For those bagging picking up King...

[fonz_#15]

As with other people I find it distressing that the club is only looking at mature aged recruits and has blatantly ignored Cameron Wood and John Meesen.

.

Only mature aged recruits??

We basically only traded away one draft pick as pick 90 would never have been used by us.

So we still have picks 9, 42 and 58 (maybe even 74) which will most likely be used on kids.

Securing Meesen or Wood would have cost us one or more of the kids from the 2007 Draft.

Wood I too quite like....but I just don't think we could have obtained him without trading No 9....or a quality player...and I prefer to have kept both.

why do you insist on common sense posting SRr? people don't get it

[Saint_Express]

Common sense?? Maybe you need to read into decisions a little harder fonz. For a club to state before trade week had even started that they were not interested in an upcoming prospect but were interested in an ageing player in our situation is absurd.

I never said King was a waste of a draft pick, as pick 90 is little more than garbage in any draft. King has experience and that is great for the short term future at St Kilda. Our club though needs to find future ruck prospects to find prosperity in the area that haunts the club called centre clearances. Who do we have? This years draft has only 20 players that you can really be certain about. To sacrifice a pick after that this year is absolutely nothing as in reality the player we pick later on in the draft will be de-listed in 1-2 years time with this years quality.

To me this is common sense. Yet you feel that after last year's recruitment of 34 year old Clarke (for one season) we have found a lifetime prospect at 28.

[Armoooo]

Common sense?? Maybe you need to read into decisions a little harder fonz. For a club to state before trade week had even started that they were not interested in an upcoming prospect but were interested in an ageing player in our situation is absurd.

I never said King was a waste of a draft pick, as pick 90 is little more than garbage in any draft. King has experience and that is great for the short term future at St Kilda. Our club though needs to find future ruck prospects to find prosperity in the area that haunts the club called centre clearances. Who do we have? This years draft has only 20 players that you can really be certain about. To sacrifice a pick after that this year is absolutely nothing as in reality the player we pick later on in the draft will be de-listed in 1-2 years time with this years quality.

To me this is common sense. Yet you feel that after last year's recruitment of 34 year old Clarke (for one season) we have found a lifetime prospect at 28.

If it were that easy to find a quality young ruckman or two, every team would have Dean Cox's running around, the fact is that it's the hardest position to find quality, you don't need a superstar you just need to be able to break even and that is something that King can do until we develop a suitable replacement... For pick 90 he was an absolute bargain...

[St Fidelius]

I have not been here for a while because of health issues, both personal and PC...

I cannot see why anyone would "bag" the selection of King (plus a forward) for pick 90.....

Please give me the link to the thread...

OR at least who has mentioned this....

I would gather it is the usual suspects

[fonz_#15]

Common sense?? Maybe you need to read into decisions a little harder fonz. For a club to state before trade week had even started that they were not interested in an upcoming prospect but were interested in an ageing player in our situation is absurd.

I never said King was a waste of a draft pick, as pick 90 is little more than garbage in any draft. King has experience and that is great for the short term future at St Kilda. Our club though needs to find future ruck prospects to find prosperity in the area that haunts the club called centre clearances. Who do we have? This years draft has only 20 players that you can really be certain about. To sacrifice a pick after that this year is absolutely nothing as in reality the player we pick later on in the draft will be de-listed in 1-2 years time with this years quality.

To me this is common sense. Yet you feel that after last year's recruitment of 34 year old Clarke (for one season) we have found a lifetime prospect at 28.

could you contradict yourself anymore in 1 post??

[Saint_Express]

I have stated from my first post on this topic that King was a bargain pick up. What seems to be confusing you and others is that there is actually a word called youth in AFL. I know you don't like hearing it as Matthew Clarke reminds you of the latest and greatest player to play for one year.

Sure King provides relief in the ruck HOWEVER that is a short-term solution. We have not got one young ruckman to develop for the long-term future.

Do you not wonder why Collingwood a club with a more than competant ruckman in Fraser gave up their top pick for wood. Meesen is in a similiar situation as Melbourne have Jamar and White and far better ruck stocks than our club.

You want a Dean Cox! Well you have to develop one as they are not older players that have suffered injuries. We will continue to suffer in the long-term until we find some young ruck prospects to develop.

[n1ck]

So you would have given up #9 for Wood, or #26 for Meesen?

I wouldnt have.

[Saint_Express]

Considering that Wood was a 1st round draft pick in a stronger draft and has been developed possibly.

