Proud

[Teflon]

the winning culture will increase when we get some high picks which will flow on to our bottom line....must get high picks this season.

Then when we get that flag I will be even prouder

What is the perfect pick number this year? I reckon a top 8 pick maybe good. Would be another 5 or 6 wins for the season. We only get one high pick even if we finish bottom 4. It isn't picks.

I fail to see how our winning culture will come with the addition of a high pick at the expense of winning for next season.

How many games have our two highest picks from last season, including the #1 pick, played so far? How many wins have they contributed to.

Next years high pick many not start contributing to our winning culture until 2017 or 18. Certainly it is a fact that McCartin or Goddard cant contribute to any wins until at least the second half of the 2015 season and probably not until next season, a good 18 months after they have been drafted.

So even if we don't win another game for the season and come last, how many games will this high pick win for us next year.

Now compare that to the damage 11 straight losses will do to confidence, reputation, media feedback, membership, potential sponsorship, the draw for 2016 etc.

Would rather we try to win every single game for 2015 and the dp will take care of itself.

A winning culture will come when we get wins.
Pick 1 is better than 2 and so on. High picks are tradeable for ready made players.
Players are rated by the pick for a reason and we increase our chances if we pick up highly rated players...look I know this all seems obvious and I'm not sure why I have to post it.
We want to get back into the finals not languish mid stream and I want that to happen by 2017, we need a top team to do that...lets get that team now.
Finals will get us the sponsorship and members. The players know where they are at...as I have said to you before...losing doesn't hurt as much as before for this reason...I loved the win the other night but it's like wanting my cake and eating it too.

short term pain long term gain.

Sounds good. I gather is that is guaranteed then? Otherwise I want no part of it and im sure most supporters and all the club want no part of it. I just hope we win our next game. Win or Lose that game I then hope we win the game after that and so on.

It does sound good doesn't it?
That's because it makes sense and Im sure its part of the Saints planning...
Guarantees? .....there are no guarantees in life....
But I can guarantee you that without a long term plan (over lets just hope we win every week..) then we'll go nowhere fast.

[Teflon]

A winning culture will come when we get wins.

Interesting theory on cause and effect but if only if it was so easy.

There are many elements to a good culture. Winning games is an outcome of a successful culture.

Lose to get higher draft picks, then wins will come and voilà: you have a winning culture.

I don't think so.

talk to me about winning culture if and when we make the finals sooner than later due to high picks.voilà: I prefer cellos

I would argue that when we make the finals sooner it will be because of the likes of Bruce, and Newnes, and Sinclair, and DMac and Dunstan, and Lonie more than Billing and McCartin.

It takes canny drafting later in the draft to fill out the team.

A higher pick can help, but as I noted in the past a Tambling over a Franklin, a Scully over a Fyfe, even a Ball over a Judd or an X over Bartel in our case. God forbid a Watts over anyone

Draft is full of high dp's who turned out to be just gops. Huge gamble to take on an underdeveloped kid with potential.

Of course it does but the reality of getting Hamill for 70 whatever has decreased dramatically as drafting has improved
No one said you don't need to choose wisely but I am yet to see anyone draft Tom Boyd from pick 12..... That's the point

I reckon the drafting for Collingwood in 2008 helped them win a premiership with Sidebottom(11) and Beams (29) in the one year. Both came on quick and were very high grade players. That year Melbourne got Watts (1) Sam Blease at priority pick 17 and James Strauss (19). Hannerbury, Sloane, Walters, Shiels, Zaharakis and Trengove from Port all came after those picks.

Good drafting by getting two guns in a year makes you a much better team and conversely wasting three picks in one kills your future. That year we got Lynch, Cahill, Al Smith etc. It was an absolute bust for us and Melbourne but a bumper crop for teams like Freo who got Stephen Hill, Balantine, Zac Clarke and walters in one year.

I think Lonie looks like a potential star already, Sinclair will at least be handy, Mc kenzie looks high level and Goddard and Mc cartin are ridiculously high potential. This could be the draft that we look back on and see where our fast track starts.

True Gringo and leveraging multiple top 20 picks for quantity is and has been the clubs focus.
FWIW I think Collingwoods Flag chances werent hurt by previously having 2 top 5 picks in Pendlebury and Thomas come into the club also.....

