The Recruits or the Recruiters?

[Jacks Back]

Many teams keep having players debut for them except us. I'm not talking about players that have played elsewhere (like Carlisle, Brown, etc) but players we have recruited for us to nurture.

Over the last two drafts we have done woefully either due to the players picked by our recruiting team or the players themselves are not up to it.

2015
Type Round Pick Player Current Team Games Since Drafted
National 1 18 Jade Gresham St Kilda 28
National 3 40 Brandon White St Kilda 1
National 3 49 Father/Son Bailey Rice St Kilda 0
Rookie 1 5 Nick O'Kearney St Kilda 0
Rookie 2 23 Nicholas Coughlan St Kilda 0
Rookie 3 40 Joshua Saunders 0

2016
Type Round Pick Player Current Team Games Since Drafted
National 2 25 Ben Long St Kilda 2
National 2 39 Josh Battle St Kilda 0
National 4 56 Edward Phillips St Kilda 0
Rookie 1 10 Rowan Marshall St Kilda 0

So out of 10 players picked in the last 2 years only Gresham has played plenty of games (28) and has shown something. White has played 1 game (the last of last year) and Long has played 2 which he really didn't deserve due to only average form for Sandy.

I know they are young but that doesn't stop other teams debuting players every week.

Why do we constantly pick the wrong players or are the players not living up to pre-draft expectations?

[Proph3t of egan]

Many teams keep having players debut for them except us. I'm not talking about players that have played elsewhere (like Carlisle, Brown, etc) but players we have recruited for us to nurture.

Over the last two drafts we have done woefully either due to the players picked by our recruiting team or the players themselves are not up to it.

2015
Type Round Pick Player Current Team Games Since Drafted
National 1 18 Jade Gresham St Kilda 28
National 3 40 Brandon White St Kilda 1
National 3 49 Father/Son Bailey Rice St Kilda 0
Rookie 1 5 Nick O'Kearney St Kilda 0
Rookie 2 23 Nicholas Coughlan St Kilda 0
Rookie 3 40 Joshua Saunders 0

2016
Type Round Pick Player Current Team Games Since Drafted
National 2 25 Ben Long St Kilda 2
National 2 39 Josh Battle St Kilda 0
National 4 56 Edward Phillips St Kilda 0
Rookie 1 10 Rowan Marshall St Kilda 0

So out of 10 players picked in the last 2 years only Gresham has played plenty of games (28) and has shown something. White has played 1 game (the last of last year) and Long has played 2 which he really didn't deserve due to only average form for Sandy.

I know they are young but that doesn't stop other teams debuting players every week.

Why do we constantly pick the wrong players or are the players not living up to pre-draft expectations?

I think some things can explain why they haven't debuted yet
Bailey rice-was sick last year and was only getting used to the AFL lifestyle, has been good at sandy, but others are ahead of him in his position
NOK-does not have an AFL ready body, I see him as a project player. Good skills though
Nicholas Coughlan-key defender, has had some injury problems and needs to build some form at Sandi before he is considered for AFL. seems to be a backup in case of injuries
Josh Battle-not even out of school key forward. Needs time to develop his craft and body
Ed Phillips- good athlete, but is injured right now, and is near the bottom of the list in his position
Roman Marshall-good form in the VFL. By all reports though is a boy in a mans body.

[Jacks Back]

So, in the main, it's the recruiters picking players that are nowhere near ready?

[Proph3t of egan]

So, in the main, it's the recruiters picking players that are nowhere near ready?

I guess so

[saintsRrising]

Though a bit of context:

Pick 2016 Pick 10 traded

We got Steele in who is young who has played every game

[Con Gorozidis]

It is a worry.

The 2011 draft was brilliant for us but we havent been great since. Especially seeing we have had better picks in more recent years.

2011
player...(pick)...games played
ross....(25)...69
markworth....(35).....NA
newnes.....(37)....101
webster....(42)....58
lever ....(60)...NA
maister....(68)...NA

[carn_sainter]

I think the expectation here is too high. Or too early.

2015, for example. Should we expect the 40th best 18yr old kid in the draft (or any kid) to be in the top 22 after two pre-seasons? Again on Brandon White, he's got some competition for his spot. Would we not be flipping the coin and lambasting Webster's stalled development if White was played in front of him?

One thing I think is really important regarding player expectation is that once they're on the list, they're on the list. I really think it's silly to say that he was picked at so-and-so a pick so there is a linear relationship to how well he should be playing now. As an example, McCartin at 1 should have the same expectation on him as Battle at 39. Now, presumably McCartin is a better player, but they're all equal once they're on the list. If we stuffed up and picked someone too early, or paid them too much, those are sunk costs and the basic fact of it is that all we can do is get as much out of them as possible - find a use for their strengths and a way to mitigate their weaknesses.

