Doggies offer 3 to 4 year deal for Bruce

[PADDLEPOP1001]

Not understanding this trade(if it happens) Dogs are playing in the finals with Schache,Naughton & Dale in their forward line ,add Bruce & it’s pretty damn good! We have Membrey,Bruce & King (possibly) take away Bruce & it ain’t much!
Ryder played 17 games this year for an average of 6 kicks a game & 6 goals for the year he will be 32 next year & his body is shot & we want to offer him a multi year contract now unless I’m missing something here something is very very smelly!

[SemperFidelis]

Still cannot see the sense in trading Bruce.

Understand he has currency now and may not later but, for me, required player whilst we grow up Max King.

Keep!

[PADDLEPOP1001]

Dogs will now be desperate after that display let’s make sure we get overs as we are now in a very good bargaining position particularly if the pies are also keen!

[saynta]

To me Bruce is much required player. He was injured in 2018 and the side was piss poor without him.

As an aside Naughton suffered a knee injury today and might be out for a while.

[Linton Lodger]

The reality is, if we're serious about getting in good players. We need to pick up another first rounder and perhaps a second rounder or two.

[Scollop]

If the recruitment team sit on their hands and just look to draft young untried talent in the National Draft does that make some our list management staff redundant?

It s***s me when people want to make changes in an organisation basically to justify their bloody role.

How about concentrating on clearing out list cloggers and players retiring and focus on improving the list, not just changes for the sake of it!

If our recruiting team is only concentrating on the elite young talent and the obvious choices, then perhaps they're not doing their job properly either

[stkfc1]

The reality is, if we're serious about getting in good players. We need to pick up another first rounder and perhaps a second rounder or two.

This really depends on what we're willing to give up or who's being targeted.
Bruce will get us something decent, especially if there is multiple teams looking at him, which will drive up his price. Dont really want to lose him but if it means a couple of high picks it is a good long term strategy.
Steven is the other one. If Geelong do go after him, they'll low ball us for sure. Hopefully the club stays strong and dont get shafted although I believe it's in Jacks best interests (and ours) that he goes.
Im hoping we can swap our first pick with either North, Hawks or Power for their first and 2nd picks. Might require a player involved also (Newnes) but it would still get us Hill and back in the 2nd round.

[To the top]

Going back a few weeks we beat WB easily at Docklands.

My view is that the WB (and others) are on a par with St Kilda, in competition with St Kilda to challenge for Finals football in 2020 and onward as our List matures

So why the hell would we give the WB a free kick to improve their List to the detriment of our List?

IF we trade Bruce, who is out there St Kilda can then attract who brings more to the table than Bruce, so a 197cm, 100kg forward with mobility and marking power?

Is McCartin progressing at such a rate as to be available and performing to his potential in 2020?

Hence, with the introduction of King, we have options those options that Membrey is not a KPP (at 188cm), on our existing List?

And, if McCartin is still uncertain, who is the option and from where?

Plus, if the option is not clearly a better option than Bruce, why do it in the first instance?

The objective is to improve the List

And, as I have put before, it is my view that you improve your List (and side) from the bottom upward - so turning your bottom 6.

We have a bevy of "half back flankers", all now nervous with the emergence of Coffield and Clark, we have a bevy of "small forwards" all marginal as to AFL standard and we have a match day surplus to needs "big bodied, inside" midfielders whose statistics confirm they handball and tackle (to what effect?)

Ratten covered off on multiple themes I have put on here over time

We are in building mode - looking at generic improvement plus other options in regard CLASS players

We need to improve our profile on Brownlow Medal Night - and in Media Awards.

We need to improve our scoring abilities and our defending abilities to push our percentage to 120 and above, not the 70's or 80's where it currently continues to languish and has for years (even though we won 9 and lost 13 this season).

So we are winning games and the result is that the 3 BOG efforts are from St Kilda players (and the more the spread of contributors the better, otherwise you replicate Geelong).

The very fact that players contribute to BOG contention levels confirms ability and where consistency will deliver that generic improvement.

It is a process - including identifying young players who have (on occasion) or have the ability to feature in the Brownlow votes including BOG.