[saintsRrising]

But I can guarantee you that without a long term plan (over lets just hope we win every week..) then we'll go nowhere fast.

Re-writing history again I see. I prefer the clubs current long term plan over the simplistic tank to succes and play badly so the players become permanently inept approach.

You clearly have no idea if you believe that the Saints only plan at present is "hoping to win every week".
You clearly also do not watch the games where one can see, if one looks, that the players are already being drilled in how the club wants to play as they grow.
You clearly have not looked at ALL the players the club has picked up these last two seasons in particular.

If all that matters is another No 1 pick, then why did the club not bundle Roo and Joey off 2 year ago to get one? Because another No1 pick matters little unless many, many other things are right.

[Teflon]

But I can guarantee you that without a long term plan (over lets just hope we win every week..) then we'll go nowhere fast.

Re-writing history again I see. I prefer the clubs current long term plan over the simplistic tank to succes and play badly so the players become permanently inept approach.

You clearly have no idea if you believe that the Saints only plan at present is "hoping to win every week".
You clearly also do not watch the games where one can see, if one looks, that the players are already being drilled in how the club wants to play as they grow.
You clearly have not looked at ALL the players the club has picked up these last two seasons in particular.

If all that matters is another No 1 pick, then why did the club not bundle Roo and Joey off 2 year ago to get one? Because another No1 pick matters little unless many, many other things are right.

Where have I said we have to tank and lose every game?
Where have I said we must have the number 1 pick?

If I am guilty of re-writing history your guilty of flat out lies....I know whats worse....

Put up or shut up - produce the posts where I have said the above???

[bergholt]

So tell me who was the better pick from the 2009 draft #1 or #20?

If pick 20 works out better than pick 1 then that is the gamble but if you were offered a pick from 1 to 20 which would you take ?

I love this debate because it's largely a matter of opinion, but there are some facts. Picks 1 vs 20:

2014: McCartin (2 games) vs Laverde (0)
2013: Boyd (19) vs Leslie (5)
2012: Whitfield (40) vs Broomhead (16)
2011: Patton (29) vs Crozier (26)
2010: Swallow (77) vs Pitt (10)
2009: Scully (97) vs Fyfe (92)
2008: Watts (105) vs Swift (34)
2007: Kreuzer (107) vs Notte (2)
2006: Gibbs (185) vs Hislop (27)
2005: Murphy (194) vs Bower (70)
2004: Deledio (220) vs Polo (77)
2003: Cooney (226) vs Butler (130)
2002: Goddard (258) vs Minson (184)
2001: Hodge (257) vs Elstone (0)
2000: Riewoldt (288) vs Cornes (300)
1999: Fraser (218) vs Wheatley (135)
1998: Headland (166) vs Collica (80)
1997: Johnstone (209) vs Solomon (209)
etc

So Bunk is being disingenuous. Yes, in 2009 you would have taken pick 20 over pick 1. But literally every other year pick 1 is at least as good, usually significantly better. Pick a random three #1s and you're light years ahead of a random three #20s. There's just no argument there.

Bunk won't reply to this because he never admits he's wrong, but he knows the truth.

[plugger66]

So tell me who was the better pick from the 2009 draft #1 or #20?

If pick 20 works out better than pick 1 then that is the gamble but if you were offered a pick from 1 to 20 which would you take ?

I love this debate because it's largely a matter of opinion, but there are some facts. Picks 1 vs 20:

2014: McCartin (2 games) vs Laverde (0)
2013: Boyd (19) vs Leslie (5)
2012: Whitfield (40) vs Broomhead (16)
2011: Patton (29) vs Crozier (26)
2010: Swallow (77) vs Pitt (10)
2009: Scully (97) vs Fyfe (92)
2008: Watts (105) vs Swift (34)
2007: Kreuzer (107) vs Notte (2)
2006: Gibbs (185) vs Hislop (27)
2005: Murphy (194) vs Bower (70)
2004: Deledio (220) vs Polo (77)
2003: Cooney (226) vs Butler (130)
2002: Goddard (258) vs Minson (184)
2001: Hodge (257) vs Elstone (0)
2000: Riewoldt (288) vs Cornes (300)
1999: Fraser (218) vs Wheatley (135)
1998: Headland (166) vs Collica (80)
1997: Johnstone (209) vs Solomon (209)
etc

So Bunk is being disingenuous. Yes, in 2009 you would have taken pick 20 over pick 1. But literally every other year pick 1 is at least as good, usually significantly better. Pick a random three #1s and you're light years ahead of a random three #20s. There's just no argument there.

