Chris Pelchen - The aftermath

[stinger]

Indeed it is, F.

i agree with the basis of the comments...don't know how much the pelican had a say in some of those things though...

[dragit]

Indeed it is, F.

i agree with the bsis of the comments...don't know how much the pelican had a say in some of those things though...

That's right sting… he's responsible for all the bad stuff that has happened in the last 4 years, but none of the positive stuff.

[stinger]

Indeed it is, F.

i agree with the basis of the comments...don't know how much the pelican had a say in some of those things though...

That's right sting… he's responsible for all the bad stuff that has happened in the last 4 years, but none of the positive stuff.

right for a change... if you weren't such a smartie i would tell you more

[stinger]

Indeed it is, F.

i agree with the basis of the comments...don't know how much the pelican had a say in some of those things though...

That's right sting… he's responsible for all the bad stuff that has happened in the last 4 years, but none of the positive stuff.

[SainterK]

Why can't people think he wasn't great for the club?

It's ok, I don't think he particularly cares what we think.

Reckons we're similar to hawks list 2004, except he was there an additional 7 years.

if you think he's done good or not, we have altered the plan...clearly. Hardly can say he's finished what he started.

[karnaby]

Two really good posts that shed light on the situation, thanks bergholt and thanks Bunk

[Johnny Member]

I find it unusual that he's somewhat of a 'polarising figure'.


I don't live him, don't hate him, don't think he wrecked the club, don't think he's worked wonders at the club.

I pretty much see him as 'Chris who?'.

[dragit]

Why can't people think he wasn't great for the club?

It's ok, I don't think he particularly cares what we think.

Reckons we're similar to hawks list 2004, except he was there an additional 7 years.

if you think he's done good or not, we have altered the plan...clearly. Hardly can say he's finished what he started.

I think it's totally fine to not like the guy, he looks like a pretty weird and serious unit.

But I think nearly everyone would agree that by 2011 our list was in a pretty awful situation.

If we are going to pin our recent draft and contract failures on one bloke, then I think it would only be fair to give him some credit for the good things that have happened too. Newnes, Hickey, Billings, Dunstan, Acres, Longer, Savage, White, Wright, Petracca, Cockatoo, McKenzie - nearly all of these guys would not be on the list without the hard decisions we've made in recent years.

The club now seems happy with our long term strategy so has decided to direct the funds from his role into development… you can't blame someone for not wanting to take a big pay cut surely?

[8856brother]

Why can't people think he wasn't great for the club?

It's ok, I don't think he particularly cares what we think.

Reckons we're similar to hawks list 2004, except he was there an additional 7 years.

if you think he's done good or not, we have altered the plan...clearly. Hardly can say he's finished what he started.

How's the plan been altered K? Seems pretty clear. He walked into a basket case and has now departed with the club headed in the right direction IMO. I understand there needed to be pain for us to move on. The club needed a person like him to make some hard decisions at that time. He's done his job, he's fixed the ttp and freshened the list. He's put us in a good position to try to obtain free agents over the next couple of years.

Now we are in a new phase where the club needs different skills than his to complete the job. We need to concentrate on developing our youngsters and our coaches. Not the Pelican's Niche.

[satchmo]

Why can't people think he wasn't great for the club?

Why can't people disagree with you?

You've probably racked up a hundred or so posts on the subject since he was employed, so you could hardly say that you're not allowed an opinion.

[SaintPav]

Whether you love him or loath him, I think we can all agree that Chris Pelchen is figure that generates much debate...
I'll argue this is mainly because his role as a list manager/head of football, is someone who's responsible for sacking and recruiting at a normal company
tough and contraversial gig? I would think so.

Let's look at his time at St Kilda.

Chris Pelchen officially joined the saints in August 2011.
- We have just lost coach Ross Lyon to Fremantle at the end of the season
- The club's salary cap is maxed out.. understandablly after a successful 2009/2010 campaign
- The club list talent bar a number of stars is poor.. understandablly because of poor recruiting resource and lack of focus on development under Lyon
- The club is in decline, end of an era according to Ross Lyon.

