Strategy Blair Hartley Project 2015 II

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
The berger did well against Sandi, he is a ruck not a forward, hence he has struggled when Martin is playing as the main ruck
 

Log in to remove this ad.

MJ_23 said:
They would need to want to come for next to nothing both play 10-12 games tops. Both of which i can not see happening nor would I want it. They were great once but both are on the downwards trajectory
Click to expand...
Magic isnt saying lets go get Boyd and Bartel. he was useing an example of the type of player that can be available.

Personally i dont see the need to go after them we have their roles covered i think.
I will give an example of a player i would have loved to take. Podsiadialy when he was delisted. Why because he was a proven kpp and the likes of Vickery and Griffiths didnt and still dont look likely imo. He would have provided much needed expertise experience and competition for a kp role. He has been in a succesful environment and knows where the standard needs to be set. Lastly what great cover if the other two became very good key forwards and copped serios injuries.
 
mopsy said:
Magic isnt saying lets go get Boyd and Bartel. he was useing an example of the type of player that can be available.

Personally i dont see the need to go after them we have their roles covered i think.
I will give an example of a player i would have loved to take. Podsiadialy when he was delisted. Why because he was a proven kpp and the likes of Vickery and Griffiths didnt and still dont look likely imo. He would have provided much needed expertise experience and competition for a kp role. He has been in a succesful environment and knows where the standard needs to be set. Lastly what great cover if the other two became very good key forwards and copped serios injuries.
Click to expand...

My argument stands for any other player like them
 
mopsy said:
Magic isnt saying lets go get Boyd and Bartel. he was useing an example of the type of player that can be available.

Personally i dont see the need to go after them we have their roles covered i think.
I will give an example of a player i would have loved to take. Podsiadialy when he was delisted. Why because he was a proven kpp and the likes of Vickery and Griffiths didnt and still dont look likely imo. He would have provided much needed expertise experience and competition for a kp role. He has been in a succesful environment and knows where the standard needs to be set. Lastly what great cover if the other two became very good key forwards and copped serios injuries.
Click to expand...
His view has altered slightly but up
Until now he was specifically saying he wanted them
 
MJ_23 said:
Doesn't matter where I rate them because I think there's zero chance of it happening. We would have to offer them more money than they would be worth to get them to leave clubs they are champions of and are helping their younger players come through. The pay off isn't enough as I don't think we are challenging for a flag until 2018
Click to expand...


This is where I have different opinions if you allow me to elaborate.


IMO, if you are correct and we are challenging for a flag in 2018 we could easily be challenging for a flag in 2016 or at least 2017. I assume you are factoring in the development of youngsters like C Ellis etc.. However, the Baby bombers in the nineties are examples of other timing possibilities. Selwood won in his first year, Cripps is in his second year. The other thing is things can get fast tracked over a 18 team comp because the talent is diluted so the main initial teams to worry about would be the existing talent hoarders of Hawthorn bearing in mind they are missing normal high end progression from the draft and rely on their older players who are getting older particularly Mitchell, Burgoyne, etc...


I do not think we may have to offer them too much. Selwood is the Captain, Murphy the Captain, they have other leaders like Bontempelli etc.. for Stringer and they have progressed since Griffen left.

The question is what they could be worth for some? I think we could offer less for them to win a premiership and we could offer assistant coach opportunities if viable after playing tenure.

I do not know what you think they would cost but I think we should be able to get them for less than 350K bearing in mind a lot of the contract can be performance based with a lower base. If they do not want it fine, but I think Boyd might want a chance to win a premiership unlikely for him at the Bulldogs due to timing and Bartel might want a final crack against his old mate Hodge with the club they supported as kids.

Geelong do not have to keep Bartel. They let Chapman go and some say their is an obligation to keep past stars of premierships around as a culture thing but I think if the option is there for him to go to RFC they would not stand in his way. Having said that they might think they can win a premiership again who knows?

I have no idea what they would cost, it might be less but you have players like Goodes taking a cut to keep going and win a premiership so who knows?
 
Last edited:
Morro said:
His view has altered slightly but up
Until now he was specifically saying he wanted them
Click to expand...


Serious I would be surprised if I said I specifically wanted Boyd or Bartel in fact I was referring to business cases a lot.

I know for a fact I never said I unconditionally want Bartel or Boyd. I do not give blank cheques to anyone!!
 
Mr Magic said:
This is where I have different opinions if you allow me to elaborate.


IMO, if you are correct and we are challenging for a flag in 2018 we could easily be challenging for a flag in 2016 or at least 2017. I assume you are factoring in the development of youngsters like C Ellis etc.. However, the Baby bombers in the nineties are examples of other timing possibilities. Selwood won in his first year, Cripps is in his second year. The other thing is things can get fast tracked over a 18 team comp because the talent is diluted so the main teams to worry about would be the talent hoarders of Hawthorn bearing in mind they are missing normal high end progression from the draft and rely on their older players who are getting older particularly Mitchell, Burgoyne, etc...


