Deal to get Charman

[saintsRrising]

Sorry that it was so hard for you to follow .......as it was in the first sentence..

Surprising how a few words confuses you so easily.

It confused me because we have 'good' ruckmen.
And have had 'good' ruckmen in the past.

ah....and there we disagree...

Ignoring Gardiner we do not have a good ruckman on our list.


Kosi is not yet actually a good ruckmen in his ruckwork. He is very good as a player...but not as a ruckmen. kosi has the raw talkent to improve his ruckworks and he improved it this year...but based on his 2007 form he is nota good rucmen.


Rix. No, he is an honest tolier...and ok on your list asa back up in acse of injury as he is cheap.

Blake. Is ok against the right match up...but not against good to elite ruckmen.

Van reehan...Young and raw with lots of potential....but most likey several years away.

Brooks....lots of raw talent....but has not delivered......


In the past...well yes BUT not since we had the spader?Vidovic ruck combination.

[rodgerfox]

BUT that post-Waldron the saints got dudded in deals more often than not. The person in overall charge of this process st**d up...and our current list is not as good as it should be.

What?

When did we get dudded? More to the point, when did we get dudded moreso than other clubs have been dudded?

The last point is frog's droppings.

How good should it be?

Who, exactly, should be on our list that isn't?

And, keep in mind that there is a thing called the salary cap which means you cannot have the depth that people cry out for.

To keep with the hypothetical, lets imagine that all of these elite players we would have drafted as kids had the same serious knee injuries and broken bones as the players we ended up getting.


Now if you had have said, the list could be better, then I'd agree. Of course it could. Every list could. But it could also be much worse - every list could. It's a boring line and poor argument that you've clutched at when all your other theories were blown out of the water.

[saintsRrising]

The initial decision? Very smart. The perseverence. Smart. However, it's where they go from here that will be the judge for me on whether Hawthorn management has been good, or simply necessary. A premiership, and they look good, otherwise, it will be how they solidify the potential that is currently apparent for all to see.

Yes agree...they are at the cusp...



They have set themselves up to go further.......but now they need to do it (and I don't mean this years finals...)

[saintsRrising]

When did we get dudded?

Post Wadron for ALL the draft picks we have traded we have retained little in return...by the only measure that counts.....games of adequately quality played

[rodgerfox]

Don't get me wrong, I think the Hawthorn strategy has been very smart - however where they're at is the end on the first phase of a rebuild. Very similar spot to where the Saints were at the end of '04.

Jury is out for me on Hawthorn for 2 reasons:
1) They're only reaching a point now where older players are going to be tempting... and trading in general, if they go for players under 25, I'll hold it as wise recruitment, but it's the same boat the Saints found themselves in: every trade will be scrutinised with the benefit of hindsight 2 years later.
2) I don't think the Hawks have had especially good return for their tradeing and drafting. They've traded for picks, and the one truism of drafting is that if you do the work, throw enough mud at the wall and some will stick. The Hawks have thrown more mud at the wall than anyone, and yet not had that much more stick - a fair bit of what has (outside the Hodge/Franklin) is (arguably) due to them fastracking and opening up the list spots.

The initial decision? Very smart. The perseverence. Smart. However, it's where they go from here that will be the judge for me on whether Hawthorn management has been good, or simply necessary. A premiership, and they look good, otherwise, it will be how they solidify the potential that is currently apparent for all to see.

Hawthorn's maasive success (sarcasm intended) could also be due to the fact that they are fit and healthy.

Whilst other good teams aren't.

[snoopygirl]

Yes, appropriate that it's the Hawks & the Eagles that are flying high.

[BAM! (shhhh)]

Hawthorn's maasive success (sarcasm intended) could also be due to the fact that they are fit and healthy.

Whilst other good teams aren't.

That and lack of there being a "book" on how to play against them (since they're only hitting that level this year) are counting against them in my books ATM. ie, the GT era Saints were vulnerable to the rebound on the wings, the Bulldogs are in trouble when Gilbee gets shutdown and they can't use their outriders, if the Crows don't win the clearance, they'll struggle to create without a team playing into their net.

If you control the corridor and your own HBF, the Hawks can outsmart themselves, but that's hardly a blueprint to victory. It'll be interesting to see how they go against the Crows. Could be a very ugly game.

[saintsRrising]

Whilst other good teams aren't.

But there is the rub....if you neglect your fitness mangement side....are you a GOOD team??????

Impact injuries, acls etc...one can say are bad luck....but a large quanitiy of soft tissue injuties means that something is astray.

Winning the flag...is a matter of doing MANY things better than your opposition. Not necessarilly doing them ALL better...but getting most things right.



The Saints have underperformed in this area.....in recent years....including not having spent enought in this area.

[maverick]

Sorry that it was so hard for you to follow .......as it was in the first sentence..

Surprising how a few words confuses you so easily.

It confused me because we have 'good' ruckmen.

And have had 'good' ruckmen in the past.

We don't have good ruckmen now I'm afraid and yes we did have them in the past and traded him to Hawthorn.

[Apu]

But that was GT's problem was it not...we always got screwed in draft deals that he manged once Waldron left.

When we were on the bottom...with the Smarts of Waldron and the allure of Blight we traded well......traded to advantage.

Post Waldron we got dudded....with Gram (nota rejected player) being about our only succesful trade.