Was Chris the right person for the job to rebuild St Kilda under the circumstances?
- He did help Port Adelaide/Hawthorn to build their list, and look at them.
- We need some help urgently to re-build the list, re-balance salary cap, look for a new coach etc.
- So, with his expertise/background, I would say he is the right person for the job.

Let's look at his controversial recruiting decisions during his time.
1. Brendan Goddard leaving at the end of 2012 - Goddard is offered more money, and more success at Essendon, with our salary cap situation, regrettably we had no choice but to let him go. Note this is the first year of the free agency era, players has now more power than ever.. case in point Griffen.

2. Nick Dal Santo - Again, Nick was let go. He was 29 and is offered more opportunity and money by North Melbourne. The club had a strategy to re-balance salary cap, so again regrettablly let Nick go.

3. Ben Mcevoy to Hawthorn for Pick 18 (Dunstan), Savage and pick upgrade (19 from 24 which allowed us to get Blake Acres) - A win/win situation for both parties.
Let's be honest, Mcevoy was not a ruckmen, had little physicality and is at his best taking marks at our backline.. yes, our backline.

4. Wanted to trade Pick 1 for multiple first round picks - it fell through at the end because what was offered... If it was pick #4, #7 for our #1, #21, then I agree it's not a convincing enough offer to take.

Now letting favourite sons Goddard, Dal Santo is always going to pee off some supporters.. no matter what the rationale is... so we know why Pelchen is much hated by some on here.. but i would think it's more to do with his role/the state of our club/strategic vision, rather than Pelchen it's self. I would think somone else in the same role would made similar decisions...

Now we've made the hard decisions... (list management, salary cap wise), the club wanted to install someone to fast track the football side of things e.g. development, performance etc, it make sense for Pelchen who is a primarily a list manager/strategist to step aside. I'm not saying Pelchen is saint, and I'm sure he would have upset a lot of people inside the club with some of his decisions.. but i think some of the criticism here towards Pelchen is a little unwarranted..

In summary, Pelchen is neither a villain, or a saviour.. He took a tough job at our club in time of decline/crisis (poor list, player development, salary cap), and I for one think he did a tough job well.

End of rant.

Amen....you make a lot of sense.

contrary to others...don't agree with some of your post


he didn't get along with others.....reason lyon left....watters too in a round about way,......in the end his inability to communicate well with others cost him his job....before it was finished.....we offered bj the same amount of money ...but for some perverse reason less years....so cost us bj...don't blame pp.........mcevoy was on his plus side......but dal was a disaster......we got sfa for him...would have got delaney anyway.........piss poor decision.........stanley...according to some in the know was traded mainly as an afterthought.,......as the club states they weren't going to do that......has the potential to really bite us on the arse......pick 21 will have to be chosen wisely......he was so obsessed with numbers of early draft picks rather than the quality of those picks.....probably had to be restrained from giving in to gws.......drafting, saad, milers and tdl were disasters and will come back to haunt us......we could have recruited some decent kids.....

....overall he was a miserable failure who spit before his job was completd...thankfully......we probably would have folded if he has spent to many more years at the club......hate to say it...but nixon is right...

Blimey Sting, not the Lyon line again. I'll repeat what I've said numerous times - Pelchen had nothing to do with Lyon leaving.

Lyon left for money, pure and simple. He'd burnt the family fortune by succumbing to spivs in his time at Sin City....then, along came the GFC. Leverage cost him the lot, mostly on a speccy mining company. For a period when he came to coach us he and the family had to live with parents (can't recall if it was his or her parents).

Freo found out and offered him a massively front ended contract. He took it, and he didn't even bother to tell his manager (who, as I recall from an article by Nathan Burke, was sitting and negotiating with us in a cafe in Seaford, only to get a call from Lyon to tell him he'd gone to Fremantle).

Pelchen had Jackshyte to do with Lyon leaving. I also tend to think it was probably Lyon's clout that overruled others and led to us swapping a teens draft pick for Lovett.

And, in the pantheon of stuffed up list management by our footy club, that's hard to beat.

He leveraged into a mining speccy? What a greedy idiot!

I thought he had to move in with his old man in Resevoir.

He still owns a pub in Fitzroy.