Yes, some play in positions where the Scribes and the Umpires will not recognize them - but the Club knows who they are.

Stick with the knitting, not the seduction of speculation.

Listening to Ratten, I am certain he is on the right track.

[CQ SAINT]

Going back a few weeks we beat WB easily at Docklands.

My view is that the WB (and others) are on a par with St Kilda, in competition with St Kilda to challenge for Finals football in 2020 and onward as our List matures

So why the hell would we give the WB a free kick to improve their List to the detriment of our List?

IF we trade Bruce, who is out there St Kilda can then attract who brings more to the table than Bruce, so a 197cm, 100kg forward with mobility and marking power?

Is McCartin progressing at such a rate as to be available and performing to his potential in 2020?

Hence, with the introduction of King, we have options those options that Membrey is not a KPP (at 188cm), on our existing List?

And, if McCartin is still uncertain, who is the option and from where?

Plus, if the option is not clearly a better option than Bruce, why do it in the first instance?

The objective is to improve the List

And, as I have put before, it is my view that you improve your List (and side) from the bottom upward - so turning your bottom 6.

We have a bevy of "half back flankers", all now nervous with the emergence of Coffield and Clark, we have a bevy of "small forwards" all marginal as to AFL standard and we have a match day surplus to needs "big bodied, inside" midfielders whose statistics confirm they handball and tackle (to what effect?)

Ratten covered off on multiple themes I have put on here over time

We are in building mode - looking at generic improvement plus other options in regard CLASS players

We need to improve our profile on Brownlow Medal Night - and in Media Awards.

We need to improve our scoring abilities and our defending abilities to push our percentage to 120 and above, not the 70's or 80's where it currently continues to languish and has for years (even though we won 9 and lost 13 this season).

So we are winning games and the result is that the 3 BOG efforts are from St Kilda players (and the more the spread of contributors the better, otherwise you replicate Geelong).

The very fact that players contribute to BOG contention levels confirms ability and where consistency will deliver that generic improvement.

It is a process - including identifying young players who have (on occasion) or have the ability to feature in the Brownlow votes including BOG.

Yes, some play in positions where the Scribes and the Umpires will not recognize them - but the Club knows who they are.

Stick with the knitting, not the seduction of speculation.

Listening to Ratten, I am certain he is on the right track.

I assume you mean players 17 to 22 in our best 22. Or do you mean 20 to 26? Or lower ranked players than this.

Rowe, Pierce, Longer, Armitage gone. They weren't best 25, so 6 more?

Who is gettable, that won't require a trade with what we have to offer? No one wants our bottom 6 even if it is 17 to 22.

[To the top]

16 of 22.

So (in no particular order), start with Savage, Lonie, Newnes, Long, Brown, Sinclair, Hind and Rowe from the side that was trounced (after half time) by Sydney and beaten by Carlton the previous week. So make that the bottom 8 not the bottom 6, which, by putting names, confirms our problem

To me, Long is the only one of those who should remain on the List.

The rest will not deliver the generic improvement required.

Then we are trying to fit in all of Ross, Dunstan, Acres, Steele and Hannebery (some, such as Acres then not getting the mid contests he should be and playing as a forward which he is not - and, apart from Acres, who can go forward and contribute, which also confirms the problem).

The "demographic" problem is not just a key last line defender (or 2), KPP forward support, Ruck support and damaging leg speed and disposal from our mid assets.

It spreads elsewhere - and is a result of our player assets (or more correctly deficiencies)

[Devilhead]

To me the only reasoning behind getting rid of Bruce is to bring in Bing without having to use a future first - literally a straight swap with another team involved

Of course Max will replace Bruce in the forward position and Ben will likely return down back where played most of his junior football

Be interested how Bruce's body is holding up - maybe another reason they are looking to ship him

[Myron Gaines]

Trade Bruce...Is the club undertaking rebuild mk2?

[magnifisaint]

Brucey wont go unless the Saints get the deal of the century

[fugazi]

At the Carlton game at the MCG I got talking to a couple of young Carlton supporters (about 20 years old).

One of them said he had a cousin on the board (Or married to a board member) at Saints.

