Starting 22 2018 what we'll see/ what you'd like to see.

[samoht]

I'm sure if someone moves ahead of him in the roles he plays, or if we recruit someone like Fyfe, he'll make way for them (and of course I'd want him too).
Until then ... he's contributing to our team ....and I'll take his 3 clangers out of 23 possessions vs the 430 metres he gains. But that's just me ... and we don't have to agree.

Here's something else for you to ponder, CQSaint ... Savage, whom you rate ahead of Newnes (and I have him slightly ahead, too, at the moment - I hope he continues his form).
Based on the 2017 season, Savage has more inside 50's (3.8 inside 50's vs 3.4 inside 50's) but less Goal Assists (0.2 vs 0.3).
Newnes also has more Score Involvements 5.1 vs 3.8

So if Newnes's disposal is so woeful and his possessions are so ineffective, how should we view Savage, if we are to be fair about it? Shouldn't we be "savaging" him?

I rate them both - by the way. But fair is fair! Should we keep singling out Newnes (and hold the wrong/false perception about him)?
We don't expect Savage to be a superstar, but for some reason Newnes's good is not good enough for us (even if it's better than most); and we want to look for his faults (or make some up/imagine some). Yes, Savage has one less clanger per game - if that's the only measuring stick.

Even the fact Newnes' is durable is yet another reason to like him - knowing you're going to get continuity and reliability from him; meaning there's one less position you need to worry about. He'd be one of the first 10 players you'd want to re-sign (given his durability).

No response is a tacit agreement (you've finally seen my point - that we need to be fair). I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong, I'm just asking that they'd be fair; for fairness sake (and maybe Newnes's sake) - not for my sake.


Newnes vs Savage ................. Newnes has:
3.4 Inside 50s Per Game 3.8 .... less inside 50's per game
0.3 Goal Assists Per Game 0.2 .. yet more goal assists per game!
6.5 Contested Possessions Per Game 4.8 ...1.7 more contested possessions per game!
1.4 Clearances Per Game 0.4 ... 1 more clearance per game
3.4 Rebound 50s Per Game 2.8 ... 0.6 more rebounds per game!
5.1 Score Involvements Per Game 3.8 ... 1.3 more score involvements per game. Interesting!
431.2 Metres Gained Per Game 432.0 .. equally good!

[CQ SAINT]

I'm sure if someone moves ahead of him in the roles he plays, or if we recruit someone like Fyfe, he'll make way for them (and of course I'd want him too).
Until then ... he's contributing to our team ....and I'll take his 3 clangers out of 23 possessions vs the 430 metres he gains. But that's just me ... and we don't have to agree.

Here's something else for you to ponder, CQSaint ... Savage, whom you rate ahead of Newnes (and I have him slightly ahead, too, at the moment - I hope he continues his form).
Based on the 2017 season, Savage has more inside 50's (3.8 inside 50's vs 3.4 inside 50's) but less Goal Assists (0.2 vs 0.3).
Newnes also has more Score Involvements 5.1 vs 3.8

So if Newnes's disposal is so woeful and his possessions are so ineffective, how should we view Savage, if we are to be fair about it? Shouldn't we be "savaging" him?

I rate them both - by the way. But fair is fair! Should we keep singling out Newnes (and hold the wrong/false perception about him)?
We don't expect Savage to be a superstar, but for some reason Newnes's good is not good enough for us (even if it's better than most); and we want to look for his faults (or make some up/imagine some). Yes, Savage has one less clanger per game - if that's the only measuring stick.

Even the fact Newnes' is durable is yet another reason to like him - knowing you're going to get continuity and reliability from him; meaning there's one less position you need to worry about. He'd be one of the first 10 players you'd want to re-sign (given his durability).

No response is a tacit agreement (you've finally seen my point - that we need to be fair). I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong, I'm just asking that they'd be fair; for fairness sake (and maybe Newnes's sake) - not for my sake.


