Our very inexperienced team

[Oh When the Saints]

# of Players with < 100 games experience:

18 - Carlton
17 - Richmond
16 - Port Adelaide
16 - Hawthorn
15 - Brisbane Lions
14 - St Kilda
14 - Western Bulldogs
13 - Kangaroos
13 - Adelaide
12 - Melbourne
12 - West Coast
12 - Geelong
11 - Fremantle
11 - Essendon
11 - Collingwood
10 - Sydney
10 - St Kilda of 2005


We only have 4 players in our side with 150+ games experience, below the average of 5 for teams that competed this weekend.

If you take about 150 of Harvey's games out of the equation (because he skews the result somewhat), we have the 5th lowest average games in the AFL.


What's my point?


That we have an inexperienced side.

Consider the fact that in 2005:

• We averaged 6 players per game with 150+ games experience
• We averaged 10 players per game with <100 games experience.

Compare that with 2007 and you can see where the difference is.

We have effectively lost 7 players since 2005 who averaged about 130 games experience between them.



So when people say we went backwards in 2006 - well consider the fact that we had a lot more youth and inexperience in the team than when we made Prelims.

It wasn't Thomas' fault, it wasn't poor recruiting ... it was our inexperience and the diminished output from our older players.

And when people say we went backwards in 2007 - well consider the fact that we have EVEN MORE youth and inexperience in the team.


We are one of the youngest and least experienced teams in the AFL.

[fonz_#15]

i don't want excuses or reasons, we should he in a better position than what we are

[JeffDunne]

Cop out.

We haven't gone backwards because we are getting younger.

[Life Long Saint]

Meaningless when you look at Hawthorn and Port Adelaide with 16 and the Kangaroos with 13.

It shows what ou can do with a game plan where the players are encouraged to take risks and a little self belief.

[Oh When the Saints]

So you wouldn't agree that the loss of 7-8 experienced players has had an impact?

You would expect the same output from 7-8 relatively inexperienced players?

I am not claiming that this is the sole reason we have gone backwards - merely that it is another piece in the puzzle that deserves some consideration.


I actually thought this analysis offered a degree of hope -- because we are still one of the younger teams in the AFL, and that brings a huge amount of upside with it.

[Oh When the Saints]

Meaningless when you look at Hawthorn and Port Adelaide with 16 and the Kangaroos with 13.

It shows what ou can do with a game plan where the players are encouraged to take risks and a little self belief.

All those sides have been coached by the same person for at least 3 years.

In Port's case, there would hardly be a player on the list who was not developed by Mark Williams.

They are supremely drilled in the philosophy of the coaching staff over a number of years.

It has taken Dean Laidley 4 years to get it right at the Kangaroos ...

[saintsRrising]

I would think that 100games is way to high a mark to set as split for someone being "iexeperienced"....


More like say 50 odd that players should be valuable contributors...abd be settling down into good steady football..


And say 25 odd to be still very raw...

[Dan Warna]

LOL

on one hand we have people telling us we aren't blooding new players on the other we have people telling us we are in experienced.

[st_Trav_ofWA]

# of Players with < 100 games experience:

18 - Carlton
17 - Richmond
16 - Port Adelaide
16 - Hawthorn
15 - Brisbane Lions
14 - St Kilda
14 - Western Bulldogs
13 - Kangaroos
13 - Adelaide
12 - Melbourne
12 - West Coast
12 - Geelong
11 - Fremantle
11 - Essendon
11 - Collingwood
10 - Sydney

all that proves is that we have players not good enuff to get games on a regular basis how manyof that 14 are stuck in the under 15 games bracket ?? and how many of those have been in the team for more then 2 years ??

[Oh When the Saints]

LOL

on one hand we have people telling us we aren't blooding new players on the other we have people telling us we are in experienced.

The facts tell you we are inexperienced.

Fact #1: We had the 5th lowest average games played of teams on the weekend

Fact #2: We have the 6th highest number of players who have played less than 100 games.

Fact #3: Our team of 2007 is significantly younger (by an average of 30 games experience) than our average team of 2004 and 2005.


I raised these points for two reasons:

1. There is still a huge amount of upside at St Kilda, and we will for a number of years to come be in a position to improve, because we still have a large element of youth --- larger than in 2004/05 when we were a "young and exciting" team.