I do not think we may have to offer them too much. Selwood is the Captain, Murphy the Captain, they have other leaders like Bontempelli etc.. for Stringer and they have progressed since Griffen left.

The question is what they could be worth for some. I think we could offer less for them to win a premiership and we could offer assistant coach opportunities if viable after playing tenure.

I do not know what you think they would cost but I think we should be able to get them for less than 350K bearing in mind a lot of the contract can be performance based with a lower base. If they do not want it fine, but I think Boyd might want a chance to win a premiership unlucky for him at the Bulldogs due to timing and Bartel might want a final crack against his old mate Hodge with the club they supported as kids.

Geelong do not have to keep Bartel. They let Chapman go and some say their is an obligation to keep past stars of premierships around as a culture thing but I think if the option is there for him to go to RFC they would not stand in his way. Having said that they might think they can win a premiership again who knows?
Click to expand...

Appreciate the thought you have put into it but why come to Richmond? Why leave a club/team that you have spent your entire football life at when you're at the end? These guys are spent they have one more year in them both tops, pass for me but thanks for raising a interesting point
 
mopsy said:
Magic isnt saying lets go get Boyd and Bartel. he was useing an example of the type of player that can be available.

Personally i dont see the need to go after them we have their roles covered i think.
I will give an example of a player i would have loved to take. Podsiadialy when he was delisted. Why because he was a proven kpp and the likes of Vickery and Griffiths didnt and still dont look likely imo. He would have provided much needed expertise experience and competition for a kp role. He has been in a succesful environment and knows where the standard needs to be set. Lastly what great cover if the other two became very good key forwards and copped serios injuries.
Click to expand...
We went down that path when we recruited the likes of Kingsley Miller and even Mark Graham back in TW first year. We don't need to be chasing 29-30 year olds especially ones that are coming towards the end. It's as simple as that.
 
mopsy said:
If we talk premierships it is pointless imo to be talking about this yr.
Click to expand...
Sure isn't. We've shown we can beat anyone. The race is wide open this year. We can win it, if we believe it. Just because we should be a better side in two years doesn't mean we shouldn't realise the opportunity in front of us this year. GWS might be unbeatable in two years.

Doesn't preclude us planning for the future. We brought in seven teenagers at the end of last year. Our list is comparatively young.
 
MJ_23 said:
Appreciate the thought you have put into it but why come to Richmond? Why leave a club/team that you have spent your entire football life at when you're at the end? These guys are spent they have one more year in them both tops, pass for me but thanks for raising a interesting point
Click to expand...


You might be right. I do not know everything, far from it.

I do not think they are spent although I admit they have not got long to go and their quality footy time going forward is limited.

To cover the risk of them being spent as you say, we can still go to the draft and do other trades like get Plowman or whoever, might get Kruezuer as well who knows depending on values

The other thing is assuming they are not spent end of year but becoming spent in 2016 we would only be giving them a one year contract anyway. We might renew it after 2016 for another year, who knows.

Now why would they come to Richmond? Good question!! Boyd could come to Richmond for his last chance to win a premiership. We can sympathise, I think with Boyd, as a guy from a club that has been close but no cigar like Richo etc... and others. The fact is, IMO, Bulldogs are truely on the rise but despite this I struggle to see Bulldogs contending prior to Boyds retirement.

Bartel could come to Richmond for similar reasons. He has a final shot at a premiership, very unlikely at Geelong IMO before he retires. He also has the chance to play for the club he supported as a kid and help them win a premiership for them which has not happened for years. That is bound to give him a thrill. On top of that, if he plays for RFC against Hawthorn in a 2016 GF he has the chance to line up against his childhood mate in Hodge, both who supported the Tigers, and win won over him for the club they supported as a kid!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

_EAD_ said:
We went down that path when we recruited the likes of Kingsley Miller and even Mark Graham back in TW first year. We don't need to be chasing 29-30 year olds especially ones that are coming towards the end. It's as simple as that.
Click to expand...


I relate to exactly what you are saying.


You are absolutely correct!!

Three differences now IMO.

1. FA meaning we can get these guys easier and replace them easier and cheaper with free agency with more flexibility to de-risk.

2. The competition is arguably weaker due to 18 teams and the concentration of talent in GWS and GC.

3. Bartel and Boyd are far better players than those guys in the above post IMO. Apart from that, IMO unless they rely on pace and lose pace classier players tend to hold their form a little longer. It helps the comp is a little weaker with less contested play to IMO
 
Last edited:
richoatthedisco said:
Sure isn't. We've shown we can beat anyone. The race is wide open this year. We can win it, if we believe it. Just because we should be a better side in two years doesn't mean we shouldn't realise the opportunity in front of us this year. GWS might be unbeatable in two years.

