Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Teflon wrote: ↑Sat 30 Jun 2018 6:32pm
The bargaining power that a pick 1 opens up this year in a strong draft is important
As others have said you can’t be relegated down due to preference picks etc and can trade up
Important
Pick 1 is no different to other picks. If a Brisbane academy player is the best, they can still bid for him at a discount if they have the points even if their first pick is 2 or 3.
That’s true except Lukosius isn’t a Brisbane academy player ..
Anyhoo , if you land pick 1 no one chooses before you, your trade up options are wide open in a very strong draft
It’s an important position to hold at draft time and suggestions that’s not the case are rubbish
I've done a little bit of homework, and haven't found any evidence that it's particularly helped teams in the past.
You're pretty strong on this point, so I'm curious as to what you're basing it on.
I can only see 3 Number 1 picks that have played in flags in the past 20 years - and one of them was Des Headland from the 1998 draft. Luke Hodge another, and Tom Boyd - who was traded out from the club that drafted him and they haven't won a flag.
Obviously in theory, having pick 1 is great. But the problem is in reality, it just doesn't seem to actually make a huge difference to teams.
Teflon wrote: ↑Sat 30 Jun 2018 6:32pm
The bargaining power that a pick 1 opens up this year in a strong draft is important
As others have said you can’t be relegated down due to preference picks etc and can trade up
Important
Pick 1 is no different to other picks. If a Brisbane academy player is the best, they can still bid for him at a discount if they have the points even if their first pick is 2 or 3.
That’s true except Lukosius isn’t a Brisbane academy player ..
Anyhoo , if you land pick 1 no one chooses before you, your trade up options are wide open in a very strong draft
It’s an important position to hold at draft time and suggestions that’s not the case are rubbish
I've done a little bit of homework, and haven't found any evidence that it's particularly helped teams in the past.
You're pretty strong on this point, so I'm curious as to what you're basing it on.
I can only see 3 Number 1 picks that have played in flags in the past 20 years - and one of them was Des Headland from the 1998 draft. Luke Hodge another, and Tom Boyd - who was traded out from the club that drafted him and they haven't won a flag.
Obviously in theory, having pick 1 is great. But the problem is in reality, it just doesn't seem to actually make a huge difference to teams.
Also worth noting that Hawthorn were coming off a Preliminary Final when they traded for the number one draft pick. They didn’t “earn” it by tanking.
I’ve been waiting three years for a list of teams who tanked or just were hopeless, got the number one draft pick and went on to win a flag.
Too bad Cooney and Deledio didn’t hang around at their original clubs long enough to play in a Premiership.
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
Did the teams that got the #1 draft picks improve should be the key factor. Did they go from last to playing finals a few years alter. That should be your key outcome. It takes more than one player to win a flag but one gun can make a huge difference. Ideally you need at least three. One back mid and forward. The way carlton played last night makes me think that they will beat us on current form but that may change after today
DJ Higgins wrote: ↑Sun 01 Jul 2018 10:37am
Did the teams that got the #1 draft picks improve should be the key factor. Did they go from last to playing finals a few years alter. That should be your key outcome. It takes more than one player to win a flag but one gun can make a huge difference. Ideally you need at least three. One back mid and forward. The way carlton played last night makes me think that they will beat us on current form but that may change after today
They'd definitely improve. But Carlton are a decent example of raking in number 1 pick after number 1 pick and still, haven't really done much good from it. That's not to say that it's a problem having the number 1 pick - but teams that get picks 2 through to 10 have generally done just as well, if not better.
So as I said, in theory the higher the pick the better off you are and will be. But in practice, it just doesn't actually work out like that.
DJ Higgins wrote: ↑Sun 01 Jul 2018 10:37am
Did the teams that got the #1 draft picks improve should be the key factor. Did they go from last to playing finals a few years alter. That should be your key outcome. It takes more than one player to win a flag but one gun can make a huge difference. Ideally you need at least three. One back mid and forward. The way carlton played last night makes me think that they will beat us on current form but that may change after today
They'd definitely improve. But Carlton are a decent example of raking in number 1 pick after number 1 pick and still, haven't really done much good from it. That's not to say that it's a problem having the number 1 pick - but teams that get picks 2 through to 10 have generally done just as well, if not better.
So as I said, in theory the higher the pick the better off you are and will be. But in practice, it just doesn't actually work out like that.
