Zac Dawson rejects St Kilda's offer

[bergholt]

I agree bergholt no obvious ready replacements for us and I was just assessing his relative worth and rank on the market.

Also the FB's today get a lot of help from their team mates and the average FB gets maybe 30 goals kicked on them over the year - the ones that are worth the $300,000 plus would probably need to bring a fair bit to the table over and above stopping an immediate opponent.

you didn't understand. there's no point assessing him at "market" rates because we don't have the option of going to the market for a replacement. we can't just go to darren glass and say "come and play for us in 2011 and we'll give you $300,001". in the same way that we can't go to danny frawley or chris langford or david dench as a zac replacement.

we need a fullback for 2011. so we have to pay an amount for zac at which he gives us the same value as our next best option, which is blake with a question mark over him. the fact that scarlett is better than him is completely irrelevant.

[samoht]

I love a good argument ,, but I think we're probably close to being on the same page.

Bergholt of course I understand.,, it's not rocket science.

We need to decide how much he's worth to us, how much we need him and if we can afford him ... but we need to do that in the context of his market value.
So it's important to assess his market value and do a pragmatic assessment !!

No use in going into a bidding war over an average FB (who
nevertheless happens to be our best option at the moment - not by much mind you as he's no Scarlett or Fletcher ).

[To the top]

Nobody has mentioned Gilbert as the replacement.

194cm, 90kg with pace and a good reach into the spoil.

Good credentials for full back.

[samoht]

Shame in my book.

Of course he had his limitations; was always nervous when he was one on one and was never subtle enough in a show of strength.

But he's a serviceable full back and, while the cap means we can't have a team of superstars, will be hard to replace.

His left boot which cops a bit of flack on here was actually a pretty reliable weapon and he was a selfless part of th defensve unit; ready to take a risk and peel off when needed.

Sorry to see him go.

He only averaged about 3 kicks and 7 handballs over 2011 .. so you wouldn't have seen too many kicks.
That's where the good FB's like scarlett and fletcher ,, who might average 15 kicks per game and their 20 possessions stand out,
That's 3 -4 kicks per quarter for the good FBs vs Zacs 3 for the whole match !!

[saintsRrising]

Nobody has mentioned Gilbert as the replacement.

.

See other thread where suggested a 2012 backline of:

Dempster Gilbert Gwilt
Cripps Fisher Goddard

Is a pretty handy backline.

[samoht]

Gilbert would average more than 3 kicks per game.
Stanley would average more than 3 kicks per game for that matter.

I want Dawson to stay ..I still think he's an important player to us(even if he's not a great player) but for the right money.

Paying over the top is what got us into this situation with the salary cap.

How much would a FB who averages 3 kicks per game be worth on the open market .. ? Whatever the answer to that is - that's how much we should pay him... and not a cent more !!

So for bergholt to say I don't get it and a market assessment is irrelevant here .. I hope the St Kilda brain trust similarly don't get it too and do a pragmatic market assessment on Zac and every player from now on.
No more paying over the top !!!

[dragit]

Nobody has mentioned Gilbert as the replacement.

194cm, 90kg with pace and a good reach into the spoil.

Good credentials for full back.

Yes they have - Page 3

I'd be trying Gilbert out in the FB role first up.

I think a few others have too... He's got the Dustin fletcher physique...

[Bardon Saint]

Nobody has mentioned Gilbert as the replacement.

.

See other thread where suggested a 2012 backline of:

Dempster Gilbert Gwilt
Cripps Fisher Goddard

Is a pretty handy backline.

I initially liked the idea. It would limit the exposure of Gilbert's kicking. However I'm less excited when I think of match-ups. Is our full back line strong enough against Buddy/Hale or Roughhead? Cloke/Dawes? etc etc. Do we have cover for the resting ruckman?

[skeptic]

Whilst it's all well and good to say we have no ready made replacement... FB is one of the easier positions on the ground to cover

Ruck, full forward and CHF are challeniging to get good ones... FB is not. Even if we do without next same, come start of next year we can bet on the fact that we'll have somewhere there taking that role

[SainterK]

Dempster Gilbert Gwilt
Stanley Fisher Gram

[borderbarry]

Too much reliance is being placed on Zac's size. At 195cm he is a good size, but Max was a better fullback at 191.
And to complicate things further, our best ever fullback came to the Saints as a Centreman. Work that one out.

[ralphsmith]

I will not miss the arms of balsa wood that Zac Dawson possessed or the apathy he projected on the football field.

Max Hudghton was a million times the backman Dawson ever was or could hope to be, even though Max also wasn't well built.

[borderbarry]

The only moment of glory I can remember for Zac was when he knocked Buddy's tooth out.

[Mr Magic]

Gilbert would average more than 3 kicks per game.
Stanley would average more than 3 kicks per game for that matter.

I want Dawson to stay ..I still think he's an important player to us(even if he's not a great player) but for the right money.

Paying over the top is what got us into this situation with the salary cap.

How much would a FB who averages 3 kicks per game be worth on the open market .. ? Whatever the answer to that is - that's how much we should pay him... and not a cent more !!

