List Mgmt. 2020 Draft and Trade Hypotheticals

[RUNVS]

How can you be underwhelmed by someone you obviously haven't watched ?

If he was a top talent I think I would know more about him.

 

[caesar88]

If he was a top talent I think I would know more about him.

He is a young defender who has looked really good for Richmond. You'd know that if you'd seen any of him, so not sure how you can be underwhelmed by him.

 

[Dubai Quacker]

He is a young defender who has looked really good for Richmond. You'd know that if you'd seen any of him, so not sure how you can be underwhelmed by him.

Average player made to look good by getting a game (as a borderline selection) in a top side.

Has enormous list clogger potential.

 

[caesar88]

Average player made to look good by getting a game (as a borderline selection) in a top side.

Has enormous list clogger potential.

Potentially, but a one on one is a one on one, and he's won a fair few of them in recent weeks. That's just good individual form.

 

[Dubai Quacker]

Potentially, but a one on one is a one on one, and he's won a fair few of them in recent weeks. That's just good individual form.

We can’t afford to be recruiting more fringe selections in the hope they’ll get better.

He’s only 20, so could still go either way - but gawd, imagine yet ANOTHER dud recruit. The board would implode.

 

[caesar88]

We can’t afford to be recruiting more fringe selections in the hope they’ll get better.

He’s only 20, so could still go either way - but gawd, imagine yet ANOTHER dud recruit. The board would implode.

There will be more dud recruits. But the duds don't matter if you get others right. We can't just be scared to make any calls on players in fear of getting them wrong otherwise we get nowhere.

 

[Dubai Quacker]

There will be more dud recruits. But the duds don't matter if you get others right. We can't just be scared to make any calls on players in fear of getting them wrong otherwise we get nowhere.

Yep, there’ll be more duds.

But our next trade needs to be for a proven talent, not a well tried B-grader, or a speculative hit n’ hope.

 

[caesar88]

Yep, there’ll be more duds.

But our next trade needs to be for a proven talent, not a well tried B-grader, or a speculative hit n’ hope.

I agree. Balta wouldn't be my first priority (though I certainly wouldn't oppose it.) I just think it's a bit exaggerative to say he's underwhelming when he's looked quite solid. No one said he was Reg Grundy and worth a pick 2.

 

[Kapers]

Imo, gotta take gambles when trading.
All trades we have done I agree with, just because they didn't work didn't mean the intention was wrong. We are trying to buy low and get someone with a lot of upside.

Now have they targeted the right players? That can be argued, but I think the risk it's self can't be criticised

 

[Dubai Quacker]

Imo, gotta take gambles when trading.
All trades we have done I agree with, just because they didn't work didn't mean the intention was wrong. We are trying to buy low and get someone with a lot of upside.

Now have they targeted the right players? That can be argued, but I think the risk it's self can't be criticised

In Thurlow, Gray, L.Taylor we took players with plenty of years in the AFL, in the hope they’d get better. Chances of that happening were always going to be negligible.

I didn’t see those recruits as gambles. We knew exactly what we were getting.

Instead, it feels like the club just took players for whom there was no demand elsewhere, in order to fill a list.

Clarke and Brand were probably worth a go.

 

[Kapers]

In Thurlow, Gray, L.Taylor we took players with plenty of years in the AFL, in the hope they’d get better. Chances of that happening were always going to be negligible.

I didn’t see those recruits as gambles. We knew exactly what we were getting.

Instead, it feels like the club just took players for whom there was no demand elsewhere, in order to fill a list.

Clarke and Brand were probably worth a go.

It's 100% a gamble. We took players that were cheap, didn't risk much by picking them up, and telling them to get better. If they got better we win the gamble, if they stay stagnant and we have to drop them we lose the gamble.

Anytime you put a player on your list it's a gamble with different probabilities of bust or not. Buddy was a gamble. What happened if he got an acl game 1.
Josh Kennedy was a gamble, what happened if he never improved from his hawks form.

Buying low and gambling on players is a really good plan, I feel maybe we haven't gotten the players we wanted though.

Imagine if we did get Moore, that would of been a great win, we take a player that is constantly injured and turn him into an AA defender.
Imagine if we got Langdon, that would of been a major loss, getting a guy that hit his peak in the finals only to be in doubt to ever play again.

 

[Olian]

He is a young defender who has looked really good for Richmond. You'd know that if you'd seen any of him, so not sure how you can be underwhelmed by him.

8 interceptions out of his 10 disposals that’s an impressive outing.

 

[Cadsky]

In Thurlow, Gray, L.Taylor we took players with plenty of years in the AFL, in the hope they’d get better. Chances of that happening were always going to be negligible.

I didn’t see those recruits as gambles. We knew exactly what we were getting.

Instead, it feels like the club just took players for whom there was no demand elsewhere, in order to fill a list.

Clarke and Brand were probably worth a go.

Grey and L Taylor were imo taken to give a young list some experience and leadership around them.

 

[caesar88]

8 interceptions out of his 10 disposals that’s an impressive outing.

