Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
Well, FWIW, I reckon you only need to go to a game to see the improvement, regardless of what is read into the stats. How much does 6-6-6 affect the numbers too?
twirlyhair wrote: ↑Sat 27 Apr 2019 10:00pm
The idea of the game is to score more than your opposition, which we have done 4 times this year. 4 times in 6 games. 4 games in 22 last year. I think we have improved.
If only it was that simple.
The idea of the game is to win enough games to qualify for Finals, then to win Finals to qualify for the Grand Final, then to win that.
That's why they don't hand out trophies in April.
In my opinion, we're no closer to the ultimate prize. Some areas have improved, but other critical ones are still significantly bad and have shown no signs of improvement.
Umm yes you just agreed with me. The aim is to score more than your opponent, which will result in more wins than your opponent, which means, as you stated, qualifying for finals. I think it is fairly simple. Will the Saints be that team this year? I doubt it. However, your thread asked whether we have improved, and clearly, we have. So maybe you need to ask a different question next time. Ok?
If you don't think the team has improved from last year, you fair dinkum haven't been watching the team play. Last year's team would have lost today's game by 10+ goals.
And hey, we have won 4 out of 6 games. We're only half a game behind what we ended up with last year, only a quarter of the way through the season. We'll get a better barometer of where we're at after the next 5 games.
FFS, hang in there!
Curb your enthusiasm - you’re a St.Kilda supporter!!
Sainternist wrote: ↑Sun 28 Apr 2019 1:33am
If you don't think the team has improved from last year, you fair dinkum haven't been watching the team play. Last year's team would have lost today's game by 10+ goals.
And hey, we have won 4 out of 6 games. We're only half a game behind what we ended up with last year, only a quarter of the way through the season. We'll get a better barometer of where we're at after the next 5 games.
FFS, hang in there!
So we've definitely improved, but we won't know if we've improved until we play the next 5 games??
That's actually my point. Everyone is jumping up and down at our supposed improvement, but they're basing that purely on the fact that we've won 4 games.
However if you strip it back, I don't think the improvement is anywhere near as big as people think. The same huge flaws, remain huge flaws.
And as you say, the perspective will become far clearer as the season moves on.
twirlyhair wrote: ↑Sun 28 Apr 2019 1:03am
However, your thread asked whether we have improved, and clearly, we have. So maybe you need to ask a different question next time. Ok?
I don't think we have improved much, if at all. Certainly not offensively.
The fact that we won 4 games against weak opposition by less than a kick, is not evidence of improvement.
We won't improve until we bring in/recruit some healthy, robust A grade midfielders - with poise and elite kicking skills.
Our midfielders just kick the ball without looking too many times for my liking.
We need midfielders with tear away speed and kicking skills - like Brad Hill, etc....
How did we let someone like Tom Lynch go ? - his linking play and elite kicking into the F50 is exactly what we need.
We definitely missed Carlisle's intercept marking ... and Roberton will be hard to replace.
Bruce was obviously not right and Brown is just a fill-in player.
Last edited by samoht on Sun 28 Apr 2019 11:01am, edited 1 time in total.
twirlyhair wrote: ↑Sun 28 Apr 2019 1:03am
However, your thread asked whether we have improved, and clearly, we have. So maybe you need to ask a different question next time. Ok?
I don't think we have improved much, if at all. Certainly not offensively.
The fact that we won 4 games against weak opposition by less than a kick, is not evidence of improvement.
Not good with numbers or the rules of the game?
2 games by less than a kick, also lost one by less than a kick.
40 points against Melbourne
11 points after two dodgy decisions gifted two goals to Essendon in the last minute.
Melbourne is the only weak team we’ve beaten.
Macquarie Dictionary Word of the Year for 2023 "Kosi Lives"
Considering we played yesterday without Marshall (who has been a revelation this year), Geary (our captain and defensive leader), Hannebery, Carlisle, Bruce injured... and we still were in the hunt in the last quarter.
Our midfield hasn't improved.
And our backline is missing a couple of good players.... when will Carlisle return and will he bounce back after back surgery?
Bruce is not right (and we can't afford to carry him).
Our number 1 pick/power forward is not even in the picture.
It's hard to improve with all this happening.
On the other hand ..
