Our 'Stars' and Consistency

[rodgerfox]

I've been saying for years that our list is overrated.

It's a good list, certainly in the top part of the comp, but has never been even close to 'the best list in the league' that so many (plenty on here too I might add) claimed.

Our depth has always been very good. The fact that we won 14 games for 3 years straight, with the worst injury list in the comp for 2 of those, simply has to prove that we had good depth.

The 'bottom 6' aren't our problem. I've said this for a while. It's our supposed 'stars'.

These are the guys that are overrated.

There was a discussion on here about a year or two ago about elite players. I was astounded to read on here how many of our guys are considered to be 'elite'. Pretty much everyone who was picked in the top 10 of the draft, or who can get 25 touches every 6th week seems to be considered elite.

To me, that's not elite.

To be elite, you for one need to be capable of playing at an elite level - which most AFL players posess. Then, you need to be able to do it every week. And, if you can't do it every week, you still need to have an impact on the game in some way.

How many of our guys, our 'stars', can you say we can confidently rely on to play 'really well' every week? To do what makes them 'stars' every single week?

I'd say Harvey, Max, Bakes and now Sam Fisher.

Lenny Hayes is close.

Roo these days, can be relied on to kick 2 or 3 and play well. Rarely can I say I fully expect him to dominate a game. He hasn't done that for some time. To be fair, the way we've played over the past 18 months makes that very difficult for a forward.

That's it.

We just do not have the 'stars' who play well and consistently dominate games like the other good teams have.

And I'm not just talking about dominating in the sense of getting 30 touches every week. If you can't get the 30 touches each week, then you need to influence the game in other ways. Pressure, tackling, 1%ers.

How many of our on-ballers can we say will get 3-4 clearances every week, no matter what?

None.

How many of our on-ballers can we say will get 20 quality positions every week, no matter what?

One. Harves.

How many of our forwards can we say will be involved in 3-4 goals every week, no matter what?

None.

How many of our defenders can we say will beat their opponent every week, no matter what?

Two. Max and Bakes.

How many of our HBs can we say will provide run and rebound 50s every week, no matter what?

One. Sam Fisher.

How many of our Rucks can we say will at the worst, break even in their position every week, no matter what?

None.


If we go back a couple of years I'd say Luke Penny, Ball, Max, Aussie, Roo, Gehrig, Hamill, Lenny, Harves, Bakes could be relied on to do what they do - what made them good players, every week. 5 of these guys when playing well, were match winners.

Then we had guys who were guns when at their best - however their best only happened every other week. Kosi, Dal, Luke Ball, Joey, X etc.

If we take the former list consistently having impacts on games, it was often enough to get us over the line against average sides. If the latter list of players had their 'good games' aswell, we'd brain anyone.

Now back to the present. We have about 5 who I figure we can genuinely rely on to be consistent and do their job (1 is suspended, 1 is 100 years old and 1 is coming back from a reco).

Unfortunately, the list of players who 'are guns when at their best - however their best only happened every other week' far outweighs the more important list above.

This is the problem we have. Reliability and consistency.

Ironically, we've become famous for relying on our stars in the past. I don't think this was the case at all. We just had more players who were consistent in their roles, with a good sprinkling of guys who bobbed and blitzed games.

Our list of 'elite' players would be one of the lowest in the league right now. Our list of genuine reliable players how very rarely get beaten in their position, would also be one of the lowest too.

Lyon needs to address this. We lost Penny and Aussie since 2004 - these guys were massive losses. However we then won 14 games for the next 2 years, without Hamill aswell.

We were very deep, and could cover the loss of good players - simply because we had guys playing reliable footy each week.

Last year, and this year we don't.

[Oh When the Saints]

Interesting perspective, and when you express it like that I'm inclined to agree with a fair bit of what you're saying.

However, there is one thing you have wrong IMO.

How many of our forwards can we say will be involved in 3-4 goals every week, no matter what?

Riewoldt had over 20 goals assists last year, plus averaging 2 goals per game.

So he was "involved" in at least three goals per game last year.

He has won the last two club B&F's.

He is consistently rated in the top 15 players in the AFL by everyone. Everyone can't be wrong.

Riewoldt has started this season slowly and is not playing to the level he was last year.


However, to not put him in the "star" category, when he dominated 3-4 matches in the second half of last year and won our B&F despite missing two matches is wrong IMO.

[Otiman]

Everyone can't be wrong.

Yes, "they" can and often are.

[Oh When the Saints]

Everyone can't be wrong.

Yes, "they" can and often are.

I have never spoken to a football fan who wouldn't have Riewoldt in their top 15-20 ....

Maybe everyone is wrong and he is that over-rated. Personally I don't think so, and clearly our coaching staff didn't think so last year when they voted him B&F for the second time in two years.

