Are St Kilda the AFL's Next Moneyball Team?

[samuraisaint]

Copyright: Luke Stubbs (YouTube channel)

[Impatient Sainter]

Definitely worth a look thanks samurai.

[Sainter_Dad]

2022 - The year of the Saint!

Bring it on - I am so excited!

And this can be tied to one thing - Captain Jack - I have long been calling for a guy to stand up and ask for the SAME commitment as the captain ala Lenny Hayes - and in Captain Jack - I see him taking St Kilda on his shoulders and literally saying "F@rk if - We ARE winning this thing"

If you doubt the commitment - Look Left!!!!!!!

[saynta]

Interesting.

[st.byron]

Copyright: Luke Stubbs (YouTube channel)

Thanks for posting. After watching that I’m not quite exactly sure what he thinks the Saints’ strategy is. Interesting watch though.

[samuraisaint]

Copyright: Luke Stubbs (YouTube channel)

Thanks for posting. After watching that I’m not quite exactly sure what he thinks the Saints’ strategy is. Interesting watch though.

Watch Ratts' presser near the end.

[The_Dud]

I think a lot of people missed the biggest point about the ‘Moneyball’ strategy - it doesn’t work.

[diddley]

I think a lot of people missed the biggest point about the ‘Moneyball’ strategy - it doesn’t work.

It did, just not with the first team that did it.
When they increased the budget a bit, it worked.
In a league where we have the same money to spend on the players as everyone else, trying to find the advantage in any way possible is the key.

[Ghost Like]

To be honest, unless the AFL reverse or tighten the amount of money given to clubs then it should work but the AFL allows too many escape clauses for clubs that should be over the salary cap. Clubs include: Brisbane, Geelong, Collingwood, West Coast, Sydney, Richmond, soon to be the Doggies & the Demons. The salary cap means nothing unless it's enforced.

TBH, the system is a joke, the joke being the only transparent thing about the AFL.

[Toy Saint]

it's quite likely that a lot of players will be unable to play this season because of COVID. This will be an advantage to those clubs with real depth.

Our list may be a bit 'light on' A Grade players, but I feel we do have quite good depth this season.

[samuraisaint]

I think a lot of people missed the biggest point about the ‘Moneyball’ strategy - it doesn’t work.

It did, just not with the first team that did it.
When they increased the budget a bit, it worked.
In a league where we have the same money to spend on the players as everyone else, trying to find the advantage in any way possible is the key.

Correct Diddley.
You cannot really compare the NFL or the Premier League with our AFL, the money is completely astronomical in Europe and North America.
Even there though, Leicester and the New Orleans Saints have had success despite the inequality.
Melbourne, the Dogs and Geelong - as well as Port up to a point - are competing with the clubs with significantly greater assets.
If we finish top 8 and win a final this season that will be a great start.

Then we need to trade in an A Grader like B. King to shore up our long term future onfield.

[The_Dud]

I think a lot of people missed the biggest point about the ‘Moneyball’ strategy - it doesn’t work.

It did, just not with the first team that did it.
When they increased the budget a bit, it worked.
In a league where we have the same money to spend on the players as everyone else, trying to find the advantage in any way possible is the key.

Correct Diddley.
You cannot really compare the NFL or the Premier League with our AFL, the money is completely astronomical in Europe and North America.
Even there though, Leicester and the New Orleans Saints have had success despite the inequality.
Melbourne, the Dogs and Geelong - as well as Port up to a point - are competing with the clubs with significantly greater assets.
If we finish top 8 and win a final this season that will be a great start.

Then we need to trade in an A Grader like B. King to shore up our long term future onfield.

Not so sure about that inequality, as both the New Orleans Saints and Leicester City are owned by billionaires!

The NFL has a salary cap too, and the main reason the Saints were any good was because they had one of the greatest QBs of all time running the team.

That's the problem with the moneyball strategy, you still need the stars and 'x-factor' players to get you through the big games.

[B.M]

Isn’t Moneyball about finding low profile, cheap players who have value?

Not sure how that can hurt?

You still need to pay 95% of the Cap so you can still have stars, in fact to have stars on your list… you need role players.

[Life Long Saint]

Isn’t Moneyball about finding low profile, cheap players who have value?

Not sure how that can hurt?

You still need to pay 95% of the Cap so you can still have stars, in fact to have stars on your list… you need role players.

This was Ross Lyon's approach. Pay the stars virtually everything and then find role players for the rest.
You could argue this both ways. Ultimately it didn't work because we couldn't win a flag. I suspect too much was invested in role players and not enough on player development.
Conversely, we were very, very close to winning two flags. But when the star players don't have great games, the team lacked the class to fill the void.

Players like Eddy, Dawson, Jones, McQualter, Peake were given games because they filled roles. Players like Armitage, McEvoy, and Steven were held back in those years.
Ball was rested for a lot of Q4 in the 2009 GF.

We were the Oakland A's for 2009/10 before Hawthorn became the Red Sox and showed us the right way. Skills matter. A lot!

[CQ SAINT]

Isn’t Moneyball about finding low profile, cheap players who have value?

Not sure how that can hurt?

You still need to pay 95% of the Cap so you can still have stars, in fact to have stars on your list… you need role players.

This was Ross Lyon's approach. Pay the stars virtually everything and then find role players for the rest.
You could argue this both ways. Ultimately it didn't work because we couldn't win a flag. I suspect too much was invested in role players and not enough on player development.
Conversely, we were very, very close to winning two flags. But when the star players don't have great games, the team lacked the class to fill the void.

Players like Eddy, Dawson, Jones, McQualter, Peake were given games because they filled roles. Players like Armitage, McEvoy, and Steven were held back in those years.
Ball was rested for a lot of Q4 in the 2009 GF.

We were the Oakland A's for 2009/10 before Hawthorn became the Red Sox and showed us the right way. Skills matter. A lot!

The difference being that most of our stars of that era, were developed by a different coach via the draft and when did we start doing things the right way?

[Life Long Saint]

Isn’t Moneyball about finding low profile, cheap players who have value?

Not sure how that can hurt?

You still need to pay 95% of the Cap so you can still have stars, in fact to have stars on your list… you need role players.

This was Ross Lyon's approach. Pay the stars virtually everything and then find role players for the rest.
You could argue this both ways. Ultimately it didn't work because we couldn't win a flag. I suspect too much was invested in role players and not enough on player development.
Conversely, we were very, very close to winning two flags. But when the star players don't have great games, the team lacked the class to fill the void.

Players like Eddy, Dawson, Jones, McQualter, Peake were given games because they filled roles. Players like Armitage, McEvoy, and Steven were held back in those years.
Ball was rested for a lot of Q4 in the 2009 GF.

We were the Oakland A's for 2009/10 before Hawthorn became the Red Sox and showed us the right way. Skills matter. A lot!

The difference being that most of our stars of that era, were developed by a different coach via the draft and when did we start doing things the right way?

I meant the royal "us" as in the football world.