I'm torn...

[Teflon]

Saints are aiming again for three picks in the top 20 at year end.

A top 5 and a trade or two.

Aiming and achieving are two different things.

Source???

We failed to do this in 2014, though went close.

I can't see who we can trade now that we can afford to lose. One of Longer or Hickey could be expendable as both are No1 rucks.

We have some expendable players, but they would not attract Top 20 picks even if bundled.

The bigger question you avoid is why????
Why so aggressive this year....according to some on here the list is cherry ripe to rise as it is??????

Maybe the club know thats rubbish? and tank.. the lord for that....

[Teflon]

Ofcourse its not tanking.....but as the season draws to a close.....I expect some very early season ops/youthfull teams..../position juggling...

Now that is funny

Did you actually bother to look at who we are playing in the last 5 rounds before dashing of your latest gem?

Position juggling? Even with our best possible team we would probably lose all 5 with the most likely exception being the North game.

If you want to tank Teflon you need to do it against teams that you would otherwise win against You know like the last game againts the Dees.

So no upsets in an AFL season can occur? All wins align to whats written on paper? Watch much footy?
I wouldve thought the last 5 or so rounds of the year are a very good reminders of how lower sides often can and do get up against more fancied opponents?
For someone telling us all how we cant be losers and must win at all costs.....you have little real faith in this side dont you?
Whose really supporting us?

[Teflon]

i think our 'high octane get the pill back play the fast break ' style of footy already guarantees we run out of legs as the season progresses.
Good.
... more fitness needed.

Probably run out of legs on the brink of 9th next season.
Good.
... more fitness required

... ahhh , ere we are , 2017 pre season already.

Playing a great brand of footy aint we !!!
Fit 'n Fast bunch of farkers aint we !!!
Drilled , confident 'n with the cattle to get on with it.

Good ay.

Now that I like!
yep, we are playing a great brand and its only going to get better when we introduce some further elite talent into that midfield which is suspect...

[saintsRrising]

i think our 'high octane get the pill back play the fast break ' style of footy already guarantees we run out of legs as the season progresses.
Good.
... more fitness needed.

Probably run out of legs on the brink of 9th next season.
Good.
... more fitness required

... ahhh , ere we are , 2017 pre season already.

Playing a great brand of footy aint we !!!
Fit 'n Fast bunch of farkers aint we !!!
Drilled , confident 'n with the cattle to get on with it.

Good ay.

Agree.

And as Bomber noted Richo is having the players play now how he wants them to play in three years. So by the time they have built their tanks and bodies the gameplan and set-plays will be instinctive.

[asiu]

i saw that !!!


Tank the Lord indeed.

[asiu]

...did Bomber say that tonight ?

'n good on the Club.
... its smart.

We need the Admin to be solid n stay solid as well.
... no more 'lost years' like when the last 10 year plan morphed into 2 lots of 5
over 12.

[desertsaint]

The guys are looking great and playing to the plan, but they're young and we'll fall away. Those that want high picks will get them, no way we'll finish out of bottom five. No need to tank, we just aren't there yet. And we definitely need to add a bit more quality to become a real contender. But as mentioned - give these lads a few years to grow bodies, fitness, knowledge, and finesse and we'll give it a real shake. Exciting to see it all unfold - but it's years from fruition.

[Austinnn]

I want a top 5 pick or below this year - does that mean we beat Dogs? dont know....Does that mean we win week later? not fussed. I cant be clearer than that - I'll letyou pick the wins/losses as Ive stated numerous times (and you clearly neglect to understand) winning right now to me is a nice aside.
We domnt have a list with enough talent to seriously challenge the top end
We need to get talent in
We need to maximise our draft options in the short-medium term and before all our ageing stars go (who are largely propping up our performances.....go check the weekends game...)
Getting all hot and sweaty cause we managed to get lucky and keep Melbourne at bay isnt my idea of success.
I understand for others the bars a lot lower - thats fine too and explains those supporters who accept mediocrity so they can have some short term gratification a win brings.

Away from all the rhetoric, you are still avoiding honesty. You can't tell us how many games you'd be prepared to lose, it makes you look like you want to lose. Keep going with your jokey put downs, but do us the courtesy of answering that question without trying to twist it around.

You are happy to mortgage our present for a big pay off in a few years, but isn't there a football fan screaming inside that reptilian Mr Burns style schemer? Someone who wants Leigh Montagna to do whatever it takes to give all his young teammates some idea of what an AFL win feels like? How many games do you get to? It must frustrate to be surrounded with all those short term losers only caring if we win or lose.