2. As a part of the cause of our team struggling in some matches, as we lack the experienced and talented edge of older senior players that we have had over the past two seasons.

[Otiman]

What experienced players have we lost in the last few years that haven't been replaced with equivalent or better players?

[Dan Warna]

so you arguing that we have some young developing of players coming through?

LOL i've been arguing about the list and team for ages.

and by all accounts mini is tearing it up in the boiler room for casey, armitage is doing damage in front of goals, gwilt is solid in defence and watts, brooks and van rheenan are going ok for talls.

don't tell barks

[Oh When the Saints]

What experienced players have we lost in the last few years that haven't been replaced with equivalent or better players?

My point was that the players who have come in as replacements are equal in ability, but inferior in experience and development.

I believe that at AFL level footballers are not physically and mentally mature until they are 26 or 27 years of age.

If you lose 8 blokes who are 27+ years old and replace 'em with 8 blokes under 24, you may in fact add more ability to the team.

But you don't add the composure, mental strength and physical development required to compete.


And based on that ....

H. Black > A. Fiora
Black was a player of 130 games experience with St Kilda, and collected Brownlow votes on several occasions playing with us.
Fiora is yet to collect a Brownlow vote for St Kilda.

A Jones > J. Gram
Jones was a dual AA, 200-game star for the Saints who was a hardened senior player when we were at our peak.
Gram has played 50 games and does not have the composure, presence or experience of Jones.

S. Powell > C. Jones/S. Birss
Powell was a hard-nosed competitor with over 100 games of experience, who added a physical presence to our side and could protect our ball carriers.
Jones or Birss are not his equal in development or experience at AFL level.

J. Peckett > L. Fisher
Leigh Fisher has ability at least Peckett's equal, but Frankie was a veteran of 250 games who stood up when it counted. He had the experience behind him and was mentally and physically mature enough to handle AF football.
Leigh Fisher is not at that level of experience or development yet.


Plus Gehrig doesn't have the same output ...

And you can make a case for Penny, Hamill and Thompson too.

[Dan Warna]

What experienced players have we lost in the last few years that haven't been replaced with equivalent or better players?

we miss powell. of all the players who have left we are missing someone fast enough to line up opposition players in the centre square, and defend our running players.

ball, hayes and baker pick up some slack, but powell was the guardian in teh centre square.

RL has experimented with blake and GT tried hamill in there, both these guys were just not as good as powell.

a lot of people just looked at the stats and said how crap powell was, but he really did a lot more work of the ball that folks just didn't give him credit for.

ball does some shepherding as does lenny, but neither of them are powell.

ever since I saw an analysis of dean greig, i've been watching for that type of player.

timmid had no respect for sziller and rod keoghs contribution.

Powell coming to st kilda filled that roll.

sadly however that type of impact player tends to have a short career and I think eh was finished at 29.

Guerra got a run, but at st kilda he was too unfit to play in teh cauldron and his bumps were either illegal or innefectual, while powell knew when to bump and when to tackle and when to shepherd.

probably the only player/player class we desperately need.

for those who have seen ball cleaned up this year, and wonder what is missing from our engine room...powell.

but folks look at his stats and dont realise his value.

[Oh When the Saints]

so you arguing that we have some young developing of players coming through?

Almost.

In 2004 and 05, we had developing players coming through - Joey, X, BJ, Grammy, Chips, Fish etc.

Now those developing players are in our team each week.

And they are still developing.


And yes, we've still got developing players coming through, although due to one or two drafting errors, the quality isn't as good as some would like.

[Otiman]

And how would Peckett and Powell be in todays game where leg speed is king? Answer is nowhere.

[Dan Warna]

And how would Peckett and Powell be in todays game where leg speed is king? Answer is nowhere.

frankie was fast.

he was kept off the wing by jones, winmar, matty young, gilbert mcadam, and others during his career, when he was let on the wing he proved quite damaging.

powell was never fast, he was our dean greig, rod keogh, cameron ling in the engine room.

he more than made up for a lack of speed with hardness and a quick mind.

IMO powell is about the only 'class' of player we haven't replaced.

