Saints delistings as at 22 September

[shanegrambeau]

In terms of moving him to the backline, I'm still not sure he would be a starting back for us without injuries.

We'll never know, at least the Bummers had more faith in him than we did.
They supposedly recruited him to fill the spot that Saad vacated and he did a good job, his way, or under instruction.

So did the Bummers undervalue Saad?
They obviously had the opportunity to keep him (by matching or beating whatever contract he was offered from outside but chose not to.

On the criteria being used here to describe Hind's defection/recruitment to Essendope then every player who moved Clubs (after NOT being delisted) was devalued by his existing Club.

Howard/Ryder obviously devalued by Port
Butler/Higgins obviously devalued by Richmond
Jones obviously devalued by Sydney
Hill obviously devalued by Fremantle
Crouch obviously devalued by Adelaide
Acres/Newnes/Hind/Bruce obviously devalued by St Kilda.

Interesting way of looking at the concept of Trading players, IMHO

The Tip Rat by Essendon.

[samoht]

We are not talking about "undervaluing." Maybe we couldn't develop Hind and so "we gave up on him."
Are we doing the same with Battle? Giving up on him because of our inability to develop.

... it is about knowing how to get the best out of a player and about how to develop and "add value to a player."

You have it backwards, Mr Magic.

Essendon got Hind back for a song and added value.
The new or improved development team at Essendon ... maybe they have just learned from past mistakes, and there is nothing wrong with that ... they should be commended.

[Mr Magic]

We are not talking about "undervaluing." Maybe we couldn't develop Hind and so "we gave up on him."
Are we doing the same with Battle? Giving up on him because of our inability to develop.

... it is about knowing how to get the best out of a player and about how to develop and "add value to a player."

You have it backwards, Mr Magic.

Essendon got Hind back for a song and added value.
The new or improved development team at Essendon ... maybe they have just learned from past mistakes, and there is nothing wrong with that ... they should be commended.

We gave up on him and offered a new contract?
That makes no sense to me.
When we offered him a new contract we had Ben Paton playing the position that he now has found himself in at Essendope.
Are you suggesting we should have replaced Paton with him?
As it transpires Paton was injured and we discovered Sinclair could play that position.
Personally I’d rather have Paton and Sinclair for that position.
Maybe Hind could play elsewhere but he chose to reject our offer and take up Essendope’s offer.
His choice entirely.
But you seem intent on using it to criticise our Club.
You don’t need to.
Our lack of development in youth doesn’t need made up examples.
For too many years we’ve either been drafting duds or our development programme has been lacking.
Thankfully over the past 2 or 3 years that seems to have been corrected to some extent.

[samoht]

Just to clarify ... (last time)

We gave up on developing Hind ... on him becoming a fixture in our team.

We couldn't develop him. He was a fringe player for us - that's all we saw him as.

Essendon pounced and picked him up for a song ... because that's all he was worth.

He'd be worth triple what we were paying him now - that's what you call "adding value to a player and developing them to the next level."

Essendon have shown us up.

And I'm asking the question ... are we similarly giving up on Battle, who was tracking beautifully under AR and heading for a breakout year?
Are we similarly seeing him as a fringe player?

Yes, I'm criticising our development dept ... or lack thereof. Too right.

Hopefully, the new additions to our development team next year - that wayne 42 mentioned -- will turn things around.

[Mr Magic]

Just to clarify ... (last time)

We gave up on developing Hind ... on him becoming a fixture in our team.

We couldn't develop him. He was a fringe player for us - that's all we saw him as.

Essendon pounced and picked him up for a song ... because that's all he was worth.

He'd be worth triple what we were paying him now - that's what you call "adding value to a player and developing them to the next level."

Essendon have shown us up.

And I'm asking the question ... are we similarly giving up on Battle, who was tracking beautifully under AR and heading for a breakout year?
Are we similarly seeing him as a fringe player?

Yes, I'm criticising our development dept ... or lack thereof. Too right.

Hopefully, the new additions to our development team next year - that wayne 42 mentioned -- will turn things around.

Sorry, I must be thick as I cannot see it.
On the one hand you’re stating that we gave up on Hind and yet the fact is we offered him a new 1 year contract.
Surely if we had have in fact given up on him we’d not have offered him a new contract?
It can’t be both, it has to be one or the other.
I agree we probably didn’t see him as a hbf like Essendope has but that’s because we have other options for that position that the Club obviously felt were superior to him.
I think you need to find another example to push the point you’re trying to make - that the people in charge, IYHO. are no good.

Using your logic (as expressed) in this thread the we obviously don’t rate Ryder as we’ve only offered him a 1 year contract.
I know it’s different because of Ryder’s age but I’m struggling to understand why you think offering Hind a new 1 year contract means we gave up on him?
Surely if we’d actually given up on him we would have delisted him (Clavarino, Alabaskis, Parker, Young etc)?

As far as Battle is concerned, do you actually know any of the conversations going on about him and his future at the Club?
I don’t but before I make definitive pronouncements about him and his future at our Club I’ d like to know some facts and not base my opinion on supposition

[samoht]

see next post ...

[samoht]

On both hands, and categorically (what's this "on the one hand you're saying this" and yet "on the other hand that" - I'm not taking an each way bet) we had given up on Hind ... on "DEVELOPING" him past being a fringe player.

Essendon "developed" him into an awesome and regular player.

What's there not to criticise, as regards our development of players?

Similarly have a look at how Battle was tracking under AR ... and how his development has fared (and nose-dived) since.

Who's talking about contracts?

"Developmentally," (I'm making up terms now) we had given up on Hind.

We are giving up on players - developmentally - and just shrugging our incompetent shoulders.

