Miller's Drafting Record: 2003- present

[astro_toby]

I am sick of repeating myself but given the state of the list at the time that Nathan Brown was traded for, it was not a good trade. You like every other brown trade lover are using hindsight to back up your arguments. Folly.

Given how shit the list was, we needed to rebuild much earlier then when Wallace came to the helm did we not? Trading our top picks for a flanker (a good one granted) did nothing but hurt us long-term. Wonder why we don't have any mid age players, it's because we traded those picks for players. The result of those picks is irrelevant, it is the fact we traded away our future for a quick fix that in the end did nothing for us.

Like I said in another post, the back of the skill othe odds are that Brown will never play a finals game for the RFC. What a good trade indeed.

the odds are ben holland never would have again - and that tenace would have only based on the quality of other players

its all good and well to have a crack at the club for mistakes in hindsight - but only an idiot would choose to have a crack at possibly the only decision which wasn't a mistake

hello idiot

 

[the ranger]

I am sick of repeating myself but given the state of the list at the time that Nathan Brown was traded for, it was not a good trade. You like every other brown trade lover are using hindsight to back up your arguments. Folly.

Given how shit the list was, we needed to rebuild much earlier then when Wallace came to the helm did we not? Trading our top picks for a flanker (a good one granted) did nothing but hurt us long-term. Wonder why we don't have any mid age players, it's because we traded those picks for players. The result of those picks is irrelevant, it is the fact we traded away our future for a quick fix that in the end did nothing for us.

Like I said in another post, the odds are that Brown will never play a finals game for the RFC. What a good trade indeed.

He was 25. It was a weak draft. It was a good trade. It's pretty straight forward. Getting Brown hasn't stopped us rebuilding.

We'd have had to have pulled off a miracle on draft day 2003 to make keeping picks 6 and 20 worthwhile. Those picks each had about a 1 in 10 chance of turning into a player that would now be a regular in the side. So that's a 1% chance that we'd now have two extra 22-23 year olds in the best 22 instead of Nathan Brown. A 20% chance that we'd have one young player instead of Brown and a 79% chance that we'd have SFA.

 

[beaver fever]

the odds are ben holland never would have again - and that tenace would have only based on the quality of other players

its all good and well to have a crack at the club for mistakes in hindsight - but only an idiot would choose to have a crack at possibly the only decision which wasn't a mistake

hello idiot

Christ do you even bother to read what I wrote. Do you understand what the meaning of hindsight is? Look it up fool.

 

[beaver fever]

He was 25. It was a weak draft. It was a good trade. It's pretty straight forward. Getting Brown hasn't stopped us rebuilding.

We'd have had to have pulled off a miracle on draft day 2003 to make keeping picks 6 and 20 worthwhile. Those picks each had about a 1 in 10 chance of turning into a player that would now be a regular in the side. So that's a 1% chance that we'd now have two extra 22-23 year olds in the best 22 instead of Nathan Brown. A 20% chance that we'd have one young player instead of Brown and a 79% chance that we'd have SFA.

Go on loving that trade then fool.

 

[astro_toby]

Christ do you even bother to read what I wrote. Do you understand what the meaning of hindsight is? Look it up fool.

i did read what your wrote - the proof is me still shaking my head at how stupid it is

 

[beaver fever]

i did read what your wrote - the proof is me still shaking my head at how stupid it is

Well then why did you continue to use the tenace argument?

 

[the ranger]

Christ do you even bother to read what I wrote. Do you understand what the meaning of hindsight is? Look it up fool.

Just because hindsight proves that it was a good decision, doesn't mean it wasn't a good one at the time. It clearly was.

Footscray thought that 6th pick was so valuable, they dealt it to Hawthorn for a player that didn't want to play for them. For some reason, they also had to use their #1 pick in the PSD to get Rawlings to sign on. They didn't want pick #20 either, dealing it to the Cats for Peter Street. The Cats didn't want it and dealt it to the Eagles for David Haynes.

Both the picks got traded twice more after we sent them to Footscray. Clearly, most teams didn't rate the depth of the draft at the time. Hindsight proved them right.

 

[the ranger]

Go on loving that trade then fool.

Will do

 

[beaver fever]

Just because hindsight proves that it was a good decision, doesn't mean it wasn't a good one at the time. It clearly was.

Footscray thought that 6th pick was so valuable, they dealt it to Hawthorn for a player that didn't want to play for them. For some reason, they also had to use their #1 pick in the PSD to get Rawlings to sign on. They didn't want pick #20 either, dealing it to the Cats for Peter Street. The Cats didn't want it and dealt it to the Eagles for David Haynes.

Both the picks got traded twice more after we sent them to Footscray. Clearly, most teams didn't rate the depth of the draft at the time. Hindsight proved them right.