Meesen went at pick 8 a few years ago and as there is really only 20 top notch players 26 is a pretty good deal.

After what we have gone through with ruckmen recently we have undervalued the role of developing quality ruckman.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Do you not wonder why Collingwood a club with a more than competant ruckman in Fraser gave up their top pick for wood. Meesen is in a similiar situation as Melbourne have Jamar and White and far better ruck stocks than our club.

Collingwood's a very different situation to St. Kilda. However, the primary difference they were in a position to give up pick 14 - St. Kilda is not in a position to give up pick 9. I don't wonder why Collingwood would do this at all given the large stock of developing players they've got, and given that Richards looks done, Bryan looks good around the ground, but not like someone who'll be a #1 tap ruck, and Fraser is injury prone - a ready to go #2 who could develop to a #1 allowing C'wood to take Fraser out of the ruck and be spelled by Bryan fits short, middle and long term strategy for them.

St Kilda would be looking at a medium term solution to cover their rucks while they develop a young ruckman that they might take with a draft pick (they have stated this as an intention, be it McEvoy, or a later pick). Backed up by a hopeful improvement from Van Rheenan this year allowing him to be elevated in '09.

There was nobody available that was going to fit price/payoff for St. Kilda during trade period, I don't actually see the King trade as relating to your youth concern, beyond saying that there are 3 or 4 draft picks to be taken shortly of much greater relevance... unless you're eyeing off a ruckman who might slip to pick #74?

[n1ck]

If either of them had played a full season or two of decent quality football, then yes look at it. But to pay that higher price for either unknown quality then no.
Wood may very well turn out to be a very good ruckman, Meesen from the rumours ive been hearing is very talented but soft, with no workrate.

Couldnt afford to take the risk with where we are at, at the moment.

[Saint_Express]

A mid-term solution is wood or meesen. They have already got 2 years development ahead of any draftee we get this year. They still have a good 10 years ahead of them and didnt get opportunities mostly because of development and players such as charman and hudson.

Even if we pick a player this year pick 9 is our only promising pick which there wont be any decent ruckman at anyway. We gave our second round pick for schnieder and dempster which is more questionable than taking meesen who would address our needs.

I understand our situation, however, if we take a young ruckman late in the draft there is a high chance he will be de-listed a season or two later. Meesen was relatively cheap and wood has a pretty certain future.

[saintsRrising]

It looks like those that desire to grow our own young ruckman are going to have their wish granted..



RL is going to cover both bases...the immediate and the long term.

http://realfooty.com.au/news/news/saint ... 97213.html

Saints big on building ruck stocks
Karen Lyon | October 15, 2007

JUST days after securing Geelong premiership ruckman Steven King in last week's trades, St Kilda is looking to further lift its ruck department in next month's national draft.

The Saints will go into the draft with four selections — Nos 9, 42, 58 and 74 — and coach Ross Lyon said the team would select four young players, including a ruckman, to continue rebuilding stocks.

While Carlton will almost certainly select ruckman Matthew Kreuzer with the opening pick, there are other ruckmen available, including Ben McEvoy from the Murray Bushrangers and his teammate Dawson Simpson, as well as Gippsland Power's Brent Connelly, Tassie Mariner Tom Bellchambers, Western Jets' Will Sullivan and Joel Smouha from Queensland's Mount Gravatt.

The Saints spoke to young Geelong ruckman Mark Blake, who missed out on the premiership medal when the Cats chose King ahead of him for the grand final, but Blake remains at Kardinia Park.

After a thorough medical for King and what the coach labelled an "impressive" meeting, Lyon said he was prepared to take a "calculated risk" with the ruckman, believing he has another two or three good years in him.

"He is still hungry," Lyon said. "What I saw on grand final day was a lean, hungry, highly conditioned athlete."

Lyon also believes King is motivated by Geelong's decision to ultimately choose Blake in front of him, even though King tasted premiership glory. "He has a point to prove, according to him. Not according to Geelong, or according to me," the coach said. "I have real confidence in him, I am thrilled to have him and there is work to be done over our pre-season."

With ruckmen at a premium during trade week, and given the Saints' lack of success in the area in recent years, Lyon believes King buys the club time to "grow our own" and develop another young ruckman.

With Matthew Clarke retired and Michael Gardiner continuing his comeback from injuries, the club wants to put time into a young ruckman. Luke Van Rheenen has agreed to spend another year on the Saints' rookie list.