[SaintPav]

Pelchen on SEN said we were spending 111% of our SC when he arrived in 2011.

The list was "in decay" and 'tough decisions had to be made"

We were in a world of SC pain and our window was slammed shut.

What other possible course was there to as quickly as possible get a list that was capable of competing?

Pelchan also said the Saints list was within 5% of where the Hawthorn list was in 2004.

Said to expect pain for 12-18 months and a reasonable expectation to be a finals contender in 2017.

Without losing those STAR and GREAT Saints players, we could not possibly have the cap relief we now have where we can target players in the next seasons trade time.

So for everyone critisising the strategy to get the SC down and get the team competitive, could you please give us your alternative plan?

Oh BTW was refreshing to hear an ex employee be fulsome in praise of the club and its direction, gives us some insight on the SC problems and remedies, also how the STKFC is in the top third for football spend in the league and how it has now got 4 FT development coaches and 4 FT recruiters.

Good to hear positive news from someone from the coalface.

Was Pelchen on SEN today?

[SideshowMilne]

Yes, morning glory and should be on their site.

Spoke really well and positively about the club he is no longer at. Love the Pelican.

[SainterK]

Why can't people think he wasn't great for the club?

Why can't people disagree with you?

You've probably racked up a hundred or so posts on the subject since he was employed, so you could hardly say that you're not allowed an opinion.

only a hundred?

Your underplaying my obsessiveness...

[bigred]

I thought he did a good job.

Had to make some decisions to move on some substantially popular players, before they lost all currency.

We have had issues with this in the past.....

Rebuild was well and truly under control.


Anyway.

Back to my Ham Radio....

[saintsRrising]

, we have altered the plan...clearly.

Sorry, I missed that announcement.

Can you please explain to rest of us which part of his list management plan has clearly been altered? What is our new list management plan?

In the meantime I will still expect the Club to keep:
> Gaining players through early draft picks, and attempting to gain more picks in the first three rounds where possible, and in particular in the first 20 odd picks
> Doing trading deals that provide good leverage, and if not enough leverage then they do not go ahead
> Chasing Free Agents in a season or two (this will depend in part our progress next season )
> Retiring/delisting older players, as we build up more youth (Schneider may still go this year).
> To churn through new players, till we find enough good players

Hardly can say he's finished what he started.

Has any one stated that?

The key thing for me is that it was begun, and will get finished, after many years of stumbling around in both managing player payments and the list we now have a clear strategy for both. That there are successors versed in his approach is a good thing. I am sure that it will evolve, but it is going to keep going, and not be "torn-up". If for no other reason that we are so far along with it, that it would be stupid to abandon it now.

[saintsRrising]

If we are going to pin our recent draft and contract failures on one bloke, then I think it would only be fair to give him some credit for the good things that have happened too. Newnes, Hickey, Billings, Dunstan, Acres, Longer, Savage, White, Wright, Petracca, Cockatoo, McKenzie - nearly all of these guys would not be on the list without the hard decisions we've made in recent years.

The club now seems happy with our long term strategy so has decided to direct the funds from his role into development… you can't blame someone for not wanting to take a big pay cut surely?

Good post.

I created a thread a while back on how we were "super-tanking" to get the lowest picks possible. So if you enjoy watching Petracca, Billings and the like next season, it is worth noting that without the Pelchen Plan that they would not be there.

Without Pelchen we might still have BJ OR Dal playing...but not both as you cannot pay 110% of your salary cap....and be a "Carlton" who are trying to hold onto their older players, and top up with readymades in the mistaken belief that they are in finals tilt mode. But all they are doing is treading water, and going nowhere till Malthouse retires and they change tack.

[satchmo]

Why can't people think he wasn't great for the club?

Why can't people disagree with you?

You've probably racked up a hundred or so posts on the subject since he was employed, so you could hardly say that you're not allowed an opinion.

only a hundred?

Your underplaying my obsessiveness...

I've been told a millions times not to exagerate.

[dragit]

only a hundred?

Your underplaying my obsessiveness...

I just did a quick search for "pelchen" within your posts and only came up with 155 entries.

