Don't sleep on the Saints

By Ryan Buckland / Expert

Football is back everyone! All is right with the world. They say you should be wary of reading much, if anything, into pre-season footy. Bah, I say.

I loved what I saw of the Saints, and I’m ready to make a fashionably bold call: St Kilda have finals on their radar – if only faintly – in 2016.

Okay, okay, I know it sounds crazy. St Kilda finished in, what, 14th spot last season, and had a percentage of 78? Here me out. I make my sporting bones as a supposedly level-headed, evidence-based writer. What follows is going to bend my standards, if only a little, because I really like what St Kilda are doing.

The middle part of the table could stretch as far as third to 14th this season, and in years like that there is scope for a lot of surprises. Want a hot take? St Kilda could be one of those surprises.

Don’t call it a Power “surge”; nor a Dog “leap”. If it comes off, we’ll have to coin a new phrase. The second coming? The super Saints? That’s a problem for another day.

That 2013 Power team was one of six teams that have managed to enter into finals calculations the year immediately after recording a percentage of 80 or less. The others?

2002 West Coast Eagles
2006 Collingwood
2010 Fremantle
2011 West Coast Eagles
2012 Adelaide
2013 Port Adelaide

Last year’s Western Bulldogs just escaped qualification, recording a percentage of 81.9 in 2014. That’s six teams out of a total of 39 that have recorded a percentage of 80 or less since the year 2000. It isn’t as rare as you may think.

Don’t tell me St Kilda are the fourth-youngest and fifth-least experienced list heading into 2016, either. Port Adelaide were the third-youngest and fourth-least experienced in their surge year, and the Dogs were similarly placed last season (15th and 17th respectively). In fact, all of the sides listed above ranked near the bottom on either or both of the age and experience ladders in the year before they surged. But this is different.

This St Kilda side is the result of four years of meticulous planning, which commenced half way through the reign of Scott Watters. I had a good look at this last year, so let’s not spend a heap of time on list management. The Saints have stacked their deck with draft picks and young discards from other clubs, cut hard at the top of their list, and are now at the point where they will be looking to add established talent to compliment the home grown stuff.

Jake Carlisle was the first of what promises to be half a dozen or so mature age acquisitions in the years ahead. The timing of a new CBA, and the additional salary cap space that this is likely to bring, likely suits the Saints just nicely. They will be in a position to sell a future, and a chance to shape the fortunes of a team overflowing with youngsters.

So I get it, they are young, and mostly unproven. But boy, did I see some great signs in the first half of Saturday’s game against North Melbourne.

This was the only game I watched from start to finish, because it was the only game of the weekend that felt like a real game. These are glorified practise matches afterall, with a secret agreement for all of the away teams to play mostly kids, it seems. Facing a Kangaroo outfit that was practically full strength, the young Saints, who were missing all but their two veteran defenders in Sam Gilbert and Sean Dempster on the mature age front, smacked their opponents around a little bit.

It may have been the exuberance of getting underway for another year, but last season that exuberance was St Kilda’s go-to strategy. Supposedly serious football people said the Saints wouldn’t win a game – a feat reserved for the absolute worst of the worst AFL teams of all time – but under coach Alan Richardson, the Saints made their experience gap up with a game plan built on intensity and pressure.

The Saints were ranked as one of the best sides in the competition on Champion Data’s pressure gauge, meaning their opponents were consistently harassed but also that they forced their style of play on the game. It did blow up on occasion, with the Saints blown out three times last year. There was shades of Hawthorn in the Saints’ ball movement, with St Kilda ranked third for field marks taken and 13th for handballs per game. The Hawks were ranked number one on everything on the per game team statistic tallies, but the two had a near-identical kick/handball ratio (1.31 kicks for every handball).

St Kilda aren’t in the same universe as the Hawks, but there are enough similarities there to suggest this is the look they’re going for. It will take time to develop Hawthorn-like skills. In the mean time, St Kilda’s speed and intensity will serve them well.