The coach said the addition of King and Geelong teammate Charlie Gardiner, as well as Sydney premiership duo Adam Schneider and Sean Dempster, would create "pressure on spots around the edges" of the senior team.

Having given up pick No. 90 for the Geelong pair — a pick that neither St Kilda nor Geelong would be likely to use — the Saints have effectively picked up four experienced players, three of them under the age of 25, for pick No. 26 in the draft. Three come with premiership experience, something that can be a double-edged sword, according to Lyon.

"It's a problem if they have been to the top of the mountain and are just playing out their years, but they are still hungry. They come from two teams, Geelong and the Swans, that encourage hard workers and they are highly disciplined; they will bring these traits with them and they are traits, I think, that are already inherent in our group," Lyon said.

"If you look at the two players we got from the Swans, they could be 150-game players for us."

Lyon had been looking at another, unnamed, ruckman but went with King not just because of his interview, but because of the chance of also getting Gardiner, who is seen as a possible replacement for Aaron Hamill or Brett Voss.

[Animal Enclosure]

A mid-term solution is wood or meesen. They have already got 2 years development ahead of any draftee we get this year. They still have a good 10 years ahead of them and didnt get opportunities mostly because of development and players such as charman and hudson.

Even if we pick a player this year pick 9 is our only promising pick which there wont be any decent ruckman at anyway. We gave our second round pick for schnieder and dempster which is more questionable than taking meesen who would address our needs.

I understand our situation, however, if we take a young ruckman late in the draft there is a high chance he will be de-listed a season or two later. Meesen was relatively cheap and wood has a pretty certain future.

The fact is that Wood was rated by our staff as too expensive pick wise (pick 9) and Meesen was not rated. He was the 4th ruck option with the Crows & hadn't shown much. Not sure why Melbourne traded for him either.

The fact that you rate Meesen as a better option than Schneider means that you are either related to the Meesen family or under rate our need for a Schneider type. The fact is that there were very few ruckmen of quality available during this trade period. Who knows maybe St.Kilda have spoken to Warnock from Freo & will have a real crack at getting him when he's out of contract next year.

The fact that Ross has stated that they will draft a young ruckman makes King's selection even more meritorious. We now have an experienced 28 year old ruckman who can not only fill a gaping hole in our side in 2008 but someone who will allow a young ruckman to develop & also allow Michael Gardiner to get himself fit and back into senior footy without the pressure of being our saviour in the ruck.

It looks more & more like they will draft McEvoy if he is still available & may even look to him as a tall forward option (with the reported delistings of Watts & Brooks).

We'll obviously be able to make a much better judgement after the National Draft but so far I can see a definite method to Ross' madness!

Now all we need is to fast forward 12 months & see Rossco add Robert Warnock and draft Michael Hurley (as Max's replacement) to the 2008 Saints Premiership side!

[saintsRrising]

Purely asa guess I would think that they will take the ruckman after our first pick....

McEvoy seems to be more a ruck forward......I would prefer a tall ruckman....hopefully one with good aerobic cpacity. Evidently many of the young rucks this year are of just that type.

[saintly]

I was very happy with picking him up and thought the trade was a bargain but some people may be dissappointed not with King, but the fact that he was one of four players we picked up who will take 4 spots from 4 young players in the draft. But, I was very happy with it and as he is fit he should be in a good position to have a good impact next year.

the saints would not have drafted 8 players.

we have 4 spots left. it has been stated that the saints will go for young players.
tas the this darft is not great. the saints would not be going for 8 players.
they just proably would have kept the 4 players they need to delist.

I'd rather them go for 4 new players and bring in relatively 4 young players. 3 are under 25 next year.

[Saint_Express]

That article is certainly good news for the future and the ideas the coach has for the club. Our problem is our draft picks though as with no pick in 20s or 30s we are limiting ourselves to a very raw prospect that as many clubs have found will end in failure. With our picks Id be inclined to take 2 ruckman with our later picks to allow the club to develop a solid combination while king is at the club.

As has been a problem with blake and to some extent kosi, our ruck prospects have lacked height. As I believe Rix, Brooks (If still on list), gardiner, clarke (retired), blake and kosi were all under 200cm.

The most effective ruckman in the game have height as sandilands, cox, lade, fraser etc are all over 200cms and are able to dominate.

I still rate Meesen highly as a ruckman as going into the draft a few years ago he was the best prospect along with wood and his ability to dominate around the ground I rated very highly. At pick 37 I rate him a steal as he has had 2 years of development ahead of this years draftees.