Newnes vs Savage ................. Newnes has:
3.4 Inside 50s Per Game 3.8 .... less inside 50's per game
0.3 Goal Assists Per Game 0.2 .. yet more goal assists per game!
6.5 Contested Possessions Per Game 4.8 ...1.7 more contested possessions per game!
1.4 Clearances Per Game 0.4 ... 1 more clearance per game
3.4 Rebound 50s Per Game 2.8 ... 0.6 more rebounds per game!
5.1 Score Involvements Per Game 3.8 ... 1.3 more score involvements per game. Interesting!
431.2 Metres Gained Per Game 432.0 .. equally good!

You strategically left out disposal efficiency which was your main point earlier. Savage's is elite for an uncontested possession player and 10% improved on Newnes. You asked for names and I gave you one. Everything else is very similar other than Savage spends more time in the back half being accountable for his man in my opinion.

No response. Ha ha. I should probably do some work while Im being payed.

Are you related to Jack?

[CQ SAINT]

I'm sure if someone moves ahead of him in the roles he plays, or if we recruit someone like Fyfe, he'll make way for them (and of course I'd want him too).
Until then ... he's contributing to our team ....and I'll take his 3 clangers out of 23 possessions vs the 430 metres he gains. But that's just me ... and we don't have to agree.

Here's something else for you to ponder, CQSaint ... Savage, whom you rate ahead of Newnes (and I have him slightly ahead, too, at the moment - I hope he continues his form).
Based on the 2017 season, Savage has more inside 50's (3.8 inside 50's vs 3.4 inside 50's) but less Goal Assists (0.2 vs 0.3).
Newnes also has more Score Involvements 5.1 vs 3.8

So if Newnes's disposal is so woeful and his possessions are so ineffective, how should we view Savage, if we are to be fair about it? Shouldn't we be "savaging" him?

I rate them both - by the way. But fair is fair! Should we keep singling out Newnes (and hold the wrong/false perception about him)?
We don't expect Savage to be a superstar, but for some reason Newnes's good is not good enough for us (even if it's better than most); and we want to look for his faults (or make some up/imagine some). Yes, Savage has one less clanger per game - if that's the only measuring stick.

Even the fact Newnes' is durable is yet another reason to like him - knowing you're going to get continuity and reliability from him; meaning there's one less position you need to worry about. He'd be one of the first 10 players you'd want to re-sign (given his durability).

No response is a tacit agreement (you've finally seen my point - that we need to be fair). I'm not trying to prove anyone wrong, I'm just asking that they'd be fair; for fairness sake (and maybe Newnes's sake) - not for my sake.


Newnes vs Savage ................. Newnes has:
3.4 Inside 50s Per Game 3.8 .... less inside 50's per game
0.3 Goal Assists Per Game 0.2 .. yet more goal assists per game!
6.5 Contested Possessions Per Game 4.8 ...1.7 more contested possessions per game!
1.4 Clearances Per Game 0.4 ... 1 more clearance per game
3.4 Rebound 50s Per Game 2.8 ... 0.6 more rebounds per game!
5.1 Score Involvements Per Game 3.8 ... 1.3 more score involvements per game. Interesting!
431.2 Metres Gained Per Game 432.0 .. equally good!

You strategically left out disposal efficiency which was your main point earlier. Savage's is elite for an uncontested possession player and 10% improved on Newnes. You asked for names and I gave you one. Everything else is very similar other than Savage spends more time in the back half being accountable for his man in my opinion.

No response. Ha ha. I should probably do some work while Im being payed.

Are you related to Jack?

Another thing. Savage was sent back to Sandy for producing what Newnes has made a career out of. Hardly fair in my opinion. In his most recent form (the last 6 or so games) Savage is smashing Newnes.

[samoht]

Bottom line:
Newnes possessions result in 5.1 scoring involvements compared to only 3.8 from Savage - who I really rate.
It means that Newnes picks better options when he disposes of the ball - i.e., Newnes's kicks and handballs are more likely to kickstart a better chain that results in more scores, compared to Savage.

