Collingwood = 183 games (44 Collingwood) St Kilda club champion – GF player (disgraceful loss)
#32 Nicholas Winmar St Kilda = 2 games (developing)
#38 Sam Reid Swans = 18 games 15 goals KPP forward
#42 Nathan Vardy = 8 games developing ruckman/forward

2009 Rookie Draft
#20 Mark Hutchins St Kilda = 0 games delisted
#24 Alex Silvagni Freo = 20 games KPP player was in our own back yard yet over looked.

NOTE: SAINTS of old looking for the quick fix and trading for other clubs duds! We were screaming out for speed but they simply over looked far too much quality again attempting to fill needs rather than drafting best available.

Extremely Poor draft!


2010 National Draft
#24 Jamie Cripps St Kilda = 4 games (will be ok)
#26 Jack Darling WCE = 17 games 15 goals superstar missed!
#45 Sam Crocker St Kilda = 0 games (small developing mid)
#47 Alex FASOLO Collingwood = 6 games 9 goals readymade mid.

2010 Rookie Draft
#24 Tom Curren St Kilda = 0 games
#37 Nick Lower Freo = 16 games
#41 Warwick Andreoli St Kilda = 0 games
#51 Wayde Twomey Carlton = 2 games

NOTE: Once again RL convinces the recruiters to draft on a needs basis rather than going for best available talent. Missing Nathan Fyfe and Jack Darling in consecutive years is a huge loss and would have made a significant difference to our forward line set ups.

Average draft!

RL has obvioulsy now acknowledged the clubs extremely poor drafting record - however we have to ask ourselves who is to blame for the above decisions Recruiters or Coach?

Good Post...whilst recruiting is not one of StKilda's strong points it comes a distant second to player development...that's where we are woeful.....

[kosifantutti23]

Good Post...whilst recruiting is not one of StKilda's strong points it comes a distant second to player development...that's where we are woeful.....

Poor recruiting and woeful player development. I guess it explains why we have been down the bottom of the ladder for the last eight years.

[BigMart]

No.....but probably why we may be ther for a while when the classes of
98-2003 retire....

[plugger66]

No.....but probably why we may be ther for a while when the classes of
98-2003 retire....

Yep and that is usually how the draft works.

[PJ]

We were never going to go for Darling after the Lovett debacle. I think in each draft you have to look at the prevailing circumstances - team needs, perceived trends, premiers strengths, etc.

[st_Trav_ofWA]

for crying out loud lets get over the whole Jack Darling thing ... we got some good kids from last years draft and who knows how good they could end up .. heck Darling could do a Goose next w/e and be a also ran for the rest of his time ...

[Dr Spaceman]

for crying out loud lets get over the whole Jack Darling thing ... we got some good kids from last years draft and who knows how good they could end up .. heck Darling could do a Goose next w/e and be a also ran for the rest of his time ...

At least it's knocked out all the "We Should Have Got Jack Riewoldt" threads

[st_Trav_ofWA]

for crying out loud lets get over the whole Jack Darling thing ... we got some good kids from last years draft and who knows how good they could end up .. heck Darling could do a Goose next w/e and be a also ran for the rest of his time ...

At least it's knocked out all the "We Should Have Got Jack Riewoldt" threads

true ...

[bobmurray]

Good Post...whilst recruiting is not one of StKilda's strong points it comes a distant second to player development...that's where we are woeful.....

Poor recruiting and woeful player development. I guess it explains why we have been down the bottom of the ladder for the last eight years.

How many flags have we won........i think the last one was about 45 years ago.

There wasn't one before that......explain that...