Drafting hindsight

[PLSC]

Whilst Gasper has been good for us this ended when he did his knee (lost that crucial yard of pace). As much as no one here likes to admit it football is not a sentimental game and people's memories only stretch back a year or two generally but this is not the case with us due to a lack of finals. Realistically Gaspar has been poor for awhile lately. His previous service is no exucse for this and in my opinion this has been one of the problems with the Richmond football club for awhile. We reward a years good performance with a fantastic contract and then get the worst of the deal. We are absolutely shocking at realising when to move a player on. 2001 was a pivotal year for us. Gasper was desperate to head back west and Ben Holland had us over a barrel wanting more money. With the benefit of hindsight we should've given both away for top 20 draft picks (which sadly they commanded at the time) instead we thought we were on the gusp of greatness but thats the way the world works I suppose. Instead we reward both for their 'loyalty' with overpriced overlong contracts that are hard to lay off and hit the bottom four. Realistically I acknowledge Gaspers service but we owe him no favours in terms of laying off the abuse (this goes for everyone on the list) basically its a year to year thing we are far too patient waiting for OLDER players to perform as far as I'm concerned you wait til the age of 23 if they haven't shown they're GOOD quality then get the best deal you can for them (nature of modern footy is that you can't afford the investment of sticking em in the ressies for 4 seasons to wait for them to mature, some just don't put on weight and exp problems etc.). Funnily enough Gasper did not fall into this category and when he went down he lost any value he had thus he always should've been kept. This is more relevant to the current crop. For the poster above both Krakouer and Tivendale will NEVER play in a premiership team and this applies to a significantly high proportion of our current first team and should thus be moved on for the best deal we can recieve.

love your work sim

 

[Bentleigh]

Whilst Gasper has been good for us this ended when he did his knee (lost that crucial yard of pace). As much as no one here likes to admit it football is not a sentimental game and people's memories only stretch back a year or two generally but this is not the case with us due to a lack of finals. Realistically Gaspar has been poor for awhile lately. His previous service is no exucse for this and in my opinion this has been one of the problems with the Richmond football club for awhile. We reward a years good performance with a fantastic contract and then get the worst of the deal. We are absolutely shocking at realising when to move a player on. 2001 was a pivotal year for us. Gasper was desperate to head back west and Ben Holland had us over a barrel wanting more money. With the benefit of hindsight we should've given both away for top 20 draft picks (which sadly they commanded at the time) instead we thought we were on the gusp of greatness but thats the way the world works I suppose. Instead we reward both for their 'loyalty' with overpriced overlong contracts that are hard to lay off and hit the bottom four. Realistically I acknowledge Gaspers service but we owe him no favours in terms of laying off the abuse (this goes for everyone on the list) basically its a year to year thing we are far too patient waiting for OLDER players to perform as far as I'm concerned you wait til the age of 23 if they haven't shown they're GOOD quality then get the best deal you can for them (nature of modern footy is that you can't afford the investment of sticking em in the ressies for 4 seasons to wait for them to mature, some just don't put on weight and exp problems etc.). Funnily enough Gasper did not fall into this category and when he went down he lost any value he had thus he always should've been kept. This is more relevant to the current crop. For the poster above both Krakouer and Tivendale will NEVER play in a premiership team and this applies to a significantly high proportion of our current first team and should thus be moved on for the best deal we can recieve.

 

[lids2004roar]

Krakouer and Tivendale will NEVER play in a premiership team and this applies to a significantly high proportion of our current first team and should thus be moved on for the best deal we can recieve.

You know what, you're a genius! If only TW thought of trading them for champion premiership players earlier

 

[PLSC]

they arent going anywhere

tivendale is a suck up honest type of bloke and krak and miller are tight as and miller will keep giving him 3 year deals wishing one day good ol krak might string 2 good games together

joke

 

[monty1104]

RIGHT on. Couldn't agree more Hag!
Sure the Fiora-Pavlich one haunts us to a degree, but Fiora ahead of the likes of Beetham and Roach is a masterstroke.
There are never any guarantees when it comes to drafting. As was the case with Pettifer, I think it was more a case of his coach (Frawley...that name again) not giving him a chance, opting to go with the likes of Houlihan instead! Interesting that Wallace would have picked him at the Bulldogs and then came in and gave Petts a chance. The rest is history.

