Where on the ladder would the Storm finish without Cameron Smith?

[Morkel]

Take a future immortal, most important player in the game, one of the best players in the game, captain, goal kicker, and one of the most important positions on the field out of a team just before kick-off and the team loses, and people are acting like it was the biggest upset in the history of professional sport and that all of a sudden the other 16 guys who won a premiership 2 years ago and went to within 2 matches of back to back premierships are actually no good and only got there because of one guy?

I guess that's one way to look at it. The other and more realistic way is far less interesting.

You are correct. Losing Smith just before kick-off produced a result that is not surprising. But it doesn't take away from the OP. And that's what we're discussing. No different to asking if the Broncos would have been as successful without Lockyer, which would be a pretty cut-and-dried argument IMO. The difference being that Lockyer stayed here legally, whereas Smith's retention by the Storm was questionable, and therefore means the scenario hypothesised could well have happened.

 

[Porthoz]

OMG Morkel... what have you done? :shocked:

 

[Anonymous person]

The difference being that Lockyer stayed here legally, whereas Smith's retention by the Storm was questionable

was it? what was questionable about it?

do you really think that the storm would be able to get away with anything even remotely resembling cheating the salary cap after what happened to them?

 

[Morkel]

was it? what was questionable about it?

do you really think that the storm would be able to get away with anything even remotely resembling cheating the salary cap after what happened to them?

We're not talking about the future, we're talking about the past. That's what I took from the original question. Cheating the cap AGAIN is not what I'm talking about.

 

[Rally Towel]

Hypothetically, I would say they'd be in the bottom half of the eight. This would assume that they had a serviceable (but not exceptional) player in the 9.

Despite his obvious class, and his additional leadership qualities that he brings to the side, I wouldn't say his loss would be insurmountable. They would still have Slater and Cronk, which is not to be sneezed at.

Also, I believe their key strengths are also their conditioning, discipline, and they are amongst the best drilled, and structured teams you'll see anywhere. They stick to the gameplan with ruthless efficiency, and exploit any advantage possible.

Undoubtedly heaps stronger for his presence but it's not their only strength.

 

[Anonymous person]

We're not talking about the future, we're talking about the past. That's what I took from the original question. Cheating the cap AGAIN is not what I'm talking about.

Wait which contract are you talking about? The one way back in like 08? Or the one he just signed.

 

[Morkel]

Wait which contract are you talking about? The one way back in like 08? Or the one he just signed.

The previous one. I've been reading this whole thing as "would they have been the same team without him", as in, Grand Final victories, etc. I just re-read the OP and it may be referring to the here-and-now though.

 

[Morkel]

Hypothetically, I would say they'd be in the bottom half of the eight. This would assume that they had a serviceable (but not exceptional) player in the 9.

Despite his obvious class, and his additional leadership qualities that he brings to the side, I wouldn't say his loss would be insurmountable. They would still have Slater and Cronk, which is not to be sneezed at.

Also, I believe their key strengths are also their conditioning, discipline, and they are amongst the best drilled, and structured teams you'll see anywhere. They stick to the gameplan with ruthless efficiency, and exploit any advantage possible.

Undoubtedly heaps stronger for his presence but it's not their only strength.

That went out the door with Smith though. So the question is would they be as composed without Smith in the long run. Say if Huddles Cronk was calling the shots instead?

 

[CaptainHook]

Sooo......a side loses it's captain, chief playmaker and goal kicker minutes before the start of a match

......without warning

and they then lose???

Interesting ......

He also took away their tackling ability it seems.

The fact that they lost isn't a surprise but the scoreline certainly was. Everytime Smith doesn't play, they get hammered by 40. Look at the 2008 decider for another example. Are the big three really the big one?

 

[Anonymous person]

He also took away their tackling ability it seems.

The fact that they lost isn't a surprise but the scoreline certainly was. Everytime Smith doesn't play, they get hammered by 40. Look at the 2008 decider for another example. Are the big three really the big one?

Well Slater has won the same, if not more, accolades than Smith, so no I don't think so.

 

[CaptainHook]

Well Slater has won the same, if not more, more accolades than Smith, so no I don't think so.

They don't get belted though when Smith plays and Slater doesn't so...

