Names on a page are NOT the same as a footy team.

[mjp]

I read some comments that Gallagher (Saints) is "clearly" the best list manager in the AFL based on what he has done in the last 2x off-seasons.

But - what has he done exactly?

Comments seem to be based around the foreign legion based recruiting spree they went on last year (Ryder, Jones, Hill, Howard, Butler) and what happened this year 'so far' with Crouch and Adelaide not matching etc and process being part of the grand plan (bringing players in without giving anything up).

But games aren't played on paper and the more I read about things this off-season the more I am concerned that we are all losing our collective minds over stuff that doesn't actually matter.

First off - and back to the Saints - the fact that a player like Butler went from the reserves at Richmond in 2019 to have a pretty solid year (over and above expectations) in 2020 actually means nothing with regards the 2021 season. And if you think it does you are crazy - I would suggest looking at his career - he isn't young - that he is more likely to return to the fringes of the side than perform like he did in the first half of the 2020 season ever again.

Second, what is the opportunity cost of a player like Crouch? Has getting him in cost the Saints Treloar? Has getting him in changed their draft strategy and compromised their ability to get a talented young mid? Is having Crouch on a 5-year deal an asset for the long term or an asset for 2021? I don't think any of us really know the answers to these questions but it seems we are quick to judge success vs failure without the ball being bounced.

Bringing it back to us, I get the angst around Dunks 100% because I feel it too. But whether the outcome is a 'win' or a 'loss' wont be determined by whether he stays or goes or what we get or don't get. It will be determined on the field over the next 7-8 years (or 10-12 potentially if we end up with a draft pick with whom someone is selected who can actually play!).

What am I saying with all of this? I don't know really - just hope for the best and expect the worst - or the opposite even...but just keep in mind that the ultimate outcomes are played out ON the field, not between recruiters on a ZOOM call.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

Re: Names on a page are NOT the same as a footy team.

2020 certainly looked great for the saints’ recruiting. But I agree 2021 and beyond will be the ultimate measure. We were looking alright after Gowers’ and Lloyd’s first seasons with us. Now look what’s happened. The saints also had a new coach and fresh gameplan that the competition had to adjust to. No one knew their "style". I think 2021 will be a big test for them as they’ll have expectations to meet.

But typically players fall back to their "level" like Gowers and Lloyd did for us. I can’t think of too many who changed clubs and suddenly excelled. Butler and Ryder weren’t setting the world on fire previously. Howard was ok and Zak Jones is who he is. Same goes for Brad Hill who is cream on the top.

I don’t think they’ve made great long term choices, especially with Crouch now coming in. But at what point did they need to stop their failed rebuild and try something different? They might be looking to just try win one flag sooner rather than build a list of great young talent that may not eventuate in 5-6 years or be poached by the bigger clubs.

[Bulldog Joe]

Re: Names on a page are NOT the same as a footy team.

The OP makes me think of the Judd deal and who really got the most out of it.

If it had just been Judd for Kennedy alone West Coast is probably in front as they ended up winning a flag.

For us the whole Griffen/Boyd saga was demoralising at the time, but clearly we won with the flag.

Dunkley may just deliver us a better list and even better coaching because of his action now.

[Bornadog]

Re: Names on a page are NOT the same as a footy team.

I think the Saints would think Treloar is a better bet than Crouch but they most likely had already committed to Crouch and it was too late. Time will tell.

On the other Saints recruits, sure they have made the team a whole let better, but did the strategy work overall? Butler kicked 29 goals in a 17/18 game season, which seems ok, but he needs to go on with it. We brought in Lloyd who was also condemned to the reserves at Richmond and he ended up with 38 goals but has had difficulty capturing that form in 2020. As the OP says, it is the long term that determines whether a strategy works, unless you win a premiership within a year or so and then you can say it was a great success.

[Danjul]

Re: Names on a page are NOT the same as a footy team.

2020 certainly looked great for the saints’ recruiting. But I agree 2021 and beyond will be the ultimate measure. We were looking alright after Gowers’ and Lloyd’s first seasons with us. Now look what’s happened. The saints also had a new coach and fresh gameplan that the competition had to adjust to. No one knew their "style". I think 2021 will be a big test for them as they’ll have expectations to meet.

But typically players fall back to their "level" like Gowers and Lloyd did for us. I can’t think of too many who changed clubs and suddenly excelled. Butler and Ryder weren’t setting the world on fire previously. Howard was ok and Zak Jones is who he is. Same goes for Brad Hill who is cream on the top.

To be fair the game plan changed without considering their skills.

In 2019 Lloyd was a marking forward, averaging 6 a game (similar to Crozier and Naughton) leading to set shots at goal. With the long-bomb and crash-the-pack entries this year he didn’t have a hope (unfortunately).

He wasn’t the only one to suffer from the change. Look at how many marks Bruce and Wallis took in the final (1 each) and Naughton had only 1 possession to 3/4 time.

Our new game plan was one our players (forwards) couldn’t adjust to.

[1eyedog]

Re: Names on a page are NOT the same as a footy team.

Agree re. the OP just take a look at GWS. A team full of first rounders who have underachieved.

[Go_Dogs]

Re: Names on a page are NOT the same as a footy team.

Saints doing it to such a scale never worked before.

Mjp, unsure if it was something you posted years ago - that consistency and familiarity within the best 22 is so important for success. Players need to know each other - how they respond/react, where to run, which side they’ll turn to and where they’ll kick the ball etc - and that comes from playing together. Also makes executing a game plan easier.

Credit to the Saints for doing so well with such a new group last year. Not sure how sustainable it is and whether they’re a one hit wonder or will be competing in the pointer end in 2021.

[GVGjr]

Re: Names on a page are NOT the same as a footy team.

It's really up to the coach to inspire a team and assembling big name players is just part of the challenge of a footy club

[Bornadog]

Re: Names on a page are NOT the same as a footy team.

familiarity within the best 22 is so important for success. Players need to know each other - how they respond/react, where to run, which side they’ll turn to and where they’ll kick the ball etc - and that comes from playing together. Also makes executing a game plan easier.

I felt with Bruce in our forward line it was a case of not coming to grips with some of this. We were a little disorganised, although this improved in the second half - we kicked more goals than most teams.
Similarly the backline started badly in the first three or so rounds, but soon the General took over and direction was improved. It is of course harder to get a coordinated forward line compared to a backline.