Saints trade rating

[st.byron]

I don’t think anyone can reasonably argue that the moves we made were bad...

.

For the pick cost neither pick up is bad. BUT both have poor recent injury records and so both may struggle to stay on the park. As such both are high risk acquisitions. Neither are certainties, and that why my ranking is low. I do suspect that Hannas worst will be stodgey if he cannot get back to his fitness of 2 years back. If he can get his fitness back, then he will be a bargain for us.just two

The Lions were looked at as a basket case just two drafts back. But they have done very well in rebuilding their list. Saints with our ins and outs have been only been treading water at best.


The Hawks have for example landed one player in Wingard who will lay very good football week in week out, and one high risk pick up in Scully who may well never, or rarely, play.

Scully virtually cost nothing though, but will squeeze their salary cap which is the only real negative in throwing the dice in gaining him. If they can get him back to his best then having Tom, JOM, Wingard and Scully gives them an elite midfield.

Even without Scully they have some cream in Wingard.


The main thing that gets up fans noses is the constant PR Spin from the club which does not match with what is actually being achieved list wise. there is way too much chest thumping and wishful thinking going on

Yep, the spin is insulting. Worse for me is the complete lack of accountability at the pointy end of the management cohort. i.e conducting a “thorough” review that didn’t include the senior coach with a win ratio of 33%. Laughable.

[guitars4]

Fox Sports gave us a B. Who said D and F?!

Ted right again...and I'm apparantly too positive. Lol.

====================


ST KILDA

Who left: Tom Hickey (West Coast Eagles)

Who arrived: Dean Kent (Melbourne), Dan Hannebery (Sydney Swans)

Draft Picks (at the time of trade deadline): 4, 36 (via Melbourne pick swap), 46 (via Melbourne pick swap), 67 (via Port Adelaide in 2017), 79

Nick Dal Santo says: “I really like the move of Dan Hannebery, even if he doesn’t play much football. I’d love for him to bring the culture, the standards and the accountability from the Swans and that Bloods culture. Let alone playing some decent football which’d be really nice. He’s had a poor 12 months, it hasn’t been his whole career, people are getting carried away with the amount of poor football that Dan Hannebery has played. I like it. Is he going to be in their best team when they’re hopefully competing for premierships and finals again? I’m not quite sure. But that’s years away.”

Brad Johnson’s predicted ladder position: 17th

Nick Dal Santo’s predicted ladder position: 17th

Grade: B

The AFL site gave us a 6 out of 10 that's hardly a B IMO. It depends on who you listen to obviously you think we did pretty well but a lot people think we didn't . That doesn't mean your right & it just a matter of opinion.

[Joffa Burns]

3 grades gave a B. AFL 6/10. Another graded us a C.

So on average a B- I guess. Vastly different to a very negative and unreasonable D or F assessment off some posters here.

Thanks Ted, I enjoyed reading those assessments.
I think C is fair, D and below too negative.

I was always happy to get him, but concerned we’d over pay for Hannebery (pick wise) but that trade turned out well from that perspective.

[Sainter_Dad]

I cannot be bothered reading the bitchiness and name calling, but here is my two cents:

We have not trade IN anything great from an on field perspective, serviceable but not great.
In comparison to others though - we have retained some very good talent.

Picked up a nice Category B Rookie

Just a B

[Zed]

It’s not a fail. But it’s not a high pass mark either. 6.5/10 which makes it a C grade for me.

[skeptic]

It’s not a fail. But it’s not a high pass mark either. 6.5/10 which makes it a C grade for me.

I think that’s about right

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

So the consensus is clearly a mix between B and C. I can accept that.

[Aussie Jonestown]

Dan will provide value for money on and off the field!!!!!

Look at what we gave up to get him, nothing of any value what so ever!!!!!

You cannot be serious?

800,000 for four years plus a fifth year
injury prone
on the decline
ranked 355 this year
next years second rounder which might pick 19 or 20 for Hannerbury
Seriously, this is desperation on steroids

giving up next years second rounder is way too much
paying him 800,000 a year for four years plus a fifth year is outrageous

[SaintPav]

C-

[Aussie Jonestown]

One poster called it F and one called it Z.

Z minus to be precise!

[older saint]

Purely on trades made B-, may improve once draft night comes and live trading of picks.

[spert]

6/10 indicates just OK, like this season where everyone just did enough to get a game, but no more. Headless chicken coach, plus a list where few really put their hands up and made a statement..more like "Ok what do I need to do to get a senior game, but I'm doing any more than I have to"

[Shaggy]

Dan will provide value for money on and off the field!!!!!

Look at what we gave up to get him, nothing of any value what so ever!!!!!

You cannot be serious?

800,000 for four years plus a fifth year
injury prone
on the decline
ranked 355 this year
next years second rounder which might pick 19 or 20 for Hannerbury
Seriously, this is desperation on steroids

giving up next years second rounder is way too much
paying him 800,000 a year for four years plus a fifth year is outrageous

And he is a Xavier lad! You must be disgusted.

[chico2001]

So the consensus is clearly a mix between B and C. I can accept that.

No, you are not correct.

The consensus is C or lower or in percentage terms 38% that is a fail in any school , anywhere. What part of that dont you understand? The club has failed in its trading duties thus far for 2018.

[tedtheodorelogan2018]

Incorrect. Consensus is more on the B side if anything and a C is not a fail. We got a distinction basically.

