Saints Preview- The age

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Smacks of lazy journalism I reckon

I like that best 22 better than any I've seen on this site for 2011. Not going to be the R1, let alone R22 team... but I like it.

I suspect those calling for "spark" are looking to get excited after an uninspiring preseason. There's no indication at this point that senior players are playing in need of "spark" or that any of the kids are likely to provide it, while there's every indication we'll be a top 4 side again.

Since you're all into "quanifying" things and not a fan of emotive decisions in sport...when sport is largely about emotion and motivation that cant be quantified....Im intersted in your statistical evidence based on performances so far this pre season that indicates:

(a) Senior player are clealry motivated.
(b) None of our kids are likely to provide "spark"
(c) Clear indication we will be top 4.

Statistically quantifiable for a person of your standing Im sure.

Short answer:

I don't see anything statistically meaningful over preseason that isn't an extreme. Outliers, while fascinating (and much beloved of commentators), are bad stats. Preseason creates contexts of which we the fans are not informed. The only real point is (c)... so my tip is to scroll ahead...

Long answer:

a) Some rope to the senior players perhaps? Reiwoldt's statements about sticking fat at AGM have to be worth as much as a NAB match. I watch BJ get angry, Clarke throw himself into contests, Jones, Fisher and Geary all pulled for getting head knocks. I see the leadership group demand players follow the edicts of "Saints Footy". They're still hungry.

I also see a couple of kids (Archer and Ledger) having a good crack, but it hasn't made the team better... It does show what's required to make this team. Even at a stretch, while I could identify some senior players I think have been average, I'm not sure how adding more kids to our lineup would help those guys... but I guess I'm getting ahead...

b) The issue is with defining spark. I'm not having a go at the kids. In fact, I think McEvoy's a really exciting prospect for 2011, and really important to our results. However, he played in GF2, and I don't believe that's what the posts above want. I think spark, I think it means igniting the fire, increasing the hunger, helping motivate players to throw themselves into the contest one more time... I think the Saints play with more spark than any other team in the AFL already. They just play defense and veterans, which doesn't "spark" the fans.

No, I can't quantify that. Guess I'm lazy. Compared to throwing out cliche's like "there's gotta be some spark".

c) In the last 5 years, there have been 20 top 4 teams. 12 of those have been in the top 4 the year before. In the last 10 years, 21 of 40. From a variation perspective there's been at least one team from the previous top 4 every year, with the top 4 repeating only once (last year). Further, top 2 teams have gone 7/10 in the last 5 years, 14/20 in the last 10. 70%. No Guarantees, but I'll take it over any "clear" need for "spark" based on a disappointing month of preseason.

Not that there's any surprise in this - Good teams will trend over multiple seasons. Only twice have both the top 2 gone out - 2007 (and it doesn't matter whether you count Sydney or Adelaide as #2, both went) and 2005 when Port and Brisbane imploded.

Interestingly, there is good news for Essendon as well. of the 20 teams to appear in a NAB(/Wizard) final in the last decade, 70% have gone on to make top 4.

From a more speculative standpoint, at 2nd on the ladder, while onus is on us to make up the differences of GF2, equally, the onus is on the teams behind us to catch up.

P.S: Thanks for adding some colour.

[Teflon]

Smacks of lazy journalism I reckon

I like that best 22 better than any I've seen on this site for 2011. Not going to be the R1, let alone R22 team... but I like it.

I suspect those calling for "spark" are looking to get excited after an uninspiring preseason. There's no indication at this point that senior players are playing in need of "spark" or that any of the kids are likely to provide it, while there's every indication we'll be a top 4 side again.

Since you're all into "quanifying" things and not a fan of emotive decisions in sport...when sport is largely about emotion and motivation that cant be quantified....Im intersted in your statistical evidence based on performances so far this pre season that indicates:

(a) Senior player are clealry motivated.
(b) None of our kids are likely to provide "spark"
(c) Clear indication we will be top 4.

Statistically quantifiable for a person of your standing Im sure.