Your points pretend that we have no chance of doing any of them if we finish mid ladder, as if there's only 5 kids in the country that could make a difference.
Its so simplistic, but not really proven yet. You also claim we non tankers are happy just to win in the short term with no sustainable long term vision, a binary argument that even you know is nonsense. The only difference is that you've forgone the pleasures of football because you think you're Chris Pelchen.

Its one thing to console yourself with the rewards of being rubbish, a its another thing entirely to actively seek rubbishness for some theoretical advantage. If this is what Saints fans are like now, no wonder we're getting such low numbers at our home games. All at home playing super coach on the internet and dreaming of Darcy Parish I'll be bound. And you have the termacity to question our ambition.

[falka]

If we have pick 4 or 5 and have the list we have (don't want to lose any young players who could get a good pick e.g. Billings)

Can someone please tell me ho on earth we could get 2 top 20 picks, let alone 3 in top 20?

[plugger66]

Im an amazing guy/gal so not surprised my response is amazing (I could be cat woman...)
I've already said I want to win every game including the flag!! (whose with me!!)
But that's unrealistic
How are Carltin/Melbourne even relevant to what happens at an entirely different club in St Kilda..... again, nonsensical airy fairy, poorly thought out examples that don't relate!!
So what we want and what we need right now IMO are poles apart
I've also stated winning isn't the most important thing in our sides development right now IMO
I don't feel I can be much more categoric than that
Responding to simplistic questions on when talking about long term planning is irrelevant
I hope you find this response amazing too!!

But Richmond are some how relevant. That is your problem. When you mention sides its relevant but when others mention them it isn't. Talk about complete rubbish. Again you have just displayed no courage. Talking in riddles because you don't want to say we will hopefully lose games.

Clearly you cant, wont or dont understand the discussion.
In the context of finishing 9th I think Richmond are entirely relevant....
Carlton/Melbourne have no resemblance to us in anyway so whatever point you continue to try and make makes no sense.
It really is very simple.
Now I think you are Robin.....never quite good enough in your own right to be a super hero and always just a little to closely admiring of Batman coming down that rope for my liking...

Yes simple is the right word. This thread is about finishing near the bottom to get good picks. Carlton and Melbourne are certainly relevant. Richmond really isn't. Now whats going on in your head I cant explain but not everything is about finishing 9th on this thread. matter of fact most isn't. Its on whether finishing near the bottom for years helps you get to the top eventually. There is bugger all sides that proves that happens. And anyway you must live in fantasy land if you think we can suddenly go from bottom 3 for 4 years and then into the 8. We may actually have to finish ninth. That may mentally effect you. Will you need some help to get through that?

In another post you say we need to maximise our picks. Not nearly maximise or maybe maximise. To maximise our picks we need to lose every game. If we win games we may not maximise our picks. If you could explain what you think maximise means that may clear things up but people who understand the word maximise realise that would mean you don't want to win anymore games this season. Please have the courage to say that. It wont hurt No one knows you. Over to you Penguin.

[Old Mate]

If we have pick 4 or 5 and have the list we have (don't want to lose any young players who could get a good pick e.g. Billings)

Can someone please tell me ho on earth we could get 2 top 20 picks, let alone 3 in top 20?

3 in 20 is a loose objective. Part of the clubs list strategy is too get multiple picks in the first 2 rounds. A pick in between out 1st and 2nd pick ideal. Also don't discount Bailey Rice being in that category - despite the club using its 3rd pick once bidding is matched.

There are untouchables on our list however some in the fringe of the untouchable list may be moved on if a McEvoy / Stanley deal comes along.

In the gun for trade
White
Murdoch
Saunders

[bergholt]

If we have pick 4 or 5 and have the list we have (don't want to lose any young players who could get a good pick e.g. Billings)

Can someone please tell me ho on earth we could get 2 top 20 picks, let alone 3 in top 20?

3 in 20 is a loose objective. Part of the clubs list strategy is too get multiple picks in the first 2 rounds. A pick in between out 1st and 2nd pick ideal. Also don't discount Bailey Rice being in that category - despite the club using its 3rd pick once bidding is matched.

There are untouchables on our list however some in the fringe of the untouchable list may be moved on if a McEvoy / Stanley deal comes along.

