Barrett HS article

[SainterK]

Article's done exactly what it was supposed to, it's generated a bit of discussion amongst Saints supporters without needing to present anything new.

Would they love their time over, knowing what they know now? Pffft, of course.

Thing is, I'd bet that what they'd really like is for Andrew Lovett to have his time over, and not end up under investigation for rape. I'd bet that what they'd really like is for an extra week to work out a more amicable solution to the Ball scenario as they were trying to do with North (the guys who actually held the much vaunted pick 25) and the Bulldogs (who allegedly refused a pick 25 for Everitt swap, and told us to hunt pick 22 or higher).

Unless getting their time over included prescience, I'd bet that the Saints would do exactly the same thing, that they wouldn't consider the 2 disasters to be the result of bad decisions, but worst possible outcomes from their strategy.

Well, of course the loss of Ball and the seeming non-arrival of Lovett are not "disasters".

As was the case when Brooks went bad and Watts went bad and Brad Howard wasn't worth pick 27 and etc., we had more than enough strength in our list to remain a top club throughout that period.

And we will almost certainly be one of the top clubs again this season.

I don't personally care so much about the fact that we got nothing for Ball in the end than I do about the nagging feeling I can't get rid of that the club wasn't really prepared to make more than a token effort to hang onto him. Even with his limitations, I think he was a required player in 2010 and I think others will have to lift to take up the slack in order to prevent us from going backwards.

I know a lot of other posters on here think Ball is "crap", a "waste of space" and so forth (well, at least, this is what they keep posting). And it would seem that the coach is not an enormous fan.

I disagree. I think Ball as a player and a man was a pretty important element in the "ecology" of the playing group and I am nervous about the impact his departure will have.

The recruitment of Lovett excited me and I thought (although a different sort of player) he could help to compensate for the damage done by the loss of Ball. I don't agree with some of the posters on here who suggest that Lovett is overrated. I reckon he's a gun.

I also don't see how the club could foresee what happened on Xmas Eve. I think everyone expected Lovett to continue to make minor transgressions like the "caught drinking" incident. But to be accused of such a reprehensible and inexcusable form of sexual assault? Nobody could have predicted that.

So the Ball and Lovett affairs have, it would seem, left us the poorer. And I think - in combination - they outrate the bad recruitment outcomes from past off-seasons: you have to go back to the Timmy Watson era to find such a severe net blow to the collective talent pool at the club.

But, as you say, not a "disaster". Just a rotten outcome.

To stand alone against the majority on here and say that you are worried how the departure of Ball will impact the team is very honest of you.

I have never said Ball was a crap footy player, I leave that to those who understand these sort of things better than me.

Wasn't a fan of his departure though and "mr perfect" is not a title that would sit comfortablly with me if I was in his shoes.

[Con Gorozidis]

Meh.

The only line I would take umbrage with is:

In trade week, St Kilda refused to deal with Collingwood, which ultimately saw Ball become a Magpie (via the pre-season draft) for nothing in exchange.

There was no refusal to deal with Collingwood. We just couldn't reach an acceptable agreement.

He might have also mentioned that in an injury free season, Ball could only manage to finish equal 17th in the Saintsational Player of the year award.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/b ... 5820991611

so ball was 17th in saintsational player award.
was dropped in round 16 and the coach publicly discussed the weakneses he needed to work on.
was played mainly off the bench: BUT
the coach would not accept pick 25 for him cos he was too good and he wanted fair value.

Well put, Con. Well Put.

forum votes to be used in your points

Dalsanto was dropped.............so on that bases you would accept pick 23+

i had other factors besides the dropped thing. and i was only using forum votes cos they were quoted and i was directly refuting that quote. and even so - nothing wrong with forum votes unless u are some kind of snob?
and im sure a stat will show that dal spends far less % on the pine than LB.

[joffaboy]

You cannot comment on a draft pick.....it does not guarantee a successful or unsuccessful player.....which most on here are arguing about.....and it's pointless giving examples, there are a thousand to prove either pov right

what going to the draft does do is give you an OPPORTUNITY to pick a player.......having NO pick makes drafting a success story an impossibility....

the order of your pick......makes the odds of picking a player better.....but it's always a gamble......but NOT having a pick is a bigger gamble, because you gauranteed NOT to get a successful player

So we shouldnt have traded for Gehrig, Hamill and any other player we traded for because we have lost os draft pick.

I thought the argument here was the loss of a pick for Ball, bceause the other is a ludicrious argument as you have pointed out.

