Drafting Suggestions

[richoatthedisco]

Hear, hear!

 

[beaver fever]

There are serious question marks on Butcher's kicking, something that should not be glossed over lightly. Regardless of position, our first pick should go to the best available player. Worry about structure with subsequent picks.

 

[Tetley Tigers]

With the number one pick - always best players available.

With rest of picks to address particular needs in team.

 

[Colonel Matrix]

Are there any Cyril Rioli's in the next draft?

 

[richoatthedisco]

Yeah probably. I very much doubt we would get a top 3 pick for Foley. A first rounder yes, but not top 5. Tuck, Raines, McMahon all poor kicking I doubt we'd get great picks. 3rd rounders if we are lucky.

GC has to build a team that's going to be competitive immediately. They'll be trading out a lot of picks. I definitely think we can get a top-10 pick for Foley and at least 2nd-rounders for the rest I mentioned.

- Key Forward. Would love butcher or scully.

Scully is a small midfielder.

I think we only need one good draft to be back in the mix, it definatly wont be a 5 year plan this time.

I'll say two good drafts.

There are serious question marks on Butcher's kicking, something that should not be glossed over lightly. Regardless of position, our first pick should go to the best available player. Worry about structure with subsequent picks.

Agreed on best available. Butcher's kicking is a little ungainly but they seem to go straight enough. If Melbourne has any brains we won't get a look-in at him anyway.

 

[coke_zero]

our first pick should go to the best available player. Worry about structure with subsequent picks.

agree, and who ever we pick must have all the skills to become an afl footballer. not a project player that is a gun but lacks in something like kicking or picking the ball up.

 

[chargers 09]

what we need:

- Small defender. The key here is he needs to be a good kick and a fierce tackler.

Raines, King, Mcmahon dont have a complete game. Raines always runs in to trouble and is an average kick, King is a shocking kick and gives away to many free kicks with indiscipline and Mcmahon is just to weak and doesnt have a great defensive sense.

- Key Forward. Would love butcher or scully. Add Vickery resting up forward, Morton, Riewoldt and Nahas and theres alot of potential.

- Small Forward. to be brutally honest we need an aborigional boy. Forward pressure is very important these days and along with nahas could be a dynamite duo.

Midfield is good!
Cotchin, Deledio, Foley = superstars
Tuck, White, Tambling, Jackson, cousins = good depth

Anyone know if ROK contract is expiring this year, afl might introduce free agency and he would be IDEAL for us, runs all day good tackler, great disposal just a quality half forward.

I think we only need one good draft to be back in the mix, it definatly wont be a 5 year plan this time.

Not a tigers supporter but have a bit of a soft spot for them (dad goes for em)]

couldn't agree more with your small forward idea, ive played tac cup footy against the likes of farran priest, allen christensen and tom rockliff. they would all be good small forwards dont u reckon? definetetly worth having a look at.

Key forward- wat happened to Cleeve Hughes remember he kicked 7 against port power last year? Simmonds maybe to finish his carrer in the goal square?

ruckman- if simmonds goes into the goal saquare lets browne, vickery, pattison and graham fight it out for ruck duties.
i think graham turned out to be better than most expected.

Ive player footy agsint Josh free a few times, dead set gun although small good attack on the footy and very hard to move

 

[chargers 09]

Are there any Cyril Rioli's in the next draft?

from victoria Farran Priest and allen christensen

 

[cormick]

IS Josh Muling any chance in the draft this year?
Or Jackson Bolton?

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

Wrong draft year to Trade Foley unless its within the top 4.Anything over that and we are more or less giving him up for nothing.

 

[_RT_]

Regardless of position, our first pick should go to the best available player. Worry about structure with subsequent picks.

Hypothetical Beaver:

At the end of the season we've got a top 3 pick. Its quite clear that we need KPP's at both ends of the ground. The best available kid is a midfielder, but he isn't that much better than the kids we could get later on in the draft. Behind him are a couple of KPP's who are rated as much better prospects than those later on in the draft.

Who do you take the slightly better midfielder or the much better KPP's?

 

[beaver fever]

I think your hypothesis is flawed. A top 3 midfielder only being slightly better than those in the second round? Come off it.

Let's go with a reasonable hypothesis. The top rated KPP is far better than the other KPPs in the draft (i.e. no KPP depth), while there are still some good midfielders to be found in the later rounds. However the top midfielder is rated higher than the top KPP. My answer is still you take the best available.

 

[_RT_]

I think your hypothesis is flawed. A top 3 midfielder only being slightly better than those in the second round? Come off it.

Let's go with a reasonable hypothesis. The top rated KPP is far better than the other KPPs in the draft (i.e. no KPP depth), while there are still some good midfielders to be found in the later rounds. However the top midfielder is rated higher than the top KPP. My answer is still you take the best available.

Ok the hypothesis might not have been great but my point was I don't think its wise to go solely with a best available policy. You need to see what you're likley to get later on in regards what you need. Given we need KPPs more than we need midfielders at the moment I would be much more inclined to go with the KPP at this stage than getting another midfielder and then finding there isn't much down forward for them to kick to in the next couple of years.