In the gun for trade
White
Murdoch
Saunders

Surely none of those guys are worth more than a fifth round pick? They can't get a game with us so I don't see who would trade for them.

And on the Bailey Rice thing, the father son bidding process has changed so we'll basically pay full value now. If someone else values him at a second round pick, it'll cost us the equivalent of a second round pick.

[Teflon]

I want a top 5 pick or below this year - does that mean we beat Dogs? dont know....Does that mean we win week later? not fussed. I cant be clearer than that - I'll letyou pick the wins/losses as Ive stated numerous times (and you clearly neglect to understand) winning right now to me is a nice aside.
We domnt have a list with enough talent to seriously challenge the top end
We need to get talent in
We need to maximise our draft options in the short-medium term and before all our ageing stars go (who are largely propping up our performances.....go check the weekends game...)
Getting all hot and sweaty cause we managed to get lucky and keep Melbourne at bay isnt my idea of success.
I understand for others the bars a lot lower - thats fine too and explains those supporters who accept mediocrity so they can have some short term gratification a win brings.

Away from all the rhetoric, you are still avoiding honesty. You can't tell us how many games you'd be prepared to lose, it makes you look like you want to lose. Keep going with your jokey put downs, but do us the courtesy of answering that question without trying to twist it around.

You are happy to mortgage our present for a big pay off in a few years, but isn't there a football fan screaming inside that reptilian Mr Burns style schemer? Someone who wants Leigh Montagna to do whatever it takes to give all his young teammates some idea of what an AFL win feels like? How many games do you get to? It must frustrate to be surrounded with all those short term losers only caring if we win or lose.

Your points pretend that we have no chance of doing any of them if we finish mid ladder, as if there's only 5 kids in the country that could make a difference.
Its so simplistic, but not really proven yet. You also claim we non tankers are happy just to win in the short term with no sustainable long term vision, a binary argument that even you know is nonsense. The only difference is that you've forgone the pleasures of football because you think you're Chris Pelchen.

Its one thing to console yourself with the rewards of being rubbish, a its another thing entirely to actively seek rubbishness for some theoretical advantage. If this is what Saints fans are like now, no wonder we're getting such low numbers at our home games. All at home playing super coach on the internet and dreaming of Darcy Parish I'll be bound. And you have the termacity to question our ambition.

Honestly the above is worthy of a Robbo HS article (you can forget being Pelchen that's for sure....)

How bout you answer a question for a change?
Here goes:
Give me the measurable, tangible benefit to our team in 5 years from beating Melbourne last weekend ? Tell me exactly what % improvement that translates into in the longer term????
I expect you'll come back with..... "Belief in the young boys eyes....." yada yada yada
I tell you what..... IF we land a Parish with a top 3-5 pick..... I'll come back in 5 years and statistically prove what he's been worth...

Stop with emotiv drivel or getting your populist views from HS articles or worse, hiding behind cliched football intangibles - it's like those dreamers who insist on rhetoric before a game like "play for the jumper boys!!" - it last 1 minute and means squat when you hit the field

I'm unsure what the Mr Burns reptile but was about....

[Teflon]

Im an amazing guy/gal so not surprised my response is amazing (I could be cat woman...)
I've already said I want to win every game including the flag!! (whose with me!!)
But that's unrealistic
How are Carltin/Melbourne even relevant to what happens at an entirely different club in St Kilda..... again, nonsensical airy fairy, poorly thought out examples that don't relate!!
So what we want and what we need right now IMO are poles apart
I've also stated winning isn't the most important thing in our sides development right now IMO
I don't feel I can be much more categoric than that
Responding to simplistic questions on when talking about long term planning is irrelevant
I hope you find this response amazing too!!

But Richmond are some how relevant. That is your problem. When you mention sides its relevant but when others mention them it isn't. Talk about complete rubbish. Again you have just displayed no courage. Talking in riddles because you don't want to say we will hopefully lose games.

Clearly you cant, wont or dont understand the discussion.
In the context of finishing 9th I think Richmond are entirely relevant....
Carlton/Melbourne have no resemblance to us in anyway so whatever point you continue to try and make makes no sense.
It really is very simple.
Now I think you are Robin.....never quite good enough in your own right to be a super hero and always just a little to closely admiring of Batman coming down that rope for my liking...