He told me a few things, including the probable trade of Bruce.

He said he was actually something of a trouble maker or disruptive influence or something and was being touted as a trade. The same with Carlisle.

While I immediately understood the Carlisle one, I strongly pushed back on the Bruce info saying that he seems to be one of the most popular players and leaders at the club.

Was surprised to hear that he may have been on the money.

[derby Street]

You have to give up something to get something. Don't come on here whinging that we did nothing in the trade period. BTW I'm not suggesting trading Bruce is a good idea.

[CQ SAINT]

16 of 22.

So (in no particular order), start with Savage, Lonie, Newnes, Long, Brown, Sinclair, Hind and Rowe from the side that was trounced (after half time) by Sydney and beaten by Carlton the previous week. So make that the bottom 8 not the bottom 6, which, by putting names, confirms our problem

To me, Long is the only one of those who should remain on the List.

The rest will not deliver the generic improvement required.

Then we are trying to fit in all of Ross, Dunstan, Acres, Steele and Hannebery (some, such as Acres then not getting the mid contests he should be and playing as a forward which he is not - and, apart from Acres, who can go forward and contribute, which also confirms the problem).

The "demographic" problem is not just a key last line defender (or 2), KPP forward support, Ruck support and damaging leg speed and disposal from our mid assets.

It spreads elsewhere - and is a result of our player assets (or more correctly deficiencies)

Replacements?

[CQ SAINT]

Speculation is speculation, whether you keep it low key and minimal or reach for the stars.
Low key won't bring much change and it won't take long for the pitchforks and daggers to appear.
Expect a shake up I reckon.

[fugazi]

Savage could well be in the top 6 in the b and f.
I don't know why so many on here don't rate him.

[CQ SAINT]

Savage could well be in the top 6 in the b and f.
I don't know why so many on here don't rate him.

Agreed. Savage, Sinclair and Brown are at least quality depth, even if we land 6 decent trades/Fan's.

[Scollop]

Is McCartin progressing at such a rate as to be available and performing to his potential in 2020?


....



Stick with the knitting, not the seduction of speculation.

Listening to Ratten, I am certain he is on the right track.

I heard a radio interview with Ratts on Triple M Melbourne and Brett said that Paddy is not even doing ANY running. Paddy will need 12 months to get back to AFL fitness standards imo

During the interview Brett kept repeating the oft use line of 'we just want Paddy to get his health right' or something similar, which I took to mean that Ratts is not banking on Paddy coming good and not planning 2020 with the expectation that Paddy comes good.

[To the top]

Savage played a top game v Fremantle, probably his best in St Kilda colours

Then there were the next 2 weeks

This from one of the oldest and most experienced players on our List

Time to move on

In regards “replacements”, what you do do whether it be business or sport is that you continue to turn and turn and turn

And when you have done that you turn again - because the opposition is always improving so you have to improve again

This was the problem with the Lyon regime

[To the top]

So if it is wait and see with McCartin, why would you offload Bruce - and for who?

How do we get the third defender to Membrey - not the best or second best?

Because Membrey is 188cm - So midfielder size

[fugazi]

I think we can rule a line thru Paddys name. Pay him out and delist.
He ain't coming back.

[gone fission]

Savage played a top game v Fremantle, probably his best in St Kilda colours

Then there were the next 2 weeks

This from one of the oldest and most experienced players on our List

Time to move on

In regards “replacements”, what you do do whether it be business or sport is that you continue to turn and turn and turn

And when you have done that you turn again - because the opposition is always improving so you have to improve again

This was the problem with the Lyon regime

Funny because this is the exact reason that Bruce should and will be moved on if we can attract a good deal.

12 out of 22 games this year he managed one or less goals.

Very good athlete, but pretty average and inconsistent footballer at 27 years of age.

Savage won’t get us a first rounder but Bruce apparently might, so cash in now while we can.

He can go and play 4-5 really good games per year somewhere else.

[sunsaint]

I think we can rule a line thru Paddys name. Pay him out and delist.
He ain't coming back.

I dont get this either - just pull the pin its time
I get the feeling the thought bubble at Linton St is that no matter how bad or how long it takes they can fix anything