Bunk won't reply to this because he never admits he's wrong, but he knows the truth.

I would think BM know pick one is better. Im sure everyone does but it isn't pick one over 20. Its about pick 3 or 4 over picks 5 or 6. And then there are other things you cant see like the effect winning has on the players, the club as a whole, memberships, sponsorship, good publicity and so on. I would take wins now over a draft pick in 6 months time that obviously cant be guaranteed.

[saintsRrising]

But I can guarantee you that without a long term plan (over lets just hope we win every week..) then we'll go nowhere fast.

Re-writing history again I see. I prefer the clubs current long term plan over the simplistic tank to succes and play badly so the players become permanently inept approach.

You clearly have no idea if you believe that the Saints only plan at present is "hoping to win every week".
You clearly also do not watch the games where one can see, if one looks, that the players are already being drilled in how the club wants to play as they grow.
You clearly have not looked at ALL the players the club has picked up these last two seasons in particular.

If all that matters is another No 1 pick, then why did the club not bundle Roo and Joey off 2 year ago to get one? Because another No1 pick matters little unless many, many other things are right.

Where have I said we have to tank and lose every game?
Where have I said we must have the number 1 pick?

If I am guilty of re-writing history your guilty of flat out lies....I know whats worse....

Put up or shut up - produce the posts where I have said the above???

LOL! You cannot even quote what I wrote. Which is pure Teflon 101!

Your post was clearly implying that the club and supporters in this thread were just hoping to just win every week as the extent of the plan to gain success (which it most clearly is not)....whereas your tanking desire was somehow a well thought out master strategy with no negative aspects to it at all!

Might as well hope to become a millionare by buying tatts ticket.

Do you want the Saints to beat the Dogs? Yes or No
Do you want the Saints to beat the Dons? Yes or No
Do you want the Saints beat the Dees when we replay then? Yes or No

These three games are the ones most likely to affect where our draft picks are taken.

I want to win all 3. Do you?

[Bunk_Moreland]

So tell me who was the better pick from the 2009 draft #1 or #20?

If pick 20 works out better than pick 1 then that is the gamble but if you were offered a pick from 1 to 20 which would you take ?

I love this debate because it's largely a matter of opinion, but there are some facts. Picks 1 vs 20:

2014: McCartin (2 games) vs Laverde (0)
2013: Boyd (19) vs Leslie (5)
2012: Whitfield (40) vs Broomhead (16)
2011: Patton (29) vs Crozier (26)
2010: Swallow (77) vs Pitt (10)
2009: Scully (97) vs Fyfe (92)
2008: Watts (105) vs Swift (34)
2007: Kreuzer (107) vs Notte (2)
2006: Gibbs (185) vs Hislop (27)
2005: Murphy (194) vs Bower (70)
2004: Deledio (220) vs Polo (77)
2003: Cooney (226) vs Butler (130)
2002: Goddard (258) vs Minson (184)
2001: Hodge (257) vs Elstone (0)
2000: Riewoldt (288) vs Cornes (300)
1999: Fraser (218) vs Wheatley (135)
1998: Headland (166) vs Collica (80)
1997: Johnstone (209) vs Solomon (209)
etc

So Bunk is being disingenuous. Yes, in 2009 you would have taken pick 20 over pick 1. But literally every other year pick 1 is at least as good, usually significantly better. Pick a random three #1s and you're light years ahead of a random three #20s. There's just no argument there.

Bunk won't reply to this because he never admits he's wrong, but he knows the truth.

Well first off you are wrong, as usual, as I did reply.

Secondly, it was an example not a definitive. Anyone with any intelligence would understand that, obviously you dont.

The fact is that the simplistic rubbish about losing so you will win in 3 years is fraught with danger.

We are not the NFL, we dont draft 23 year olds, we draft underdeveloped 18 years olds on POTENTIAL.

It is simply dumb to think it is a fait accompli that just because you get pick #2 instead of #5 you are GUARANTEED a top notch player and you are not with pick 5.

It is just simply wrong, but hey, maybe you can do a comparision between #2 and #5 over the past fifteen years as well, considering you are obviously a literal person and not that well school with nuance, so knock yourself out.

