Did We Win In This Year's Draft?

[damienc]

Did we win on draft night? I've retraced my thought processes ever since. It’s a question I’ve been asking myself but I’m not sure I know the answer.

Don’t get me wrong. I think our selections at 7 & 8 have merit. I defended the selections. Clark and Coffield both offer something to our list. And we got defenders, one, a tall intercept marking specialist, which we needed as well.

But did we get the potential A grade outside mid we were crying out for? I think the jury is out.

We tried to negotiate our way up the draft order but in the end didn’t succeed. So we were stuck with 7 & 8.

An argument might be put that we made a mistake in overlooking Bonar or Higgins, who both offered a bit of X factor. I don’t count Stephenson in the argument. The Pies shared our interest in him and their pick was before ours.

We played it safe. But sometimes with risk there is reward. Clark and Coffield will play senior AFL footy. They would have done so for whichever club they ended up being selected for. But I don’t think either of them has X factor.

I can’t help thinking we could have been a bit bolder, a bit more imaginative. A bit of a risk taker.

In the end sensible choices were made. But sometimes a little madness can go a long way in a game as unpredictable as Australian football.

Just a niggle rather than a regret.

[Con Gorozidis]

Ask us in two years.

[Sainter_Dad]

We won the Hunter Games

[Con Gorozidis]

We won the Hunter Games

All the talk of X factors in the last week has me wondering if we are running a footy club or a strip club

[bergsone]

Agree with all that,thing is we have doubts on freeman,paddy etc,these 2 look likely to play a lot of footy.Just dont think club willing to take a chance with a x factor,who may not have any factor
Must admit I really liked Bonar but

Time will tell

[cwrcyn]

prior to being drafted...X Factor.....think Motlop, Dustin Martin, Hoskin-Elliott, Harley Bennell, Gary Rohan, Cyril Rioli


No X factor......Andrew Gaff, Brendan Goddard, Patrick Dangerfield, Travis Boak.



X factor isn't everything when considering a draftee.

[skeptic]

An observation is that a lot of ppl over here last few months have insisted that the club should be able to turn nothing into something.

With the trade period, the reality is that the type of player we needed, was not traded. None of them... not Kelly or Fyfe or Martin left.
Whilst some ppl will, this ultimately means we couldn’t get it done, I say you can only get what’s on offer.

To me, the frustration of this forum, is that so many would seemingly have been content for us to get reckless and pay overs for a guy like Motlop that really wasn’t what we were after... don’t get it.
Draft pick 16 was way overs for an Andrew Lovett... a type of player that we needed with a crap attitude and bad work ethic... did t exactly work out well.

And in the draft... ppl seem so desperate for that X-Factor that again they want to pay overs for undemonstrated potential. I’ve watched the footage on Bonar and the reality is he doesn’t look that good. He’s clumsy, not overly skilled, decision making seems subpar... for a big guy he gets brushed off easily...
If he wasn’t so big... I don’t know that this guy even goes in the top 30.

But ppl are so intent to take him because of “what he could become”. It’s almost like X-Factor is a new term “wishing and hoping whilst too lazy to do research”.

I don’t get the fuss about someone that has not demonstrated half as much as about 20 other ppl.

Higgins is a different matter because in this case I get the hype... but I’m happy for the recruiters to do the work and determine who they rate more. Certainly with Coffield and Clarke, you can see the attributes they have that made them so desirable.

[parkeysainter]

An observation is that a lot of ppl over here last few months have insisted that the club should be able to turn nothing into something.

With the trade period, the reality is that the type of player we needed, was not traded. None of them... not Kelly or Fyfe or Martin left.
Whilst some ppl will, this ultimately means we couldn’t get it done, I say you can only get what’s on offer.

To me, the frustration of this forum, is that so many would seemingly have been content for us to get reckless and pay overs for a guy like Motlop that really wasn’t what we were after... don’t get it.
Draft pick 16 was way overs for an Andrew Lovett... a type of player that we needed with a crap attitude and bad work ethic... did t exactly work out well.

And in the draft... ppl seem so desperate for that X-Factor that again they want to pay overs for undemonstrated potential. I’ve watched the footage on Bonar and the reality is he doesn’t look that good. He’s clumsy, not overly skilled, decision making seems subpar... for a big guy he gets brushed off easily...
If he wasn’t so big... I don’t know that this guy even goes in the top 30.

But ppl are so intent to take him because of “what he could become”. It’s almost like X-Factor is a new term “wishing and hoping whilst too lazy to do research”.

I don’t get the fuss about someone that has not demonstrated half as much as about 20 other ppl.

Higgins is a different matter because in this case I get the hype... but I’m happy for the recruiters to do the work and determine who they rate more. Certainly with Coffield and Clarke, you can see the attributes they have that made them so desirable.