We used #16 for the opportunity to have Lovett, which may not have worked. We used #17 on Watts that didn't work. In contrast we used pick #9 on Beetham which didn't work.

The only pick we "lost" was compensation for Ball.

[Moods]

You cannot comment on a draft pick.....it does not guarantee a successful or unsuccessful player.....which most on here are arguing about.....and it's pointless giving examples, there are a thousand to prove either pov right

what going to the draft does do is give you an OPPORTUNITY to pick a player.......having NO pick makes drafting a success story an impossibility....

the order of your pick......makes the odds of picking a player better.....but it's always a gamble......but NOT having a pick is a bigger gamble, because you gauranteed NOT to get a successful player

So we shouldnt have traded for Gehrig, Hamill and any other player we traded for because we have lost os draft pick.

No. Not if that player is 27yrs old. Has a history of trouble. Also has a history of laziness as well as inconsistency. Have we ever traded a first rounder for that type of player before?

It may be a first round but it was pick 16 in a very weak draft. maybe our recruiters said that any player going that late is probably not going to make it or if he does he will just be a GOP. Lets face it we are in our window of opportunity right now and if Lovett had come off it might have been the difference between winning a flag and not winning one. Pick 16 last year wouldnt have been the difference you would think.

Fair points - however I reckon you've deliberately overlooked what I said. Sure Lovett can be dynamic on his day - but did he have the tools in place to get more consistent, even discounting his alleged transgression, not to mention his age. His endurance fitness has apparently always been terrible, which would suggest that he plays in bursts and can easily be tagged out of a game. Also may be an indicator as to why he rarely gets over 25 possessions. I would have much preferred the club to target Everitt. Younger player who looks to me like he could be anything.

Ppl say we need speed. Not sure that's the case or not. The cats have done okay w/o being all that speedy. WE definitely need more goal kicking mids, I will concede that, and I will concede that Lovett could have provided that.

Just reckon ppl are obsessed/lured by some of the magical things he could do which are very flashy and in some cases very impressive, rather than look at the overall package.

[SainterK]

You cannot comment on a draft pick.....it does not guarantee a successful or unsuccessful player.....which most on here are arguing about.....and it's pointless giving examples, there are a thousand to prove either pov right

what going to the draft does do is give you an OPPORTUNITY to pick a player.......having NO pick makes drafting a success story an impossibility....

the order of your pick......makes the odds of picking a player better.....but it's always a gamble......but NOT having a pick is a bigger gamble, because you gauranteed NOT to get a successful player

So we shouldnt have traded for Gehrig, Hamill and any other player we traded for because we have lost os draft pick.

No. Not if that player is 27yrs old. Has a history of trouble. Also has a history of laziness as well as inconsistency. Have we ever traded a first rounder for that type of player before?

It may be a first round but it was pick 16 in a very weak draft. maybe our recruiters said that any player going that late is probably not going to make it or if he does he will just be a GOP. Lets face it we are in our window of opportunity right now and if Lovett had come off it might have been the difference between winning a flag and not winning one. Pick 16 last year wouldnt have been the difference you would think.

Fair points - however I reckon you've deliberately overlooked what I said. Sure Lovett can be dynamic on his day - but did he have the tools in place to get more consistent, even discounting his alleged transgression, not to mention his age. His endurance fitness has apparently always been terrible, which would suggest that he plays in bursts and can easily be tagged out of a game. Also may be an indicator as to why he rarely gets over 25 possessions. I would have much preferred the club to target Everitt. Younger player who looks to me like he could be anything.

Ppl say we need speed. Not sure that's the case or not. The cats have done okay w/o being all that speedy. WE definitely need more goal kicking mids, I will concede that, and I will concede that Lovett could have provided that.

Just reckon ppl are obsessed/lured by some of the magical things he could do which are very flashy and in some cases very impressive, rather than look at the overall package.

Not sure if Lovett fell into the "need" catergory, I personally have never felt that we needed him to win a premiership.

I think it was more of a case of the coaching staff going over our list with a fine tooth comb, and identifying the types of players we don't neccessarily have.

If I go grocery shopping, I don't load up on the things I already have, I purchase the things that I haven't got in the pantry.

[saint66au]

When people say we got "nothing" for Ball,....do you think some extra leeway in our salary cap counts as nothing?

[stinger]

When people say we got "nothing" for Ball,....do you think some extra leeway in our salary cap counts as nothing?

that's drawing a very long bow saints66au.....there is no up side to that debacle.....imho, that is.....