Short answer:

I don't see anything statistically meaningful over preseason that isn't an extreme. Outliers, while fascinating (and much beloved of commentators), are bad stats. Preseason creates contexts of which we the fans are not informed. The only real point is (c)... so my tip is to scroll ahead...

Long answer:

a) Some rope to the senior players perhaps? Reiwoldt's statements about sticking fat at AGM have to be worth as much as a NAB match. I watch BJ get angry, Clarke throw himself into contests, Jones, Fisher and Geary all pulled for getting head knocks. I see the leadership group demand players follow the edicts of "Saints Footy". They're still hungry.

I also see a couple of kids (Archer and Ledger) having a good crack, but it hasn't made the team better... It does show what's required to make this team. Even at a stretch, while I could identify some senior players I think have been average, I'm not sure how adding more kids to our lineup would help those guys... but I guess I'm getting ahead...

b) The issue is with defining spark. I'm not having a go at the kids. In fact, I think McEvoy's a really exciting prospect for 2011, and really important to our results. However, he played in GF2, and I don't believe that's what the posts above want. I think spark, I think it means igniting the fire, increasing the hunger, helping motivate players to throw themselves into the contest one more time... I think the Saints play with more spark than any other team in the AFL already. They just play defense and veterans, which doesn't "spark" the fans.

No, I can't quantify that. Guess I'm lazy. Compared to throwing out cliche's like "there's gotta be some spark".

c) In the last 5 years, there have been 20 top 4 teams. 12 of those have been in the top 4 the year before. In the last 10 years, 21 of 40. From a variation perspective there's been at least one team from the previous top 4 every year, with the top 4 repeating only once (last year). Further, top 2 teams have gone 7/10 in the last 5 years, 14/20 in the last 10. 70%. No Guarantees, but I'll take it over any "clear" need for "spark" based on a disappointing month of preseason.

Not that there's any surprise in this - Good teams will trend over multiple seasons. Only twice have both the top 2 gone out - 2007 (and it doesn't matter whether you count Sydney or Adelaide as #2, both went) and 2005 when Port and Brisbane imploded.

Interestingly, there is good news for Essendon as well. of the 20 teams to appear in a NAB(/Wizard) final in the last decade, 70% have gone on to make top 4.

From a more speculative standpoint, at 2nd on the ladder, while onus is on us to make up the differences of GF2, equally, the onus is on the teams behind us to catch up.

P.S: Thanks for adding some colour.

What a dull, inane world....a world without stats.

Even the post lacks "spark".

FWIW the posters in this thread dont associate "spark" with throwing yourself in a pack....for god sakes our games built on that we all know that.

"Spark" would mean they want to see a fresh injection of talent into the side, maybe an evolution of players to some youth that....you guessed it....creates energy aka spark (see current Collingwood/Essendon...look what Hurley/Crameri? has done there). The same "spark" we saw when Jones/Smith/Brown played at St Kilda.

Most fans are concerned that without this injection of "spark" the same side that has failed on 3 occasions will inevitabely fall short again and perhaps even tread water and not make it.

Glad I could add some color to your world.

Did you realise 78.5% of the poulation NEVER stop to smell the roses?

[Teflon]

Smacks of lazy journalism I reckon

I like that best 22 better than any I've seen on this site for 2011. Not going to be the R1, let alone R22 team... but I like it.

I suspect those calling for "spark" are looking to get excited after an uninspiring preseason. There's no indication at this point that senior players are playing in need of "spark" or that any of the kids are likely to provide it, while there's every indication we'll be a top 4 side again.

Since you're all into "quanifying" things and not a fan of emotive decisions in sport...when sport is largely about emotion and motivation that cant be quantified....Im intersted in your statistical evidence based on performances so far this pre season that indicates:

(a) Senior player are clealry motivated.
(b) None of our kids are likely to provide "spark"
(c) Clear indication we will be top 4.

Statistically quantifiable for a person of your standing Im sure.

