Richmond. The rebuild to the 2017 premiership (Review on 2016-2017)

[The Dice Man]

So a thread directed at all clubs has been merged into a thread dedicated to only Richmond. Who’s running this show ffs?

We are.

Biggest club in the land.

 

[hk89]

I was obviously talking about captaining finals.

Wasn't that obvious, or that relevant. Selwood has been an outstanding finals performer, Cotchin has been patchy at best. Their win loss ratio has little to do with Selwood, who was outstanding in many of Geelong's losses (unlike Cotchin who seems to be a finals downhill skier, and tended to be terrible in losses, in fact you could say Richmond's inability to win finals up until 2017 had a lot to do with Cotchin being unable to stand up when needed).

 

[Bazzar]

Wasn't that obvious, or that relevant. Selwood has been an outstanding finals performer, Cotchin has been patchy at best. Their win loss ratio has little to do with Selwood, who was outstanding in many of Geelong's losses (unlike Cotchin who seems to be a finals downhill skier, and tended to be terrible in losses, in fact you could say Richmond's inability to win finals up until 2017 had a lot to do with Cotchin being unable to stand up when needed).

Patchy? Just the one bad final, and kicking against the wind in the Port EF was a coaching decision, not Cotchins, and remember, Selwood against us in the QF was similar to Cotchins game in the EF against Port, good but not great

 

[hk89]

Patchy? Just the one bad final, and kicking against the wind in the Port EF was a coaching decision, not Cotchins, and remember, Selwood against us in the QF was similar to Cotchins game in the EF against Port, good but not great

Yes I think patchy if fair for a supposedly elite mid. 35 ranking points was simply terrible, and none of his other finals approach Selwood's best work. Looks like those are super coach points, and I would have thought 80 is below average for an elite mid. That was a 16 possession game (when he averaged around 26 for H&A), and the 80 was probably generous due to him accumulating a few tackles (4, which is roughly his home and away average), but he also got 0 marks for the entire game. Looks like there were at least 3 Richmond mids that had better games in that port loss.

As that graph shows his best finals game leading up to the 2017 GF was probably the game against Carlton, where he kicked a couple of goals, but other than the two goals it was about on par for his H&A performances that year. Some players go to another level in finals, Cotchin simply hasn't shown to be one of them when you look at the sum of all his finals work so far. In fact he's more likely to underperform than overperform compared to his H&A form.

The post I was replying to tried to compare Selwood and Cotchin's finals record, but in reality there is no comparison. The difference between Cotchin's Port final and Selwood's QF was that Selwood probably shouldn't have been on the ground and was clearly playing under duress right from the start of the game. So I'd agree they were similar games, a fit Cotchin is about as useful in a final as a hampered Selwood. Cotchin has had some ok finals, but I'm not sure you could say based on his finals performances alone that he is an elite player. His H&A games make a better case for that.

 

[The Dice Man]

Yes I think patchy if fair for a supposedly elite mid. 35 ranking points was simply terrible, and none of his other finals approach Selwoods best work. Looks like those are super coach points, and I would have thought 80 is below average for an elite mid. That was a 16 possession game (when he averaged around 26 for H&A), and the 80 was probably generous due to him accumulating a few tackles (4, which is roughly his home and away average), but he also got 0 marks for the entire game. Looks like there were at least 3 Richmond mids that had better games in that port loss.

As that graph shows his best finals game leading up to the 2017 GF was probably the game against Carlton, where he kicked a couple of games, but other than the two goals it was about on par for him H&A performances that year. Some players go to another level in finals, Cotchin simply hasn't shown to be one of them when you look at the sum of all his finals work so far. In fact he's more likely to underperform than overperform compared to his H&A form.

The post I was replying to tried to compare Selwood and Cotchin's finals record, but in reality there is no comparison. The difference between Cotchin's Port final and Selwood's QF was that Selwood probably shouldn't have been on the ground and was clearly playing under duress right from the start of the game. So I'd agree they were similar games, a fit Cotchin is about as useful in a final as a hampered Selwood. Cotchin has had some ok finals, but I'm not sure you could say based on his finals performances alone that he is an elite player. His H&A games make a better case for that.

You missed the 2017 finals series? He lead from the front and demonstrated exactly what his teammates needed to do to take the cup. His 2017 finals series is bloody inspirational.

 

[Luv_our_club]

OP needs to stop making threads.

If you make one Lunch Lady Doris, then i will stop for a month.

But is that your mo?

 

[Bazzar]

Yes I think patchy if fair for a supposedly elite mid. 35 ranking points was simply terrible, and none of his other finals approach Selwoods best work. Looks like those are super coach points, and I would have thought 80 is below average for an elite mid

Didn't you watch the QF when Cotchin terrorised your meek mob? It was an outstanding game
Did you watch the PF? Also outstanding.
And if 80 isn't good for an elite what about Selwoods 84 in the QF? for a so called elite isn't that below standard? and his 45 in the semi against the Swans? Very poor. So how does that compare to Cotchins poor 35?