Yes simple is the right word. This thread is about finishing near the bottom to get good picks. Carlton and Melbourne are certainly relevant. Richmond really isn't. Now whats going on in your head I cant explain but not everything is about finishing 9th on this thread. matter of fact most isn't. Its on whether finishing near the bottom for years helps you get to the top eventually. There is bugger all sides that proves that happens. And anyway you must live in fantasy land if you think we can suddenly go from bottom 3 for 4 years and then into the 8. We may actually have to finish ninth. That may mentally effect you. Will you need some help to get through that?

In another post you say we need to maximise our picks. Not nearly maximise or maybe maximise. To maximise our picks we need to lose every game. If we win games we may not maximise our picks. If you could explain what you think maximise means that may clear things up but people who understand the word maximise realise that would mean you don't want to win anymore games this season. Please have the courage to say that. It wont hurt No one knows you. Over to you Penguin.

Am I still amazing ?
Grasping a concept isn't your strong suit -it's all black and white with you like..... "AFL footy in schools is struggling because of women teachers.....".... Yeah.... that's the only reason...lol
Again, who says we need to be down as long as Melbourne or floating like Carlton? Where in this thread has it been stated we should emulate their approach? Do provide some proof (use your internet courage meter to work out if you'll answer it ..) As always, and so predictable, you make up what people gave said and pretend it's fact .... not very honest is it?
Anyway, let's try the "maximise" concept ...
I want to be a millionaire. To do that I need to "maximise" my savings potential. In your simplistic view of the word that means EVERY single cent I earn has to go into my bank...... but can I really afford to invest EVERY (again your view of maximise), single penny into my bank? Or do I have to also take into consideration my living circumstances and therefore the proposition becomes:
Maximise my current savings in the context of where my living expenses is currently at???
It's exactly the same premise for the Saints
Does maximising our chances to land a top 5 pick mean we have to drop EVERY single game? In the context of our development (where we are currently at), is that a good thing?? Of course not and no one has said that on this thread....
But if the choice comes where winning 1 extra game puts that pick opportunity in jeopardy I see no long term measurable benefit in the win...... especially IF that win meant the difference between gaining a midfield gunkike Parish OR if it means removing any possible chance for a priority pick (which is not off the table).
I expect you won't understand and that's ok.... cause it ain't black or white like you'd like it to be - maybe you should a followed the Pies??

[gringo]

Those little wins might make us a team who has ridiculous self belief which might actually be better than the benefits of moving two or three places up the draft order. Geelong continue to defy the odds by just having a belief that they will win. They seem to have it in their DNA. Melbourne and carlton have had ridiculous access to high picks and Gold Coast have assembled the best young talent for 5 years and none of them are doing so well. Collingwood and geelong can bring in Taylor Adams and Caddy types because the kids coming believe they will remain competitive and are still moving forward. The model I want to follow is the Collingwood Geelong one.

[Old Mate]

If we have pick 4 or 5 and have the list we have (don't want to lose any young players who could get a good pick e.g. Billings)

Can someone please tell me ho on earth we could get 2 top 20 picks, let alone 3 in top 20?

3 in 20 is a loose objective. Part of the clubs list strategy is too get multiple picks in the first 2 rounds. A pick in between out 1st and 2nd pick ideal. Also don't discount Bailey Rice being in that category - despite the club using its 3rd pick once bidding is matched.

There are untouchables on our list however some in the fringe of the untouchable list may be moved on if a McEvoy / Stanley deal comes along.

In the gun for trade
White
Murdoch
Saunders

Surely none of those guys are worth more than a fifth round pick? They can't get a game with us so I don't see who would trade for them.

And on the Bailey Rice thing, the father son bidding process has changed so we'll basically pay full value now. If someone else values him at a second round pick, it'll cost us the equivalent of a second round pick.

They could be worth a pick upgrade or late 2nd in Whites case. Freo could offer their 2nd for White, which will be a pick between 35-40. The other two could be 3rds / 4ths which would help in getting Rice.

The new F/S rules still makes the club use its next pick after the bidding pick but is based on a points system which offers the club taking the F/S a points discount. Hypothetically, a club could bid their second rounder which falls just after our second rounder meaning we use our third plus potentially a later pick received from trading out a player. Not having the points table in front of me makes it difficult to say exactly what we would give up if Rice is bidder with pick 25 for instance but I think it may be something like our 3rd and 4th pick meaning we still use our first 2 picks at the draft.