The benefits are always contingent on the actual decisions taken after you have the number 1 pick
The real benefit is choice (trade up in a strong draft, simply first choice with no one in front of you etc)
Silly doing an analysis in how many no 1 draft picks haven’t come on - irrelevant to the real benefit of choice which can’t be disputed
Can you do some analysis that suggest pick 2,3,4 etc gives you a choice BEFORE pick 1? I’m curious to see if that can be done in a non compromised draft...
Teflon wrote: ↑Sat 30 Jun 2018 6:32pm
The bargaining power that a pick 1 opens up this year in a strong draft is important
As others have said you can’t be relegated down due to preference picks etc and can trade up
Important
Pick 1 is no different to other picks. If a Brisbane academy player is the best, they can still bid for him at a discount if they have the points even if their first pick is 2 or 3.
That’s true except Lukosius isn’t a Brisbane academy player ..
Anyhoo , if you land pick 1 no one chooses before you, your trade up options are wide open in a very strong draft
It’s an important position to hold at draft time and suggestions that’s not the case are rubbish
I've done a little bit of homework, and haven't found any evidence that it's particularly helped teams in the past.
You're pretty strong on this point, so I'm curious as to what you're basing it on.
I can only see 3 Number 1 picks that have played in flags in the past 20 years - and one of them was Des Headland from the 1998 draft. Luke Hodge another, and Tom Boyd - who was traded out from the club that drafted him and they haven't won a flag.
Obviously in theory, having pick 1 is great. But the problem is in reality, it just doesn't seem to actually make a huge difference to teams.
Also worth noting that Hawthorn were coming off a Preliminary Final when they traded for the number one draft pick. They didn’t “earn” it by tanking.
I’ve been waiting three years for a list of teams who tanked or just were hopeless, got the number one draft pick and went on to win a flag.
Too bad Cooney and Deledio didn’t hang around at their original clubs long enough to play in a Premiership.
Silly to suggest no 1 pick equals flag?
Multiple ingredients go into winning a flag....1 of those is quality players
No 1 pick gives you first option on that - that’s the benefit
Of course plenty stuff it up - that’s not the point at all
Teflon wrote: ↑Sun 01 Jul 2018 11:47am
The benefits are always contingent on the actual decisions taken after you have the number 1 pick
The real benefit is choice (trade up in a strong draft, simply first choice with no one in front of you etc)
Silly doing an analysis in how many no 1 draft picks haven’t come on - irrelevant to the real benefit of choice which can’t be disputed
Can you do some analysis that suggest pick 2,3,4 etc gives you a choice BEFORE pick 1? I’m curious to see if that can be done in a non compromised draft...
No one disagrees that having pick 1 gives you more choice than any other pick.
The original discussion wasn't about that. You've moved the goal posts on that one.
The discussion/debate is that in theory it results in better players, and in theory having first choice means you get first crack at getting the best player.
But as I've pointed out, in practice the best player actually very rarely gets picked at no. 1. And in practice, the club that has had the number 1 pick hasn't benefited all that much compared to other clubs with high picks.
Therefore, the question is not 'Do we tank in order to get the best young player in the draft?' - it is 'Do we tank in order to get first choice in the draft?'.
Given that the past 20 years of history has shown that getting first choice at the draft doesn't give the club any more advantage after Draft day than those that had picks 2-10, I personally don't think it can really be justified.
Need more than a no 1 draft pick for sure. The good clubs manage their way through that with clever use of the pick and trading etc. The saints need to win more games this year....simple as that. 4-5 wins may attract a couple of players next year and that will improve the list. Start getting smashed for the rest of the year and we will get no-one apart from the No 1 pick. Probably a bit each way but if you have a loser mentality then you stay that way and hard to shake the tag off regardless of top picks.
Getting back on topic no team tanks anymore. But they do change who they play which is different. We aren't tanking as we are playing armo and Brown. I would have played Logan and possibly Ray connelan excuse spelling. Pump games into them. As previously mentioned our pick will come down to our Carlton game. Lose say pick 2 win 3-4
Wayne42 wrote: ↑Fri 29 Jun 2018 11:50pm
One minute people are saying don't use a high draft pick on a tall, then when one comes along, that dominates in a comp that is kind to talls, everyone then says
get him at any cost. When the wonderkind has to play at AFL level, with multiple defenders impeding his every move, something that never happened to him
in junior ranks and he struggles, the same people want the recruiters sacked. It's like a merry go round.
Pudding is not a TALL tall, he is a SHORT tall.
