4 hours ago, Lord Travis said:

The hype for them is real. They missed Finals in 2016 only by %. They came within a few points of beating numerous top 4 teams and were unlucky not to have won some of those games due to poor umpiring. They have good young talent, aren't too reliant on older players anymore, and have a really strong forward line in the making. I think they'll be top 8 this year, possibly around 6th. I'm guessing/hoping we can squeeze into the bottom of the 8 this year and make the leap to top 4 next year.

Until we can beat them, and consistently beat other teams below us (eg. Essendon, Carlton this year) then they deserve more expectation and hype than us. I think we'll surpass them in a year or two and have a better shot at a flag, but they're a better team than us based on form at the moment.

They missed the top 8 on % cause they got smashed in a heaps of games. 70, 40, 88, 103, 47, 57 and 33 point looses is not results of a top 4 team and finished with a % of 95. 3 out 4 top 4 teams last year had a % of over 140 with the other being Haw. Need to improve a lot to make top 4 let alone top 8 IMO. 

1 hour ago, Thrice said:

DeeSpencer was referring to the 8 players in the midfield (and the 7 forward and 7 in defence).

thanks Thrice, that explains it

As i read it much of anyone's anticipation about St Kilda comes from the idea ( rightly or wrongly ) about trajectories of their younger players.

We know only too well how misplaced and over valued this can be. 

2 hours ago, beelzebub said:

This is an oft mooted rationale.

Personally i don't see what stagnating your ability to battle on game day accomplishes other than losing .

Think back (not too far) to our last H&A game.  Do you think starting Brayshaw on Selwood was about winning the game, or more a learning opportunity?  Especially given Viney's performance when he last tagged Selwood.

Further to that, do you think Viney tagging Dangerfield was about winning the game, or more a learning opportunity?  Especially given Vince's performance when he last tagged Dangerfield.

52 minutes ago, billy2803 said:

Think back (not too far) to our last H&A game.  Do you think starting Brayshaw on Selwood was about winning the game, or more a learning opportunity?  Especially given Viney's performance when he last tagged Selwood.

Further to that, do you think Viney tagging Dangerfield was about winning the game, or more a learning opportunity?  Especially given Vince's performance when he last tagged Dangerfield.

that hardly explains all of the occasions Billy. We were slow to adjust on many a day..There's learning...and theres losing also.  You dont need to stick on someone ALL day to learn something.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/st-kilda-v-melbourne-who-is-closer-to-a-premiership-the-ultimate-verdict/news-story/fa1caa2867ad0276014d30bcf8b938d3 

On 10/2/2017 at 1:35 PM, Grimes Times said:

They missed the top 8 on % cause they got smashed in a heaps of games. 70, 40, 88, 103, 47, 57 and 33 point looses is not results of a top 4 team and finished with a % of 95. 3 out 4 top 4 teams last year had a % of over 140 with the other being Haw. Need to improve a lot to make top 4 let alone top 8 IMO. 

As this thread has raised its head again, thought I'd share this will you, GT.

Geelong, season 2006, finished 10th with 10 wins.  % of 99.

Losses greater than 30 points;

Rd 3 by 52, Rd 8 by 102, Rd 13 by 92, Rd 17 by 30, Rd 22 by 61.  3 of their biggest losses came against sides below them on the ladder.

No need to say what happened to them in 2007.

Edited March 8, 20178 yr by billy2803
Edit - had the wrong year

1 hour ago, Grimes Times said:

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/st-kilda-v-melbourne-who-is-closer-to-a-premiership-the-ultimate-verdict/news-story/fa1caa2867ad0276014d30bcf8b938d3 

Thanks for posting GT. Interesting read and comparisons.

I still remember Terry Wallace around 3 years ago on SEN comparing Melbourne and Doggies list. He said that we had better team depth and that we'd win a flag before them.....

I actually like the way both the Saints and the Dees have gone about turning around the fortunes of their respective clubs, and lists.

Not confident going into Round 1, but I would nominate the Saints and Dees to be the two clubs outside of the eight would most likely push up into the eight in 2017.

I hate using the word, but I think we have a greater ceiling and potential to push for the flag, but potential means nothing without the hard work and team cohesiveness. Again I would not be suprised if the Dees got a top 4 stop if they have a great year, but I can't see the Saints pushing higher than 5th.... 

9 minutes ago, Ouch! said:

I actually like the way both the Saints and the Dees have gone about turning around the fortunes of their respective clubs, and lists.

Not confident going into Round 1, but I would nominate the Saints and Dees to be the two clubs outside of the eight would most likely push up into the eight in 2017.

I hate using the word, but I think we have a greater ceiling and potential to push for the flag, but potential means nothing without the hard work and team cohesiveness. Again I would not be suprised if the Dees got a top 4 stop if they have a great year, but I can't see the Saints pushing higher than 5th.... 