Just wondering who these rejected players were? Do you mean players that left because they were not getting a chance in their previous team?
eg Guerra, Fiora, Mcgough, Ackland, Knobel? If so the first three were not bad trades and if still at the club all would be on our 2008 list, Guerra and Fiora in our first 22. Knobel was a 5th round pick, so no big loss. McGough is the only big mistake.

also why doesnt Gram fit into this same category? As well as being homesick, he had only managed 2 games in 2 years thanks to Brisbane's gun midfield.

Also what about the trades for Brooks and Watts? how are they any different to the gram trade? both these guys were not rejected from their teams, yet they havent yet worked out . Perhaps you didnt mention these two guys because John Beveridge would have vouched for their ability, not GT?

[rodgerfox]

Whilst other good teams aren't.

But there is the rub....if you neglect your fitness mangement side....are you a GOOD team??????

Who's neglected fitness management?

[saintsRrising]

Just wondering who these rejected players were? Do you mean players that left because they were not getting a chance in their previous team?

Rejected GOPS means that their clubs chose to reject them and that they only promised to be ordinary at best.........rather than the player choosing to leave.

eg Guerra, Fiora, Mcgough, Ackland, Knobel? If so the first three were not bad trades and if still at the club all would be on our 2008 list, Guerra and Fiora in our first 22.

Any one deal you can argue the virtues of....but there was a pattern of recruiting too many players with very little upside.

You can say yes we are now wise in hindsight....well a coach rises or falls by backing his judgement and how gooda lista he builds. GT consistently got it wrong.He says it was all delagted to JB...well that does not wash because it was his CHOICE to do so...if he failed to adequtely direct the type of player he wanted then that is still his failing.

Fiora while having underachieved had already played many good games....and so does not qualify as a reject. He obviously had the potential to be a lot more thana GOP. He now seems to be realising that potential.

Fiora was also a shot gun deal...and for this reason I think Gt failed to exploit him and he fealt somewhat "unloved". Ross ceratainly has built his confidence u.


Guerra you can argue about but PA got rid of him for attitude problems....which is the same reason why the saints rejected him.

Knobel was a 5th round pick, so no big loss. McGough is the only big mistake.

also why doesnt Gram fit into this same category?

Because Knoble was only ever going to be a GOP at best...Gram obviously had the potential to be a good player..


Gram chose to leave.....

As well as being homesick, he had only managed 2 games in 2 years thanks to Brisbane's gun midfield.

Also what about the trades for Brooks and Watts? how are they any different to the gram trade? both these guys were not rejected from their teams, yet they havent yet worked out . Perhaps you didnt mention these two guys because John Beveridge would have vouched for their ability, not GT?

The Watts trade in itself can look ok...BUT why recruit a specialist slow big forward when you already have Roo, Kosi, GTrain...and Brooks???? Particularly when you are deficient in other areas. This was the problem with the watts trade rather than Watts himself.


Brooks....whichever way you look at it...even through the most optimistic eyes....swapping TWO lowish draft picks for him was way overpriced. If his price had been more realistic then you could argue it wasa fair enough trade as they cannot all work....and at least Brooks hada good potential upside.



GT needed to be communicating to JB the type of player he wanted.....despite what some people say about Brooks I have always reagrded him asa ruck/forward more thana true No1 ruck type.

Maybe Gt should have given the nudge nudge wink wink to JB that:

*we were about to lose Powell, Peacket, Thommo and Harvey...and the game was changing so that you needed EVEN more mids...

So what did we have in the pipeline..ONLY Mini and McG. Go figure eh???

But sure go ahead and get ore key forwards than you can play...

*that with Penny going down...that someone else that could play FB would be handy

*that ruckmen need to be at least good to recruit.

It has said that GT didn't rate good ruckmen. Then WTF did he recruit Knoble, Sugar and Rix?????


Rix is GT's most puzzling pick...drafts the guy...and then ignores him.



Then states that Kosi is our ruck...BUT fails to give Kosi LOTS and LOTS of specialised ruck coaching. Kosi is on record this year as staing how much he has learnt from M Clarke. Wella bit of specilaided coaching over the previous two years may well have seen Kosi a lot more advanced now in his ruck skills.

[plugger66]

Dont understand your bit about Rix. Played 10 games last year so he was played a fair bit by GT. I am confused.

[Beekay]

we are a bit different to your average forum footy fan ......they always want to exchange bolied lollies for chocholate......we, on the other hand want to give a bag of gold for a sack of crap.........

Enjoyed that post Stinger.

[saintsRrising]

Dont understand your bit about Rix. Played 10 games last year so he was played a fair bit by GT. I am confused.

Early when there was opportunity and need to play him...he did not.

[plugger66]

Dont understand your bit about Rix. Played 10 games last year so he was played a fair bit by GT. I am confused.

Early when there was opportunity and need to play him...he did not.

I think as we have seen this year he may not have been good enough to get a game. Surely JB recruited him not GT.

[saintsRrising]

I think as we have seen this year he may not have been good enough to get a game.
.

well cannot argue there....and that was my point

Surely JB recruited him not GT.

Surely GT gave JB some guidelines on:

*what he wanted in types of players
*what standards were accptable..


And if not..WHY NOT????


It almost seemed to be that we had picked up Rix...but GT did not want to use him. So if GT did not think him good enough...WTF was Rix recruited for in the first place????




In my view the recruiting/trading process under GT's watch was not what it should have been.