X-Factor is BS IMO. There are just players that are simply A grade material and a cut above the norm. That is X-Factor in itself. I understand what people are trying to convey but these supposed x-factor players are flakey blokes like Motlop that are on or off too much usually.

[Sainter_Dad]

An observation is that a lot of ppl over here last few months have insisted that the club should be able to turn nothing into something.

With the trade period, the reality is that the type of player we needed, was not traded. None of them... not Kelly or Fyfe or Martin left.
Whilst some ppl will, this ultimately means we couldn’t get it done, I say you can only get what’s on offer.

To me, the frustration of this forum, is that so many would seemingly have been content for us to get reckless and pay overs for a guy like Motlop that really wasn’t what we were after... don’t get it.
Draft pick 16 was way overs for an Andrew Lovett... a type of player that we needed with a crap attitude and bad work ethic... did t exactly work out well.

And in the draft... ppl seem so desperate for that X-Factor that again they want to pay overs for undemonstrated potential. I’ve watched the footage on Bonar and the reality is he doesn’t look that good. He’s clumsy, not overly skilled, decision making seems subpar... for a big guy he gets brushed off easily...
If he wasn’t so big... I don’t know that this guy even goes in the top 30.

But ppl are so intent to take him because of “what he could become”. It’s almost like X-Factor is a new term “wishing and hoping whilst too lazy to do research”.

I don’t get the fuss about someone that has not demonstrated half as much as about 20 other ppl.

Higgins is a different matter because in this case I get the hype... but I’m happy for the recruiters to do the work and determine who they rate more. Certainly with Coffield and Clarke, you can see the attributes they have that made them so desirable.

X-Factor is BS IMO. There are just players that are simply A grade material and a cut above the norm. That is X-Factor in itself. I understand what people are trying to convey but these supposed x-factor players are flakey blokes like Motlop that are on or off too much usually.

Totally agree....

If you call X-Factor 100% but you get it only 25% of the time and 75% performance the other 75% of the time - you end up with 81.25% total performance - and if you were getting that it would not be X-factor but superstar. More likely is 100% x 25% and 50% x 75% - or 62.5% = barely a pass mark - I would prefer 75% of the flamboyance 100% of the time - you know what you are getting and your team mates can rely on it.

In my mind this makes perfect sense - but I work with numbers all day - and reduce most stuff to mathematics.

[meher baba]

Our club picked the two guys who they thought were the best available at 7 and 8. The general consensus around the traps is that they got this just about right. Some would suggest that Bonar or Darcy Fogarty might have more upside than our two guys, but they also have significantly more downside (Bonar because of his injury record and Fogarty both injury and the inherent risk of taking any interstate player).

Some would suggest that we might have taken Constable ahead of Clavarino and hoped that the latter might still have been available at 46. But we decided not to take this risk and fair enough.

As for Ben Paton: if who we take with pick 46 is going to play a critical part of assessing how we went in a draft, then I will give it all away.

As to how any of the four guys will go: the evidence suggests that 50 per cent of top 10 picks will make it in the long run, and the rate slips significantly away below about pick 20. So, if one of the four (it doesn't really matter which one) turns out to be an A grade player and one other a GOP who plays 100+ games for the club, it will have been a great draft for us.

[skeptic]

An observation is that a lot of ppl over here last few months have insisted that the club should be able to turn nothing into something.

With the trade period, the reality is that the type of player we needed, was not traded. None of them... not Kelly or Fyfe or Martin left.
Whilst some ppl will, this ultimately means we couldn’t get it done, I say you can only get what’s on offer.

To me, the frustration of this forum, is that so many would seemingly have been content for us to get reckless and pay overs for a guy like Motlop that really wasn’t what we were after... don’t get it.
Draft pick 16 was way overs for an Andrew Lovett... a type of player that we needed with a crap attitude and bad work ethic... did t exactly work out well.

And in the draft... ppl seem so desperate for that X-Factor that again they want to pay overs for undemonstrated potential. I’ve watched the footage on Bonar and the reality is he doesn’t look that good. He’s clumsy, not overly skilled, decision making seems subpar... for a big guy he gets brushed off easily...
If he wasn’t so big... I don’t know that this guy even goes in the top 30.

But ppl are so intent to take him because of “what he could become”. It’s almost like X-Factor is a new term “wishing and hoping whilst too lazy to do research”.

I don’t get the fuss about someone that has not demonstrated half as much as about 20 other ppl.

Higgins is a different matter because in this case I get the hype... but I’m happy for the recruiters to do the work and determine who they rate more. Certainly with Coffield and Clarke, you can see the attributes they have that made them so desirable.

X-Factor is BS IMO. There are just players that are simply A grade material and a cut above the norm. That is X-Factor in itself. I understand what people are trying to convey but these supposed x-factor players are flakey blokes like Motlop that are on or off too much usually.