[saynta]

I want a top 5 pick or below this year - does that mean we beat Dogs? dont know....Does that mean we win week later? not fussed. I cant be clearer than that - I'll letyou pick the wins/losses as Ive stated numerous times (and you clearly neglect to understand) winning right now to me is a nice aside.
We domnt have a list with enough talent to seriously challenge the top end
We need to get talent in
We need to maximise our draft options in the short-medium term and before all our ageing stars go (who are largely propping up our performances.....go check the weekends game...)
Getting all hot and sweaty cause we managed to get lucky and keep Melbourne at bay isnt my idea of success.
I understand for others the bars a lot lower - thats fine too and explains those supporters who accept mediocrity so they can have some short term gratification a win brings.

Away from all the rhetoric, you are still avoiding honesty. You can't tell us how many games you'd be prepared to lose, it makes you look like you want to lose. Keep going with your jokey put downs, but do us the courtesy of answering that question without trying to twist it around.

You are happy to mortgage our present for a big pay off in a few years, but isn't there a football fan screaming inside that reptilian Mr Burns style schemer? Someone who wants Leigh Montagna to do whatever it takes to give all his young teammates some idea of what an AFL win feels like? How many games do you get to? It must frustrate to be surrounded with all those short term losers only caring if we win or lose.

Your points pretend that we have no chance of doing any of them if we finish mid ladder, as if there's only 5 kids in the country that could make a difference.
Its so simplistic, but not really proven yet. You also claim we non tankers are happy just to win in the short term with no sustainable long term vision, a binary argument that even you know is nonsense. The only difference is that you've forgone the pleasures of football because you think you're Chris Pelchen.

Its one thing to console yourself with the rewards of being rubbish, a its another thing entirely to actively seek rubbishness for some theoretical advantage. If this is what Saints fans are like now, no wonder we're getting such low numbers at our home games. All at home playing super coach on the internet and dreaming of Darcy Parish I'll be bound. And you have the termacity to question our ambition.

Is termacity a word even?

I think you mean "temerity".

" Definition of temerity by Merriam-Webster
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/temerity
the quality of being confident and unafraid of danger or punishment especially in a way that seems rude or foolish. "

Anyway Teffers has a point. The point that Daniel Wulf kicked in the dying seconds of the match against the swans which drew the match, cost us a priority pick and Daniel Wells who just may have been more than handy in 2009 and 2010.

[saintsRrising]

Ofcourse its not tanking.....but as the season draws to a close.....I expect some very early season ops/youthfull teams..../position juggling...

Now that is funny

Did you actually bother to look at who we are playing in the last 5 rounds before dashing of your latest gem?

Position juggling? Even with our best possible team we would probably lose all 5 with the most likely exception being the North game.

If you want to tank Teflon you need to do it against teams that you would otherwise win against You know like the last game againts the Dees.

So no upsets in an AFL season can occur? All wins align to whats written on paper? Watch much footy?
I wouldve thought the last 5 or so rounds of the year are a very good reminders of how lower sides often can and do get up against more fancied opponents?
For someone telling us all how we cant be losers and must win at all costs.....you have little real faith in this side dont you?
Whose really supporting us?

you really do write a lot of garbage.

first you want to tank....now you want to say that we can win.

UNLIKE you my argument is consistent. We should try and win every game and I will be delighted to win any game.

it does not mean that it is probable that we will win some games this year.


But it is extremely funny that you clearly did not look who we were playing in the last 5 games before making your post that we should tank then.

If you want to be succesful at tanking you need to tank now...and not at the end of the year.

if you want expouse a tanking strategy please at least think it through.

[Teflon]

Ofcourse its not tanking.....but as the season draws to a close.....I expect some very early season ops/youthfull teams..../position juggling...

Now that is funny

Did you actually bother to look at who we are playing in the last 5 rounds before dashing of your latest gem?

Position juggling? Even with our best possible team we would probably lose all 5 with the most likely exception being the North game.

If you want to tank Teflon you need to do it against teams that you would otherwise win against You know like the last game againts the Dees.

So no upsets in an AFL season can occur? All wins align to whats written on paper? Watch much footy?
I wouldve thought the last 5 or so rounds of the year are a very good reminders of how lower sides often can and do get up against more fancied opponents?
For someone telling us all how we cant be losers and must win at all costs.....you have little real faith in this side dont you?
Whose really supporting us?

you really do write a lot of garbage.

first you want to tank....now you want to say that we can win.

UNLIKE you my argument is consistent. We should try and win every game and I will be delighted to win any game.

it does not mean that it is probable that we will win some games this year.


But it is extremely funny that you clearly did not look who we were playing in the last 5 games before making your post that we should tank then.