Savage might be a good footballer, but he doesn't read the play quite as well as Newnes.

You were criticising Newnes that his kicks and handballs don't count for much - that he kicks it indiscriminately - that he hopes for the best. That's obviously not the case.
The complete opposite is true, in fact.

Newnes gets the ball to the better options - which is the sign of a good footballer - he's not someone to criticise baselessly just for the sake of it.

And learn some respect (watch your ha has - and I'm not related to Jack, but I'm related more to the facts)

[CQ SAINT]

Bottom line:
Newnes possessions result in 5.1 scoring involvements compared to only 3.8 from Savage - who I really rate.
It means that Newnes picks better options when he disposes of the ball - i.e., Newnes's kicks and handballs are more likely to kickstart a better chain that results in more scores, compared to Savage.

Savage might be a good footballer, but he doesn't read the play quite as well as Newnes.

You were criticising Newnes that his kicks and handballs don't count for much - that he kicks it indiscriminately - that he hopes for the best. That's obviously not the case.
The complete opposite is true, in fact.

Newnes gets the ball to the better options - which is the sign of a good footballer - he's not someone to criticise baselessly just for the sake of it.

Disposal efficiency Savage 81% vs Newnes 74%. Youve talked a good game but dont really bring.much to the argument.

Both guys basically run around by themselves, run passed for handballs, run into wide open spaces and kick the ball long. Savage is just better at it.

[samoht]

Newnes reads the play better, chooses the better options and generates another 1.3 score involvements - this is the measure that counts.
So Newnes gets the ball into the right spots and the better spots - obviously.

He doesn't just kick it or handball it anywhere - the disposal efficiency doesn't compensate for a better football brain. You could have a more accurate kick and 6% better disposal efficiency - but do you kick it to the right option??
I'm sure there's people kicking the ball around their back yards who might be better kicks, but they are not footballers. Newnes is - and he's a good one at that.
He deserves due respect.

[CQ SAINT]

Newnes reads the play better, chooses the better options and generates another 1.3 score involvements - this is the measure that counts.
So Newnes gets the ball into the right spots and the better spots - obviously.

He doesn't just kick it or handball it anywhere - the disposal efficiency doesn't compensate for a better football brain.
I'm sure there's people kicking the ball around their back yards who might be better kicks, but they are not footballers. Newnes is - and he's a good one at that.
He deserves due respect.

I tend to agree with these guys.

Re: 5 main positives from JLT1
Postby Saintmatt » Thu 01 Mar 2018 8:06am
BringBackMadDog wrote:
Its been a long time since I have been so excited about two first year players. 32 disposals and 2 goals from 19 year olds in their first senior hitouts, plus the composure, disposal accuracy, run and carry and commitment to the contest. They both must be looked at for round 1. If I was Gilbo, Newnes, Weller i would be nervous about my position in the side


Newnes. My God. Possibly the most overrated C grader we have. His kicking efficiency is beyond deplorable and to have him as a leader is right up there with Geary as Captain. Both excellent runners ... but vile exponents of basic skills. And yet Gilbert has got a 10 yr career out of being a butcher. As for Weller - there’s a reason GCS got rid of him.

Play the draftees - we’re kidding ourselves if that JLT wasn’t a portent of things to come so we might as well develop. We’re not close to the 8.

And how we’ve given our clueless coach an extension is beyond me. I mean - was he likely to be poached by another club? Spare me
Go you red, black & white warriors
Saintmatt
Club Player

Posts: 134
Joined: Fri 20 Jan 2012 3:57pm

[samoht]

1.3 more shots at goal - 1.3 more score involvements per game ...Newnes uses the ball better and chooses the better options ----he's got a better football brain --- END OF STORY.

You were hoping that the stats would prove otherwise - well they don't. You had the wrong perception about Newnes (probably through listening to people who don't have a clue).

I don't need any more proof. I've got all the proof I need. Argue it out with yourself. Have a good night.

I can understand why some people have left saintsational ....