Totally agree....

If you call X-Factor 100% but you get it only 25% of the time and 75% performance the other 75% of the time - you end up with 81.25% total performance - and if you were getting that it would not be X-factor but superstar. More likely is 100% x 25% and 50% x 75% - or 62.5% = barely a pass mark - I would prefer 75% of the flamboyance 100% of the time - you know what you are getting and your team mates can rely on it.

In my mind this makes perfect sense - but I work with numbers all day - and reduce most stuff to mathematics.

Sainterdad, this post makes no sense to me whatsoever and I love it because it gives us an insight into how you think and different ways ppl convey and interpret information.

[saynta]

Elshaug thinks we did.

"After adding some class and speed around the ball, as well as one of the best key defenders in the draft pool, St Kilda List and Recruiting Manager Tony Elshaug was thrilled with how the draft panned out for the Saints."

[saynta]

Couple of bushrangers, two stingers and a knight.

Not a bad haul , all in all.

[Sainter_Dad]

An observation is that a lot of ppl over here last few months have insisted that the club should be able to turn nothing into something.

With the trade period, the reality is that the type of player we needed, was not traded. None of them... not Kelly or Fyfe or Martin left.
Whilst some ppl will, this ultimately means we couldn’t get it done, I say you can only get what’s on offer.

To me, the frustration of this forum, is that so many would seemingly have been content for us to get reckless and pay overs for a guy like Motlop that really wasn’t what we were after... don’t get it.
Draft pick 16 was way overs for an Andrew Lovett... a type of player that we needed with a crap attitude and bad work ethic... did t exactly work out well.

And in the draft... ppl seem so desperate for that X-Factor that again they want to pay overs for undemonstrated potential. I’ve watched the footage on Bonar and the reality is he doesn’t look that good. He’s clumsy, not overly skilled, decision making seems subpar... for a big guy he gets brushed off easily...
If he wasn’t so big... I don’t know that this guy even goes in the top 30.

But ppl are so intent to take him because of “what he could become”. It’s almost like X-Factor is a new term “wishing and hoping whilst too lazy to do research”.

I don’t get the fuss about someone that has not demonstrated half as much as about 20 other ppl.

Higgins is a different matter because in this case I get the hype... but I’m happy for the recruiters to do the work and determine who they rate more. Certainly with Coffield and Clarke, you can see the attributes they have that made them so desirable.

X-Factor is BS IMO. There are just players that are simply A grade material and a cut above the norm. That is X-Factor in itself. I understand what people are trying to convey but these supposed x-factor players are flakey blokes like Motlop that are on or off too much usually.

Totally agree....

If you call X-Factor 100% but you get it only 25% of the time and 75% performance the other 75% of the time - you end up with 81.25% total performance - and if you were getting that it would not be X-factor but superstar. More likely is 100% x 25% and 50% x 75% - or 62.5% = barely a pass mark - I would prefer 75% of the flamboyance 100% of the time - you know what you are getting and your team mates can rely on it.

In my mind this makes perfect sense - but I work with numbers all day - and reduce most stuff to mathematics.

Sainterdad, this post makes no sense to me whatsoever and I love it because it gives us an insight into how you think and different ways ppl convey and interpret information.

LOL @ Skeptic

Think of my example as a car that can drive at 100kph for 15 minutes, but overheats and then needs to run at 50kph for 45 minutes to cool down - they get 62.5 km each hour

alternatively

my beater can only do 75kph - but it can do it every minute of every hour.

Does 75 kms in the same time
and
everyone knows exactly where I will be at any time along the journey.

[Con Gorozidis]

Agree with all that,thing is we have doubts on freeman,paddy etc,these 2 look likely to play a lot of footy.Just dont think club willing to take a chance with a x factor,who may not have any factor
Must admit I really liked Bonar but

Time will tell

Bonars.
X factors.

Many on here ARE very keen on running a strip club...

No wonder we recruited Matty Lappin...... Maybe we could get him back as an Asst Coach?

[Vazelos]

It was a very solid performance in the Draft by Trout & the boys.
I believe, correct me if i am wrong, but all 4 were U 18 All Australians this year.
These boys will play plenty of football at St Kilda, injuries permitting we could see some of them play 200 games +.

[David-Lee]

Imo no one knows. We think we guess we hope.
I do believe at least one of the 4 based on normal odds will come good and hopefully all of them...
I do think we missed it in the rookie draft by not selecting Tom Lamb. He has a elite enderance and outside speed. He appears to have a few issues at his former club but surely he was miles ahead of a totally unproven rookie nowhere near ready to play afl.

[Zed]

We did X factor last year - ie Long.
And went safe with Battle

If you had to pick who is going to play more games based on exposed form, it’s hard to split them.