That was all on show in the first half on Saturday, but more than that, the Saints were very deliberate when attacking. There was precious little sideways or backwards movement; get the ball, and move it towards your end of the field seemed to be the mantra. The field was left open in general play, and tightened up when the set piece situation demanded it.

St Kilda’s first goal was a perfect example of this. An attacking stoppage on St Kilda’s right wing drew numbers in, but the Saints kept three forwards at or near the goal square ready to lead out once the ball was won. Josh Bruce ended up winning a free kick, but the situation that St Kilda sought to bring about was what forced the one-on-one battle.

Their second quarter was even more impressive, as the Saints completely controlled the pace of the game and built a lead over their much more fancied opponent.

They did run out of legs towards the end of the second quarter, and were somewhat obliterated from that point onwards. North Melbourne won the game by 44 points in the end, as the better skilled and more hardened ‘Roos did what they really should have done from the start. That’s a measure of how well the Saints managed to play their game.

This group may not have the class of some others – like, say, Collingwood, who have a similar age profile through the middle of the ground – but it has pace and endeavour. Richardson’s game plan looks to have evolved in line with the growth of his group, with the additional attacking element necessitating the players being given some license with decision making in a fluid structure. Based on this game – and let’s not over-react, okay? – there’s still a tendency to use the boundary rather than the corridor, but this is likely to do with St Kilda’s underdeveloped defensive unit.

It’s the sort of game plan that, if executed, can give any team a run for their money. Last year, when swarming and pressure was option A, the Saints won just one game (the Western Bulldogs) against a team that finished outside of the bottom six on the ladder. Adding this additional attacking element, with the more mature heads of David Armitage, Jack Steven (who played very little), Leigh Montagna to help shoulder the load, could see the Saints get themselves into more games, early on in the piece.

The other thing to consider in St Kilda’s draw, which is, well, it’s amenable to a surprise push towards the eight. The Saints leave Victoria just once in their final 10 games, and have been gifted the prospect of a clear 4-0 in double ups against Carlton and Essendon. An attacking St Kilda would feel pretty good about knocking off Melbourne twice, too, and have shown on the weekend that they can give North a bit of grief.

Let’s say they split the ledger with North (they play them in Round 7 – who knows what the ‘Roos will do in the first half of this season after their recent issues): that’s seven wins! In a crowded year, 12 wins might be enough to get you into the eight. St Kilda would need to go 5-9 from their remaining 14 games, which may not be likely, but is certainly plausible.

It’s the time of the year that we’re all permitted to have a hot take or two. Sam Kerridge is a lock for the Brownlow after Thursday night, Port Adelaide won’t make the eight, and neither will Sydney. Matthew Pavlich might be the key forward Fremantle are looking for, Troy Chaplin might keep Jack Riewoldt out of the Richmond team, Lance Franklin is past his best, and the new deliberate out of bounds rule is going to cause all sorts of unintended consequences. Wayne Milera is a young Daniel Wells, the Eagles have no hope of winning the flag, and the Geelong discard Dean Gore looks a lock to replace Patrick Dangerfield’s output.

These are all views I’ve seen expressed – some tounge in cheek, but some genuine – over the weekend. Want a hot take with a little bit of evidence, both recent and not so recent, attached? Don’t sleep on the Saints this season.

The Crowd Says:

2016-02-24T13:34:34+00:00

Anne Dall

Guest


As a Saints fan I enjoyed the article and (most) comments. Thanks!

2016-02-23T11:19:52+00:00

Pumping Dougie

Guest


Btw, yeah fair point on the Bulldog names I mentioned. Stringer is definitely elite IMO but the others aren't - but they are very good already and their careers are in their infancy.

2016-02-23T11:16:39+00:00

Pumping Dougie

Guest


Yeah maybe Ryan. When I met Richardson he was an assistant coach at Carlton. Not sure if that means anything ... But he's not a natural leader like say, Brendan McCartney or Mick Malthouse (which obviously panned out poorly for their respective clubs) although he may share their educator skills. I'd say hie's more in the mould of Peter Rhode. But I wont be upset if I'm wrong.