His opponents have the advantage of height on him.
He can not overcome this because he has no leap and he is too slow on a lead to gap his opponent.
But there is no way anyone would give us a first round pick 13 for him we would be lucky to get a third round pick 49.
Most clubs would simply say "list clogger" you will have to throw in a draft pick to get us to take him.
you are just clueless. McCartin leads up plenty and in a good side he would be hit on those leads, we constantly miss him on the lead or ignore him and kick to the contest 20 metres out from goal. But you are just always looking at ways to denigrate the kid. AND I so wish you could have an opportunity to call him pudding to his face, I'd love to watch him pummel the living suitcase out of a piss weak keyboard coward such as yourself
Paddy had plenty of opportunity and failed to get any clutch goals or capitilise on the hard work of our mids. Dropped a sitter in the last quarter. I'd mark Paddy a 4/10 today.
He was handed some frees as well as that goal by the ump from a soft 50m penalty and although he kicked 2 goals, he didn't have an impact. Don't know when the Saints coaches start judging him a bit more harshly on his overall game ( goal kicking accuracy, tackling, pressure, etc ) and don't know how many games he can continue to be gifted if he underperforms considering his inside 50 chances
Wayne42 wrote: ↑Fri 29 Jun 2018 11:50pm
One minute people are saying don't use a high draft pick on a tall, then when one comes along, that dominates in a comp that is kind to talls, everyone then says
get him at any cost. When the wonderkind has to play at AFL level, with multiple defenders impeding his every move, something that never happened to him
in junior ranks and he struggles, the same people want the recruiters sacked. It's like a merry go round.
Pudding is not a TALL tall, he is a SHORT tall.
His opponents have the advantage of height on him.
He can not overcome this because he has no leap and he is too slow on a lead to gap his opponent.
But there is no way anyone would give us a first round pick 13 for him we would be lucky to get a third round pick 49.
Most clubs would simply say "list clogger" you will have to throw in a draft pick to get us to take him.
you are just clueless. McCartin leads up plenty and in a good side he would be hit on those leads, we constantly miss him on the lead or ignore him and kick to the contest 20 metres out from goal. But you are just always looking at ways to denigrate the kid. AND I so wish you could have an opportunity to call him pudding to his face, I'd love to watch him pummel the living suitcase out of a piss weak keyboard coward such as yourself
Paddy had plenty of opportunity and failed to get any clutch goals or capitilise on the hard work of our mids. Dropped a sitter in the last quarter. I'd mark Paddy a 4/10 today.
He was handed some frees as well as that goal by the ump from a soft 50m penalty and although he kicked 2 goals, he didn't have an impact. Don't know when the Saints coaches start judging him a bit more harshly on his overall game ( goal kicking accuracy, tackling, pressure, etc ) and don't know how many games he can continue to be gifted if he underperforms considering his inside 50 chances
FFS, he kicked 2.3 and had 11 score involvements, thats a very good game, his field kicking is elite, he actually looked good when the ball was on the ground. His game was 7/10
Wayne42 wrote: ↑Fri 29 Jun 2018 11:50pm
One minute people are saying don't use a high draft pick on a tall, then when one comes along, that dominates in a comp that is kind to talls, everyone then says
get him at any cost. When the wonderkind has to play at AFL level, with multiple defenders impeding his every move, something that never happened to him
in junior ranks and he struggles, the same people want the recruiters sacked. It's like a merry go round.
Pudding is not a TALL tall, he is a SHORT tall.
His opponents have the advantage of height on him.
He can not overcome this because he has no leap and he is too slow on a lead to gap his opponent.
But there is no way anyone would give us a first round pick 13 for him we would be lucky to get a third round pick 49.
Most clubs would simply say "list clogger" you will have to throw in a draft pick to get us to take him.
you are just clueless. McCartin leads up plenty and in a good side he would be hit on those leads, we constantly miss him on the lead or ignore him and kick to the contest 20 metres out from goal. But you are just always looking at ways to denigrate the kid. AND I so wish you could have an opportunity to call him pudding to his face, I'd love to watch him pummel the living suitcase out of a piss weak keyboard coward such as yourself
Paddy had plenty of opportunity and failed to get any clutch goals or capitilise on the hard work of our mids. Dropped a sitter in the last quarter. I'd mark Paddy a 4/10 today.
