Saddened! wrote:
Saints are in a pretty tough position. We have so many established players off contract this season. Eastmond, Pryce, Graham, Puletua, Wilkin, Flannery, and Gardner (Plus Armstrong who will obviously be released) I believe. That means we are very, very likely to have to replace Jammer from the NRL as there just aren't enough decent English props about and I don't think the few that are good enough are off contract anyway. With Tony P also possibly going, that would leave us having to sign two big forwards. I expect Wilkin, Gardner and Flannery to get new deals if they want them as they are all solid first teamers and actually bettering them would be a tough ask and an expensive one.
That leaves us with the problem of Lomaskell. About a month ago when Kyle confirmed he was selling his soul I think most people would have advocated going and recruiting a top class NRL half back. Stevo and a few more in the rugby league press were convinced at the time that we'd already signed a replacement for Eastmond and that he was an international half back. Royce also came out with a statement numbering the players on the shortlist to replace Kyle.
Now, having seen the buds of life emerging in Lomax and Gaskell will the club still push on with that and spend a big chunk of the cap on a half back? Or has either or both of the young guns shown enough promise to shelve that idea? Leaving it until later in the season probably isn't an option as most players worth signing would have sorted their futures out by then.
Personally I would like to see some effort to align the number of outgoing senior players with an equal amount coming in. But knowing Saints that isn't very likely. In an ideal world I'd like to see us sign at least 2 big forwards (1 if TP doesn't leave) and a proper centre for once so we actually have two in the side like you are meant to. I would also like to see Leon signing for another year or two. This would mean Lomaskell would get enough game time but with an old head about the place. How likely is it that Pryce will stay?
Eastmond for me it looks like he will be replaced with Lomax, he may not have the hype of Eastmond but has a better all round game. Kicker, passer, runner, whether he is an organiser will take time just like it does for all halfbacks.
Pryce I would have said he was odds on for Bradford at the start of the year, but given his injury run it maybe a gamble Bradford are no longer willing to take if they are building for the future. It will do Saints no harm to let him decided for himself, trying to offload him will put the player down, trying to keep him will increase the signal to Bradford that he is ok and increase his price. Bradford may lose interest given the injuries or lower their offer to him making it cheaper for Saints to keep him and better for Pryce to stay. It's all in the balance this one, 50/50 and in Pryce's hands.
Graham, I would imagine he has gone, the draw of the NRL maybe too much even if Saints offer alot of cash, the guy is great and if we can keep him fantastic but we can't spend everything on him. Clubs have invested in 1 player before to find their squads cannot match others. We need balance not all the money in one basket. If he goes good luck to him, we will need a replacement but a like for like replacement is unlikely, so long as they are good and work hard that will do me.
Puletua would really like to keep this guy, obviously there is the same balance arguement under the salary cap as there is for Graham but with the strength of the Oz dollar we may need to pay more to keep him. Suppose it depends on whose watching him in Oz.
Wilkin this is a tough one, personally I like him at loose, but I know different people have mixed views on the guy. I don't think he is critical to the future of Saints and maybe replacable but whether you would get anyone with the same desire to perform for the Saints and the versitility is debatable.
Flannery last year I would have said goodbye, but at 2nd row rather than loose he looks a much better player, he was never a loose for mine and if he keeps up his form I'd have no worries resigning
Gardner playing well but will be dependant upon cash and what he wants and what the club have left under the cap.
All in all the player recruitment will depend upon each other, when you have a salary cap you can't keep everyone. I would not agree that all that leave need others bringing in from outside. Basically that's saying the academy can't cut it. I disagree. Eastmond is replaceable with Lomax, Pryce well it's in the balance we may need to buy in but depends how gaskell progresses and whether Pryce decides to stay.
Prop wise we have no immediate candidates so for Puletua and GRaham if both go then yes we will have to buy in.
Wilkin, flannery and Gardener I recon you can replace 2 out of those 3 from within. We are good at 2nd rowers. But also if Pryce stays he could cover loose as can Moore. Lots of people can play wing. The centre position is again debatable it maybe Meli and Wheeler will cover that with Wheeler as the long term option, but it's Wheelers to lose for mine.
If he can't handle it then sure buy in, but you have to give the chances or you may as well disband the academy. Currently we are 1 point off the top spot with a team that has had a poor start and is playing alot of kids. I think they are playing for places and not making a bad fist of it.
Lets see how they get on and not just buy in for buying in's sake. We bought in to replace Tommy God. That never worked, we never replaced him. We have never replaced Scully at loose by buying in.
There is alot of interdependancy with the players whose contracts are up so we'll have to see how some of them pan out.