AUTHOR

2016-02-23T06:11:12+00:00

Ryan Buckland

Expert


Everything is relative PD, and I mean that as a comment on the rest of the football media. Don't give me too much credit! It's a fair view to hold on the Saints list. There's nobody that particularly stands out as having the elite-ness of a Marcus Bontempelli or Tom Liberatore (who I'd argue are two Dogs that will be locks in the Brownlow/All Australian conversation consistently in the years ahead. Everyone else you've raised are very very good, but I'd need to see more before making that kind of call). Perhaps your view on Richardson is what this club needs, though? He's basically the chaperone on an under-age Contiki right now after all...

2016-02-23T04:10:02+00:00

Macca

Guest


Not relying on it PD, just observing that it is a possibility and given the blues gave up very little for them the risk reward is in the blues favour. As for Gresham and Parish, I have said I think they will both be very good players butI (and the recruiters and most draft analysyts) have Parish ahead of Gresham.

2016-02-23T04:03:28+00:00

Don Freo

Guest


I'm with you on Melbourne, Dougie. I'm tipping them for the 8.

2016-02-23T04:01:41+00:00

mattyb

Guest


In fairness to your good self PD you may need to leave room to yet be further amazed. This year you will be seeing more and more talent emerging. Hunter,Daniel,Jong,McLean,Dale,Zaine and that is only the definates.

2016-02-23T03:38:39+00:00

Pumping Dougie

Roar Guru


I'm in Josh Elliott's camp on this one Ryan. But love your work. It's always interesting to see somebody intelligent try and argue an unpopular view. Knowing the Doggies well, I was amazed at the young talent emerging - Stringer, Bont, Libber, Wallis, Macrae, Roughead (and now Boyd). In fairness, I thought they would take longer to impact the competition, but my point is, as per Josh Elliott, I just don't see St Kilda possessing that young emerging elite talent, aside from Billings (and possibly McCartin). They performed better than I expected last year and Riewoldt is a freak. The Bulldogs will miss Bob Murphy whenever he retires, but the Saints will miss Riewoldt a lot more - a key dominant mobile forward like that who is consistently brilliant, is very rare and hard to replace. The one thing I don't agree with Josh on is that I don't think Richardson is a good coach - but I give him credit for performing above expectations last year. Having met him at a coach's function once a few years ago, I just didn't think he had the presence of a strong leader nor the strategic brains required to outsmart other AFL coaches. But he was a genuinely nice bloke who helps build a good club culture and was a patient, nurturing type of personality. Saints will finish above Brisbane and Essendon, maybe Carlton, but not much else. I tip Melbourne to be the major improver in 2016 from the lowest ranks.

2016-02-23T03:24:48+00:00

Pumping Dougie

Roar Guru


Don, you may be right, but Macca is relying on GWS discards to become guns, by virtue of the fact they were originally drafted high. This underlines his argument on Parish v Gresham.

AUTHOR

2016-02-23T03:20:10+00:00

Ryan Buckland

Expert


They would need to get lucky for sure; the draw puts them in a decent spot in that regard. But you're right, they probably won't make finals...still, they could, and wouldn't it be ridiculous and crazy if they did.

AUTHOR

2016-02-23T03:19:03+00:00

Ryan Buckland

Expert


Thanks! It would be pretty remarkable for sure. There's plenty more to come this year, so stay tuned!

2016-02-22T13:51:38+00:00

Don Freo

Guest


You'd think, after Gibbs, Murphy and Kreuzer, that a Carlton fan would know that a high draft pick does not assure quality.

2016-02-22T11:09:01+00:00

Cradle

Roar Rookie


Love it, Ryan! A bold, comment befitting the NAB challenge. As a saints supporter like Luke, I think the Saints making finals would be amazing but I'm not getting my hopes up yet (to protect my fragile St Kilda heart). Still, totally the article that will make you a genius come September if a few games go the right way! Looking forward to another year of your expertly analysis-driven consideration of Australia's greatest sport!