I like to put a different spin on things (don't I always...good old Goldy from left field for a change). The likes of Essendon might boast of their genius at picking Hird at pick 79. But was it? The way I look at it, the Bombers had four picks before they even selected Hird. Yes it worked well in hindsight, but they felt there was at least four better players available to the club (and who knows how many others that lande at other clubs).

Coughlan over Cloke....genius!!!

Actually, we couldn't pick Hird before that. The draft that year still used some of the zoning rules, and since Hird was forn Ainslie in the ACT, he was zoned to Sydney. They over looked him because he was too injury prone... said something about chronic foot injuries

 

[RHAS]

give me a ****ing break

the guy is a joke who had 1 good year and ripped the club off by getting himself a healthy contract

was never able to kick and shows about as much leadership on a football field as an 18 year old

good luck to the guy he did well for himself doesnt change the fact we are meant to be rebuilding and opposition supporters laugh when he is embarrassing us at full back

dud

One good year? He was twice All Australian

 

[Weaver]

Sorry Weave, but seven or eight seasons of Andrew Rogers (pick 6), or even Parsons or Brockhurst would have been better than the one decent game (out of four career games) that we got from Lounder!
Agree, the draft was not strong, but I don't think anyone else was even remotely interested in Lounder and we soon saw why. The only reason he kicked four on debut was because North Melbiourne persisted by playing three foot three John Law on him.

Peter Bubner at pick 13 was a better player fthan Lounder from the same time and would have suited our needs far greater - a full back! It was a poor, poor pick. Of the four you mentioned - Wright, Obst, Tingay and Benny Gale - alf four were availoable at pick number one.

Player retention scheme operating in SA meant that most of the good SA players were under contract to the SANFL and were unable /unwilling to leave.

There was a long list of ways a guy could become elligable for that scheme (games, premierships, medals, rep games etc) but it often came down to simply being picked or targetted by the AFL.

Brisbane may have drafted Chris McDermott, but it was a wasted pick because they were basically trying to draft him and then persuade him to break his SANFL contract. They were hoping that he'd let his SANFL contract run out and then he'd sign with them in the 3rd year (a draft pick is valid for 3 years). Brisbane's first 2 picks were McDermott and Andrew Jarman.

Peter Bubner never played for Carlton. Bad pick.

Essendon had the budget and muscle to get Andrew Rogers - we wouldn't have been able to. They got a whole 8 games out of him before cutting him.

Getting Michael Parson for 25 games of reserve ruck work was hardly going to swing things around. Getting the 25 game nuff-nuff instead of the 4 game nuff-nuff, hardly matters.

Lounder had talent and size but a complete unwillingness to even try - he didn't want to be a footballer.

Clubs had to be very careful about recruiting SA and the nervousness about whether they'd play or not forced them down the draft order in many cases (eg Andrew Obst, Simon Tregenza with the Bullies last pick).

Even 3 years later in 1992 when we drafted Mark Jones, Jamie Tape, Matthew Rogers and Paul Bulluss (all because we had Neil Balme as our man in SA) ... Rogers and Jones elected to stay in SA for another year.

 

[always right]

Pettifer, and the club and the rest of us by default, copped it from all angles for being a dud number 9 until the last year or two, but of the eight guys taken ahead of him 3 no longer play (Livingston, Angwin and Dylan Smith), one's changed clubs in desperation trying to get a game (McDougall) and another (Daniel Motlop) is behind Pett's and probably in a make or break year at his second club. Only the top 3 - Riewoldt, Ko****zke and Didak - stand above him, and all 3 have had their fair share of problems.

Western Bulldogs
Pick 10 Jordan McMahon
Pick 56 Daniel Cross

 

[PLSC]

Western Bulldogs
Pick 10 Jordan McMahon
Pick 56 Daniel Cross

nah he wanted to bring up the duds who petts is better than, wouldnt want facts to get in the way of his fluff post would we

cross @ 56 is quality

 

[Weaver]

nah he wanted to bring up the duds who petts is better than,

10. Jordan McMahon
26. Shane Birss
56. Daniel Cross
70. Wayde Skipper
78. Pass
83. Pass
PSD 7. Nick Bruton
Trade - Ben Harrison

8. Kayne Pettifer
25. Mark Coughlan
40. Chris Hyde
41. Andrew Krakouer
55. Chris Newman
57. Steve Sziller
69. Pass

wouldnt want facts to get in the way of his fluff post would we

cross @ 56 is quality

55. Chris Newman
56. Daniel Cross

 

[peejay]

12. Christ Scott

Apparently is a miracle worker on the field - Heard his old man could do a bit

 

[Crumden]

Whilst Gasper has been good for us this ended when he did his knee (lost that crucial yard of pace).