 

[Manbush]

They don't get belted though when Smith plays and Slater doesn't so...

Disagree, was it 2 or 3 years ago Slater was out for about 5 games and they were rubbish without him

 

[CaptainHook]

Disagree, was it 2 or 3 years ago Slater was out for about 5 games and they were rubbish without him

Did they get hammered by 40 though? I remember Slater missing (I think it was 2012) but I can't recall the scorelines.

It seems when Smith is missing not only do they struggle to score points but they forget how to tackle as well. It's probably not surprising though. The guy averages 40 tackles a game. I guess if he's missing someone has to make them.

The 2008 decider is a prime example. How can a team that still boasts the likes of Slater, Cronk, Inglis, Folau etc not score a single point? And concede 40?

I think they would struggle long term without Smith. Interesting times ahead for the Storm.

 

[Anonymous person]

The 2008 decider is a prime example. How can a team that still boasts the likes of Slater, Cronk, Inglis, Folau etc not score a single point? And concede 40?

rugby league games arent played on paper, thats how.

Manly - who were an awesome team as well remember - came out and just outplayed them, simple as that. every team takes beatings - melbourne just happen to take fewer of them than most other teams because of how bloody good they've been for almost a decade - but that doesn't mean the whole team is useless just because one player was out, even if he's probably the most important player in the game.

remember that was 1 game 6 years ago. people need to stop going back to it as if it was some huge indicator. all it was was a team missing their best player playing against a team who was firing on all cylinders.

 

[CaptainHook]

rugby league games arent played on paper, thats how.

Manly - who were an awesome team as well remember - came out and just outplayed them, simple as that. every team takes beatings - melbourne just happen to take fewer of them than most other teams because of how bloody good they've been for almost a decade - but that doesn't mean the whole team is useless just because one player was out, even if he's probably the most important player in the game.

Well, the 40-0 scoreline would suggest the whole team did under perform. It is unfair though, as I thought Cooper Cronk was outstanding but they clearly didn't handle Smith's suspension well.

remember that was 1 game 6 years ago. people need to stop going back to it as if it was some huge indicator. all it was was a team missing their best player playing against a team who was firing on all cylinders.

I wouldn't call it one game - it was just an example. Another is the game a fortnight ago. I remember a few games over the years when they've copped a heavy loss without Smith (I think even the Broncos did a number on them one game a few years ago, with him missing). It is surprising considering they've been such a great defensive side. I can understand their attack being stifled as he gives such great service from dummy half but their defense is shocking when he's not there. I can't explain that. Do you have to be Cameron Smith to tackle?

They might turn out to be a one man band a la the Fittler-led Roosters side in the late nineties.

 

[Broncoman]

rugby league games arent played on paper, thats how.

Manly - who were an awesome team as well remember - came out and just outplayed them, simple as that. every team takes beatings - melbourne just happen to take fewer of them than most other teams because of how bloody good they've been for almost a decade - but that doesn't mean the whole team is useless just because one player was out, even if he's probably the most important player in the game.

remember that was 1 game 6 years ago. people need to stop going back to it as if it was some huge indicator. all it was was a team missing their best player playing against a team who was firing on all cylinders.

Well spoken. The game is never won on paper and every team in the league recieves floggings.

That grand final is some indicator that they don't work as effectively with Smith out but it should be remembered that the Storm were without Ryan Hoffman and that they were literally battered and on their last legs while Manly IIRC still had plenty left and were pumped and out for blood.

 

[Alec]

Well, the 40-0 scoreline would suggest the whole team did under perform. It is unfair though, as I thought Cooper Cronk was outstanding but they clearly didn't handle Smith's suspension well.



I wouldn't call it one game - it was just an example. Another is the game a fortnight ago. I remember a few games over the years when they've copped a heavy loss without Smith (I think even the Broncos did a number on them one game a few years ago, with him missing). It is surprising considering they've been such a great defensive side. I can understand their attack being stifled as he gives such great service from dummy half but their defense is shocking when he's not there. I can't explain that. Do you have to be Cameron Smith to tackle?

They might turn out to be a one man band a la the Fittler-led Roosters side in the late nineties.

Cameron Smith is their best defender too, actually.