Short answer:

I don't see anything statistically meaningful over preseason that isn't an extreme. Outliers, while fascinating (and much beloved of commentators), are bad stats. Preseason creates contexts of which we the fans are not informed. The only real point is (c)... so my tip is to scroll ahead...

Long answer:

a) Some rope to the senior players perhaps? Reiwoldt's statements about sticking fat at AGM have to be worth as much as a NAB match. I watch BJ get angry, Clarke throw himself into contests, Jones, Fisher and Geary all pulled for getting head knocks. I see the leadership group demand players follow the edicts of "Saints Footy". They're still hungry.

I also see a couple of kids (Archer and Ledger) having a good crack, but it hasn't made the team better... It does show what's required to make this team. Even at a stretch, while I could identify some senior players I think have been average, I'm not sure how adding more kids to our lineup would help those guys... but I guess I'm getting ahead...

b) The issue is with defining spark. I'm not having a go at the kids. In fact, I think McEvoy's a really exciting prospect for 2011, and really important to our results. However, he played in GF2, and I don't believe that's what the posts above want. I think spark, I think it means igniting the fire, increasing the hunger, helping motivate players to throw themselves into the contest one more time... I think the Saints play with more spark than any other team in the AFL already. They just play defense and veterans, which doesn't "spark" the fans.

No, I can't quantify that. Guess I'm lazy. Compared to throwing out cliche's like "there's gotta be some spark".

c) In the last 5 years, there have been 20 top 4 teams. 12 of those have been in the top 4 the year before. In the last 10 years, 21 of 40. From a variation perspective there's been at least one team from the previous top 4 every year, with the top 4 repeating only once (last year). Further, top 2 teams have gone 7/10 in the last 5 years, 14/20 in the last 10. 70%. No Guarantees, but I'll take it over any "clear" need for "spark" based on a disappointing month of preseason.

Not that there's any surprise in this - Good teams will trend over multiple seasons. Only twice have both the top 2 gone out - 2007 (and it doesn't matter whether you count Sydney or Adelaide as #2, both went) and 2005 when Port and Brisbane imploded.

Interestingly, there is good news for Essendon as well. of the 20 teams to appear in a NAB(/Wizard) final in the last decade, 70% have gone on to make top 4.

From a more speculative standpoint, at 2nd on the ladder, while onus is on us to make up the differences of GF2, equally, the onus is on the teams behind us to catch up.

P.S: Thanks for adding some colour.

What a dull, inane world....a world without stats.

Even the post lacks "spark".

FWIW the posters in this thread dont associate "spark" with throwing yourself in a pack....for god sakes our games built on that we all know that.

"Spark" would mean they want to see a fresh injection of talent into the side, maybe an evolution of players to some youth that....you guessed it....creates energy aka spark (see current Collingwood/Essendon...look what Hurley/Crameri? has done there). The same "spark" we saw when Jones/Smith/Brown played at St Kilda.

Most fans are concerned that without this injection of "spark" the same side that has failed on 3 occasions will inevitabely fall short again and perhaps even tread water and not make it.

Glad I could add some color to your world.

Did you realise 78.5% of the poulation NEVER stop to smell the roses?

[Teflon]

Smacks of lazy journalism I reckon

I like that best 22 better than any I've seen on this site for 2011. Not going to be the R1, let alone R22 team... but I like it.

I suspect those calling for "spark" are looking to get excited after an uninspiring preseason. There's no indication at this point that senior players are playing in need of "spark" or that any of the kids are likely to provide it, while there's every indication we'll be a top 4 side again.

Since you're all into "quanifying" things and not a fan of emotive decisions in sport...when sport is largely about emotion and motivation that cant be quantified....Im intersted in your statistical evidence based on performances so far this pre season that indicates:

(a) Senior player are clealry motivated.
(b) None of our kids are likely to provide "spark"
(c) Clear indication we will be top 4.

Statistically quantifiable for a person of your standing Im sure.

Short answer:

I don't see anything statistically meaningful over preseason that isn't an extreme. Outliers, while fascinating (and much beloved of commentators), are bad stats. Preseason creates contexts of which we the fans are not informed. The only real point is (c)... so my tip is to scroll ahead...

