stuie

I genuinely do. We may argue about it cos we don't see things the same, and I don't think it's necessary on a forum to start every post with "IMO" so I figured you would get that my posts are merely my opinion. You make some very good points, and a lot I agree with, big hopes for Hunt and Wagner especially, but I do worry about that "gulf" as I feel they need experience around them on game day and senior bodies to carry the load so we don't run them into the ground. For me, it's just about the balance and security. It's great if the kids are earning games and getting opportunity, but the lack of senior depth is a major concern for me this year. It may be bolstered next year with a fit Lumumba, Melksham, maybe some form improvements from others, but none of those factors carry much of a guarantee. I feel we need to improve our mature backline depth this offseason or I worry we won't be able to pace out the development of the kids properly.

Right, so that's a lot of posts you've made for someone who doesn't have an opinion then....

Just seeing you obviously didn't read it the first time and seeing you clearly struggle with context. Overall - We have improved. Backline - Has gone backwards. Do you disagree?

Where have I said we have gone backwards? Don't change the context of the comments Billy. Overall we have improved, but as I have said, the backline and it's lack of mature players, for whatever reason, is a worry as Roos has said MANY times that development should be a slow steady progress with no pressure on the younger players to carry the team. At the moment, we have a 26 year old and a 23 year old leading a backline full of kids. We've seen in the recent past what relying on the kids does to their development.

I think trade time might challenge that notion tbh. As I've stated, I like Hunt, Wagner and OMac, but my concern is for their proper development by having senior players who can lead them and teach them in that part of the ground.

Ok, just to clarify again, I'm talking specifically about our backline, do you think it's improved this year? It's a big need for us in the offseason. Our backline has gone from our biggest strength to our biggest weakness, so no, my argument is not flawed.

How will it come? Trading? Chucking all the kids in and playing them every week is not good development IMO. It's a never ending cycle if you just play kids who don't develop properly and then become the leaders to the next round of kids who won't develop properly because their leaders didn't.... Roos has talked a lot about this kind of scenario and it's what culture is all about.

Not in the backline we're not, and that is my worry at the moment. Jetta is a legend, but at 26 he is 3 years older than our next oldest regular defender Tom McDonald who is regarded as the backline leader.

They are the future, but they can't learn from each other. They need quality mature players to play alongside them. Development doesn't just automatically happen by playing games.

Huh? They're good enough but they can't get a game?

I'm saying the lack of them, not the quality of the ones we already have.

It also shows the hole in our list and the worry about development, particularly in the backline, without senior players to help bring them through. Works both ways.

Fair enough, just using them as a part of an argument, they're clearly not meaningless and although stats based assessments aren't the be all and end all I consider them to have more merit than a mere opinion.

Armitage and Stevens are absolute guns, no debate about them, I was arguing about Jones/Vince vs Riewoldt/Montagna. As I said earlier, I don't believe their older players are THAT far ahead, but they are ahead as a group, my disagreement is with people saying they're "way ahead". As far as the AFL player rankings go, the top 4 St Kilda players who have played 150 games or more have a median of 167, our top 4 have a median of 151. I think we're letting senior players who underperformed against the Saints off the hook if we're saying their senior players are a lot better than ours, ours just failed against them on the weekend.

Over their careers sure, but that's not how I'd rate them this year, and neither do the official AFL rankings.

How is that out of context? It's the complete sentence and it's not exactly an ambiguous one.

That seems pretty clear to me. You're more than entitled to that opinion, but I disagree as do the AFL player ratings.

So you're saying that right now, not over their careers but right now, you'd rate Montagna and Riewoldt higher than Jones and Vince? Give me a spell. The AFL player ratings don't agree with that and neither do I.

Yeah look totally agree about the lists going forward, but I really don't think their senior players are THAT much ahead of ours in performance, however... in leadership? Well, that was my roundabout point, and the thing I was most disappointed with on Saturday. Heck, even Cotchin dragged his team in after the game to give them a talking to, we just trudged off Etihad with our eyes down once again.

As an aside, Melbourne played 10 players with less than 50 games experience..... So did St Kilda. Our average age was 24, there's 25. Granted I understand your point is our inconsistency, but I don't like to make experience our excuse when up against a team just as inexperienced.

Yeah, there's an article on the Sun now. Wasn't doubting the info, just wanted to read it.

Source? Link?

Yep, I agree with that, but what I'm saying is IF Hogan asks for a trade this year (worst case scenario) then it certainly changes the context of that decision.

It's more our eagerness to trade away that future first round pick that makes me wonder I guess. I don't buy in to the rumours about Hogan, BUT if the worst case scenario did happen then that trading for Weed would point to us knowing about it as early as last year.

Puts an interesting spin on us trading away a future round 1 pick last year (especially seeing we took Weed)...