Doesn't preclude us planning for the future. We brought in seven teenagers at the end of last year. Our list is comparatively young.
Click to expand...


I agree although I would like to add one more point.


It is a competition against opposing sides. I think we can say that is a fact.

Therefore it is not just about how good we are soley but how good the opposition are and how we perform against them relatively speaking. With that in mind we know teams are slowing like the Swans, Geelong, Freo and arguably others like Hawthorn. We also know teams like GWS and GC are not going away and they will come with a surge at some point.

So we could have a better team in 2018 but have less of an opportunity because the Hawthorn vintage of 2016 is weaker than GWS or GC going full blast in 2018. Lot of hypotheticals here but it is something to consider IMO
 
richoatthedisco said:
It's getting to the stage that I'm going to start putting those who respond to Magic on ignore as well, just to stop getting notifications about posts that add nothing. There is no point arguing with him, please just ignore.
Click to expand...
Claw was banned for less.
 
mopsy said:
In a lot of ways Mr Magic is correct. In some ways he deserves our respect rather than ridicule. He's always prepared to put it out there and cop criticism.
Good on him i say and keep being different.

I have always thought we should be targeting all types at all ages if there is a need, one reason/need being we may not have a certain type on the list, another reason could be we bring in a mature player so juniors can learn from them..

There is nothing wrong in targeting a 30 plus year old. The real keys in taking them are cost, take them as f/as , imo they should be very good proven players. When taking mature players we ensure we actively continue to take more than our share of kids by using good draft picks or thru trades.

If we talk premierships it is pointless imo to be talking about this yr. We should be honest and be targeting when it is most likely to happen if things go to plan. Imo we should be looking two more likely three years down the track.
Looking three yrs ahead we should be asking ourselves, who most likely will be gone ? who will be past their best ? who may not make it ? then make an assesment of who and what we may need over the next 3 yrs. Without a doubt making a g/f in 3 yrs time will require us gaining our fair share of decent mature players.
Click to expand...
Dual accounts now.
 
Mr Magic said:
My business case suggests they and others, as an option, offer far more than Yarran and Motlop next year and future years.


Are you saying Geelong and Bulldogs should write them off next year?

If Bartel and Boyd's value is nothing next year then their value would have been depreciated so the clubs would be carrying players taking up positions on their list without value if they extended their contracts?:confused:

I hope you are right. If you are right Boyd and Bartel will be delisted end of year from having no value and if RFC sees value in them achieving a premiership we can pick them up for very little except a annual wage as picking up as delisted players!:thumbsu:

In fact according to your valuations it might be possible to get Bartel, Boyd, Kruezeur, a Plowman type via a possible trade, draftee selections and maybe someone else:)
Click to expand...
Your business just went bust.
 
_EAD_ said:
We went down that path when we recruited the likes of Kingsley Miller and even Mark Graham back in TW first year. We don't need to be chasing 29-30 year olds especially ones that are coming towards the end. It's as simple as that.
Click to expand...
Agree but like the Hoilhans these guys were not guns
Barely c grade
 
PopeYablett_zps75d0160e.jpg
 
Have watched a bit of Aish the last couple of weeks and I'm really not sure where he stands (or is at?) as an AFL footballer. In fact he actually reminds me a little of Richard Tambling whereby he is a the skill set but lacks the application. He isn't strong enough inside to make an impact and doesn't find enough of the ball on the outside to be able to utilise his footskills which wouldn't be that great of a problem if he was a run and carry player but he isn't. Now the question here is, is he under performing due the situation he finds himself in i.e. dislike for Brisbane and is that a good enough excuse to explain his absence in form or is it because he just hasn't developed and is one of many past players who could never make the next step regardless of how talented they were, which this was one of my and others question marks for him prior to being drafted.

As of this point in time I wouldn't be parting with our first rounder for him and would definitely be utilising our relationship with Leppa prior to making any commitment towards Aish.

Lastly talk of 500-550k for Steven Motlop sounds absurd to me. One I don't think he is worth that. Two I think some are overestimating how much the average AFL footballer makes, someone like Shane Edwards would be lucky to be on 400k if I had to take a guess so I find it hard to believe Motlop could be worth anywhere near the 500k mark.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

prodigy
AFLW Qualifying Final - Brisbane v Richmond - Act II of the Mental Capitulation of Dakota Davidson
2 3 4
Replies
95
Views
3K
Phar Ace
Phar Ace
Stan Judkins
2022 Part II AFLW fixture revealed
Replies
14
Views
636
balmainforever
balmainforever

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top