 

[hk89]

You missed the 2017 finals series? He lead from the front and demonstrated exactly what his teammates needed to do to take the cup. His 2017 finals series is bloody inspirational.

No I didn't which is why I'm saying he is patchy rather than just plain poor. He was below average in 2 out of his previous 3 finals campaigns. If he'd been more inspirational in those previous campaigns you may have got further than an elimination final before 2017. Even his 2017 I'd say was good rather than great (compared to what a player like Selwood can produce).

 

[hk89]

Didn't you watch the QF when Cotchin terrorised your meek mob?

You seem to mistake me for a Geelong supporter, I'm an impartial neutral in this Selwood vs Cotchin in finals debate, and have more reason to hate Selwood than Cotchin.

It was an outstanding game
Did you watch the PF? Also outstanding.

I think you are having trouble understanding "patchy", I also think you are overrating his games. His 2017 finals series games were good but not elite. Given you've brought super coach points into the discussion as a metric, his QF final wasn't even as good as Scott Selwood (or Mitch Duncan) based on SC points. If Joel was playing uninjured it would likely not have been as good as his QF either given Joel's previous record.

And if 80 isn't good for an elite what about Selwoods 84 in the QF? for a so called elite isn't that below standard? and his 45 in the semi against the Swans? Very poor. So how does that compare to Cotchins poor 35?

Well obviously 84 and 45 are both > 35 so I think your last question answers itself. As for Joel's performance in this series, it was obvious he was brought back too soon from his lower leg injury, and perhaps shouldn't have played. He was played because a semi fit Joel Selwood is usually better than a fully fit Cotchin (Hell a fully fit Scott Selwood was better than a fully fit Cotchin in the QF based on the metric for comparison that you've chosen), but it was probably a tactical error, and the fitness staff underestimated how much his leg (ankle?) was going to hinder him. Hawthorn made the same mistake with Hodge in our 2010 Elimination final against Freo, and paid a similar price.

 

[BF Tiger]

Dimma is hurting them more than Hirdy hurt the bombers.

Yep, you got that one right.

 

[dean33]

No I didn't which is why I'm saying he is patchy rather than just plain poor. He was below average in 2 out of his previous 3 finals campaigns. If he'd been more inspirational in those previous campaigns you may have got further than an elimination final before 2017. Even his 2017 I'd say was good rather than great (compared to what a player like Selwood can produce).

 

[hk89]

So a thread directed at all clubs has been merged into a thread dedicated to only Richmond. Who’s running this show ffs?

Agreed, is there a way to see which mod made this merge decision? A thread asking if Richmond currently has the best group of elite players has been merged into a 2016 "where is Richmond at" thread. Doesn't seem like a sound moderating choice to me. If you think the thread is trolling move it to the bay, if you think it is a duplicate of another discussion, merge it into that. Don't merge it into a completely irrelevant 2016 thread.

 

[hk89]

View attachment 449655

Yup, patchy. Polled well in QF and PF, no votes in the GF. Suspect a strong argument could be made that some Geelong players were better than him in the QF, but in these type of voting systems, to the winner goes the spoils, and no Geelong players polled votes. The AFLCA Best finals player uses a bit of a silly voting system anyway because different teams play a different number of games in finals. You could conceivably get a guy kick 10 goals in each of his 3 finals, including the grand final, and get beaten for the award by a player in a team that didn't make top 4, so plays 4 games in the series and was best on ground in 3 of his games up until the GF where he'd only need 1 vote in the GF to beat the guy who blew the finals series apart with 3 10 goal hauls (not that this is relevant to Cotchin who only played 3 games, but it could be an issue in the future).

Only been going for two years, but it will be interesting to see how long it takes for the player of the series to be someone that didn't make the GF. Suspect it should be renamed "Best player of the finals series from a team that made the GF".

 

[dean33]

Yup, patchy. Polled well in QF and PF, no votes in the GF. Suspect a strong argument could be made that some Geelong players were better than him in the QF, but in these type of voting systems, to the winner goes the spoils, and no Geelong players polled votes. The AFLCA Best finals player uses a bit of a silly voting system anyway because different teams play a different number of games in finals. You could conceivably get a guy kick 10 goals in each of his 3 finals, including the grand final, and get beaten for the award by a player in a team that didn't make top 4, so plays 4 games in the series and was best on ground in 3 of his games up until the GF where he'd only need 1 vote in the GF to beat the guy who blew the finals series apart with 3 10 goal hauls (not that this is relevant to Cotchin who only played 3 games, but it could be an issue in the future).