He was handed some frees as well as that goal by the ump from a soft 50m penalty and although he kicked 2 goals, he didn't have an impact. Don't know when the Saints coaches start judging him a bit more harshly on his overall game ( goal kicking accuracy, tackling, pressure, etc ) and don't know how many games he can continue to be gifted if he underperforms considering his inside 50 chances
FFS, he kicked 2.3 and had 11 score involvements, thats a very good game, his field kicking is elite, he actually looked good when the ball was on the ground. His game was 7/10
Agreed. Some supporters just want Paddy to fail.
Paddy is a good kid and has had a pretty good year overall. Not world beating, but he's building his game, tank and confidence. He is getting better.
Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud
In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death, taxes and the St Kilda FC
Teflon wrote: ↑Sun 01 Jul 2018 11:47am
The benefits are always contingent on the actual decisions taken after you have the number 1 pick
The real benefit is choice (trade up in a strong draft, simply first choice with no one in front of you etc)
Silly doing an analysis in how many no 1 draft picks haven’t come on - irrelevant to the real benefit of choice which can’t be disputed
Can you do some analysis that suggest pick 2,3,4 etc gives you a choice BEFORE pick 1? I’m curious to see if that can be done in a non compromised draft...
No one disagrees that having pick 1 gives you more choice than any other pick.
The original discussion wasn't about that. You've moved the goal posts on that one.
The discussion/debate is that in theory it results in better players, and in theory having first choice means you get first crack at getting the best player.
But as I've pointed out, in practice the best player actually very rarely gets picked at no. 1. And in practice, the club that has had the number 1 pick hasn't benefited all that much compared to other clubs with high picks.
Therefore, the question is not 'Do we tank in order to get the best young player in the draft?' - it is 'Do we tank in order to get first choice in the draft?'.
Given that the past 20 years of history has shown that getting first choice at the draft doesn't give the club any more advantage after Draft day than those that had picks 2-10, I personally don't think it can really be justified.
No goal posts moved at all but glad you’re conceding
In fact that’s my only point all along
Rest of your post I didn’t read apologies as it’s again irrelevant to my single point
Wayne42 wrote: ↑Fri 29 Jun 2018 11:50pm
One minute people are saying don't use a high draft pick on a tall, then when one comes along, that dominates in a comp that is kind to talls, everyone then says
get him at any cost. When the wonderkind has to play at AFL level, with multiple defenders impeding his every move, something that never happened to him
in junior ranks and he struggles, the same people want the recruiters sacked. It's like a merry go round.
Pudding is not a TALL tall, he is a SHORT tall.
His opponents have the advantage of height on him.
He can not overcome this because he has no leap and he is too slow on a lead to gap his opponent.
But there is no way anyone would give us a first round pick 13 for him we would be lucky to get a third round pick 49.
Most clubs would simply say "list clogger" you will have to throw in a draft pick to get us to take him.
FWIW, looking at McCartin standing next to Carlisle today, and there would have only a cm or two between them.
McCartin has some technique issues IMO. His height and size is a bit understated.
Never, ever tank - plenty of high picks don't make it for various reasons. Certainly, nos. 1-4 give no guarantee. Some of the greats come from outside the top 10 draftees - so forget how gifted the drafters are and how expert the media reporters are. Much more important for a team to finish a season well and have the right games/age profile to improve next year.
The recruiting logic, which I agreed with, was to go with McCartin because you have to have a big, strong key forward to win flags and if you don't get one in the draft, you'll pay plenty to buy one (a la Boyd / Lynch). Even so, there are never any guarantees - who's to know a kid is suscecptible to head knocks? Even so, in today's game, key forwards take a long time to mature. Hawkins still has plenty of mediocre games. Lynch is being talked about as >$1 - 1.5m a year and yet he has many mediocre games. Jack Reiwoldt is performing so well, largely because his job is now more a case of bringing the ball to ground. How did Hogan (killed until Brown got injured) and McDonald (killed) go today - and they're now very experienced and physically mature players. McCartin is a big, big man who hasn't yet learned how to use his body properly against these grubby defenders. Give him time.
Saints have had a really crap year, for reasons unknown. There was so much promise of a rise but we started the season badly, went to worse, and then had a succession of injuries. A re-build to being contenders takes longer than anyone expects. Now I see a level of endeavour that shows they've now re-kicked into a style of play that's genuinely competitive. Although he's a dud around the ground, perhaps Longer's return has had a bigger impact than expected. Now the Saints might shape the 8 and lead the club into a pre-season of optimism and determination; particularly as they've found a couple of promising prospects.