No really knock yourself out.

[saintspremiers]

I love SS.

Teffers taking on plugs usual position.

[gringo]

So tell me who was the better pick from the 2009 draft #1 or #20?

If pick 20 works out better than pick 1 then that is the gamble but if you were offered a pick from 1 to 20 which would you take ?

I love this debate because it's largely a matter of opinion, but there are some facts. Picks 1 vs 20:

2014: McCartin (2 games) vs Laverde (0)
2013: Boyd (19) vs Leslie (5)
2012: Whitfield (40) vs Broomhead (16)
2011: Patton (29) vs Crozier (26)
2010: Swallow (77) vs Pitt (10)
2009: Scully (97) vs Fyfe (92)
2008: Watts (105) vs Swift (34)
2007: Kreuzer (107) vs Notte (2)
2006: Gibbs (185) vs Hislop (27)
2005: Murphy (194) vs Bower (70)
2004: Deledio (220) vs Polo (77)
2003: Cooney (226) vs Butler (130)
2002: Goddard (258) vs Minson (184)
2001: Hodge (257) vs Elstone (0)
2000: Riewoldt (288) vs Cornes (300)
1999: Fraser (218) vs Wheatley (135)
1998: Headland (166) vs Collica (80)
1997: Johnstone (209) vs Solomon (209)
etc

So Bunk is being disingenuous. Yes, in 2009 you would have taken pick 20 over pick 1. But literally every other year pick 1 is at least as good, usually significantly better. Pick a random three #1s and you're light years ahead of a random three #20s. There's just no argument there.

Bunk won't reply to this because he never admits he's wrong, but he knows the truth.

It's pretty bare picking though from pick one about 3 are stars of exceptional quality...Riewoldt, Hodge, Cooney and Goddard possibly but he hasn't been a super star due to consistency IMO.

Whitfield, Murphy, Gibbs and Swallow are all good players so far but a fair way off stars. Pick 20 is a long way off pick 1 though, I'm sure other top 10 picks have netted a high hit rate.

[Austinnn]

Sure, everyone would prefer earlier picks. That's the point the tankers think we are all arguing over, but its not.

What we arguing about is how important an earlier pick is to us, and how uncompetitive we're prepared for our club to be to secure an earlier pick. That's all.

I would like the first 4 picks of the draft, as would anyone. It's a straw man argument to imagine there a loon out there who would actually prefer to have pick 20 than pick 1, unless you dont like the pressure of getting pick 1 right. We could picked the same players we picked if we'd had picks 1-4, (although it wouldn't have been as satisfying because they wouldn't have been steals.)

But at the expense of winning games and maybe creating a winning culture? No. I'd rather have later picks and have our core players of the future win some more games by taking on the game using the coaches plan.

Young players winning games together is more important than draft picks. If we had more older players like Roo, Monty, Fisher, Dempster, Schneider and Ray winning the games themselves and there was just a handful of kids topping up the team, I'd see the logic of The Tank Theory, even though it would still be against everything I believe in.

So be honest about the debate is about and maybe you'll get some answers that satisfy you.

[gringo]

Sure, everyone would prefer earlier picks. That's the point the tankers think we are all arguing over, but its not.

What we arguing about is how important an earlier pick is to us, and how uncompetitive we're prepared for our club to be to secure an earlier pick. That's all.

I would like the first 4 picks of the draft, as would anyone. It's a straw man argument to imagine there a loon out there who would actually prefer to have pick 20 than pick 1, unless you dont like the pressure of getting pick 1 right. We could picked the same players we picked if we'd had picks 1-4, (although it wouldn't have been as satisfying because they wouldn't have been steals.)

But at the expense of winning games and maybe creating a winning culture? No. I'd rather have later picks and have our core players of the future win some more games by taking on the game using the coaches plan.

Young players winning games together is more important than draft picks. If we had more older players like Roo, Monty, Fisher, Dempster, Schneider and Ray winning the games themselves and there was just a handful of kids topping up the team, I'd see the logic of The Tank Theory, even though it would still be against everything I believe in.

So be honest about the debate is about and maybe you'll get some answers that satisfy you.