[chico2001]

No we never. Lethlean and his offsider were a failure in this draft. They let the club down. The club administration has a lot to answer for.

[stonecold]

Dan will provide value for money on and off the field!!!!!

Look at what we gave up to get him, nothing of any value what so ever!!!!!

You cannot be serious?

800,000 for four years plus a fifth year
injury prone
on the decline
ranked 355 this year
next years second rounder which might pick 19 or 20 for Hannerbury
Seriously, this is desperation on steroids

giving up next years second rounder is way too much
paying him 800,000 a year for four years plus a fifth year is outrageous

Turkish Roll!!!!!

[Waltzing St Kilda]

As with most arguments, it comes down to semantics.

When we're grading this year's draft "performance" does that mean "considering what we had to work with" or "considering where we were promised we'd be by now in 2014"?

If the latter, this club is an ongoing, delusional disaster.

We were meant to develop a slew of high draft picks, gracefully retire some old champions, and then pounce on some high profile free agents with a massive war chest.

Instead we're mired in mediocrity with Coach 33% and a list clogged up with GOPs (at best). No one wants to come here.

Accordingly we've had to massively overpay Hannebury, offer ludicrous amounts to Shiel (who even then wasn't interested), and wildly overpay our underperforming GOPs.

Those on here who complain about negativity should realise we're only complaining to somehow jolt our administration out of its delusions before it's too late.

In the end I think it's good we didn't get Shiel (or anyone else worthwhile) as it would only offer a temporary fillip and buy Coach 33% an extra year or two.

We need to wipe the slate clean and start rebuilding again ASAP.

[desertsaint]

if i picked up a footy again and kicked it through the big sticks from 20m i'd call that an A.
if kennedy did it i'd tell him to put some bloody effort into it and try from 60m.
st kilda's trading team just did the former.

[desertsaint]

http://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/AVJs5/1/
shows longt erm gain/loss and short term (2019) for all teams over the trade period.
we are 15th in long term with a fairly bad loss, but with a minor gain for 2019.
The opposite of teams like gws and the suns. freo good short term and excellent on long.

[chico2001]

if i picked up a footy again and kicked it through the big sticks from 20m i'd call that an A.
if kennedy did it i'd tell him to put some bloody effort into it and try from 60m.
st kilda's trading team just did the former.

Did you mean 20 m or 2m? Thought you made have made a mathematical error there

[minneapolis]

As long as DH gets on the park then he will get his 20-25 disposals and keep a good opposition player occupied. If he has a good summer getting his body right and you will then see a difference in Ross and Jack. Only problem is the buggers are poor kicks which really hurts.

Thanks for the kind words Chico but I have decided to hang up the boots

Disappointing I know but I have seen the future and all is good

I wish you all the best in any future endeavors DH

And thank-you for all your contributions to the club.

[terry smith rules]

I don’t think anyone can reasonably argue that the moves we made were bad...

.

For the pick cost neither pick up is bad. BUT both have poor recent injury records and so both may struggle to stay on the park. As such both are high risk acquisitions. Neither are certainties, and that why my ranking is low. I do suspect that Hannas worst will be stodgey if he cannot get back to his fitness of 2 years back. If he can get his fitness back, then he will be a bargain for us.just two

The Lions were looked at as a basket case just two drafts back. But they have done very well in rebuilding their list. Saints with our ins and outs have been only been treading water at best.


The Hawks have for example landed one player in Wingard who will lay very good football week in week out, and one high risk pick up in Scully who may well never, or rarely, play.

Scully virtually cost nothing though, but will squeeze their salary cap which is the only real negative in throwing the dice in gaining him. If they can get him back to his best then having Tom, JOM, Wingard and Scully gives them an elite midfield.

Even without Scully they have some cream in Wingard.


The main thing that gets up fan's noses is the constant PR Spin from the club which does not match with what is actually being achieved list wise. There is way too much chest thumping and wishful thinking going on.

What you forget to mention re hawthorn is that yes they got Wingard but gave up Burton, who was 2nd in the rising star . So it’s not all plus plus

[skeptic]

It didn’t have to be a super star but who/where is that young guy with a bit of upside that we’re hoping can take the next step? Just a seed for someone that will be a lock in a position we need civered

[Saintmatt]

if i picked up a footy again and kicked it through the big sticks from 20m i'd call that an A.
if kennedy did it i'd tell him to put some bloody effort into it and try from 60m.
st kilda's trading team just did the former.

That's true. But to be fair - I think St Kilda's trading team only did what the hand they had allowed them to do. They started with: -

- Being backed into a corner by having a numpty coach extended whom the industry knows isn't up to it;
- A list of players whom were largely untradeable due to their poor years and overall stagnation (the one player with currency - J Steven - was outright rejected as tradeable);
- A recent poor year which 'featured' coaching, game plan and effort that was so uncohesive at times that you wonder whether our boys would beat a good VFL team

In short - I don't think they were able to trade some/most/nearly all of our of players because there were simply no takers for them. All this talk of shipping Weller, Gilbert, Armo et al off to GC for a 2nd rd pick was highly unlikely as the opposition knows as much as our fans that most of our players are strugglers. And so it came to pass.

Our hope is that (1) the existing players respond to Hanners and Kent coming in and lift their performances or (2) Richo finally gets the ar$e that he deserves and that a new coach is able to extract more from the list so that we ultimately improve to a level that we're able to sell ourselves as a destination for quality talent and not just fringe players