[Bunk_Moreland]

Pelchen on SEN said we were spending 111% of our SC when he arrived in 2011.

The list was "in decay" and 'tough decisions had to be made"

We were in a world of SC pain and our window was slammed shut.

What other possible course was there to as quickly as possible get a list that was capable of competing?

Pelchan also said the Saints list was within 5% of where the Hawthorn list was in 2004.

Said to expect pain for 12-18 months and a reasonable expectation to be a finals contender in 2017.

Without losing those STAR and GREAT Saints players, we could not possibly have the cap relief we now have where we can target players in the next seasons trade time.

So for everyone critisising the strategy to get the SC down and get the team competitive, could you please give us your alternative plan?

Oh BTW was refreshing to hear an ex employee be fulsome in praise of the club and its direction, gives us some insight on the SC problems and remedies, also how the STKFC is in the top third for football spend in the league and how it has now got 4 FT development coaches and 4 FT recruiters.

Good to hear positive news from someone from the coalface.

Was Pelchen on SEN today?

yes. It was a very good interview, went for about 10 minutes.

Went through the financial issues compared to Hawthorn. Bottom half for finances BUT top third for football dept spending.

When he started Saints had one development coach and 1.5 FT recruiters

Now four FT for each.

Cap maxed out (to 111%) in 2011 after going all out for a flag.

Needed to reign in the cap and revitalize a "decaying" list.

The strategy in place was seen as the best and quickest way to make the Saints a contender again.

Full of praise for the club and the organization.

Again I ask, for all of those who are critisising the strategy, give an alternative that

1) Dealt with the 111% of SC spending
2) Dealt with the lack of development and recruiting
3) Dealt with revitalizing the list to make the club a competitive and a contender
4) Doing all this while the club was in the bottom half of the competition for finances.

I would love to know what your alternatives are?

have yet to hear anything but moaning and whinging.

[stinger]

Pelchen on SEN said we were spending 111% of our SC when he arrived in 2011.

The list was "in decay" and 'tough decisions had to be made"

We were in a world of SC pain and our window was slammed shut.

What other possible course was there to as quickly as possible get a list that was capable of competing?

Pelchan also said the Saints list was within 5% of where the Hawthorn list was in 2004.

Said to expect pain for 12-18 months and a reasonable expectation to be a finals contender in 2017.

Without losing those STAR and GREAT Saints players, we could not possibly have the cap relief we now have where we can target players in the next seasons trade time.

So for everyone critisising the strategy to get the SC down and get the team competitive, could you please give us your alternative plan?

Oh BTW was refreshing to hear an ex employee be fulsome in praise of the club and its direction, gives us some insight on the SC problems and remedies, also how the STKFC is in the top third for football spend in the league and how it has now got 4 FT development coaches and 4 FT recruiters.

Good to hear positive news from someone from the coalface.

Was Pelchen on SEN today?

yes. It was a very good interview, went for about 10 minutes.

Went through the financial issues compared to Hawthorn. Bottom half for finances BUT top third for football dept spending.

When he started Saints had one development coach and 1.5 FT recruiters

Now four FT for each.

Cap maxed out (to 111%) in 2011 after going all out for a flag.

Needed to reign in the cap and revitalize a "decaying" list.

The strategy in place was seen as the best and quickest way to make the Saints a contender again.

Full of praise for the club and the organization.

Again I ask, for all of those who are critisising the strategy, give an alternative that

1) Dealt with the 111% of SC spending
2) Dealt with the lack of development and recruiting
3) Dealt with revitalizing the list to make the club a competitive and a contender
4) Doing all this while the club was in the bottom half of the competition for finances.

I would love to know what your alternatives are?

have yet to hear anything but moaning and whinging.

all good things.......hope no one else picks him up before the draft though.......he knows who we are targetting...useful information to all the other clubs...

[SainterK]

only a hundred?

Your underplaying my obsessiveness...

I just did a quick search for "pelchen" within your posts and only came up with 155 entries.

Pelchen

156....