Well said. I almost think there is a flip side argument where a pick between 4 and 10 almost drops away the shackles and is an un pressured pick. Guys like Bontempelli would have been a huge risk at 3 but around 6 it was a worth while risk. Cockatoo last year would have been an outrageously risky top 5 pick but has the attributes to be the best of his draft. Stringers leg meant he would be an unacceptable risk in the top 3 like Menzel from Carlton. Of course some drafts are very light on for stars and there aren't many you would want. Look at 2009. Fyfe is a star and Dustin Martin not far off but apart from a few more like Gunston and Mitch Duncan it was a terrible draft.

Round Pick Player Recruited from League Club
Priority 1 Tom Scully Dandenong Stingrays TAC Cup Melbourne
1 2 Jack Trengove Sturt SANFL Melbourne
1 3 Dustin Martin Bendigo Pioneers TAC Cup Richmond
1 4 Anthony Morabito Peel WAFL Fremantle
1 5 Ben Cunnington Geelong Falcons TAC Cup North Melbourne
1 6 Gary Rohan Geelong Falcons TAC Cup Sydney
1 7 Brad Sheppard East Fremantle WAFL West Coast
1 8 John Butcher Gippsland Power TAC Cup Port Adelaide
1 9 Andrew Moore Eastern Ranges TAC Cup Port Adelaide
1 10 Jake Melksham Calder Cannons TAC Cup Essendon
1 11 Jordan Gysberts Eastern Ranges TAC Cup Melbourne
1 12 Kane Lucas East Fremantle WAFL Carlton
1 13 Daniel Talia Calder Cannons TAC Cup Adelaide
1 14 Lewis Jetta Swan Districts WAFL Sydney
1 15 Christian Howard Glenelg SANFL Western Bulldogs
1 16 Jasper McMillan-Pittard Geelong Falcons TAC Cup Port Adelaide
1 17 Daniel Menzel Central District SANFL Geelong
2 18 Luke Tapscott North Adelaide SANFL Melbourne
2 19 Benjamin Griffiths Eastern Ranges TAC Cup Richmond
2 20 Nathan Fyfe Claremont WAFL Fremantle
2 21 Ryan Bastinac Dandenong Stingrays TAC Cup North Melbourne
2 22 Gerrick Weedon Claremont WAFL West Coast
2 23 Koby Stevens Gippsland Power TAC Cup West Coast
2 24 Jake Carlisle Calder Cannons TAC Cup Essendon
2 25 Aaron Black Peel WAFL North Melbourne
2 26 Travis Colyer Claremont WAFL Essendon
2 27 Callum Bartlett Geelong Falcons TAC Cup Brisbane Lions
2 28 Mitch Duncan East Perth WAFL Geelong
2 29 Jack Gunston Sandringham Dragons TAC Cup Adelaide
2 30 Luke Ball St Kilda AFL Collingwood
2 31 Jason Tutt Ainslie NEAFL Western Bulldogs
2 32 Nicholas Winmar Claremont WAFL St Kilda
2 33 Anthony Long Calder Cannons TAC Cup Essendon
3 34 Max Gawn Sandringham Dragons TAC Cup Melbourne
3 35 David Astbury North Ballarat Rebels TAC Cup Richmond
3 36 Joel Houghton Perth WAFL Fremantle
3 37 Jamie MacMillan Oakleigh Chargers TAC Cup North Melbourne
3 38 Sam Reid Murray Bushrangers TAC Cup Sydney
3 39 Sam Grimley Northern Knights TAC Cup Hawthorn
3 40 Allen Christensen Geelong Falcons TAC Cup Geelong
3 41 Ayden Kennedy Eastern Ranges TAC Cup North Melbourne
3 42 Nathan Vardy Gippsland Power TAC Cup Geelong
3 43 Marcus Davies North Hobart TSL Carlton
3 44 Matthew Dea North Ballarat Rebels TAC Cup Richmond
3 45 Sam Shaw Oakleigh Chargers TAC Cup Adelaide
3 46 Benjamin Stratton East Perth WAFL Hawthorn
3 47 Ryan Harwood Glenorchy TSL Brisbane Lions
3 48 Jesse Crichton North Launceston TSL Fremantle
3 49 Dylan Roberton Dandenong Stingrays TAC Cup Fremantle
4 50 Jack Fitzpatrick Western Jets Melbourne

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_AFL_draft

[Austinnn]

Lucky we didn't tank for picks that year!

[perfectionist]

We are 14th. The teams we have beaten are 13th, 15th, 16th and 17th.