There is a long way to go before we have developed a solid ruck foundation but atleast the club is doing something about it.

[carn_sainter]

The most effective ruckman in the game have height as sandilands, cox, lade, fraser etc are all over 200cms and are able to dominate.

Your view is too narrow...the fact that Lade is 198-199cm (from memory) illustrates my point...

who cares if they're 201 vs 200cm...no difference...sure, sandilands vs. kosi is a significant difference, but didn't the 9th best performed saint of 2007 beat sandilands, despite a 24cm deficit in height?

it's like people who say 25% hitouts to advantage will win you a game whereas 20% will lose you one...ridiculous, 2 hitouts to advantage difference?

the players need to be well rounded and able to contribute...absolutely, keeping all else equal, an extra inch or two in height will help you out...but you don't go for these things in spite of other talents

all i know, is i'd rather have 197cm Peter Moore than 204cm Trent Knobel anyday...

[saintsRrising]

With our picks Id be inclined to take 2 ruckman with our later picks to allow the club to develop a solid combination while king is at the club.

.

We could...but we also have Van Reehan to develop and only one team in Casey to develop them in....unless you fancy Casey Twos....

I would go for only the one....and have look at Van Reehan for another year.

If he does not look the goods by the next draft I would then go for another young ruckmen then.



For this years draft with the 4 picks I would tend go for:

*2 mids
*a possible future FB
*one ruckmen

However we also have some rookie picks as well.....

[n1ck]

For this years draft with the 4 picks I would tend go for:

*2 mids
*a possible future FB
*one ruckmen

Exactly!

Will be interesting to see who is available in the PSD, but i would have thought a FB option is a MUST.

[Armoooo]

all i know, is i'd rather have 197cm Peter Moore than 204cm Trent Knobel anyday...

I'd rather have milne in the ruck ffs...

[Oh When the Saints]

it's like people who say 25% hitouts to advantage will win you a game whereas 20% will lose you one...ridiculous, 2 hitouts to advantage difference?

Tell that to the Cats against Sydney in a particular semi-final ...

[saint patrick]

The thing I like about the King decision is that it will throw him a big challenge to stick it up the Cats to prove he still had some more to give A big preseason and year for King means top 4 for us IMO

With our midfield a 25% improvement in Rucking would translate to 5 or 6 more wins

[CURLY]

Hudson?? King for free is clearly better.

The trade was - Hudson, Pick 43 for Pick 30, Pick 38

If we had have convinced Hudson to come to St Kilda we could have got him very cheap, and he has proven that he is a quality ruckman who can stand up to a full season of footy.

In terms of salary I don't think there would be much difference between him and King. King refused a contract at Geelong because he wanted more money. We would probably be paying him about 200k in 2008.

Hudson has 3-4 years left and is in the top 6 ruckmen in the competition. He is good in ruck contests and is very good around the ground.

King played one reasonable game in 2007, and in that game the opposition was pathetic, his team's midfield dominated and he was given no respect and allowed to run loose to pick up possessions. He gave away 5 free kicks, which would have been costly had it been a closer game. He did compete well with a quality ruck duo, but by no means did he beat them.

But, King is at St Kilda in 2008 and nothing anyone says on here changes that, so I'm dropping the subject.

Surely you cant be serious that Hudson is in the top six ruckmen in the AFL? GOP at best, King has to be the best trade that has ever been pulled off.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Hudson?? King for free is clearly better.

The trade was - Hudson, Pick 43 for Pick 30, Pick 38
...

Surely you cant be serious that Hudson is in the top six ruckmen in the AFL? GOP at best, King has to be the best trade that has ever been pulled off.

Don't know that King's best trade ever, even having been aquired for nothing, he's got to do something to earn that rap, essentially he's a PSD pick that got past the bottom teams (who may have passed anyway) by attaching Charlie Gardiner.

That said, Hudson? I've been impressed with the year he's had, and he's not really bad at anything (no small feat amongst ruckmen i guess), but I'm floored that Hudson attracted a higher price than Schneider... though NOT that he attracted a higher price than King (I was thinking 38 straight up).

Be interesting to compare Hudson and King in '08, they've both got great opportunities to take #1 jobs ... on the strength of '07, Hudson's got the edge, but if King gets on the park for more than 15 games (reasonable based on past performance, generally has made 15, but only 3 times in 11 years did he play more than 20) King's a good chance to break even at a much lower pricetag.