[cwrcyn]

Action had to be taken. Anyone who couldn't see we were in for a dreadful decline were fooling themselves. Pelchen was in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation with the supporter base, but better to make bold and hard decisions than fall for the same delusions that cursed Richmond for 30 years. I don't agree with everything he's done regarding list management, but i think the overall approach has been correct, and with that approach there are always going to be unpopular decisions and one or two mistakes along the way. We are better positioned now than we were in 2011. It may not seem like it for many on here, and the vitriol directed at Pelchen seems odd, given that most people, like me, have no idea about the internal relationships within the club.....how could we? All we can do is look at the list management and make a call on that alone. For me, I am glad we made some tough calls, even though I was disappointed to see dal Santo leave.

I see us being in a similar position to where we were when Grant Thomas took over as coach, with a large group of players coming through at around the same time and within a similar age group. There will be much improvement from the likes of Billings, Dunstan, Templeton, Webster, Newnes, Bruce, Ross, White, and Wright. The main difference this time around is that our ruck stocks are better, and our recruiting staff can now focus on midfielders and genuine key position players only for the next few drafts.

There were far greater list management errors during the Lyon era, when Pelchen was not around.

[Armagizmo]

Have a look at his net results.

Basically he was left with a basket case list to build from. When he joined us in 2011 we had the oldest, most experienced list in the comp. Next year we'll be right down the bottom on both measures. Someone had to make that happen.

Look at the guys he delisted or retired:

Delisted:
Cahill, Clarke, Crocker, Gamble, Gram, Heyne, Johnson, Jones, Ledger, Peake, Polo, A Smith, Winmar, Andreoli (r), Archer (r), Ferguson (r)
(also Dennis-Lane, Dunell, Lever, Milera, Saad, Staley (r) who were picked up during his reign)
Retired:
Baker, Blake, Eddy, Gardiner, Hayes, Koschitzke, McQualter, Milne (also Maister who was picked up during his reign)

Obviously a few stars at the end of their careers but mostly spuds who were on the list before he arrived at the club. There's probably 20 guys there who are the right age to still be on our list if they were any good. They're not and that's not Pelchen's fault. He had a lot of work to do.

That said, he lost others as well:

Free Agents: Dal Santo, Goddard, Gwilt
Traded Out: Cripps, Lynch, McEvoy, Stanley, Walsh
Lost: Dawson

A lot more quality there. The argument against Pelchen is that he didn't get full value for these guys. I'm not sure I agree with that but there's certainly a case to be made. So the question is who did he get in return?

Traded In: Bruce, Delaney, Hickey, Lee, Longer, Savage (also Dennis-Lane, Milera, Saad who are gone)
Free Agent: Roberton

There are seven guys here who have every chance of being mainstays of the club for a period. Yes, Roberton had a disappointing season and Lee is very much at the crossroads. But one way or another there's some talent here. Probably no superstars though. Hopefully the stars are here:

Drafted - top 25:
pick 1 2014, Billings (3), Dunstan (18), Acres (19), pick 21 2014, pick 22 2014, Wright (24), Ross (25), White (25)
Drafted - later:
Markworth (35), Newnes (37), Murdoch (40), pick 41 2014, Webster (42), Saunders (43), Pierce (75) (also Lever (60), Maister (68) who are gone)
Drafted - rookies:
Shenton (r), Minchington (r), Templeton (r), Weller (r), Holmes (r) (also Dunell (r), Staley (r) who are gone)

Obviously some good/very good players, a bunch who the jury's still out on. Only a couple of potential stars. So it's really going to come down seriously to picks 1, 21 and 22 this time around. If we get Rising Star nominations from two of them next year (like this year) then the picture will look pretty rosy.


Look, it's way too early to judge. In five years we'll know a lot more, in ten we'll know everything. But right now there are some serious unknowns. If you don't rate Lee and Murdoch and Hickey etc then obviously you're feeling like Pelchen did a terrible job. If you do rate our kids and think they can be very good players then you do. I don't reckon either position is really rational - we just don't know enough yet.

This is excellent- the most thorough overview of the Pelchen era on record I would say.

sensational analysis. really makes it easy to evaluate, and like you say, comes down to your individual opinion of our 50/50 draftees.

[SaintPav]

Thanks for the updates BM and Sideshow.