We have won one more game this year than at the same time last year.

It was nice to win a game with a lucky bounce having endured so many losses (or draws) with unlucky bounces.

I see no improvement in skills from last year to this year. Compare WCE, especially their handball which won the game for them last night. Accurate and straight, either close in or at some distance. Forward of the play to a player running into space, rather than half a metre to a teammate standing next to him with an opponent near by.

I see very few contested marks on the backline. We lack height and skill in the back six. Premierships are born by champions in the back six. In the last few minutes of a close GF, the pressure is greater than at any other time in the season. A player who can still fly, take a contested mark and reverse the flow of play is the most important player in the team in such games. Punches away at best kill the contest, they never turn the contest. This was most obvious in both the 2009GF and 2010GF1. In the last quarters of those games, our back six did not take one contested mark in the backline whilst our opponents took five and three respectively.

Paddy McCartin is the most physically ill prepared No 1 pick I have ever seen. He is not even fit enough to play VFL let alone AFL. We can only hope that there is a temporary reason for this and he will be able to get to an AFL fitness standard rather than turn out to be just a champion schoolboy footballer. He has time on his side. A couple of our other draft choices will be handy players over the years.

From what I have seen this year, our next finals appearance is, at best, just one year closer than it was last year.

[Austinnn]

All fair points. Bit tough on Paddy.

[Old Mate]

We've made progress from last year and wins don't even come into it. We are playing better and more competitive football and starting to get more consistent. We haven't been blown away too often and have shown glimpses of competitive football against top sides for periods of games.

[#gosaintas]

We lack height and skill in the backline because our idiotic selectors are too stupid to pick Goddard and Lee

[felix]

Perfectionist ...Bit half glass empty mate....cheer up

[Teflon]

But I can guarantee you that without a long term plan (over lets just hope we win every week..) then we'll go nowhere fast.

Re-writing history again I see. I prefer the clubs current long term plan over the simplistic tank to succes and play badly so the players become permanently inept approach.

You clearly have no idea if you believe that the Saints only plan at present is "hoping to win every week".
You clearly also do not watch the games where one can see, if one looks, that the players are already being drilled in how the club wants to play as they grow.
You clearly have not looked at ALL the players the club has picked up these last two seasons in particular.

If all that matters is another No 1 pick, then why did the club not bundle Roo and Joey off 2 year ago to get one? Because another No1 pick matters little unless many, many other things are right.

Where have I said we have to tank and lose every game?
Where have I said we must have the number 1 pick?

If I am guilty of re-writing history your guilty of flat out lies....I know whats worse....

Put up or shut up - produce the posts where I have said the above???

LOL! You cannot even quote what I wrote. Which is pure Teflon 101!

Your post was clearly implying that the club and supporters in this thread were just hoping to just win every week as the extent of the plan to gain success (which it most clearly is not)....whereas your tanking desire was somehow a well thought out master strategy with no negative aspects to it at all!

Might as well hope to become a millionare by buying tatts ticket.

Do you want the Saints to beat the Dogs? Yes or No
Do you want the Saints to beat the Dons? Yes or No
Do you want the Saints beat the Dees when we replay then? Yes or No

These three games are the ones most likely to affect where our draft picks are taken.

I want to win all 3. Do you?

yes, yes yes.....Teflon 101 but you squirm out of the drivel in your previous post and produce no evidence Ive ever said those things because you know its untrue.
Nothing worse than a liar.
I dont answer liars questions.

[Teflon]

I love SS.

Teffers taking on plugs usual position.

I apparently get a coffee mug as well which is great!

[Teflon]

We are 14th. The teams we have beaten are 13th, 15th, 16th and 17th.

We have won one more game this year than at the same time last year.

It was nice to win a game with a lucky bounce having endured so many losses (or draws) with unlucky bounces.

I see no improvement in skills from last year to this year. Compare WCE, especially their handball which won the game for them last night. Accurate and straight, either close in or at some distance. Forward of the play to a player running into space, rather than half a metre to a teammate standing next to him with an opponent near by.

I see very few contested marks on the backline. We lack height and skill in the back six. Premierships are born by champions in the back six. In the last few minutes of a close GF, the pressure is greater than at any other time in the season. A player who can still fly, take a contested mark and reverse the flow of play is the most important player in the team in such games. Punches away at best kill the contest, they never turn the contest. This was most obvious in both the 2009GF and 2010GF1. In the last quarters of those games, our back six did not take one contested mark in the backline whilst our opponents took five and three respectively.