Marshall will return ... and we need one more tall backman to come good and/or come in (one of Austin, Clavarino or Joyce) so we can send Battle (who's developing nicely) forward.
Wilkie is a good player, but he's half-back flanker sized. It's not fair to match him up on Walker or other taller forwards.
twirlyhair wrote: ↑Sun 28 Apr 2019 1:03am
However, your thread asked whether we have improved, and clearly, we have. So maybe you need to ask a different question next time. Ok?
I don't think we have improved much, if at all. Certainly not offensively.
The fact that we won 4 games against weak opposition by less than a kick, is not evidence of improvement.
Not good with numbers or the rules of the game?
2 games by less than a kick, also lost one by less than a kick.
40 points against Melbourne
11 points after two dodgy decisions gifted two goals to Essendon in the last minute.
Melbourne is the only weak team we’ve beaten.
The Suns average 8 goals per game. They're weak. We played them at home.
Hawthorn lost two players during the game, and had already 3 of their best before the first bounce. They were weak.
Essendon were incredibly weak when we played them.
Melbourne are pathetic, and certainly were when we played them.
The only difference between what we dished up yesterday and the way we played in the first month, was the pressure and standard of our opposition.
lewdogs wrote: ↑Sun 28 Apr 2019 11:04am
Considering we played yesterday without Marshall (who has been a revelation this year), Geary (our captain and defensive leader), Hannebery, Carlisle, Bruce injured... and we still were in the hunt in the last quarter.
That shows that we have improved.
Marshall back will make a huge difference.
I don't think we were in the hunt at all.
We didn't throw in the towel, and kept trying which is a positive. But our skill level, entries into 50 and lack of ability to score remain huge problems. That's why we were never in it yesterday.
No matter how much Ross and co. get the pill and burst forward, if they put it straight down the throat of the opposition then you're simply not going to win games. They've been doing it for 5 years now.
The only thing we can hope for, is if like in the first 5 games, our opposition serves up rubbish at the other end.
BarryGrogan wrote:We averaged 73 Points For last year.
We average 77.3 this year.
Not sure if my math or my English is out.
Doesn’t improvement mean better, and isn’t 77 more than 73?
Your English.
As stated, the additional 4 points is purely due to a slight improvement in conversion.
More Clearances (ave. 6 more than last year) = first use. Yet Less Inside 50s, & less scoring shots.
Less Inside 50s and less scoring shots clearly shows that our biggest problems have not been resolved.
Oh Barry, the darkness is growing as the hole you dig deepens.
Please leave me out of the childish forum bickering.
If you want engage as an adult, I'm happy to oblige. But if you want to play the 'tit for tat' stuff with me like you to try to do with everyone else, you're barking up the wrong tree and I'm not interested.
After 6 rounds last year we were sitting at 388 pts for, 546 against.
In 2019 we're 464/441
That's a +12.7 pts offensive improvement and a -17.5 pts defensive improvement - overall +30.2 points per game to the good.
twirlyhair wrote: ↑Sun 28 Apr 2019 1:03am
However, your thread asked whether we have improved, and clearly, we have. So maybe you need to ask a different question next time. Ok?
I don't think we have improved much, if at all. Certainly not offensively.
The fact that we won 4 games against weak opposition by less than a kick, is not evidence of improvement.
Not good with numbers or the rules of the game?
2 games by less than a kick, also lost one by less than a kick.
40 points against Melbourne
11 points after two dodgy decisions gifted two goals to Essendon in the last minute.
Melbourne is the only weak team we’ve beaten.
The Suns average 8 goals per game. They're weak. We played them at home.
Hawthorn lost two players during the game, and had already 3 of their best before the first bounce. They were weak.
Essendon were incredibly weak when we played them.
Melbourne are pathetic, and certainly were when we played them.
The only difference between what we dished up yesterday and the way we played in the first month, was the pressure and standard of our opposition.
What about Fremantle in Perth - are they weak? Honest question, because Freo are a lot of things but they are definitely a hard-nosed side and I believe we were very unlucky to lose. I agree yesterday we were poor but player-wise we are very skinny down back, and even the most cynical supporter could see that as soon as Lonie went down so did the entire side. They will need to work on forward entries, that's for sure, but the sounds coming out of the club are that we are going to mount a recruiting challenge to fix that.
love it.