I think this was the key to Gaspar. He had two qualities that made him one of the better full backs over the last ten years:

• he reads the ball in the air better than most players in the league; and
• he was very quick off the mark, which allowed him to match leading full forwards.

It was the combination of both of these that made him a good full back. After the knee injury, he lost the second. And in the resulting confidence loss he seemed to lose the first. As a result, in 2004 he had nothing and looked like one of the worst players going around. If he is back at full fitness and gets his confidence back, he can still be useful at full back, but the signs so far are that he has lost that acceleration that he relied on so much.

 

[PLSC]

10. Jordan McMahon
26. Shane Birss
56. Daniel Cross
70. Wayde Skipper
78. Pass
83. Pass
PSD 7. Nick Bruton
Trade - Ben Harrison

8. Kayne Pettifer
25. Mark Coughlan
40. Chris Hyde
41. Andrew Krakouer
55. Chris Newman
57. Steve Sziller
69. Pass



55. Chris Newman
56. Daniel Cross

your point?

give me cross and mcmahon anyday over our 2000 crop who only petts is playing well atm

besides the dogs molested the 99 draft so only getting 2 decent players in 2000 isnt that bad a result

 

[NQTIGER]

Have you not seen any of Gaspars carrer?

He has been a fantastic Full-Back for us, he has been an All-Australian and IMO certainly justified his No.1 Pick, even though it wasn't ours in the first place.

BTW how many All-Australians have you won PLSC???

Fantastic full back,what a load of c**p the guy cant kick, cant handball and he is slow, andy kellaway got dumped wrong bloke IMO

Gaspar is overpaid and overated, he has cost us.......

 

[Delidio]

10. Jordan McMahon
26. Shane Birss
56. Daniel Cross
70. Wayde Skipper
78. Pass
83. Pass
PSD 7. Nick Bruton
Trade - Ben Harrison

8. Kayne Pettifer
25. Mark Coughlan
40. Chris Hyde
41. Andrew Krakouer
55. Chris Newman
57. Steve Sziller
69. Pass



55. Chris Newman
56. Daniel Cross

your point?

give me cross and mcmahon anyday over our 2000 crop who only petts is playing well atm

besides the dogs molested the 99 draft so only getting 2 decent players in 2000 isnt that bad a result

coughlan = cross
pettifer > mcmahon
newman >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> skipper
+ hyde, krakouer

richmond easily had a better draft.

 

[Dr Gonzo]

coughlan = cross
pettifer > mcmahon
newman >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> skipper
+ hyde, krakouer

richmond easily had a better draft.

Cross has been rated in the top 50 players in the AFL by Mike Sheahan and Pettifer > McMahon is debatable

Richmond EASILY???? please

 

[lids2004roar]

Cross has been rated in the top 50 players in the AFL by Mike Sheahan and Pettifer > McMahon is debatable

Richmond EASILY???? please

Coughlan has been rated as an ELITE level midfielder by many people when at his peak.

Most people expected him to get to a level similar to Lenny Hayes, if he can still get there is a tough question. Cross is great but who says COgs wouldn't be in Sheahan's top 30? In fact I think he was 2 years ago.

Kayne Pettifer is the reason why we won that draft. He's a walk up start to any club in the league.

Chris Newman could be our next captain and is playing great footy atm. Let's hope he doesn't get soreness like Browny did last year..

Krakouer has been handy even if not consistent and Chris Hyde has been a very solid contributor over the years. They can't all be stars but Hyde was much better than your other picks.

Richmond clearly won that draft, doesn't mean you didn't get one or two players we just hit jackpot with 2 stars, 1 great player, and 2 solid players.

 

[Tigerbob]

Cross has been rated in the top 50 players in the AFL by Mike Sheahan and Pettifer > McMahon is debatable

Richmond EASILY???? please

Mike Sheahan is a moron.

Mark Coughlan is an ELITE midfielder. He'll be back.

Kayne Pettifer is a walk up start in any team.

Chris Newman is also a walk up start in any team. Wonderful underrated defender.

Krakouer and Hyde are servicable.

We did clearly win that draft, althought he Bulldogs did very well. Daniel Cross is a very special talent, just dont agree with top 50.

 

[polakthetiger]

Chris Newman could be our next captain and is playing great footy atm. Let's hope he doesn't get soreness like Browny did last year..