 

[beaver fever]

Oh I am well aware of what your opinion is on this matter, and what you were alluding to, I simply don't agree with it. You don't risk the opportunity to miss a star player because you need another type of player more. In essence star players are always needed, they are a list deficiency.

 

[bigstyletiger]

Re: The Purge

Before I start this post I know my suggestions will ruffle a few feathers and most people will disaprove of it, but rest assured the club won't have the balls to go through with my suggestion anyway.

With the Gold Coast and the West Sydney coming into the comp the strategy is going to have to be different than how teams rebuilt in the past.

With the Gold Coast and West sydney side coming in no club can properly rebuild until the 2012 draft. In the 2010 draft the Gold Coast has the 1,2,3,5,7,9,11,12,15 and I imagine that it will be similar for West Sydney in the 2011.

The worst thing that would happen for Richmond is if we finish in the middle of the road (neither bad or good) for the next few years. If that happens then we won't truely be able to recruit properly. At the moment I think Delidio and Foley are 21-22. If we finish say 11th in 2010 and 2011 then that would mean that our first pick would be pick 14 and 32 instead of the usual pick 6 and 24. At the moment I think Delidio and Foley are about 22 years old. What that means is that by 2012 when the draft becomes somewhat normal agian they will be 25-26 (and when it does come somewhat normal again there will be 18 teams in each round instead of 16). If we start rebuilding then the kid we recruit 2012 would begin reach to their peak until they are about five years into the system. So that would mean that by that time Delidio and Foley would be close to retireing by then and past their own peak.

We need to rebuild and rebuild properly. No more short cuts in recruiting of Kent Kingsleys, Ben Grahams or Patrick Bowdens. No finshing 9-10 one year and then 16-14 the next. The list needs to be purged. When I say purged I mean we almost literally have to start on a clean slate. Anybody of up to the last two drafts should be tradable provided that it is for picks and the offers are reasonable.

The first step in this strategy is to delist anybody over 30 (except for Richo. He has earned the right to decide when to walk away).

The second step is on the 2009 and 2010 draft the focus should be recruiting key position players. The reason for this is that they take longer to develop and prevent us becoming a middle of the road side for a few years while they develop. On the 2011 and 2012 drafts the focus should mainly be midfielders. This way the midfielders we select will hit their peak about the same time as the key position players.

The third step is the one where a lot of people will disagree with me but essential if Richmond don't want to still be known as ninthmond for the next 15 years. That is embrace the idea of trading at least two of our top players for the first round selections to the Gold Coast (http://gc17.com.au/index.php?id=52&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=63&tx_ttnews[backPid]=47&cHash=23d1921152). With these in hand Richmond should nominate 2012 draft to use them so we will likely have at least three of the first eight picks in that draft.

If Richmond use this strategy then the picks Richmond we like to have are:
pick 1,2 or 3 in the 2009 draft
top 10 pick in the 2010 draft
top 10 pick in the 2011 draft
three top 10 picks in the 2012 draft

That means that Richmond would have obtained 6 top ten picks in four drafts. Once the Gold Coast and the West Sydney side are in no club would have an opportunity like this.

I think that with this strategy we will be making regular finals and competing for a premiership by 2015 and the window will be open for at least 5-7 years. If we continue to finsh 9-11 then it will take much longer to build a side the can make the finals let alone win a premiership.

I know that this strategy is extreme and many people will strongly disagree with with, but if it is the best way to move ahead if the club want to become more than a middle of the road side.

Obviously this is the recruiting strategy that I think tha club should take, the club has to also look at how it develops the players once they come to the club. But this thread is about drafting suggestions and not about how the club develops players.

I don't think that we are in that bad a position to be honest. If we can secure a top 3/4 pick this year and pick up a quality key tall we should be fine.

We have enough young key backs - Rance, McGuane, Thursfield, Moore, Post.

Some good young mids - Foley, Deledio, Cotchin, Tambling (shown that he is coming on), Jackson, White, Collins

A ruck combo with potential - Angus (coming along in leaps and bounds, Vickery (have a feeling he will be a star), Pattison (very very honest second ruck) and Browne (for a first year rookie has shown plenty)

Something to work with up forward - Morton, Riewoldt, Nahas

If we secure a gun key forward in this draft it will make life much much easier for Morton, Riewoldt, Nahas and all of a sudden the backs and mids will be able to come through the corridor with confidence knowing that they will be able to kick to a forward who will at least be able to make a contest, allowing the crumbers to go to work.

Sadly we have very little that we could trade for a top 10 pick to the gold coast as most of your guns are either nearly retired or very young. There is no point trading a player like Deledio as you cannot be sure you will get somebody as good in the draft and players that age still have plenty of years to give.

The only option would be a key back as for the first time in recent history we may actually have a slight surplus.

Looking at the Saints they are so good this year largely due to their mature bodies. Same with Geelong's rise to prominence a couple of years ago. We will be a good side if we hold the above group together but add a quality key forward when our players have more experience and their bodies mature. Hence TW's disasterous 2011 line is probably fairly true.