[chook23]

When people say we got "nothing" for Ball,....do you think some extra leeway in our salary cap counts as nothing?

Is not one of our draft picks a player that replaced Ball on list.

Ball was delisted at last lodgement...prior to draft

[vacuous space]

Is not one of our draft picks a player that replaced Ball on list.

Will Johnson probably wouldn't be on our senior list had we made the trade with Collingwood. If we take pick 25 then our draft probably goes something like this:

25: Mitch Duncan
32: Nick Winmar
60: Jesse Smith
62: Adam Pattison

[borderbarry]

I wonder what Felix Russo makes of all this.

[Milan Faletic]

I think time may be the only judge of what has transpired with Ball and Lovett. We may be speaking of the rise of Armo in 2010 or the brilliant year Peake has had. Maybe Jesse Smith might rise.

Ball wanted to go. He has gone and there is nothing we can do about it.

We have enjoyed some pretty good recruiting lately. So Lovett may be the one that hasn't worked. We don't know yet although the writing is starting to appear on the wall.

[Dr Spaceman]

With all this talk about Luke Ball I’m just trying to get my own thoughts in check. People on this site have various opinions on him as do all saints supporters. To some he remains a champ who has been treated poorly; to others he’s an over-rated player who has stuck it to the club. Many others are somewhere in between.

First of all let me start by saying I’m the sort of supporter who backs our players to the hilt. It really takes a hell of a lot for me to lose faith in a saints player even when others around me start to drop off.

When Luke was drafted by the saints I was rapt as he was one of a highly regarded trio of young guns and I had very high hopes for him. Like many others I really knew very little about Judd or Hodge back then. Even a couple of years down the track there was still reason to believe he may end up being the best of the group. He was of course struck down with OP however looked to be emerging from that dark period in 2008. By that time the hopes of him matching, let alone surpassing Judd & Hodge had virtually disappeared however there was a chance he could finally get a chance to become a star player for our team. However that all came to an end with his horrific hamstring injury at the end of 2008 and his form/issues in 2009.

We can argue all we like as to whether in 2009 RL gave him a fair chance; whether he gave him enough game time; whether his expectations were unrealistic etc etc. However RL introduced a game style that produced our best footy for years and our greatest chance for a flag in recent memory. If Ball is a victim of that game plan then so be it.

I only saw one of the games Luke played for Sandy that being the one televised on the ABC. Many people commented on his performance that day with some suggesting he was BOG etc. But from what I could see he was basically doing the same things he'd been doing for the Saints and not much more. He certainly didn’t dominate as you would expect a gun AFL midfielder to do. He didn’t carry the ball and he didn’t kick with any great accuracy or depth.

If he wasn’t doing what was expected prior to being dropped I’m not exactly sure why he was reinstated. And although he did okay in the GF I tend to think that, like those old fish stories, his performance becomes greater as time passes. Sure he got a fair bit of it early however I’m in the camp that thinks he wasn’t overly dangerous with those possessions. It certainly appeared Geelong didn’t desperately try to shut him done.

In the end I didn't want Luke to go however now that he has chosen to do so I am not concerned about the loss. And that has nothing to do with pick 16, Lovett, Peake, Walsh etc. My firm view is that whether we have Luke or don’t have Luke is unlikely to make us more successful or less successful in 2010 and beyond.

[3rd generation saint]

There is no doubt that Luke got the ball (no pun intended).
However, as I have said before, I have listened to the post match review and heard how Ball got all these possessions and yet I just didn't notice him.
His kicking lost penetration, he didn't kick goals etc.
I read the article and just thought it was a lot of BS, wonder what he will write if we win the premiership and Ball makes very little impact at Collingwood.

[Eastern]

We all know LB got his fair share of possessions but perhaps we should get B4E on the job checking how many of these possessions were to advantage. There could be some surprise stats there to paste on the (Buckley-Malthouse) coaches box wall

We shouldn't forget that LB wanted OUT of our club and didn't care less if we got NOTHING for him. Remember, him, his management and Collingwood chose NOT to go to mediation during trade week. WHY?? !!

[Zed]

To be honest, it sounds reasonably spot on to me. Most articles are a tad negative about sides - it creates news stories. Articles tend to follow 'momentum' as well - Geelong escapes the negativity becasue of the premiership. Hawthorn are apparently on the way back and the Dogs and Crows on the way up, so they are too treated likewise. And then any of the bottom eight with the perception of improvement likewise (ie, Melbourne). The doubters are still there on the Saints and those articles will just be a reflection of that. Whether rightly or wrongly - generally the latter.