As wayne42 said (also referring to our insipid Development) .... "Let's hope Carroll and Enright smarten us up "

[cwrcyn]

Okay...let's see. Nick Hind couldn't get a game in an Essendon team that was underperforming. He then gets picked up by us and amazingly gets selected in a pretty strong team and performs well.

So who failed his development, Essendon or us??

[samoht]

Okay...let's see. Nick Hind couldn't get a game in an Essendon team that was underperforming. He then gets picked up by us and amazingly gets selected in a pretty strong team and performs well.

So who failed his development, Essendon or us??

As I said, that was Essendon then ... and this is Essendon now.
Essendon might have learned some valuable lessons and improved their Development team and/or program that way (and there's nothing wrong with that) ... hopefully we will too.

Hind is a regular player and much improved player this year in a team that finished higher than us (Essendon finished 8th)... whereas he was a fringe player with us.

Hind averaged over 22 disposals and 426 metres gained per match this year .... whereas he was averaging less than 10 disposals with us and 174 metres gained. Big difference.

The recruitment of Carroll and Enright might be a step in the right direction.

[kosifantutti]

Okay...let's see. Nick Hind couldn't get a game in an Essendon team that was underperforming. He then gets picked up by us and amazingly gets selected in a pretty strong team and performs well.

So who failed his development, Essendon or us??

Hind was never on the Essendon list before we drafted him. It’s like saying we failed to develop Hayden McLean.

[older saint]

I am wondering with the delistings whether Battle is being set for the 3rd tall defensive role ? He is only 193 but if taught to use his body could play that rolling off player and we always hear about his tank.
I struggle to see where else he fits in a best 22 as too slow for the wing in the current game and not better than King or Membery ( assuming Marshall and second ruck playing) as tall forward.

Battle is 193cm so Saints supporters say he's not big enough to be a Key Defender and yet at Sydney Melican is 193cm, McCartin is 193cm and Rampe is 189cm and any 2 of those 3 play Key Back for the Swans.
Steven May for Melbourne is 193cm and he plays Key Back.

I haven't looked for anymore examples.

I always find that interesting.

My comment was more about the potential role for Battle as opposed to height. That said we struggled against Port at Marvel with their 3 talls .
I cant see where else he could fit in our best 22 and using the spots he has played what other option there is?

[skeptic]

Doesn’t feel like a significant enough change of the list as yet to me

Still have Lonie, Kent and Joyce on the list whilst Dunstan is being marched out despite being the best of all of them.

[Mr Magic]

Doesn’t feel like a significant enough change of the list as yet to me

Still have Lonie, Kent and Joyce on the list whilst Dunstan is being marched out despite being the best of all of them.

You can’t trade players you’ve delisted.
I am sure there are players currently on our list who if they’re not traded will be eventually delisted by us

[saynta]

Okay...let's see. Nick Hind couldn't get a game in an Essendon team that was underperforming. He then gets picked up by us and amazingly gets selected in a pretty strong team and performs well.

So who failed his development, Essendon or us??

Hind was playing for Essenson's VFL club side. He was not on an AFL list at the time.

[saynta]

Okay...let's see. Nick Hind couldn't get a game in an Essendon team that was underperforming. He then gets picked up by us and amazingly gets selected in a pretty strong team and performs well.

So who failed his development, Essendon or us??

Hind was never on the Essendon list before we drafted him. It’s like saying we failed to develop Hayden McLean.

Correct.

[cwrcyn]

errrr....and who would have been coaching Hind at that time?.......oh yeah, Essendon's coaching staff. So, if our coaching staff are responsible for players at Sandringham and you're happy to lump them in with the failure to develop Hind at St Kilda (even though he became a senior player during that time), then why does the same logic not apply to Hind's time at Essendon the first time around? They didn't see enough in him to draft him. We saw something in him and gave him an opportunity. During his time with us he showed he was AFL standard. At the end of his contract with us he chose more money from Essendon. So....did the two years he spent with us help to make him the player he was at round one this year, or was it the 12 weeks of pre-season training at Essendon that did all that? If you have a narrative that's based around kicking the sh#t out of everyone at our club, then you'll find ways to make anything fit that narrative, however illogical

[Selhurst Saint]

When he was playing VFL for Essendon he was playing as a line breaking Half Back. We recruit him and play him primarily as a small forward. Essendon take him back and immediately put him on the Half Back flank where he is obviously most comfortable and plays his best footy. We were just dumb.

[cwrcyn]

Thank you for confirming my belief

[shanegrambeau]

Who was more effective at HB in ‘21?
Sinclair at the Saints?
Hind at Essendon?

Close call.

We must remember we performed better in 2020 than 2021 too.

Had Hind stayed, perhaps he would have had a run down there? And perhaps Sincs would be a winger, forward or even an onballer? Hard to imagine isn’t it? Why?
We didn’t see it coming. So Essendon had foresight…very good foresight. They rolled the dice and it came up a six.

[B.M]

Better question

Who was better

Hind at HB
Or
Hill at HB

One guy, selected around pick 50 in the draft on 300k

One guy cost pick 10 and more plus Acres on 900k

[samoht]

Better question

Who was better

Hind at HB
Or
Hill at HB

One guy, selected around pick 50 in the draft on 300k

One guy cost pick 10 and more plus Acres on 900k

Ouch!

[samoht]

And ...
Who was better and who was developing better ... Battle at CHB under AR or Battle now ?

[cwrcyn]

[samoht]

[saynta]

Thank you for confirming my belief

You stated "Okay...let's see. Nick Hind couldn't get a game in an Essendon team that was underperforming."

That is not correct as he wasn't eligible to play for them.

who knows if they even considered drafting him.