2016-02-22T10:40:30+00:00

TomC

Roar Guru


Ah, it's late and I'm tired. Anyway Ryan, something to bear in mind: the Saints won six games in 2015, all against teams that were younger by mean than them on the day. They're young relative to the strong teams in the comp (except the Dogs), but not really against those around them on the ladder. I think they need quite a bit of luck to even stay ahead of the top four, let alone make the finals. But then, Richardson seems to be able to get good performances out of this squad. We'll see.

2016-02-22T07:09:04+00:00

Anthony

Guest


We traded pick 5, but that became pick 6 after Mills was bid on at pick 3. We could have had Francis, not Parish.

AUTHOR

2016-02-22T06:52:29+00:00

Ryan Buckland

Expert


Fair comments, all of them. But I'm not saying they will push for finals; they may find themselves in a position to make the eight by virtue of their draw and style of play. I also think you're over-rating the impact of individuals, and under-rating the impact of a team of even contributors. Yes, there's a few older players that still shoulder the load, but that's true of every team. St Kilda have a group of young players with speed and dare and endevour, and based on the weekend's game it looks like the coach is going to let them off the chain a little this season. So just to be clear again, because I've had to say this in a few comments: I don't think St Kilda will make the eight. But I do think that we shouldn't be overly surprised if they do.

2016-02-22T06:47:30+00:00

Nick Welch

Roar Rookie


I'm not so sure I can agree with you on this Ryan. Consider where a lot of their production comes from - their older players. A lot those teams you listed had unexpected growth because a lot of their gun performances came from younger players who as a unit improved and pushed up the team with them. On the other hand, look at St Kilda's top disposal winners from last year and their ages: Armitage (28) Steven (25) Montagna (32) Newnes (about to turn 23) Roberton (24) Geary (27) Dempster (32) Not to mention that of all the players that kicked more than 20 goals, one was Nick Riewoldt. It's one thing to have a young team. It's another to actually have majority of production from a team to be young. Almost all the teams you listed had at least 2-3 players out of their top 7 disposal getters aged in the 20-22 range. It's their collective improvement that dragged them into finals contention. The Saints, plain and simple, don't have the engine room players that will drag them into finals contention this year. There's not that 3rd or 4th highest disposal getter entering into this third, fourth or fifth year that will take the step and become borderline elite because they haven't last year. They still have to replace the declining performance of Montagna, Riewoldt and Dempster, Armitage had a career year that he's unlikely to repeat, Steven is likely no to improve or regress either way. That "production" already being old is why they're not going to push for finals this year. They don't have the players in their top performers who will increase to that borderline elite level within a season.

2016-02-22T05:45:09+00:00

Macca

Guest


I agree Josh - that said the fact that the Saints unearthed Bruce from the GWS reject bin gives me greater hope for their future. You can find quality midfilders in the first and second rounds of most drafts but KPP's are a lot more rare. If the Saints stay in the draft for the next couple of years they can boost the quality of their midfield safe in the knowledge the have a genuine KPF in Bruce and the hope that Carlisle can hold down CHB (on talent yes on brain capacity?)

2016-02-22T05:33:42+00:00

Josh

Expert


They are a very young list for sure, but I think there's a flawed assumption pretty common among AFL fans that just because you're young now you're going to be good later. Aside from Billings I don't know that they've really scooped up any bonafide elite talents... time will tell on that. Free Agency is worth them looking at but I feel it'd be a mistake to starting trading out their draft picks now after really only having properly invested in the draft for two or three years.

AUTHOR

2016-02-22T05:09:19+00:00

Ryan Buckland

Expert


Let's be clear...I'm not saying they will make the eight. I'm saying that we shouldn't be discounting their chances to the extent that we are as a fan collective. It would be a shock, absolutely. But not a complete surprise.

More Comments on The Roar

Read more at The Roar