[footynut]

FB Geary, Austin, Robo
HB White Carlisle Savage
C Sinclair Ross Acers
HF Billings Bruce Gresham
FF Membrey Paddy Hunter
R Longer, Steven, Steele,
INT , Coff, Webster, Armo, Dustan

Would actually like to drop for long (play him as a backman) or newnes. But not going to happen as he's our captain

[Con Gorozidis]

FB Geary, Austin, Robo
HB White Carlisle Savage
C Sinclair Ross Acers
HF Billings Bruce Gresham
FF Membrey Paddy Hunter
R Longer, Steven, Steele,
INT , Coff, Webster, Armo, Dustan

Would actually like to drop for long (play him as a backman) or newnes. But not going to happen as he's our captain

I like this team you picked here.

I don't see any point persisting with the likes of Weller, Wright, Stevens, Gilbo or Brown unless we have injuries.

[Drake Huggins]

Love it, footynut. Longer out for Hickey or Marshall would be my only change.

[skeptic]

FB Geary, Austin, Robo
HB White Carlisle Savage
C Sinclair Ross Acers
HF Billings Bruce Gresham
FF Membrey Paddy Hunter
R Longer, Steven, Steele,
INT , Coff, Webster, Armo, Dustan

Would actually like to drop for long (play him as a backman) or newnes. But not going to happen as he's our captain

I like this team you picked here.

I don't see any point persisting with the likes of Weller, Wright, Stevens, Gilbo or Brown unless we have injuries.

Really like this team too...

It’s got a lot of run and more flare than many of our most recent teams.

Don’t love Webster in ahead of Newnes... but I get it in terms of flexibility.

I’m not completely sold on if Armo can recapture close to his best form so I dare say that he’s most vulnerable to a Newnes or a Stevens

[Gershwin]

Coffield and Clark have completed 80% of the pre-season training compared to the senior players. They played under-18's last year and people think they can compete with seasoned AFL players !! Let them develop in the VFL. They will be killed in the AFL.

[Drake Huggins]

Coffield and Clark have completed 80% of the pre-season training compared to the senior players. They played under-18's last year and people think they can compete with seasoned AFL players !! Let them develop in the VFL. They will be killed in the AFL.

Just like Gresham, McGrath, Judd, Weitering, Koschitzke et al. They hardly looked out of place the other night. In fact, I'd say they were one of the few positives to emerge from the game. Both looked well ahead of several others I could name. We need to play talented kids and fast track their development, not stick to the mediocrities that have held us back. If they're good enough, and I believe they are, they'll be alright.

[Gershwin]

Coffield and Clark have completed 80% of the pre-season training compared to the senior players. They played under-18's last year and people think they can compete with seasoned AFL players !! Let them develop in the VFL. They will be killed in the AFL.

Just like Gresham, McGrath, Judd, Weitering, Koschitzke et al. They hardly looked out of place the other night. In fact, I'd say they were one of the few positives to emerge from the game. Both looked well ahead of several others I could name. We need to play talented kids and fast track their development, not stick to the mediocrities that have held us back. If they're good enough, and I believe they are, they'll be alright.

I'm not suggesting that they are not good enough talent wise but I doubt whether they are physically ready. Senior AFL is vastly different to the pre-season run around.

[DJ Higgins]

Coffield and Clark have completed 80% of the pre-season training compared to the senior players. They played under-18's last year and people think they can compete with seasoned AFL players !! Let them develop in the VFL. They will be killed in the AFL.

There are definitely pros and cons about them playing afl this year. I think they will play but not the whole season. I.e a game up and then a few down in Sandy to help development there skilsl but also get bigger. They played well on Wednesday night but they did look like kids out there and I am concerned they might get an injury or break down early.

[congorozides]

Coffield and Clark have completed 80% of the pre-season training compared to the senior players. They played under-18's last year and people think they can compete with seasoned AFL players !! Let them develop in the VFL. They will be killed in the AFL.