So for bergholt to say I don't get it and a market assessment is irrelevant here .. I hope the St Kilda brain trust similarly don't get it too and do a pragmatic market assessment on Zac and every player from now on.
No more paying over the top !!!

Paying 'over the top' is not a simple as it sounds.
All Clubs must spend a minimum % of their Salary Cap each year.
Depending on where that Club is at the time, what many would consider outrageous for a player makes absolute sense to them
You want an example?
Mitch Clark at Melbourne
Nobody in their right mind thinks he's worth anywhere near $700k per season, but yet Melbourne who has identified their need for a strong big forward has so much room in their salary cap that they either offfer it to him or pay others that are less worthy.
For them it's a means to an end.

SImilarly, Freo (whom we suispect are the other Club re Zac) obviously have room in their salary cap to pay him the $300k he is purportedly looking for.
We don't.

Why do you think that Gold Coast and GWS are able to make the outrageous offers they have to uncontracted players?
Becasue they are filled with minimum salary players on their list and they ahve to sepnd the money on somebody.
They are in effect doing the exact opposite of most of the established teams - forward loading contracts.

IMHO it's got very little to do with Zac's value to us and everything to do with his value to other Clubs based on THEIR salary cap position.

If it is Freo who are making him the offer then clearly they are in the position where they have $500k to play with but not $700k, otherwise they would have offered it to Clark.
(Maybe they're able to put Pavlich, and his payment, onto their veteran's list and free up some salary cap?)

[Bernard Shakey]

Move on Zac, your best footy was as a forward for Box Hill. That's probably where you should still be.

[bobmurray]

[Scollop]

Nobody has mentioned Gilbert as the replacement.

.

See other thread where suggested a 2012 backline of:

Dempster Gilbert Gwilt
Cripps Fisher Goddard

Is a pretty handy backline.

I initially liked the idea. It would limit the exposure of Gilbert's kicking. However I'm less excited when I think of match-ups. Is our full back line strong enough against Buddy/Hale or Roughhead? Cloke/Dawes? etc etc. Do we have cover for the resting ruckman?

Mumford killed Zac in the EF this year when he was rested forward so you can't even say he's the best option there. It's not like mummy is superfast on the lead or anything...Another FB with half a footy brain wouldn't have bodied Mummy and tried to get too close to him.

Also one of the things that really pisses me off is when a basic defensive action goes wrong and it leads to a goal at a crucial time in the game...It was nearing quarter time or half time in the EF versus the Swans and the ball was sent deep into the Swans forwrad line...We had three or four guys defending between 10 and 15 metres out from their goal and as the footy floated in...Zac came crashing into the pack from behind to attempt a spoil...he missed...the ball came off a few hands and over the back of the pack and Goodes ran onto it, roved it and slammed it from point blank range for a gimme goal!!! If you are going to jump over the top, you better make damned sure you get a fist on the footy and punch it away from the players in the direct vicinity...If your job is to stop and your not rated on your posession count, than this sort of error is unforgivable. It's these basics that a full back needs to get right.

[Bernard Shakey]

Nobody has mentioned Gilbert as the replacement.

.

See other thread where suggested a 2012 backline of:

Dempster Gilbert Gwilt
Cripps Fisher Goddard

Is a pretty handy backline.

I initially liked the idea. It would limit the exposure of Gilbert's kicking. However I'm less excited when I think of match-ups. Is our full back line strong enough against Buddy/Hale or Roughhead? Cloke/Dawes? etc etc. Do we have cover for the resting ruckman?

Mumford killed Zac in the EF this year when he was rested forward so you can't even say he's the best option there. It's not like mummy is superfast on the lead or anything...Another FB with half a footy brain wouldn't have bodied Mummy and tried to get too close to him.

Also one of the things that really pisses me off is when a basic defensive action goes wrong and it leads to a goal at a crucial time in the game...It was nearing quarter time or half time in the EF versus the Swans and the ball was sent deep into the Swans forwrad line...We had three or four guys defending between 10 and 15 metres out from their goal and as the footy floated in...Zac came crashing into the pack from behind to attempt a spoil...he missed...the ball came off a few hands and over the back of the pack and Goodes ran onto it, roved it and slammed it from point blank range for a gimme goal!!! If you are going to jump over the top, you better make damned sure you get a fist on the footy and punch it away from the players in the direct vicinity...If your job is to stop and your not rated on your posession count, than this sort of error is unforgivable. It's these basics that a full back needs to get right.

But Goodes wasn't his opponent, hence all the idiots saying he never has a bag kicked on him. He has bags kicked on him quite regularly, they're just not kicked by his immediate opponent. In case some of you haven't noticed it is a team game and we have a team defence. Zac would be the weakest link in that team defence.

[matrix]

no no no

chips must play full back

[To the top]

What was of interest through 2011 was that it became Clarke who had the responsibility for the ruckman dropping deep forward - particularly when Gwilt went down.

Clarke proved exceptional at getting a hand into the contest and bringing the ball to ground - and had courage and skill going back into the contest.

Not ideal given the size differentials with both Clarke and Gwilt being around 188cm/189cm, but it worked fine in 2011.