It's a very hard thing to discuss because there are an infinite number of things involved. White Winmar would have good insight on this, but how a player develops surely depends on a nebulous suite of many factors, some of which, to be perfectly honest, aren't necessarily able to be controlled.

Judging the recruiters, I think structurally they've done well. We seem to be well covered in all areas. I think we've put a tick in each box of all the structural components one would need (this many of that type, this many of that type). From there, it's the player and coaches and a bit of luck that would determine what level of quality they reach.

[Beno88]

I see this as a good problem. Players should earn games, not be gifted them. It's taken players like Ross, Acres, Webster, McCartin, McKenzie, Sinclair, etc time to earn games and hold their spot in the side. They've been better for it.

Further to that, in the last two seasons no side has had less injuries than us. So the opportunities are not there.

It seems we tend to draft with a long term view and rarely select ready made players. More often than not, that can be the best way to go. Dustan was seen as a ready made player, he started as so, but has gone backwards since, showing it doesn't always work.

[Sainter_Dad]

I see this as a good problem. Players should earn games, not be gifted them. It's taken players like Ross, Acres, Webster, McCartin, McKenzie, Sinclair, etc time to earn games and hold their spot in the side. They've been better for it.

Further to that, in the last two seasons no side has had less injuries than us. So the opportunities are not there.

It seems we tend to draft with a long term view and rarely select ready made players. More often than not, that can be the best way to go. Dustan was seen as a ready made player, he started as so, but has gone backwards since, showing it doesn't always work.

Wise words.

May I also add that I am loving that the last two years crop have not had to play significant games. I remember in the not too distant future that we were throwing underdone players to wolves in the hope that they were going to be the 'saviour' of the club.

Do you know which other team did not debut their youngsters for a couple of years - Hawthorn during their threepeat.

Let the kids develop and get stronger in an age/development appropriate arena - not in the rough and tough world of AFL.

[Bluthy]

Good point. Richo has shown himself to be a really conservative coach at the selection table. Remember last year his backline for a developing team was Demps, Fish, Joey, Gilbo & Gears. So forward looking....not. And I don't need to remind anyone of him taking a 33yo b-grade forward in Schneids of the rookie list to pump games into all year. Sweet jesus talk about being conservative

With Webster out it was a perfect opportunity to play Rice who showed really strong (thank you Richo) form in the VFL. A straight like for like replacement for Webbie with Rice strong defensively and a really good kick. And by god with Joey in a slow decline and Webster out we were desperate for good kicking backmen to drive us out of the back half and hit targets. But no...lets go back to long bomb Sav. Rice probably wishes he chose Carlton - he would certainly be playing now.

White desperately needs a senior game too and is a brilliant kick. But Richo doesn't value good kicking much. Prefers his bulked up dudes on the field. How is this non-possession game working for us Richo? We seem to get tired a lot and fall in a hole. Any reason for that? Maybe cos we can't keep the footy like the other teams? Maybe hey?

IF we lose to Adelaide we should look at being a lot more experimental the rest of the year. Look at elevating Marshall and getting a game or two into him as he is showing quite a bit. When we get another elevation spot NOK should get a guernesy and a game as we need to look at him. We need to keep running the rule over Lonie as they will need to make a tough decision on him. Coughlan should have had at least a game or two under his belt to see if he can cut it at AFL level. Goddard needs to start being introduced into the team. That is the problem with topping up with Brown - he'll keep Goddard out.

Battle is probs too young and Phillips had some injury concerns. Long might need to bulk up a bit but at least he got a game early. Richo is so weird with his favs - he runs Dunstan and Gresh into the ground literally playing them every game since being drafted when they could use a bit of time out to develop other parts of their game. But then just ignores so many others. He is showing signs of Ross Lyon top-25 favoritism. That shows he doesn't have a lot of faith in his system.

We went into top up mode with CArslisle, Brown and Stevens assuming that would push us into finals. Maybe we should have kept developing our kids and keep getting the high draft picks. Would love to see what Sincs, Acres, Gresh etc could do on ball. Experiment baby - that is how you find things out.

[carn_sainter]

Bluthy, you make some good points completely consistent with the frustration most of us saints fans have at the moment, but surely you might be able to concede that the coaches have given the players pretty solid ideas about what they need to be able to do before they get a game and that they tell the players how far towards that they are? In regards to Rice, is it not possible that against their criteria, he isn't ready yet?

Surely it's not that Richo just doesn't like some players and therefore ignores them?

And what kind of reasoning is it to abandon or drastically change plans on the basis of one game (a loss v Adelaide)?

The other thing I find funny is to say 'we need to look at him'. The coaches look at him every day of the week! The fans need to look at him? So we can select him or approve his spot on the list?