Paddy McCartin is the most physically ill prepared No 1 pick I have ever seen. He is not even fit enough to play VFL let alone AFL. We can only hope that there is a temporary reason for this and he will be able to get to an AFL fitness standard rather than turn out to be just a champion schoolboy footballer. He has time on his side. A couple of our other draft choices will be handy players over the years.

From what I have seen this year, our next finals appearance is, at best, just one year closer than it was last year.

A tad dire ....but there has been improvement and IMO its the way we are going about which is the most telling - we are in games for longer and having the game played on our terms longer. I think our pressure has been better also.

That said, I agree we need more class and in tight games whether they be GF's or not class remains which is why, unlike the weekl glory hunters here just whingeing that we MUST win every week, we have to take a strategic approach to getting more AGrade talent into the club. We dont have enough and the draft is but 1 clear way while we are down at the bottom to do that.
Hang tough, ignore those who would have you believe if we lose a few extra games this year we will suddenly become uncompetitive and turn into Carlton......thats hysterical rubbish. The club is heading in the right direction but must maximise its draft chances first by getting the best pick it can and secondly by choosing wisely......Id still love a priority pick...(apparently there is some secret PP process known only to a few on here and the AFL that somehow ends with 'AFL discretion'.....which doesnt sound like much of a process but anyway....)

[Teflon]

So tell me who was the better pick from the 2009 draft #1 or #20?

If pick 20 works out better than pick 1 then that is the gamble but if you were offered a pick from 1 to 20 which would you take ?

I love this debate because it's largely a matter of opinion, but there are some facts. Picks 1 vs 20:

2014: McCartin (2 games) vs Laverde (0)
2013: Boyd (19) vs Leslie (5)
2012: Whitfield (40) vs Broomhead (16)
2011: Patton (29) vs Crozier (26)
2010: Swallow (77) vs Pitt (10)
2009: Scully (97) vs Fyfe (92)
2008: Watts (105) vs Swift (34)
2007: Kreuzer (107) vs Notte (2)
2006: Gibbs (185) vs Hislop (27)
2005: Murphy (194) vs Bower (70)
2004: Deledio (220) vs Polo (77)
2003: Cooney (226) vs Butler (130)
2002: Goddard (258) vs Minson (184)
2001: Hodge (257) vs Elstone (0)
2000: Riewoldt (288) vs Cornes (300)
1999: Fraser (218) vs Wheatley (135)
1998: Headland (166) vs Collica (80)
1997: Johnstone (209) vs Solomon (209)
etc

So Bunk is being disingenuous. Yes, in 2009 you would have taken pick 20 over pick 1. But literally every other year pick 1 is at least as good, usually significantly better. Pick a random three #1s and you're light years ahead of a random three #20s. There's just no argument there.

Bunk won't reply to this because he never admits he's wrong, but he knows the truth.

I would think BM know pick one is better. Im sure everyone does but it isn't pick one over 20. Its about pick 3 or 4 over picks 5 or 6. And then there are other things you cant see like the effect winning has on the players, the club as a whole, memberships, sponsorship, good publicity and so on. I would take wins now over a draft pick in 6 months time that obviously cant be guaranteed.

Then why ask the question?
Anyway, I like it how when Berg produces a post based on fact and all the apologists on here run scrambling to somehow argue that this wasnt their view in he first place...
Regardless great post Berg - keep up the good work.

[SaintPav]

Carlton won today so some of yous might be happy.

[SaintPav]

A winning culture will come when we get wins.

Interesting theory on cause and effect but if only if it was so easy.

There are many elements to a good culture. Winning games is an outcome of a successful culture.

Lose to get higher draft picks, then wins will come and voilà: you have a winning culture.

I don't think so.

talk to me about winning culture if and when we make the finals sooner than later due to high picks.voilà: I prefer cellos

That's a big assumption and that is the problem with the simple theory that finishing towards the bottom and getting early draft picks leads to success.

BTW. I like the cello too. I hear it every day, live and unplugged. Opera, ballet, symphonies....

???

My lovely plays the cello professionally in an orchestra. Plays me club song occasionally after a win. Could do with another instrument like a piano but I'm not complaining.

[asiu]