Only been going for two years, but it will be interesting to see how long it takes for the player of the series to be someone that didn't make the GF. Suspect it should be renamed "Best player of the finals series from a team that made the GF".

Cotchin’s 15 votes came from 2 games. Qualifying final 8 votes (2nd best)
Preliminary final 7 votes (3rd best)

 

[Milanista28]

Yep, you got that one right.

Was a joke mate. Happy holidays

 

[Bazzar]

His 2017 finals series games were good but not elite.

Don't forget his goal of the year in the QF

 

[hk89]

Cotchin’s 15 votes came from 2 games.

Yes, I mentioned that. Votes in 2 games, none in the GF.

Qualifying final 8 votes (2nd best)
Preliminary final 7 votes (3rd best)

Personally I thought he had more impact in the prelim (and Dylan Shiel's head also agrees), but Geelong were beaten so badly in the QF that neither coach wanted to give any votes to Geelong players, whereas GWS players did pick up some votes in the prelim. It is another reason I don't like the voting system, as it means you can get less votes in games you played better in if other players also play well or your team has a shocker. It works out better in H&A because that type of thing averages out over a large number of games, but when the max number is only 4 you can get unlucky (or lucky).

In any case, I think they got the award right last year, with Martin a long way in front, but I think they should swap the rising star and best finals player voting systems. The rising star system would work better in finals where the panel could easily watch all games, and the 4 week window is small enough that you still have a relatively fresh mind on performances when you vote. ALFCA type votes would be much better for the rising star as you'd be sure people were voting on games they'd seen, and not having to remember games played at the start of the season when they do their vote.

 

[Chadwiko]

Brownlow medal winning premiership captain and the best player in the league aren’t A-graders.

Lolololol

Post was made in mid 2016 when plenty of Richmond fans were also saying the same thing.

 

[Rich01]

Post was made in mid 2016 when plenty of Richmond fans were also saying the same thing.

Yup, but your call was they needed a rebuild. Instead they won the flag the next year.

 

[Heisenberg_]

Post was made in mid 2016 when plenty of Richmond fans were also saying the same thing.

Literally none said that about Cotchin and Martin.

 

[chunkylover53]

I'll cop that. If you search around I've been on the Tiges for most of 2017.

 

[JayJ20]

The first page is hilarious

 

[The Dice Man]

Hardwick must walk!

Walk a victory lap?

 

[muzhogg]

It's an interesting question.

Rance - Lever
Martin - Petracca
Cotchin - Oliver
Riewoldt - Hogan

The Richmond players have played between 120 - 175 more games than their Demon counterparts. I'd say the young Dees are tracking at a similar level at the same age / games experience. For example Hogan has kicked 105 goals from 51 games and Riewoldt had 72 goals from 51 games; Oliver already has a B&F coming off a season that included a 30 disposal average, the most loose ball gets in the AFL, and top 20 ever most contested possessions (since AFL records have been recording the stat); and Lever had the most intercept possessions in the AFL in 2017 (Rance second), and the second most intercept marks behind McGovern.

But it's still proven versus (relative) potential - albeit they all have shone at AFL level as shown above.

Perhaps the difference is we're hoping the likes of Gawn, Viney, Brayshaw, Hunt, and Salem can progress to 'All Australian' type levels to more than just complement the quartet mentioned above (as Hibberd did this year).

That's not to say Richmond don't have other quality players like Grimes, Prestia, Houli, etc.

Other than Gawn, all players are '23 and under', and none, including Gawn, have played 100 games.

I know this is a "Bay" type thread, so apologies for a serious response.

You're forgiven for saying something intelligent...

Much of the talk around the performance of Martin in particular in 2017 was to do with the support he got from Prestia and Caddy, amongst others. Jack Reiwoldt is no longer seen as the sole, or even main, avenue to goal and works hand in glove with the small forwards. He might not be the best FF in the league (or even close) but that's not his role. He's more the leader of the entire forward line and looks best when they all play well. And the reason Rance can peel off his man and attack the ball is because he has confidence in the rest of the backline.

Point being that there's structural reasons why those guys have been able to perform well and it comes down to how well the rest of the team have done their job. Richmond's top four have pretty much been able to focus on doing what they do best and leaving the rest to others.

I agree that some of Melbourne's younger players (particularly the ones you mention) could become very good, but if I was to draw any lesson from Richmond's year it's that their performance is likely to depend hugely on the support they get from the rest of the team.

I think that's the key to releasing the potential of Melbourne's younger talent.

EDIT: I left Cotchin out of the above because I don't think he's playing a different role than he has in the past, he's just playing the same role much better. That said, it's also the case that the support he gets from others is an important part of why he's improved.

 

[Bazzar]

Martin in particular in 2017 was to do with the support he got from Prestia and Caddy, amongst others. .

Support he got? I think it was the opposite, he was the one who gave others support. Dusty was as coal face as you could get.