Browny's soreness was from the rod wasn't it? Newman doesn't have a rod does he? (They both may have rods after pumping the baggers next week though )

 

[PLSC]

Coughlan has been rated as an ELITE level midfielder by many people when at his peak.

Most people expected him to get to a level similar to Lenny Hayes, if he can still get there is a tough question. Cross is great but who says COgs wouldn't be in Sheahan's top 30? In fact I think he was 2 years ago.

Kayne Pettifer is the reason why we won that draft. He's a walk up start to any club in the league.

Chris Newman could be our next captain and is playing great footy atm. Let's hope he doesn't get soreness like Browny did last year..

Krakouer has been handy even if not consistent and Chris Hyde has been a very solid contributor over the years. They can't all be stars but Hyde was much better than your other picks.

Richmond clearly won that draft, doesn't mean you didn't get one or two players we just hit jackpot with 2 stars, 1 great player, and 2 solid players.

your a goose

our 2000 draft is mediocre and we might be slightly in front of the dogs batch but have a look at their 99 draft and look at ours

 

[Dr Gonzo]

Mike Sheahan is a moron.

Kayne Pettifer is a walk up start in any team.

Chris Newman is also a walk up start in any team. Wonderful underrated defender.

Walk up start in any team eh? Thats quite funny

 

[santa claws]

You know what, you're a genius! If only TW thought of trading them for champion premiership players earlier

its a process bf.its not about trading them for champion premiership players.

its about recognising as quick as you can that they are not good enough and hopefully getting something for them before they lose all value. something we have been abysmal at. invariably we hang on to duds to long harming not only drafting opportunities but development as well.
the game went past gaspar yrs ago at the very least miller before and wallace now should have recognised this.(its their job)and if unable to delist. because of structure should have at least had a young fb in place by now preparing to replace him.
Krakouer is a failure plain and simple after 6 senior yrs he still is only 74kg cant run 50 mtrs wiyhout blowing up. is stilla as slow as a wet wick and cant get his hands on the ball. if it wasnt for his name he would have been long gone.this has been obvious for 3yrs.
hydes a hard worker and gets the most out of himself but ask yourself if he wasnt there would he be missed. i doubt it and this makes him very vulnerable.
i could go on and on. just on cogs i wouldnt call him elite. a very good inside footballer with limitations. some of those limitations are poor kick lacks a yard doesnt have a hurt factor.

finally on pettifer yes hes improved. he couldnt get any worse. but a walk up start to most teams i dont think so. in fact i would be surprised if most teams would be prepared to give up a second round pick for him.personally wouldnt give two bob for him.

 

[PLSC]

quality claw

wait for the Go Tigers! brigade to shoot you down

keep it real

 

[Kurtis G]

Personally I'm sick of people giving us grief over our draft history - there's crap and there's gold - but as Weaver says, you can't look at picks in isolation.

Pettifer, and the club and the rest of us by default, copped it from all angles for being a dud number 9 until the last year or two, but of the eight guys taken ahead of him 3 no longer play (Livingston, Angwin and Dylan Smith), one's changed clubs in desperation trying to get a game (McDougall) and another (Daniel Motlop) is behind Pett's and probably in a make or break year at his second club. Only the top 3 - Riewoldt, Ko****zke and Didak - stand above him, and all 3 have had their fair share of problems.

Now I'm grabbing one pick in isolation, but other picks we've been criticised for are not necessarily as rotten as considered: the legendary "Fiora ahead of Pavlich" pick in 99 wasn't brilliant, but it was better than Cupido at pick 6, Danny Roach at pick 7 or Cayden Beetham at 9. And since we've trade him for Troy Simmonds that original pick is starting to give some genuine value.

Sure we could have had Pavlich, but 15 other clubs could have taken Raines or Newman or Tuck or Coughlan ahead of us. By the end of 2001 the football world was laughing at us for taking Coughlan rather than using the pick as a father-son to get Jason Cloke, but maybe we weren't so stupid after all.

Some are right, some are wrong - just like every other club, but unfortunately our poor standing over the past 25 years makes everyone only see the negatives and not bother looking any deeper.

That's going to happen, nothing we can do about it but start gaining respect by winning games and playing finals, but those of us in the yellow and black should be pointing out the positives and doing what we can to restore the pride of the club.

Don't believe the hype - start making your own.

Best post on BF in 12 months.

 

[PLSC]

depends what you want to beleive

ill stick to quality from claw and bents