Yep. There were plenty of doubters about Geelong unitl they won the flag 3 years ago. As we know, over the last 6 seasons we've played lots of finals, but fallen over at the 2nd last hurdle 3 times and last year fell over at the last hurdle. Public perception about how good we have been during this period and how strong we are as a club wont change until we win the GF.

[satchmo]

We shouldn't forget that LB wanted OUT of our club and didn't care less if we got NOTHING for him. Remember, him, his management and Collingwood chose NOT to go to mediation during trade week. WHY?? !!

Not to mention the fact that he was training at the licksarse centre before he was drafted by them.

If you are to believe the tripe mongering filth dwellers, then he is already the greatest collingwood player of all time. Let's not forget that he struggled to get a full game with us.

While some will say "bless his little heart, he wanted more opportunity!", I say "damn his pea heart, he chose the path of treachery!". Beware the karma bus luke, it's headed straight for ya.

[SainterK]

When people say we got "nothing" for Ball,....do you think some extra leeway in our salary cap counts as nothing?

that's drawing a very long bow saints66au.....there is no up side to that debacle.....imho, that is.....

Low bow? How about we no longer have a player on our list who does not want to be there?

[stinger]

When people say we got "nothing" for Ball,....do you think some extra leeway in our salary cap counts as nothing?

that's drawing a very long bow saints66au.....there is no up side to that debacle.....imho, that is.....

Low bow? How about we no longer have a player on our list who does not want to be there?

what' s a low bow ffs....

[SainterK]

When people say we got "nothing" for Ball,....do you think some extra leeway in our salary cap counts as nothing?

that's drawing a very long bow saints66au.....there is no up side to that debacle.....imho, that is.....

Low bow? How about we no longer have a player on our list who does not want to be there?

what' s a low bow ffs....

Picking up on a typo, why don't you take one?

[3rd generation saint]

The reality is that if Lovett doesn't play for us at all, it won't make the slightest bit of difference seeing he's never played for us.
Let's also not forget that when Luke was dropped, it didn't affect us at all, we just kept on winning.
With younger and possibly more dynamic young players coming through, Luke may have struggled even more to get a game this season.
He may have overcome is OP physically, but mentally, the scare is still extremely deep.

[plugger66]

The reality is that if Lovett doesn't play for us at all, it won't make the slightest bit of difference seeing he's never played for us.
Let's also not forget that when Luke was dropped, it didn't affect us at all, we just kept on winning.
With younger and possibly more dynamic young players coming through, Luke may have struggled even more to get a game this season.
He may have overcome is OP physically, but mentally, the scare is still extremely deep.

That is completely true but all sides inprove every year and also we had a great run with injury and a very good draw. Also sides will have tried to work out ways of beating us. We need improvement from our youngsters as our older players were mainly at their peak last season

[PJ]

The youngsters are what will make the difference in 2010. Ball was never going to change what he does on the field - this is why he struggles in the Lyon game plan.

Lovett on the other hand had the potential - que sera sera.

When all is said and done it will come down to what is produced on the field not all the bullsh*t politics off field.

[CeilidhSaint]

Nice opinion but until Lovett NEVER plays or us and Ball offers more to Collingwood this year than he did us then this article is pure speculation.

[bigred]

Ball struggled to get a game for us?

Yeah I guess you could pay that. He did get dropped and had some low game time outings last season.

He still came third in our clearances.

Bottom line is that we DO need someone to take up the role he has vacated.

Dont get me wrong. I honestly think that Luke Ball copped out. Went to a club where he will get easy games. Or more like it will be easier for him to solidify a position.

We just need someone to dig out those 80 odd clearances that Bally did last year.

Could be worse...we could be in Carlton's shoes and trying to find an extra 100 goals in that great big hole that fev left....lols.

Ball can kiss my grass.

[samoht]

Ball is a GOP at best - and he even looked like a GOP when he was playing for Sandringham.

Ball was never tagged and so was always a chance to rack up "cheap" possesions playing in the midfield , a position where the ball probably crosses over 250 times a game.

Fisher on the other hand plays in a position where the ball crosses the ground maybe 100 times a game and generally gets tagged and when he was left untagged in a game last year he got 42 running and long kicking possessions - he stood out like a beacon and was very damaging.
That's what you expect from top line players - Ball is a fringe player whichever way you look at it.

In fact Ball was ultimately more damaging to St kilda than the opposition as he was holding back the development of players with far more potential - like Armitage.