Moment by Moment

Contest by Contest...

Didn't the Saints have a good draw and a good run with injuries last year?

Swings and roundabouts. I reckon they aren't as good as their finish last year suggests....

2 hours ago, Grimes Times said:

http://www.foxsports.com.au/afl/st-kilda-v-melbourne-who-is-closer-to-a-premiership-the-ultimate-verdict/news-story/fa1caa2867ad0276014d30bcf8b938d3 

Actually not a bad read. Although I'm glad I didn't have a mouthful of coffee when reading the Saints had more "star power" with David Armytage listed as an example.

 

 

 "It must be noted that Melbourne has been rebuilding since 2007 and had a top-five pick in seven consecutive drafts. Meanwhile, St Kilda has been replenishing its list with young talent for five years."

 

Ah yes... I'm glad they included this important slice of information when discussing who is closer to a flag in 2017.

 

It's a stupid argument though. Our list is clearly better and we are clearly, a lot closer to a flag than they are.

I just wish we'd stop letting them bend us over. Every. Single. Time.

Edited March 8, 20178 yr by Juicebox

On 2/9/2017 at 9:44 PM, Meggs said:

Punters reckon there are 7 teams gonna make it and there is only one spot from last year's group up for grabs (the Kanga's).

We are 1 of about 5 sides considered likely.   Rohan Connolly reckons he can make a case for all teams bar Brisbane to make the 8

A big footy punter 'told' me at the tennis that spot 8 is between Saints and Pies (which surprised me)...thought Dees will be 11-13.

Our hopes are pinned on the realisation of potential.  Until we consistently win the games where we are favourites, the footy world will not rate us.

https://www.responsiblegambling.vic.gov.au/awareness-and-prevention/love-the-game

Until we beat them, they're the better side.  They do have an impressive list with minimal "superstars'". A lot will have to go right for us to knock them off especially at Shitihad.

Not sure how good they are. But I guarantee they have at least 5 players who I've never heard of who will rip us apart.

6 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Didn't the Saints have a good draw and a good run with injuries last year?

Swings and roundabouts. I reckon they aren't as good as their finish last year suggests....

Nor do I

We'll own them soon

18 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Didn't the Saints have a good draw and a good run with injuries last year?.

We had the best run with injuries last year that I can ever remember.

The Saints are a good side, have added Carlisle who fills a key need and have positioned themselves very well to add a top mid (Fyfe, Martin, Rockliff?) next year which will cap them off nicely.  They're a serious contender in the near future.

On 10/02/2017 at 11:27 AM, billy2803 said:

When I participate in the annual footy tipping competitions, I will always pick with head and not heart.  

When I do my tips for Round 1 2017, I will be picking St Kilda, and will do so with a great deal of confidence.  They just continue to matchup better against us.  Does this make them a better side than us?  I don't know.

 

I won't be overly fussed if they do us in round 1. Of course not ideal, but I'll be more interested in how the return fixture pans out in round 22

21 hours ago, jnrmac said:

Didn't the Saints have a good draw and a good run with injuries last year?

Swings and roundabouts. I reckon they aren't as good as their finish last year suggests....

We also had a good draw and great run with injuries last year

On 2/10/2017 at 8:29 AM, Lord Travis said:

The hype for them is real. They missed Finals in 2016 only by %. They came within a few points of beating numerous top 4 teams and were unlucky not to have won some of those games due to poor umpiring. They have good young talent, aren't too reliant on older players anymore, and have a really strong forward line in the making. I think they'll be top 8 this year, possibly around 6th. I'm guessing/hoping we can squeeze into the bottom of the 8 this year and make the leap to top 4 next year.

Until we can beat them, and consistently beat other teams below us (eg. Essendon, Carlton this year) then they deserve more expectation and hype than us. I think we'll surpass them in a year or two and have a better shot at a flag, but they're a better team than us based on form at the moment.

They also had a very easy draw last year, which we did not. We also beat GWS and the Hawks, came within a kick of the Eagles and North (don't get me started on the umps in both those games), and didn't disgrace ourselves against Adelaide, although we did against Sydney and the Cats. In terms of who we beat and who we got close to I don't think you can split the Saints and us.

Where the difference is in they won the games they should have, we didn't. If you give us wins over Carlton and Essendon  then chances are we play finals last year, if we didn't it would only have been percentage. We would also have finished equal to the saints but from a harder draw.

I think the saints will beat us at Etihad, just because it is such a different ground. I think we will win the return match at the G. 

27 minutes ago, Fifty-5 said:

The Saints are a good side, have added Carlisle who fills a key need and have positioned themselves very well to add a top mid (Fyfe, Martin, Rockliff?) next year which will cap them off nicely.  They're a serious contender in the near future.

I hope they do their supporters deserve it. Obviously besides us, I'd love to see the saints claim a flag sometime soon. The tigers too though obviously that wont be a popular opinion