Mind you, he has been relatively quiet this year.

[saintjake]

i agree.
rooey is a gun, but he has nothing on pav and jono brown
week in those to players are in the best for their sides,
and they ahve kicked big bags regualary (5 and upwards)

roo never seems evn close to getting 5+ if he gets 4 im like WOW he played good.
but if gehrig get 4, im like gee gehrig didnt do that good.


i agree with the midfields as well.
and lenny and bally will be there again hopefully by round 15.
they laid 12 and 11 tackles respectivly last week.
fine effort for one comming back after a reco and one from op.
i wish the others would go in for the hardball and tackle more.

[Saintschampions08]

Everyone can't be wrong.

Yes, "they" can and often are.

I have never spoken to a football fan who wouldn't have Riewoldt in their top 15-20 ....

Maybe everyone is wrong and he is that over-rated. Personally I don't think so, and clearly our coaching staff didn't think so last year when they voted him B&F for the second time in two years.

Mind you, he has been relatively quiet this year.

I don't think its soo much how good he is. I think it's more a case of consistency.

Riewoldt plays well every week, he never has a really bad game, but he never dominates a game either. I think thats the difference between him and say, Jonothan Brown. Brown might have a few quiet weeks, but when he's in form you can expect him to rip you a new a-hole.

Riewoldt is consistently in the top 5-10 players on game day, but never THE best. That for mine, is what makes an elite player, being able to turn a game on its head and completely dominate.

[saintjake]

well said.

[fingers]

Interesting post....and kind of agree. For mine we lack the player that can change a game. realy impact. Carey did it. Hird did it. Pavlich can do it but not often enough.

This is what I expect from our "elite">

Week in week out they have to beat their opponents. Then when needed they need to take the game by the scruff. We needed it on Friday when the doggies got on top.

[Saintschampions08]

Interesting post....and kind of agree. For mine we lack the player that can change a game. realy impact. Carey did it. Hird did it. Pavlich can do it but not often enough.

This is what I expect from our "elite">

Week in week out they have to beat their opponents. Then when needed they need to take the game by the scruff. We needed it on Friday when the doggies got on top.

Match winners. We don't have any.

Someone, that when its close to the end, can do something special and win the match.

I remember last year, against the bulldogs, Roo had a chance to do it, yeah it was a tough shot, tough angle and 50 out, but he missed.
Compared to say,

Franklin's shot against the Crows in the final last year, seconds from the end 55-60 out, tight angle...goal.

[fugazi]

Our midfield is comprised of good players, but they never seem to all turn it on together...against weaker teams its passable for Dal and Montagna to dominate and Ball and Hayes to be a bit quiet, but against good opponents that costs us the match...we need to return to hunting in packs mentality that made us dominant right up until Grant took evryone to the movies that fateful day....we've never hunted the same way since.

[sasaint]

Our midfield is comprised of good players, but they never seem to all turn it on together...against weaker teams its passable for Dal and Montagna to dominate and Ball and Hayes to be a bit quiet, but against good opponents that costs us the match...we need to return to hunting in packs mentality that made us dominant right up until Grant took evryone to the movies that fateful day....we've never hunted the same way since.

It seems that our midfield either can't get to the fall of the ball first or is being coached to be second to the ball. In either case this explains the high tackle count but also shows why the Doggies were able to cut us up. With competitive rucks in Gardiner and King we have to get the pill first, otherwise this is going to be another long and unhappy season.

[SuperSaint]

It seems that our midfield either can't get to the fall of the ball first or is being coached to be second to the ball. In either case this explains the high tackle count but also shows why the Doggies were able to cut us up. With competitive rucks in Gardiner and King we have to get the pill first, otherwise this is going to be another long and unhappy season.

As I said before, a team needs to be versatile. Our midfielders are so hesitant to kick goals on the run that it is almost embarrassing to watch. 'One trick pony' teams don't win premierships. It is not good enough to rely on your forwards only, especially when they are being beaten or teams double up on them. We do not have one midfielder who takes the opposition on and kicks 50m goals on the run, to forcibly change the opposition's bottleneck plan they often put on our forward line players. To make matters worse, many of our midfielders lack that explosive pace that the modern game requires, not to mention hardness/toughness. On Friday night the Bulldogs midfield made most of our players look very bad with no answers/countermeasures whatsoever. The fact they couldn't regroup after half-time, unlike the Hawks did yesterday speaks for itself.

[brown-coat]

We don't have stars except for Riewoldt. He's the only one worthy of the star title.

[rodgerfox]

More often than not, the difference between a match winner and a gun player, is having consistent and reliable guys in his side that can categorically hold up their end of the dela in terms of winning their position - or at least not being beaten in it.

