Lets not get ahead of ourselves, I think a few people are elevating Leons skills. He was sometimes very very good, but sometimes pretty average. When times got tough and the pack got dominated, he had (has) a tendacy to go missing. An excellent halfback grabs a game by the scruff of the neck and wins it. IMO Leon is a good but not great half back, proved by the way he has never had a sniff at 6 for England

If I had a choice of keeping Gaskell or Wheeler, I'd pick Gaskell any time. And that is based on what I have seen of both players over the last four or more years.

If you don't want Gaskell, send him to Wigan, we'll certainly take him.

I just don't think he will, you're all welcome to your opinion if you think he will be and I'll be humble if he turns out to be as good or better.

Yes he's only made 9 appearances for the first team. But Jonny's played less games than that at HB and its obvious he is going to be a star. I don't think Gaskell will be a bad player at all, he's certainly got a career in the game, but I think if he was going to be a superstar we would have seen something to suggest that by now. All I've seen is a good solid player.

I see your point about him only playing 9 games and if somebody else had said it I probably would of been inclined to say something similar, but I just don't see him being as good as Leon.

Its a little pet hate of mine with some people on here who bang on about how good young players are when they ain't played even 10 games at super league. Youth development is great but for every good player you get I bet you get five bad ones.

I see people write on here, we don't need to replace wello as we've got Ashe, we don't need to replace flannery we've got Dixon and so on but that's taking a huge risk. Not every player can be replaced by young kids as half won't be good enough.

We had Steve Tyrer as the next Jamie Lyon and where's he now?

I just think people get to carried away with the youth development, it's a great thing but it dont always work and not every player can be replaced with youth.

Agreed, but since Gaskell has just signed a three year deal with Saints, those who are better placed to know clearly see some potential in him. Until that potential has been given a decent amount of time to develop - at least the same amount of time that Lomax has had, for instance, would be a start - I think people making negative judgments about whether that same player is going to be as good as one who has been around for over ten years is not only unfair but ridiculous.

I'm not knocking Gaskell and I like what I've seen of him, I liked him the first time I saw him because he takes the line on well for such a young kid but IMO Pryce has the class and experience and should play providing he's up to it after his injuries.

My new pet hate is the people writing we don't need to replace Gardner for next year because weve got makinson and he's fast

Makinson has played about 3 games, we don't know what he's like under the high ball, kicks to ground of if he can tackle but because he showed some pace in two games we've got him nailed on as future winger!

I'm not making negative comments at all, read my posts. I said he's a good player and will make a career of it. I also said I think he may be on the same level as Danny Orr, a compliment in my book.

I could have said people picking Gaskell in a fully fit starting team over Pryce this year is ridiculous, but I didn't because I'm not as confrontational as you are.

You can see who has potential to be good and who has potential to be great from a very early stage no matter what you say. Look how Sam Tomkins burst on the scene, he has massive potential to be great if he cuts a few facets out of his game. I'm not comparing Gaskell to Tomkins, but I haven't seen anything in Gaskell to suggest he will be 'great'.

Everybody is welcome to their opinion.

I know it is but for Christ sake, makinson has played about four games and because he's looked fast, we've got him down as our winger for the next ten years! He's not even a winger!

Indeed they are and I didn't say they weren't. However, everyone is welcome to challenge opinions too! I simply disagreed with the attitude that decides a player of 20 years old with a handful of games under his belt is never going to be as good as a player with over ten years' experience, including at international level. It's a ridiculous attitude to take.

Who has decided on Makinson as Saints' winger for the next ten years? I don't see that written anywhere. Oh, you're being melodramatic again. Surprise!

Personally, I'd like to see Makinson have a go at the wing spot because he has real pace, which is something Saints fans moan about the team not having on the wings. Probably you moaned about that too at some point. Whether he can defend well or catch a high bomb I don't know as I can't remember from the 1.5 times I saw him play or whatever it was. But it would be good to see how he goes. However, Simmons may have other ideas. So be it.

He should be given a chance on the wing because he has pace.

Classic

Leon and Lomax should be our halves when he's fit again.

Pryce is an out and out match winner and you need those in your side to win trophies.

I have moaned in the past about a lack of pace in the backs but we can't just say play him wing because he's fast. He might be worse than meli dealing with kicks, he might not have the positional mind to know when to drop back and when not to as he's not a natural winger.

The pace problem in the backs isn't as bad as it once was, Shenton, lomax and eastmond are very quick and the likes of ade, foster, Pryce, wheeler and Gaskell ain't exactly slow either.

I would like to see a attacking fast centre brought in to give us balance in the centre and also have a threat out wide.