[Teflon]

Meaningless when you look at Hawthorn and Port Adelaide with 16 and the Kangaroos with 13.

It shows what ou can do with a game plan where the players are encouraged to take risks and a little self belief.

All those sides have been coached by the same person for at least 3 years.

In Port's case, there would hardly be a player on the list who was not developed by Mark Williams.

They are supremely drilled in the philosophy of the coaching staff over a number of years.

It has taken Dean Laidley 4 years to get it right at the Kangaroos ...

Good analysis OWTS but your finding out that its all Ross Lyons fault....hes had 18 games ya know...

[Life Long Saint]

Good analysis OWTS but your finding out that its all Ross Lyons fault....hes had 18 games ya know...

Honestly...
Where have I said that it is all Ross Lyon's fault?

Slight correction BTW...He has had 19 games and a pre-season!

My only concern with his style is the game plan. It does not play to our strengths. I live in the hope that we are taking a short-term loss for a long-term gain. By playing this way for 2007 it will, somehow, make us better in 2008 and beyond. The problem that I can see with it is that it does not make the best use of our tall, marking forward line. Our style should not be based on anyone else. We have a set of unique players (like every club) and our game plan and style should be our own. It should work to our strengths and not highlight our weaknesses.

[carn_sainter]

OWTS, i find that you rely on stats too much

well, maybe rely isn't the right word, but you're always looking to them to get a point across

i mean, you say we had 5th lowest games avg this weekend, but do you have the actual numbers on that?

may as well post the full stats...as far as i've always believed, the composition among sides is never so great as to warrant an excuse

from memory, most sides hover around 22-24 for avg age and avg games maybe in the 60-80s...

my bet is that the difference between our avg games and the next club is pretty much insignificant


age/inexperience has always been a rubbish excuse i reckon

i mean, it sure wasn't a factor on the weekend...

what's the difference of 70 games instead of 60...90 instead of 100...nothing pretty much


even if we had the youngest side ever on the weekend you still couldn't use it as an excuse...we knew what we had to do, it was simple...we did most of it for most of the game and should have been able to go on with it...we weren't beaten by a better team, we beat ourselves...again

the things we failed in won't be magically reversed in another 10 games time, by virtue of having another 10 games go past


and for the record, i reckkon fiora's been better than lback this year...but no, not as good as black was with us

[vacuous space]

Experience isn't the problem. We had one player under the age of twenty in our side, and he was one of our best. The problem as I see it is that we have too many guys - of all ages - who aren't pulling their weight.

[Oh When the Saints]

Fair enough carn_sainter.

From when I did the reasearch for the original post, the team with the highest average games per player was Sydney with about 100 ...

The lowest was Carlton with about 60 ...


That is a significant difference ... the Saints were abouut 85.


Really, I was not trying to excuse our loss to the Swans ... just the difference in our side between 2005 and 2007, and the impact this has had and will have in the longer term.

[saintsRrising]

Experience isn't the problem. We had one player under the age of twenty in our side, and he was one of our best. The problem as I see it is that we have too many guys - of all ages - who aren't pulling their weight.

Good point

[Solar]

could it also be suggest that the reason why the majority of our list lacks high game totals is because of the last 3-4 years of injury. It would be interesting to see how many games our best 22 have missed.

I think that not only do games help to bring together a team they also help players learn the higher level, the game plan, the efforts required. You don't learn these things sitting on the sideline being injured.

Took peckett 10 years to start showing leadership, lenny took 4-5 years to start showing anything. max is our best backline player because he has the experience and know how to cover his player, to punch at the right time etc. The likes of maguire, fish and chips etc. are still learning and developing this.

The more games this squad can play TOGETHER the better they will get

[Life Long Saint]

Experience isn't the problem. We had one player under the age of twenty in our side, and he was one of our best. The problem as I see it is that we have too many guys - of all ages - who aren't pulling their weight.

Good point

The obvious question is "why aren't they pulling their weight?"

By all reports, this wasn't an issue last season. I don't remember reading anywhere that they players were not pulling their weight.

I don't want this to degenerate into a RB/GT holy war. That said, however, there is a different feel about our poor performances this season.

Poor player attitude is not a good sign and you would hope the club would want to rectify that ASAP.