Yep. He probably looks better than he is just by being in a very good side. He would not find things so easy at the Swans. But there's something there to work with and we can ill afford to be turning our noses up at fit, young, capable talls.

 

[Tesla Tenet]

We can’t afford to be recruiting more fringe selections in the hope they’ll get better.

He’s only 20, so could still go either way - but gawd, imagine yet ANOTHER dud recruit. The board would implode.

Grundy was a star at 20 as a rookie, Richards was a star after being traded in, Smith was a star as a rookie. NOT.

Great respect for each but they ALL take time.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[caesar88]

Grey and L Taylor were imo taken to give a young list some experience and leadership around them.

All they have led is the reserves side and the directions to KFC respectively.

 

[Dubai Quacker]

It's 100% a gamble. We took players that were cheap, didn't risk much by picking them up, and telling them to get better. If they got better we win the gamble, if they stay stagnant and we have to drop them we lose the gamble.

Anytime you put a player on your list it's a gamble with different probabilities of bust or not. Buddy was a gamble. What happened if he got an acl game 1.
Josh Kennedy was a gamble, what happened if he never improved from his hawks form.

Buying low and gambling on players is a really good plan, I feel maybe we haven't gotten the players we wanted though.

Imagine if we did get Moore, that would of been a great win, we take a player that is constantly injured and turn him into an AA defender.
Imagine if we got Langdon, that would of been a major loss, getting a guy that hit his peak in the finals only to be in doubt to ever play again.
[/QUOTE

Grey and L Taylor were imo taken to give a young list some experience and leadership around them.

Leadership is provided by Rampe, Parker, JPK.

Premiership sides don’t recruit leftovers. E

Grundy was a star at 20 as a rookie, Richards was a star after being traded in, Smith was a star as a rookie. NOT.

Great respect for each but they ALL take time.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Very true.

My point, however, still stands - we will be investing heavily at this year’s draft & if we’re going to bring in an established player via a trade, they need to be an A-grader, not another “we hope they get better” type.

 

[Cadsky]

Very true.

My point, however, still stands - we will be investing heavily at this year’s draft & if we’re going to bring in an established player via a trade, they need to be an A-grader, not another “we hope they get better” type.

do you think when parker came to the club he had only 3 senior players to guide him? young players need senior players around them to guide them and set the standards. grey and taylor may be in and out of the team but they can set standards no matter what level they are playing

 

[BloodySwan]

Grundy was a star at 20 as a rookie, Richards was a star after being traded in, Smith was a star as a rookie. NOT.

Great respect for each but they ALL take time.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

Further to your point Richards took a long time to come good. Was close to retirement and was only due to injury of the other defenders that he even got called back into the 22

 

[Dubai Quacker]

do you think when parker came to the club he had only 3 senior players to guide him? young players need senior players around them to guide them and set the standards. grey and taylor may be in and out of the team but they can set standards no matter what level they are playing

God help us if L.Taylor is setting the fitness standards.

 

[swanssince2002]

It took 4 years for our previous core to come together and win the premiership in 2012. We pumped games into them from 2009 onwards and we eventually won the whole thing. Grundy was in the 2s for a long time before he saw light at the end of the tunnel.

This is the benchmark.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

Further to your point Richards took a long time to come good. Was close to retirement and was only due to injury of the other defenders that he even got called back into the 22

IIRC Grundy was close to be delisted around 2009-2010? or am i mistaken.

 

[Virgin Dog]

Like Ed Richards at Footscray, I have seen sfa from this bloke. Pass.

Our number 1 priority is a robust decent ruckman. We have nil at present.

If Papley wants to go and threatens to stand out, he goes to Carlton for Weitering and and their first pick.

I would trade Kennedy to the Bulldogs plus a first rounder to Footscray for English. They need a big smart mid or to the GoCo for Witts and an exchange of 1st Rounders.

1 - why would the Dogs want to trade English?
2 - why would English leave Victoria for anywhere other than WA?
3 - why would the Dogs accept such a low offer?
4 - why would the Dogs need another big mid when we have Dunkley, Bont and Macrae already?

 

[caesar88]

It took 4 years for our previous core to come together and win the premiership in 2012. We pumped games into them from 2009 onwards and we eventually won the whole thing. Grundy was in the 2s for a long time before he saw light at the end of the tunnel.

This is the benchmark.

I think all great premiership sides have generally had the same benchmark, and the situation we find ourselves in is not dissimilar at all to situations those sides were in.

- Draft some good young talent and let them grow & develop together (Check.)

- Trade in to fill in the blanks that you've missed with your drafting. (?)

 

[Dubai Quacker]

1 - why would the Dogs want to trade English?
2 - why would English leave Victoria for anywhere other than WA?
3 - why would the Dogs accept such a low offer?
4 - why would the Dogs need another big mid when we have Dunkley, Bont and Macrae already?

1. Because English wants out of a club consistently referred to as “brave” by Bruce and BT, even when they grossly underachieve and get belted
2. Anywhere is better than Victoria
3. To compensate for Stevic and his crew gifting you the ‘16 GF
4. You’d be (bravely) doing it for Bob Murphy