If you want to be succesful at tanking you need to tank now...and not at the end of the year.

if you want expouse a tanking strategy please at least think it through.

The only consistent thing in your argument is the constant diahhorea you keep distributing
I don't care who the wins/losses come against as I've said repeatedly winning right now is not IMO our no 1 priority
Are you saying if 1 extra win this season means we potentially miss out on an A grade mid in Parish and any hope of a priority pick so we can beat the Lions then that's our best strategy given where our list is at????
Are you honestly advocating that? Let us all know????
If so you are further mired in HS cliche land than even I imagined

[Bunk_Moreland]

Saints are aiming again for three picks in the top 20 at year end.

A top 5 and a trade or two.

Aiming and achieving are two different things.

Source???

We failed to do this in 2014, though went close.

I can't see who we can trade now that we can afford to lose. One of Longer or Hickey could be expendable as both are No1 rucks.

We have some expendable players, but they would not attract Top 20 picks even if bundled.

The bigger question you avoid is why????
Why so aggressive this year....according to some on here the list is cherry ripe to rise as it is??????

Maybe the club know thats rubbish? and tank.. the lord for that....

The reasons are varied.

1) It was the plan to have three inside the top twenty for three years running this being the final year
2) The offer put in front of Sheil and Sloan were not accepted although the $$ offers were a deal above what GWS or the Crows could offer. Both stayed because they can feel that GWS and Adelaide are closer to a flag than the wooden spooner Saints.

Which brings us to no 3.

As Damien Hardwick pointed out, the current FA rules are too long. An older FA or RFA player around 26 or so will want to go to a club that is able to vie for a flag in the next couple of years. A club like St.Kilda will not be able to attract these recruits.

So unless FA rules change, the clubs lower down will not be able to attract FA.

Therefore tanking menas you will forever be in a constant state of rebuild and you will never be able to attract Free Agency players. Much better to pick up a top ten draftee to compliment the developing list on hand and go up the ladder thereby attracting Free Agents who can propel the club into finals and beyond.

Tanking kills a clubs chances according to an AFL coach.

[Bunk_Moreland]

I want a top 5 pick or below this year - does that mean we beat Dogs? dont know....Does that mean we win week later? not fussed. I cant be clearer than that - I'll letyou pick the wins/losses as Ive stated numerous times (and you clearly neglect to understand) winning right now to me is a nice aside.
We domnt have a list with enough talent to seriously challenge the top end
We need to get talent in
We need to maximise our draft options in the short-medium term and before all our ageing stars go (who are largely propping up our performances.....go check the weekends game...)
Getting all hot and sweaty cause we managed to get lucky and keep Melbourne at bay isnt my idea of success.
I understand for others the bars a lot lower - thats fine too and explains those supporters who accept mediocrity so they can have some short term gratification a win brings.

Away from all the rhetoric, you are still avoiding honesty. You can't tell us how many games you'd be prepared to lose, it makes you look like you want to lose. Keep going with your jokey put downs, but do us the courtesy of answering that question without trying to twist it around.

You are happy to mortgage our present for a big pay off in a few years, but isn't there a football fan screaming inside that reptilian Mr Burns style schemer? Someone who wants Leigh Montagna to do whatever it takes to give all his young teammates some idea of what an AFL win feels like? How many games do you get to? It must frustrate to be surrounded with all those short term losers only caring if we win or lose.

Your points pretend that we have no chance of doing any of them if we finish mid ladder, as if there's only 5 kids in the country that could make a difference.
Its so simplistic, but not really proven yet. You also claim we non tankers are happy just to win in the short term with no sustainable long term vision, a binary argument that even you know is nonsense. The only difference is that you've forgone the pleasures of football because you think you're Chris Pelchen.

Its one thing to console yourself with the rewards of being rubbish, a its another thing entirely to actively seek rubbishness for some theoretical advantage. If this is what Saints fans are like now, no wonder we're getting such low numbers at our home games. All at home playing super coach on the internet and dreaming of Darcy Parish I'll be bound. And you have the termacity to question our ambition.

Is termacity a word even?

I think you mean "temerity".

" Definition of temerity by Merriam-Webster
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/temerity
the quality of being confident and unafraid of danger or punishment especially in a way that seems rude or foolish. "

Anyway Teffers has a point. The point that Daniel Wulf kicked in the dying seconds of the match against the swans which drew the match, cost us a priority pick and Daniel Wells who just may have been more than handy in 2009 and 2010.