Just like Gresham, McGrath, Judd, Weitering, Koschitzke et al. They hardly looked out of place the other night. In fact, I'd say they were one of the few positives to emerge from the game. Both looked well ahead of several others I could name. We need to play talented kids and fast track their development, not stick to the mediocrities that have held us back. If they're good enough, and I believe they are, they'll be alright.

Mclean and Dunkley played plenty of games in the Bulldogs premiership year.

Rioli and Graham have got games as 19 year olds for the Tigers.

Brad hill played for the Hawks all year in 2013.

Clark and Paton are already 19. Coffield is still quite young. I think we can manage these three. But Clark And Coffield should be aiming for 10 games each this year. Paton 5.

[CQ SAINT]

Coffield and Clark have completed 80% of the pre-season training compared to the senior players. They played under-18's last year and people think they can compete with seasoned AFL players !! Let them develop in the VFL. They will be killed in the AFL.

Just like Gresham, McGrath, Judd, Weitering, Koschitzke et al. They hardly looked out of place the other night. In fact, I'd say they were one of the few positives to emerge from the game. Both looked well ahead of several others I could name. We need to play talented kids and fast track their development, not stick to the mediocrities that have held us back. If they're good enough, and I believe they are, they'll be alright.

Mclean and Dunkley played plenty of games in the Bulldogs premiership year.

Rioli and Graham have got games as 19 year olds for the Tigers.

Brad hill played for the Hawks all year in 2013.

Clark and Paton are already 19. Coffield is still quite young. I think we can manage these three. But Clark And Coffield should be aiming for 10 games each this year. Paton 5.

Let them start the seaon off 5 games each and drop regular seniors who arent quite right to make way for them like Weller and Newnes. Will be good for all four.

I would also experiment with Marshall on the bench and half forward and give Gilbert a run for a while at Sandringham.
Play Marshall with Longer and Bruce and rotate them all off bench with Gresh, Billings and Steven rotating through the forward line and roving position with high TOG %"s.

[congorozides]

Weller is 26.
Career he has kicked 53.61 from 108 games.
Less than 0.5 goals a game.

Josh Green - A fringe player of similar mould to Weller has managed 124.75 from 98 games. More than twice as good as Weller.

Toby Greene - a genuine star of the game has managed 123.84 from 117 games but has only played forward the last two seasons.

We need to give up on Weller. He is never going to be any good. Great effort he was able to bluff his way to 100 AFL games but surely the game is up?

[The Linton Street Flash]

FB Geary, Austin, Robo
HB White Carlisle Savage
C Sinclair Ross Acers
HF Billings Bruce Gresham
FF Membrey Paddy Hunter
R Longer, Steven, Steele,
INT , Coff, Webster, Armo, Dustan

Would actually like to drop for long (play him as a backman) or newnes. But not going to happen as he's our captain

Great team - I picked almost the identical team yesterday too, pretty much other than I had Hickey for Longer.

I thiink if the selection committee had any nuts this is the way they’d go, it’s a faster, more skillful, less predictable team than we’ve seen in a long time.

I doubt we’re as close as we thought we were a few years ago, our deficiencies are obvious (speed, skill), this team starts to address them.

All our best players are there, and there’s still half decent experienced players waiting in the wings.

Here’s mine:

ROUND 1 BALLSIEST BIGGEST UPSIDE TEAM:

B: Geary Austin Webster
HB: Roberton Carlisle Coffield
C: Acres Ross Sinclair
HF: Membrey Bruce Billings
F: Gresh Paddy Hunter
R: Hickey Steven Steele
I: Armitage Dunstan Savage White

E: From - Newnes Gilbert Long Stevens Longer Paton goddard Weller Brown Battle

- Puts 1 in who gives another option up forward.
- Has all our best players - 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 14, 15, 20, 27, 28, 32, 35
- Plays our best kids who can run and kick - 11, 31, 33
- Brings more speed/youth into the back six - 24, 33
- Thin ice - 29 (could be replaced in starting 18 by 31, and in 22 by 16)
- Unlucky but close - 16, 18, 19, 21, 25, 44

*I’ve gone for Acres over Acers too, think he a much safer option!