 

[_RT_]

Oh I am well aware of what your opinion is on this matter, and what you were alluding to, I simply don't agree with it. You don't risk the opportunity to miss a star player because you need another type of player more. In essence star players are always needed, they are a list deficiency.

Let me put it to you another way, lets say they are both rated equal, much the same way Kruezer and Cotchin were, which would you take then?

The gun midfielder who will impact now or the gun tall who might not have as much impact short term but will later?

 

[beaver fever]

That is an entirely different question. If you rate two players the same then obviously needs wins out. Just like why we picked Vickery over Ziebell.

 

[_RT_]

For those contemplating the draft already I thought it would be nice if we had exactly how GC will be affecting the picks over the next couple of years:

2009
Gold Coast to have the capacity to sign 12 x 17 year-olds born in the January – April window (January 1 to April 30, 1992).

Gold Coast also get picks 1-5 in the rookie draft. Assuming we finish bottom 2-3 our first rookie pick would be 6-8. If thats the case might be worthwhile cutting that extra player so you get an extra pick late in the draft that you can use on a kid before the rookie draft rolls around.

2010
GC get first pick each round plus picks 2, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15 in round one.

GC get first pick in the rookie draft.

Compensation for losing a player to GC
As part of the entry rules for the Gold Coast side, the AFL Commission resolved that any club that lost a player to the expansion side would be eligible for a compensation pick (after the entry of both Gold Coast and the second club to be based in Sydney).

Compensation picks will be tradeable and can be used by clubs at any time within five years. First round compensation picks cannot be used until the end of the first round in the 2010 and 2011 drafts. Clubs will be required to nominate the year in which they plan to use the compensation pick before the first round of the Toyota AFL Premiership Season in that particular year.

The compensatory pick would be assessed around the player’s age (greater weighting for younger players), club contract ranking (greater weighting for club key players), onfield performance (greater weighting for strong club best and fairest performance) and draft position if less than four years experience.

This ranking system will then determine if a club is eligible for a compensatory pick in one of five spots – first-round pick, end-of-first-round pick, second-round pick, end-of-second-round pick or third-round pick. Under the model, the round-one, round-two or round-three picks would be taken immediately after the pick the club already has in that round in the draft that year.

 

[SleepingGiant]

Ok the situation at this current stage looks most likely like Scully No. 1, and then Butcher No.2 (I know things can change). But Scully is rated slightly better than Butcher.... only slightly. I would take Butcher to assist Reiwolt in a twin tower role in future years. We then should look at drafting a couple aboriginal livewires with x-factor for the forwardline with later picks. The 3rd tall would come in the form of a Vickery/Graham rotation up forward and in the ruck. The next draft after this I would focus on elite mids with picks 6 and 4, providing be bite the ****ing bullet and rebuild properly and not finish 9th next year. This should create a senario where our mids and KPP's peak closer together. If this process occurs over two years, with a coach who has a hard tough attacking gameplan (Knight's Style where he makes them attack then learn to defend), I personally believe we will be out of a rut and ready to have a premiership window open. This is providing players actually develop, as well as making sure our defensive pressure and skills are constantly worked on.

 

[_RT_]

That is an entirely different question. If you rate two players the same then obviously needs wins out. Just like why we picked Vickery over Ziebell.

I'm just thinking back to the 04 & 05 drafts and the errors that we made then, had the chances to draft a couple of quality talls and decided against it for a couple of players who we get told after the fact will take a few years to develop. I hope we've learnt from that and it seems we have given last year.

 

[beaver fever]

I'm just thinking back to the 04 & 05 drafts and the errors that we made then, had the chances to draft a couple of quality talls and decided against it for a couple of players who we get told after the fact will take a few years to develop. I hope we've learnt from that and it seems we have given last year.

We rated Deledio ahead of Roughead and Tambling ahead of Franklin. We wanted to get Roughead but Hawthorn ruined the party. Turns out we rated Deledio correct as better than Roughead and Tambling incorrect as better than Franklin.

 

[SleepingGiant]

We rated Deledio ahead of Roughead and Tambling ahead of Franklin. We wanted to get Roughead but Hawthorn ruined the party. Turns out we rated Deledio correct as better than Roughead and Tambling incorrect as better than Franklin.

Right now I would reconsider that too. While i'm confident lids will be a better player right now I would take Roughie any day of the week.

 

[cormick]

Most people thought the 2004 draft would go Deledio #1, Tambling #2. Richie was seen as the second best player. Fwiw.

 

[coke_zero]

Right now I would reconsider that too. While i'm confident lids will be a better player right now I would take Roughie any day of the week.

sure we would love a big, tall, strong FF. but not at lids exspense. and to be fair he never gets the best tall and does not get doubl teamed.

 

[Spluff]

Josh Free appears to be improving constantly - a possible f/s pick.

http://www.thecourier.com.au/news/l...mbool-welcome-for-red-hot-rebels/1510083.aspx

Josh Free stepped up in his first game as captain and led by example.
Free was relentlessly in and under the ball, encouraging his team-mates to follow suit.