We beat Fremantle at Optus Oval much later in the year, so this is what cost us Daniel Wells, and also the integrity argument that we DID NOT TANK and have never tanked.

[saintsRrising]

Ofcourse its not tanking.....but as the season draws to a close.....I expect some very early season ops/youthfull teams..../position juggling...

Now that is funny

Did you actually bother to look at who we are playing in the last 5 rounds before dashing of your latest gem?

Position juggling? Even with our best possible team we would probably lose all 5 with the most likely exception being the North game.

If you want to tank Teflon you need to do it against teams that you would otherwise win against You know like the last game againts the Dees.

So no upsets in an AFL season can occur? All wins align to whats written on paper? Watch much footy?
I wouldve thought the last 5 or so rounds of the year are a very good reminders of how lower sides often can and do get up against more fancied opponents?
For someone telling us all how we cant be losers and must win at all costs.....you have little real faith in this side dont you?
Whose really supporting us?

you really do write a lot of garbage.

first you want to tank....now you want to say that we can win.

UNLIKE you my argument is consistent. We should try and win every game and I will be delighted to win any game.

it does not mean that it is probable that we will win some games this year.


But it is extremely funny that you clearly did not look who we were playing in the last 5 games before making your post that we should tank then.

If you want to be succesful at tanking you need to tank now...and not at the end of the year.

if you want expouse a tanking strategy please at least think it through.

The only consistent thing in your argument is the constant diahhorea you keep distributing
I don't care who the wins/losses come against as I've said repeatedly winning right now is not IMO our no 1 priority
Are you saying if 1 extra win this season means we potentially miss out on an A grade mid in Parish and any hope of a priority pick so we can beat the Lions then that's our best strategy given where our list is at????
Are you honestly advocating that? Let us all know????
If so you are further mired in HS cliche land than even I imagined

Every time you are called out you make up s*** about what i or another posted.

you stuffed up by writing that we should tank late in the year as you failed to look and see that we were playing teams like fremantle and west coast!

[asiu]

... wasn't that the last game of the season , bbbb's last with us ?
or am i confused with my history ?

[plugger66]

Im an amazing guy/gal so not surprised my response is amazing (I could be cat woman...)
I've already said I want to win every game including the flag!! (whose with me!!)
But that's unrealistic
How are Carltin/Melbourne even relevant to what happens at an entirely different club in St Kilda..... again, nonsensical airy fairy, poorly thought out examples that don't relate!!
So what we want and what we need right now IMO are poles apart
I've also stated winning isn't the most important thing in our sides development right now IMO
I don't feel I can be much more categoric than that
Responding to simplistic questions on when talking about long term planning is irrelevant
I hope you find this response amazing too!!

But Richmond are some how relevant. That is your problem. When you mention sides its relevant but when others mention them it isn't. Talk about complete rubbish. Again you have just displayed no courage. Talking in riddles because you don't want to say we will hopefully lose games.

Clearly you cant, wont or dont understand the discussion.
In the context of finishing 9th I think Richmond are entirely relevant....
Carlton/Melbourne have no resemblance to us in anyway so whatever point you continue to try and make makes no sense.
It really is very simple.
Now I think you are Robin.....never quite good enough in your own right to be a super hero and always just a little to closely admiring of Batman coming down that rope for my liking...

Yes simple is the right word. This thread is about finishing near the bottom to get good picks. Carlton and Melbourne are certainly relevant. Richmond really isn't. Now whats going on in your head I cant explain but not everything is about finishing 9th on this thread. matter of fact most isn't. Its on whether finishing near the bottom for years helps you get to the top eventually. There is bugger all sides that proves that happens. And anyway you must live in fantasy land if you think we can suddenly go from bottom 3 for 4 years and then into the 8. We may actually have to finish ninth. That may mentally effect you. Will you need some help to get through that?

In another post you say we need to maximise our picks. Not nearly maximise or maybe maximise. To maximise our picks we need to lose every game. If we win games we may not maximise our picks. If you could explain what you think maximise means that may clear things up but people who understand the word maximise realise that would mean you don't want to win anymore games this season. Please have the courage to say that. It wont hurt No one knows you. Over to you Penguin.