Long answer:

a) Some rope to the senior players perhaps? Reiwoldt's statements about sticking fat at AGM have to be worth as much as a NAB match. I watch BJ get angry, Clarke throw himself into contests, Jones, Fisher and Geary all pulled for getting head knocks. I see the leadership group demand players follow the edicts of "Saints Footy". They're still hungry.

I also see a couple of kids (Archer and Ledger) having a good crack, but it hasn't made the team better... It does show what's required to make this team. Even at a stretch, while I could identify some senior players I think have been average, I'm not sure how adding more kids to our lineup would help those guys... but I guess I'm getting ahead...

b) The issue is with defining spark. I'm not having a go at the kids. In fact, I think McEvoy's a really exciting prospect for 2011, and really important to our results. However, he played in GF2, and I don't believe that's what the posts above want. I think spark, I think it means igniting the fire, increasing the hunger, helping motivate players to throw themselves into the contest one more time... I think the Saints play with more spark than any other team in the AFL already. They just play defense and veterans, which doesn't "spark" the fans.

No, I can't quantify that. Guess I'm lazy. Compared to throwing out cliche's like "there's gotta be some spark".

c) In the last 5 years, there have been 20 top 4 teams. 12 of those have been in the top 4 the year before. In the last 10 years, 21 of 40. From a variation perspective there's been at least one team from the previous top 4 every year, with the top 4 repeating only once (last year). Further, top 2 teams have gone 7/10 in the last 5 years, 14/20 in the last 10. 70%. No Guarantees, but I'll take it over any "clear" need for "spark" based on a disappointing month of preseason.

Not that there's any surprise in this - Good teams will trend over multiple seasons. Only twice have both the top 2 gone out - 2007 (and it doesn't matter whether you count Sydney or Adelaide as #2, both went) and 2005 when Port and Brisbane imploded.

Interestingly, there is good news for Essendon as well. of the 20 teams to appear in a NAB(/Wizard) final in the last decade, 70% have gone on to make top 4.

From a more speculative standpoint, at 2nd on the ladder, while onus is on us to make up the differences of GF2, equally, the onus is on the teams behind us to catch up.

P.S: Thanks for adding some colour.

What a dull, inane world....a world without stats.

Even the post lacks "spark".

FWIW the posters in this thread dont associate "spark" with throwing yourself in a pack....for god sakes our games built on that we all know that.

"Spark" would mean they want to see a fresh injection of talent into the side, maybe an evolution of players to some youth that....you guessed it....creates energy aka spark (see current Collingwood/Essendon...look what Hurley/Crameri? has done there). The same "spark" we saw when Jones/Smith/Brown played at St Kilda.

Most fans are concerned that without this injection of "spark" the same side that has failed on 3 occasions will inevitabely fall short again and perhaps even tread water and not make it.

Glad I could add some color to your world.

Did you realise 78.5% of the poulation NEVER stop to smell the roses?

[BAM! (shhhh)]

I suspect those calling for "spark" are looking to get excited after an uninspiring preseason. There's no indication at this point that senior players are playing in need of "spark" or that any of the kids are likely to provide it, while there's every indication we'll be a top 4 side again.

...[/color]

...

...

Most fans are concerned that without this injection of "spark" the same side that has failed on 3 occasions will inevitabely fall short again and perhaps even tread water and not make it.

...

Nothing's inevitable. Even the weather.

The condition you're ascribing to "most fans" is called paranoia. If you're genuinely worried about finishing 2nd again a week before round one, give your head a shake.

[Dr Spaceman]

FWIW the posters in this thread dont associate "spark" with throwing yourself in a pack....for god sakes our games built on that we all know that.

"Spark" would mean they want to see a fresh injection of talent into the side, maybe an evolution of players to some youth that....you guessed it....creates energy aka spark (see current Collingwood/Essendon...look what Hurley/Crameri? has done there). The same "spark" we saw when Jones/Smith/Brown played at St Kilda.