You have some valid points about the value of throwing people in the deep end a little (Sinclair, Gresham, Acres on ball) but I think you're making a narrative around Richardson that might not be true (that his selection decisions are arbitrary. The statistical fact of what selections he has made remains but you seem to infer an arbitrary nature to those decisions) and I think you're overemphasising how much of a difference it would make to blood 6 or 7 youngsters and perhaps ignoring that throwing a new kid into the team every two weeks, for only two weeks, just to throw them in there is not a winning formula - for the team or the kid.

[Bluthy]

, just to throw them in there is not a winning formula.

So we currently have a winning formula? I'm sorry did I misread the ladder and we are actually in the top 4? At first glance it looked like to me we are worse than half the teams in the comp after 6 years of rebuilding and in danger of being passed by Essendon, Collingwood, Blues, North, Sydney even Brisbane in a couple of years as they play a pretty skillful style.

You need to see how players look in the AFL. Some players scale up, some don't. Minch tears it up in the VFL, struggles in AFL. Malthouse has said some players just don't play well in the VFL like Cloke but go on to be excellent AFL players. We need to see how Rice and White go at AFL level. It will help their development to feel the pace and intensity of the game at that level and what he needs to keep working towards.

But plus they are the sort of good ball users we need to be fast-tracking their development. I think we've pumped too many games into players with average skills and now we scratch our head and wonder why we can't keep the ball or why we can't convert our attack into goals - er because we don't have the skillful disposal players to hit targets regularly and get good shots on goal.

Look at Hawks now - they are playing so many youngsters - moving on Lewis and Mitchell - Hodge will almost certainly retire this year - churning their way through them to work out what they have. It's idiotic to talk about what they were doing when they were winning flags - of course their kids stayed in the VFL - THEY WERE WINNING FLAGS! You make hay while the sun shines.

The Adelaide game could be a tipping point, if we cop another drubbing, to say "Hey actually we are a fair way of it - lets look a bit more long term rather than finals". Lets try out some more of these little nuggets to see where the gold is shining through. They don't have to stay in the team every week - but get some churn happening - try the list out.

I like the sort of players we have recruited the last few years - they seem more skillful than what were targeting before - perhaps that's Pelchen's spreadsheet doing its magic. But you've got to have a footy philosophy that values skill as a premium to risk playing them in AFL even though you will probably go backwards a bit to go forward later. Should we have kept pumping games into Geary or bitten the bullet and said his ball use just isn't good enough. I don't think good disposal is a priority of Richo. His is a muscular, physical style he wants. I fear that is an out of date approach. Possession is becoming king in AFL.

[carn_sainter]

So we currently have a winning formula...Possession is becoming king in AFL.

Good post. At the moment, no - we do not have a winning formula. But that doesn't suggest that by default, its antithesis is a winning formula. Clearly from their actions, the coaches think we are only tweaks away from a winning formula, not in need of very large personnel changes. They think that the players they choose are those most likely to deliver a winning formula.

You need to see how players look in the afl - agreed. But when they're ready. This is a tautological argument I'm making, so I apologise, but if they're not ready, they won't be picked and they won't be picked if they're not ready. There is something from training or whatever else that happens at the club that gives the coaches the belief that Rice and White are behind Savage and Webster. That they are therefore not ready.

I think what we all have is supporter frustration. Especially saints fans - we are more than entitled to feel impatience at success. But the coaches clearly have more patience and don't see an afl game as being so urgent in the development of Rice and White, for example.

The tipping point argument goes contrary to everything every coach has said publicly so far - that we are focused on playing our way, improving our method, blahblahblah. The point is that results - farcical as this sounds - shouldn't actually cause many changes in long term plans. Every result over the whole year, you'd reconsider. But it's such a long-term ball game, with so many measures of success and progress that one win or loss by whatever margin won't change that.

We're going for the finals and have been quite open about that. Richo's background is more in director of coaching and footy programs than it is match day coaching. Tactically, in terms of opposition analysis at least, I think he defers more to the assistant coaches. He is surely qualified to balance the needs of this week, against the needs of this year, against the needs of next year and 5 years from now. A large part of his experience has been in that balance of current needs and player development for future needs.

I think the key measure here is not 'how fast do we try new players?' or 'how long is a player at the club before he gets a game?' but 'how good are they once they come in to the side?'. At that point, are they ready?

And the fact is that we need to field a side every week which gives us the best chance of winning that game. For a whole bunch of reasons. Every player has 21 team mates and if they don't think that player number 22 deserves his spot they'll mutiny.

[samuraisaint]

Goddard has played a few games - and would have played a lot more of not for that shocking injury last year. McCartin is playing regularly. Gresham is a jet. Think we will see Bailey Rice and Marshall soon.

[IluvHarvey]

....or the people in charge of developing them?