So who are our elite players...

[barneyboyz]

The two posts above are on the money, if all goes well. Reckon we'll have a couple of players with massive seasons, and that could even be new ones

[DJ Higgins]

Elite for me is usually being one of the top 2 players in that position. Unfortunately we don't.yet. but like many have mentioned before there is hope in some young players but we really need a few to come on early this season if we are to play finals. If not pump games into up and comers for next year and get them used to our game plan. Whatever that is

[spert]

Elite to me is a player like Martin who dragged Richmond to a premiership leading by example and without him they wouldn't have won it. Other elites I can think of in recent times are Hodge, Selwood, Ablett jr who just lift to a new level when the game is there to be won, and especially in big games and finals where it all counts.

I can't see anyone on our list who is capable of that- our only vague example would be Steven when he is on song, but it's not on a regular basis. We need a few players to take a step this season and become real lead-by-example types.

[Joffa Burns]

Fair to say elite in minimum AA multiple times.

Elite: 0
Potential Elite: Billings
B+ to A grade: Steven, Billings, Carslile, Robbo, Ross

We have lots of B grade footballers and foot soldiers.
We lack the pure class elite and I guess that's why we were so interested in Kelly.
of the current crop I think only Billings could become elite, while Ross would cement himself as A grade.

[saintsRrising]

Elite to me is a player like Martin who dragged Richmond to a premiership leading by example and without him they wouldn't have won it. Other elites I can think of in recent times are Hodge, Selwood, Ablett jr who just lift to a new level when the game is there to be won, and especially in big games and finals where it all counts.
.

Well elite is a an imprecise term, and by your definition (that is not wrong) elites are a very small group.

If general AFL usage I think elite is not so tight as your definition.

I would have Martin, Dangerfield, Buddy etc as Superstars of the game. Then I would have elites as a bigger group.

All clubs today should have several elite players. Most will not have a superstar. Some players will just have an elite year, or even a superstar year. True champions of the game are those players who can roll out such years on a regular basis.


If Ablett Jr can fight off father time then the Cats may well have three superstars in the one team this year. That he can play third fiddle to Danger and Selwood will assist him in this. But if his hammys keep pinging, then maybe not.


While Steven did not have a good 2017 I think that he should still be an elite player for us in 2018. In the Blues game we saw that he is still capable of turning games our way, and that is something we lack in most of our players.


While there is a healthy dose of luck in whether a team has a superstar or not on it, if a team is lacking in elite players then that really means that one is also lacking in a good recruiting/drafting team. While not all picks/trades will work, a good recruiting team over time will be notching up a few successes. An elite here, an elite there....

St Kilda Elites by year gained:

2007: Jack Steven
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2013: Jack Billings (maybe) ?


= YIKES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Hopefully some of Gresham, Carlisle, Sinclair, Clark and Coffield will soon dramatically improve that table...

[Drake Huggins]

Elite to me is a player like Martin who dragged Richmond to a premiership leading by example and without him they wouldn't have won it. Other elites I can think of in recent times are Hodge, Selwood, Ablett jr who just lift to a new level when the game is there to be won, and especially in big games and finals where it all counts.
.

Well elite is a an imprecise term, and by your definition (that is not wrong) elites are a very small group.

If general AFL usage I think elite is not so tight as your definition.

I would have Martin, Dangerfield, Buddy etc as Superstars of the game. Then I would have elites as a bigger group.

All clubs today should have several elite players. Most will not have a superstar. Some players will just have an elite year, or even a superstar year. True champions of the game are those players who can roll out such years on a regular basis.


If Ablett Jr can fight off father time then the Cats may well have three superstars in the one team this year. That he can play third fiddle to Danger and Selwood will assist him in this. But if his hammys keep pinging, then maybe not.


While Steven did not have a good 2017 I think that he should still be an elite player for us in 2018. In the Blues game we saw that he is still capable of turning games our way, and that is something we lack in most of our players.


While there is a healthy dose of luck in whether a team has a superstar or not on it, if a team is lacking in elite players then that really means that one is also lacking in a good recruiting/drafting team. While not all picks/trades will work, a good recruiting team over time will be notching up a few successes. An elite here, an elite there....

St Kilda Elites by year gained:

2007: Jack Steven
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2013: Jack Billings (maybe) ?


= YIKES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Hopefully some of Gresham, Carlisle, Sinclair, Clark and Coffield will soon dramatically improve that table...

Yikes indeed. 13 first round picks on our list. No lack of opportunity to get quality. It's in the execution that we are lacking. Melbourne, the dopers, Richmond, the WB and probably even Carlscum have gone past us in the past five years, list -wise. Brisbane looks promising as well. Our list is well down the order the way it looks. Optimistically, we are in the 7-12 range. There is potential there, but our track record of development isn't great. Other clubs like the swines, crows, cats and dorks seem to do it so much better. I'm still clinging to the hope we can do a WBs or tiggers and come from nowhere and exceed all expectations.

[takeaway]

I think needing elite players is being overhyped.

Saints have always had stars (elites?) till now apparently. Roo, Hayes, Harvey, Lockett, Winmar, Burke, Barker, etc, but no flag. In 09/10 we had a few "elites" but bottom 6 were lacking a bit - cost us. In '66 there was Baldock & Stewart, neither of whom starred in the GF, but in that team we batted right through to no.20, and won.

More important to have a strong group, good replacements, than a couple of elites. I disagree that Martin dragged the tigers to the flag. He certainly had a great year, but it was their style of play and commitment to it that won. I reckon he wasn't BOG that day either - for mine it was Houli & a couple of others before Dusty. Hawks have had sustained success, always had a few "elites", but I would argue would not have been nearly as successful without their lesser non elite players who were all pretty strong anyway.

To me the bottom 6 is just as important as the top 6.

[Drake Huggins]

True, takeaway, but stick Dusty and Buddy in our side and look out! Put them in any side and it would be instantly improved. We've got plenty of talent, it's a matter of how far it can be taken. Who knows, by the end of the year we may be talking about a couple of our own elites. Remember, three years ago, very few were interested in Dusty.

[groupie1]

I guess it doesn't really matter how to define elite. We mean players that regularly beat their opponents, I suppose. (I'd give the Tigers 5 elites, loosely defined: Cotchin, Martin, Reiwoldt, Rance, Houli.)

I think, from a positive perspective, we could have Acres, Billings, Steele, Gresh, McCartin, and Membrey joining Armitage, Steven, Carlisle, Ross, Roberton, Sinclair. That's 11 'elite' players in one side. (Others would want to add Savage, too.) That assumes a massive amount of things going right, obviously. Add a heart and soul captain and two very promising new recruits... I think things start looking up.

[spert]

I think needing elite players is being overhyped.

Saints have always had stars (elites?) till now apparently. Roo, Hayes, Harvey, Lockett, Winmar, Burke, Barker, etc, but no flag. In 09/10 we had a few "elites" but bottom 6 were lacking a bit - cost us. In '66 there was Baldock & Stewart, neither of whom starred in the GF, but in that team we batted right through to no.20, and won.

More important to have a strong group, good replacements, than a couple of elites. I disagree that Martin dragged the tigers to the flag. He certainly had a great year, but it was their style of play and commitment to it that won. I reckon he wasn't BOG that day either - for mine it was Houli & a couple of others before Dusty. Hawks have had sustained success, always had a few "elites", but I would argue would not have been nearly as successful without their lesser non elite players who were all pretty strong anyway.

To me the bottom 6 is just as important as the top 6.

I can say that having to endure replays of the Tiger flag with Tiger mates and relatives they were in unison that Martin was the man who won it for them. Cream rises to the top.