This is where we fall down.

We have guys who can win matches off their boot. Kosi, Roo, G, Dal, Milne are guys that can literally turn a game on it's ear.

We have some others too.

The problem is, unless you have your Darren Milburns, or your Sam Mitchells or your Kane Cornes' who always turn up to play and without always 'turning a game', they always do what you expect them to do, these 'matchwinners' simply become inconsistently good players.

That's where we're at now.

More Bakers and less Dal Santos is unfortunately what we need right now.

[esaint66]

I've been saying for years that our list is overrated.

As have i.

I remember on the footy show a couple of weeks back when dal was on and jim brayshaw and garry lyon were telling dal hopw well we were going and that we were premiership contenders and dal kept explaining tha we were a good list but that we were overrated to an extent and i was inclined to agree with him, but jim and garry would have a bar of it and no one in the media circles will until we lose and they jump on us saying that we are no good and that we have let everyone down which is line ball. We are pretty pissed off with this weeks performance, but deep down we must have know that our side would have to trip up with our recent style of play.

We get carryed away by other peoples thoughts and it does us no good and i think that this weeks loss might turn out to be a bit of a blessing in disguise like geelongs losses to port and the roos at home last year.

[steph]

Our issue regarding our "elite" players is that none of them are damaging.

We dont have anyone that can turn it on for 10 mins and blow a team out of the water. We have players capable of this, but until they start backing themselves and wanting the ball more than their opponents, it isnt going to happen.

[bigred]

ONE LOSS.

[Saintschampions08]

ONE LOSS.

Last year ONE LOSS was the difference between finals and a free september. I'm tipping it will be a very close and could be similar condition this year.

[rodgerfox]

ONE LOSS.

We've had more than ONE LOSS in the past 2 years.

[Cairnsman]

I know it is only one loss, but it was the way they lost that begs the question.

Bring back the selfless act.

[StSteven]

One Loss yes but that is one we needed to win if we are a top 4 side!

[rodgerfox]

The problem of our supposed stars not being consistent and reliable, has been an issue for longer than last week.

How we can go from a high scoring team who also was in the bottom 3 of 'points against', to a team that simply cannot find the goals? And against good attacking teams leaks like a sive.

Did Lyon get duped into thinking we weren't defensive enough, and focussed too much on this?

I say 'duped', because we had a very tight defense for 3 years. The only time we became leaky, was when we were decimated by injury. The football public, our own supporters included never appreciated the extent of our injury list.

I think we infact were a very reliable and consistently tight defensive team (I'm not referring to the backline, but all over defense).

Why have we - or have at least appeared to, changed so much? Considering especially now that the supposed focus is on defence.

The key personnel is pretty much the same. Some would it's now better. Certainly key players are bigger, stronger and more experienced now. This year also, all are fitter.

Why have certain players gone from being 'contest winners' or at the least, players who were rarely beaten in contests - to players who peel off and let their opponent get the ball?

[rodgerfox]

It's worth noting too, that after 2 (well 1.5 really) trade periods, we haven't traded anyone of note.

We trimmed off 'deadwood' and to be frank, recruited deadwood from other clubs in their place.

Yet all along, our 'stars' remain.

The very 'stars' who are responsible for the success of the club, and have been for 5 years.

The very 'stars' who simply don't live up to the hype.

Also, the very 'stars' who would attract quite good currency from other clubs I might.

[Sobraz]

Wonderful analysis Roger, shows that we infact have a lot of passengers who rely on others to drag them along...

It seems invariably that the discussion comes back to Roo.. Undoubted he is a gun, but I honestly think his game style is increasingly harming his effectivness..

Roo's most dominant game in his career was against Melb several years ago, when we were smashed at the MCG, and he kicked 8 or 9... He played deep in the forward line, didnt go on long 'searching' leads, and outplayed all his opponents 1 on 1, body to body...

He now pushes his running capacity so much that he is more often than not in non-threatening positions, and has very little impact...

He also has not developed the abilty to mark from behind... Due to his runing/leading game, he has not developed the skill of riding a pack or leaping over an opponent to mark when behind.. He just cant do it, and is lost when put n that possie...

Sure, front position is important, but he needs to use his body more and get in more dangerous positions...

In that, I would play Roo in the square, and Kosi and G floating around the half forward line back into the forward 50...

If we make roo put himself in positions where he can hurt teams more, he will be our most infulencial player, and a bonefied top 3 in the comp.. At the moment, he is a great player, who has little influence.. He needs to be feared..

[groupie1]

good post,
I'd reckon Harvey, Hayes, Baker, Fisher, Hudghton, Goddard, Roo would be worthy of the label of elite