It was my view that Clarke performed that responsibility far better than Gwilt, who was outmarked reasonably often.

[gringo]

Firstly no full back has a clean sheet 100% of the time. even Scarlett has games where he is beaten if you actually watch other teams.

Second Gilbert's strength is his running and evasive skills, totally wasted as a full back where his weaknesses would be amplified. same goes for raph too short and wouldn't get to use his pace or running and expose him body on body.

from our list i would say only the untried Archer and stanley could become a true long term option as they are both tall. archer could at least contest but would be a bit slower than Stanley, stanley is at least like Dustin Fletcher in physique, not sure how he would go skill wise though.

[Hammer]

Stanley may well be an option.
Has pace to burn and if he can tackle we could benefit.

[To the top]

I have a view that full backs, like full forwards, are born not made.

Dawson was a compromise for a raft of reasons - including that there was no alternative on our list, now amplified by Johnson (who had experience at VFL level leading to him being drafted in the first place) being delisted.

We have options with outer line defenders - and I include the likes of Simpkin and Stanley as outer line defenders (recalling the 15 minutes Stanley played at CHB v NM in 2010).

Like Blake, they are not options for full back on disclosed performances and credentials.

The only option we appear to have for full back at this time is Gilbert - and in regards the outer positions we have cover options for this transition by Gilbert.

Those in the inner sanctum (our coaching panel) may have other options - and we trust that they do because your rucks and the spine are crucial to succesful teams!

I have concerrns with the de-listing of Johnson and Cahill - and the retaining of the likes of Polo, Eddy and Blake - on the issue of team balance.

Also, the days of retaining mature age players on your list who are not automatic first 18 selections are gone - including for salary cap purposes and team transition (opportunity) reasons.

If we cop an injury (part and parcel of the competition) we go to Polo, Eddy and Blake et al and that is to the detriment of the long term future of the team and the opportunity that needs to be given to our young players who have had limited (or no) exposure to AFL football.

You transistion and remain competative by going forward, not by going backwards to a gaggle of mature aged players who impede your list development.

And then we drafted a significant number of this gaggle from other clubs - where they could not get regular opportunity (including at down the list clubs!) - to our long term list development detriment.

As mentioned previousy, and to raise the temprature on this forum once again, I would have taken the long term view (aka Ferguson at Manchester United) and offered Milne to Sheedy for a first round pick plus one other - also significantly solving the salary cap position (read protecting Goddard and protecting Goddard from the baying of the media).

[skeptic]

What was of interest through 2011 was that it became Clarke who had the responsibility for the ruckman dropping deep forward - particularly when Gwilt went down.

Clarke proved exceptional at getting a hand into the contest and bringing the ball to ground - and had courage and skill going back into the contest.

Not ideal given the size differentials with both Clarke and Gwilt being around 188cm/189cm, but it worked fine in 2011.

It was my view that Clarke performed that responsibility far better than Gwilt, who was outmarked reasonably often.

wow TTT

you're spot on... have often felt like the only one that made that observation... goodness knows I've spent enough time arguing it on here

he's a very good defender is Raph

[plugger66]

I have a view that full backs, like full forwards, are born not made.

Dawson was a compromise for a raft of reasons - including that there was no alternative on our list, now amplified by Johnson (who had experience at VFL level leading to him being drafted in the first place) being delisted.

We have options with outer line defenders - and I include the likes of Simpkin and Stanley as outer line defenders (recalling the 15 minutes Stanley played at CHB v NM in 2010).

Like Blake, they are not options for full back on disclosed performances and credentials.

The only option we appear to have for full back at this time is Gilbert - and in regards the outer positions we have cover options for this transition by Gilbert.

Those in the inner sanctum (our coaching panel) may have other options - and we trust that they do because your rucks and the spine are crucial to succesful teams!

I have concerrns with the de-listing of Johnson and Cahill - and the retaining of the likes of Polo, Eddy and Blake - on the issue of team balance.

Also, the days of retaining mature age players on your list who are not automatic first 18 selections are gone - including for salary cap purposes and team transition (opportunity) reasons.

If we cop an injury (part and parcel of the competition) we go to Polo, Eddy and Blake et al and that is to the detriment of the long term future of the team and the opportunity that needs to be given to our young players who have had limited (or no) exposure to AFL football.

You transistion and remain competative by going forward, not by going backwards to a gaggle of mature aged players who impede your list development.

And then we drafted a significant number of this gaggle from other clubs - where they could not get regular opportunity (including at down the list clubs!) - to our long term list development detriment.

As mentioned previousy, and to raise the temprature on this forum once again, I would have taken the long term view (aka Ferguson at Manchester United) and offered Milne to Sheedy for a first round pick plus one other - also significantly solving the salary cap position (read protecting Goddard and protecting Goddard from the baying of the media).

Still on about Milne. Seriously you lose all credibility about footy knowledge when you want to trade 32 year old AA for the first time and worry about losing Cahill and Johnson who I doubt you have seen play more than 2 or 3 times. Give up on Milne. He stays and plays and plays well and luckily for us you have nothing to do with the club.