Most fans are concerned that without this injection of "spark" the same side that has failed on 3 occasions will inevitabely fall short again and perhaps even tread water and not make it.

As the poster who I believe first raised the issue of "spark" on this thread I can say your comments basically equate to what I was thinking.

Yes there are questions about the bottom 6 being good enough, pace, skills etc. But that's only part of the issue.

Everyone, including the media, is questioning the ability of this group to get up again after having put everything into the last 2 years and coming up short. People query how this will affect them mentally. This dosen't just apply to football, or to sporting teams.

IMO we need something "different" to give everyone a lift; the team as much as the supporters. We need some youth in there, not just because we think they're better than the older guys, but because their youthful enthusiam will not be dulled by those three failed GFs.

So yes, given where everyone is at right now it may well be that the best 22 resembles a similar team to that which played most of last year.

I just hope that things transpire throught 2011 so that everyone's best 22 at the end of it looks just a little bit different.

[Teflon]

I suspect those calling for "spark" are looking to get excited after an uninspiring preseason. There's no indication at this point that senior players are playing in need of "spark" or that any of the kids are likely to provide it, while there's every indication we'll be a top 4 side again.

...[/color]

...

...

Most fans are concerned that without this injection of "spark" the same side that has failed on 3 occasions will inevitabely fall short again and perhaps even tread water and not make it.

...

Nothing's inevitable. Even the weather.

The condition you're ascribing to "most fans" is called paranoia. If you're genuinely worried about finishing 2nd again a week before round one, give your head a shake.

It is true that paranoia certainly plays a part but using "stats" from our last 3 GF attempts I think Im coming off a strongish base in suggesting the comp has gone fwd, our game plan of "defend to the end" will no longer suffice unless rejigged (as Lyon has said....we still need to see the result) with a better balanced attack.

The same personnel IMHO wont deliver that. Youth must be bought in and played.

Sorry for the paranoia

[Teflon]

FWIW the posters in this thread dont associate "spark" with throwing yourself in a pack....for god sakes our games built on that we all know that.

"Spark" would mean they want to see a fresh injection of talent into the side, maybe an evolution of players to some youth that....you guessed it....creates energy aka spark (see current Collingwood/Essendon...look what Hurley/Crameri? has done there). The same "spark" we saw when Jones/Smith/Brown played at St Kilda.

Most fans are concerned that without this injection of "spark" the same side that has failed on 3 occasions will inevitabely fall short again and perhaps even tread water and not make it.

As the poster who I believe first raised the issue of "spark" on this thread I can say your comments basically equate to what I was thinking.

Yes there are questions about the bottom 6 being good enough, pace, skills etc. But that's only part of the issue.

Everyone, including the media, is questioning the ability of this group to get up again after having put everything into the last 2 years and coming up short. People query how this will affect them mentally. This dosen't just apply to football, or to sporting teams.

IMO we need something "different" to give everyone a lift; the team as much as the supporters. We need some youth in there, not just because we think they're better than the older guys, but because their youthful enthusiam will not be dulled by those three failed GFs.

So yes, given where everyone is at right now it may well be that the best 22 resembles a similar team to that which played most of last year.

I just hope that things transpire throught 2011 so that everyone's best 22 at the end of it looks just a little bit different.

Hear hear Dr......well said.

I really do think the side needs some reinvigorating and youth can do it. To me, this would scream St Kilda DOES have the capacity to improve (everyone acknowledges our top end players are very good)....

Judging by the kids weve recruited I am excited that we seem to have FINALLY dropped the recruiting "athletes" and gone for players blessed with skills. Cripps, Ledger, Winmar, Smith et al are better ball users than Geary, Gram, Peake, Mqualter and thats no coincidence.........I truly believe thats been our achilles....in pressure games a naturally skilled footballers ability doesnt disappear, where a less gifted player under pressure ofteb reverts to true form. Its why Im dubious about Gilbert as a fwd....and Id hate to rely on him to kick the winning goal in a GF up fwd....but I get the idea Lyon is going for.