Am I still amazing ?
Grasping a concept isn't your strong suit -it's all black and white with you like..... "AFL footy in schools is struggling because of women teachers.....".... Yeah.... that's the only reason...lol
Again, who says we need to be down as long as Melbourne or floating like Carlton? Where in this thread has it been stated we should emulate their approach? Do provide some proof (use your internet courage meter to work out if you'll answer it ..) As always, and so predictable, you make up what people gave said and pretend it's fact .... not very honest is it?
Anyway, let's try the "maximise" concept ...
I want to be a millionaire. To do that I need to "maximise" my savings potential. In your simplistic view of the word that means EVERY single cent I earn has to go into my bank...... but can I really afford to invest EVERY (again your view of maximise), single penny into my bank? Or do I have to also take into consideration my living circumstances and therefore the proposition becomes:
Maximise my current savings in the context of where my living expenses is currently at???
It's exactly the same premise for the Saints
Does maximising our chances to land a top 5 pick mean we have to drop EVERY single game? In the context of our development (where we are currently at), is that a good thing?? Of course not and no one has said that on this thread....
But if the choice comes where winning 1 extra game puts that pick opportunity in jeopardy I see no long term measurable benefit in the win...... especially IF that win meant the difference between gaining a midfield gunkike Parish OR if it means removing any possible chance for a priority pick (which is not off the table).
I expect you won't understand and that's ok.... cause it ain't black or white like you'd like it to be - maybe you should a followed the Pies??

Really Teffers you have sunk to a new low. Firstly please don't lie about the only reason footy is struggling is because of women teachers. Complete lie. Well saying I said that is anyway. And when did I say you said we need to down as long at Melbourne or carlton. Another lie. They are down for so long because your concept of maximising draft picks doesn't mean you get up the ladder. My cat could understand that but she a
doesn't have lot in common with cat woman.

And now to the top 5 pick which amazingly has come down from a top 3 pick over the pages but im not surprised because I doubt you even know what you have said in this thread. Very wishy washy. And what is this one extra game win. From what you have written you suddenly think we have the ability to just switch on and off our ability. I will give you the tip. We aren't that good. And that example you used is very poor but consistent with your posts on this thread.

Teffers in 30 pages you have talked in riddles, walked like a penguin, prowled like cat woman but still haven't had the courage to say win wise, what you would like to happen. Just used words like that is the system, maximise picks but win when it suits teffers, used examples that suit you but then call others out with better examples, emotive names like Parish when the draft in 6 months away and never answered a basic question. I will give you another simple question teffers. What happens in a week if draft experts have Parish at 3 Teffers. That will require us to probably lose most if all games for the rest of the year. Should we do that Teffers? By the way how many times have you seen Parish play? You use his emotive name a hell of lot. You do provide humour though. The problem is when you try actual humour it isn't funny but when you talk about this subject it is hilarious.

And one last tip. learn the rules on the priority pick if you are going to discuss the draft. All it does is embarrass you.

[plugger66]

If we have pick 4 or 5 and have the list we have (don't want to lose any young players who could get a good pick e.g. Billings)

Can someone please tell me ho on earth we could get 2 top 20 picks, let alone 3 in top 20?

3 in 20 is a loose objective. Part of the clubs list strategy is too get multiple picks in the first 2 rounds. A pick in between out 1st and 2nd pick ideal. Also don't discount Bailey Rice being in that category - despite the club using its 3rd pick once bidding is matched.

There are untouchables on our list however some in the fringe of the untouchable list may be moved on if a McEvoy / Stanley deal comes along.

In the gun for trade
White
Murdoch
Saunders

Surely none of those guys are worth more than a fifth round pick? They can't get a game with us so I don't see who would trade for them.

And on the Bailey Rice thing, the father son bidding process has changed so we'll basically pay full value now. If someone else values him at a second round pick, it'll cost us the equivalent of a second round pick.

They could be worth a pick upgrade or late 2nd in Whites case. Freo could offer their 2nd for White, which will be a pick between 35-40. The other two could be 3rds / 4ths which would help in getting Rice.

The new F/S rules still makes the club use its next pick after the bidding pick but is based on a points system which offers the club taking the F/S a points discount. Hypothetically, a club could bid their second rounder which falls just after our second rounder meaning we use our third plus potentially a later pick received from trading out a player. Not having the points table in front of me makes it difficult to say exactly what we would give up if Rice is bidder with pick 25 for instance but I think it may be something like our 3rd and 4th pick meaning we still use our first 2 picks at the draft.

I have to agree with Bergholt. Those players aren't worth a thing unfortunately. The only possible trade we could do to get close to pick 20 is Hickey or Longer.