Let the draft take care of itself. Go through a normal sacking, trading process and look for the development within. For the rest of the year, play to the best of ability and to win. Hang on to players who were drafted high with very good reasoning (look at Billings and Membrey and how they've turned around their performances in the last 2 games). Just remember, Bulldogs, Richmond and Collingwood (and their coaches) were just as crap as we've been this year and they've shown the turnaround can be very quick. A couple of weeks ago, I was resigned to the idea the re-build has failed and the coaching group are no good; fallen behind the current way the game is played - like many others. Clearly, I've learned I'm a dill and the talent had just temporarily lost it's way.
AJR wrote: ↑Sun 01 Jul 2018 9:51pm
Never, ever tank - plenty of high picks don't make it for various reasons. Certainly, nos. 1-4 give no guarantee. Some of the greats come from outside the top 10 draftees - so forget how gifted the drafters are and how expert the media reporters are. Much more important for a team to finish a season well and have the right games/age profile to improve next year................
Reckon England deliberately tanked against Belgium in the World Cup....
AJR wrote: ↑Sun 01 Jul 2018 9:51pm
Never, ever tank - plenty of high picks don't make it for various reasons. Certainly, nos. 1-4 give no guarantee. Some of the greats come from outside the top 10 draftees - so forget how gifted the drafters are and how expert the media reporters are. Much more important for a team to finish a season well and have the right games/age profile to improve next year.
The recruiting logic, which I agreed with, was to go with McCartin because you have to have a big, strong key forward to win flags and if you don't get one in the draft, you'll pay plenty to buy one (a la Boyd / Lynch). Even so, there are never any guarantees - who's to know a kid is suscecptible to head knocks? Even so, in today's game, key forwards take a long time to mature. Hawkins still has plenty of mediocre games. Lynch is being talked about as >$1 - 1.5m a year and yet he has many mediocre games. Jack Reiwoldt is performing so well, largely because his job is now more a case of bringing the ball to ground. How did Hogan (killed until Brown got injured) and McDonald (killed) go today - and they're now very experienced and physically mature players. McCartin is a big, big man who hasn't yet learned how to use his body properly against these grubby defenders. Give him time.
Saints have had a really crap year, for reasons unknown. There was so much promise of a rise but we started the season badly, went to worse, and then had a succession of injuries. A re-build to being contenders takes longer than anyone expects. Now I see a level of endeavour that shows they've now re-kicked into a style of play that's genuinely competitive. Although he's a dud around the ground, perhaps Longer's return has had a bigger impact than expected. Now the Saints might shape the 8 and lead the club into a pre-season of optimism and determination; particularly as they've found a couple of promising prospects.
Let the draft take care of itself. Go through a normal sacking, trading process and look for the development within. For the rest of the year, play to the best of ability and to win. Hang on to players who were drafted high with very good reasoning (look at Billings and Membrey and how they've turned around their performances in the last 2 games). Just remember, Bulldogs, Richmond and Collingwood (and their coaches) were just as crap as we've been this year and they've shown the turnaround can be very quick. A couple of weeks ago, I was resigned to the idea the re-build has failed and the coaching group are no good; fallen behind the current way the game is played - like many others. Clearly, I've learned I'm a dill and the talent had just temporarily lost it's way.
We sit 3-10
We’ve just gotten over GC - duds and MEL who are fragile
“Saints have had a crap year reasons unknown” just doesn’t cut it
We KNOW the reasons - we lack skilled elite players , match winners aka Hayes RIewoldt Harvey
We can’t attract FAs as we are not destination at all
But apparently cause we beat a dud side and a fragile footy club we are back....
3-10.....for a reason.
I remain of the opinion that we have some talent on our List including some players at the 50 odd game mark and less - and we add Battle to that list today
We miss Roberton, a 194cm flanker with two sided skills but have the likes of Carlisle and Steven - plus Armitage (played where he should be played) and Gilbert as our experienced core in support of our young talent
No doubt Acres and Freeman will improve the side over the next few weeks
BUT we do have a tail - where we have to revolve and evolve
The usual suspects in that tail were again on display today - they may be honest but bring honest does not get sides playing a big part in September football
What Draft Pick did Buckley go to Brisbane with before shifting to Collingwood?
Brisbane went on to win 3 premierships
We will get another high Draft Pick this year and we have some higher end Draft Picks developing in the VFL starting with Coffield
So those in our tail will be looking over their shoulders - at last!