DO IT!!

[Con Gorozidis]

I am with you guys also.
I'd pick the same side as the Linton St Flash.

Newnes stiff but obviously he comes in when Coffee needs a rest. Or if any of the mids get injured.

I am worried about our lack of fwd line pressure but at this stage we don't have anyone who excels at that.
Long remains a possibility but needs to get better.

[Scollop]

Coffield and Clark have completed 80% of the pre-season training compared to the senior players. They played under-18's last year and people think they can compete with seasoned AFL players !! Let them develop in the VFL. They will be killed in the AFL.

There are definitely pros and cons about them playing afl this year. I think they will play but not the whole season. I.e a game up and then a few down in Sandy to help development there skilsl but also get bigger. They played well on Wednesday night but they did look like kids out there and I am concerned they might get an injury or break down early.

Luke Ball was not managed well in his early years. Look what happened to Jaeger O'meara. It's important to think of the long term and plan for an assault in maybe 2020, not dream of miracles happening in 2018

[The Linton Street Flash]

Coffield and Clark have completed 80% of the pre-season training compared to the senior players. They played under-18's last year and people think they can compete with seasoned AFL players !! Let them develop in the VFL. They will be killed in the AFL.

There are definitely pros and cons about them playing afl this year. I think they will play but not the whole season. I.e a game up and then a few down in Sandy to help development there skilsl but also get bigger. They played well on Wednesday night but they did look like kids out there and I am concerned they might get an injury or break down early.

Luke Ball was not managed well in his early years. Look what happened to Jaeger O'meara. It's important to think of the long term and plan for an assault in maybe 2020, not dream of miracles happening in 2018

We're not saying it's the team for the entire year, but a team for Round 1, maybe even the first few rounds...

We kick the season off playing the 2 teams widely tipped to finish around the bottom of the ladder, they'll both be playing against us with a load of kids, so what's to worry about?

You manage them through the year but you come out at the start of the season and show your intent for 2018 and beyond.

It's not like you're sending em out there alone, they're surrounded by senior players, so let them (and us supporters) have their/our moment in the sun.

...let them rise to the occasion!

Last year we picked a conservative nothing team for Round 1 and it bit us on the arse, lets not make the same mistake twice.

You notch a couple of wins in the first couple of rounds and then you assess how everyone is holding up for Adelaide and Geelong, if you need to bring in more experienced, harder bodies, you do it then - by that stage the likes of Newnes, Stevens, Gilbert, Brown etc will be jumping out of their skins to get back in the team.

If we win a few games with a team like the one we're suggesting (and I'm confident we would) you'll have memberships flying outta the joint!

If Richardson and his selection committee have any balls at all, or any kind of clear vision for the future, and if they're motivated by anything other than saving their skins, this is the kind of team they should turn up with at the start of the season.

Make it happen Saints!

[skeptic]

Coffield and Clark have completed 80% of the pre-season training compared to the senior players. They played under-18's last year and people think they can compete with seasoned AFL players !! Let them develop in the VFL. They will be killed in the AFL.

There are definitely pros and cons about them playing afl this year. I think they will play but not the whole season. I.e a game up and then a few down in Sandy to help development there skilsl but also get bigger. They played well on Wednesday night but they did look like kids out there and I am concerned they might get an injury or break down early.

Luke Ball was not managed well in his early years. Look what happened to Jaeger O'meara. It's important to think of the long term and plan for an assault in maybe 2020, not dream of miracles happening in 2018

I don’t know about JOM, but to me, the issue is playing injured...
Kosi was fine in 02
Ball was fine in 03-05...

Then they both pushed through injuries like there was no choice or no one else to play and they lost both agility and explosiveness...

Killed them both.

It’s something that has frustrated me to no end... don’t play injured players in the place of a plethora of fit kids looking for a go

[desertsaint]

we were doing the same to dunstan and it stalled his development. play the kids if good enough, but manage it properly.