Bulldogs overrated their list, just like we did and were screaming for a key position forward. If you want to use hindsight as an argument, then you could go through every richmond draft selection and say whether it was shit or good based upon the players taken after it's success rate. Stupid thing to do.

 

[astro_toby]

Well then why did you continue to use the tenace argument?

because it wouldn't make any difference to the arguement if i change the name Tenace to Kepler Bradley, Raph Clarke, David Trotter, Ryle Dunn, Beau Watters, Ryan Murphy, Brett Stanton, Fergus Watts, Troy Chaplin, Josh Willoughby, billy Morrison, or Llane Spaanderman - as they were the 12 other players we could have drafted with pick 6.

for once our club showed some insight in trading away a, what would usually be highly sought after pick, and a player well past his use by date - for a player of genuine class and if it wasn't for a terribly horrific injury - he would be one of the top 1% players in the competition

mate - any other trade of drafting issue of the past 8 years i would tend to agree with you - i am just really confused why you picked this one out (the only time our judgement proved to be correct ) as the example you have chosen

 

[beaver fever]

because it wouldn't make any difference to the arguement if i change the name Tenace to Kepler Bradley, Raph Clarke, David Trotter, Ryle Dunn, Beau Watters, Ryan Murphy, Brett Stanton, Fergus Watts, Troy Chaplin, Josh Willoughby, billy Morrison, or Llane Spaanderman - as they were the 12 other players we could have drafted with pick 6.

for once our club showed some insight in trading away a, what would usually be highly sought after pick, and a player well past his use by date - for a player of genuine class and if it wasn't for a terribly horrific injury - he would be one of the top 1% players in the competition

mate - any other trade of drafting issue of the past 8 years i would tend to agree with you - i am just really confused why you picked this one out (the only time our judgement proved to be correct ) as the example you have chosen

Fine in that case I'd take Brent Stanton and Jed Adcock with those picks thanks. Hmm yes that trade looks really good now doesn't it.

 

[tucker777]

Fine in that case I'd take Brent Stanton and Jed Adcock with those picks thanks. Hmm yes that trade looks really good now doesn't it.

Jed Adcock????





oh wait your serious

 

[the ranger]

Bulldogs overrated their list, just like we did and were screaming for a key position forward. If you want to use hindsight as an argument, then you could go through every richmond draft selection and say whether it was shit or good based upon the players taken after it's success rate. Stupid thing to do.

They over-rated their list after winning the spoon?

 

[beaver fever]

They over-rated their list after winning the spoon?

Wallace did the same thing at Richmond.

 

[astro_toby]

Fine in that case I'd take Brent Stanton and Jed Adcock with those picks thanks. Hmm yes that trade looks really good now doesn't it.

jed adcock went at 33. we could have gotten him at pick 22. youre arguement has got more holes than swiss cheese

it was a terribly weak draft. if the only two players you can pick our from pick 6 - 80 is Jed Adcock and and Brent Stanton - that only underlines this


question - and im not taking the piss...

are you drunk?

 

[the ranger]

Wallace did the same thing at Richmond.

In 2004? Which move are you referring to? Fiora for Simmonds, Knobel in the PSD or using pick 65 on Mark Graham?

I guess we could have used 65 on Chris Bryan and taken Eddie Betts in the PSD, but the moves we made weren't terrible.

 

[beaver fever]

jed adcock went at 33. we could have gotten him at pick 22. youre arguement has got more holes than swiss cheese

Hindsight remember.

it was a terribly weak draft. if the only two players you can pick our from pick 6 - 80 is Jed Adcock and and Brent Stanton - that only underlines this


question - and im not taking the piss...

are you drunk?

You would rather Nathan Brown then Brent Stanton and Jed Adcock. Two tough inside players that would fill a massive hole in our piss weak midfield? If that trade could happen in this years' trade week would you take it?

 

[beaver fever]

In 2004? Which move are you referring to? Fiora for Simmonds, Knobel in the PSD or using pick 65 on Mark Graham?

I guess we could have used 65 on Chris Bryan and taken Eddie Betts in the PSD, but the moves we made weren't terrible.

Wallace brought in players and didn't tank. Tried to make the finals and failed because the list wasn't good enough. The rebuild only started in 2007 and not 2005 like it ____ing should have.

 

[tucker777]

Hindsight remember.


You would rather Nathan Brown then Brent Stanton and Jed Adcock. Two tough inside players that would fill a massive hole in our piss weak midfield? If that trade could happen in this years' trade week would you take it?

yes our piss week midfield

we should get rid of those guys like foley and the new member in cotchin shouldnt we?????

ffs

 

[beaver fever]

yes our piss week midfield

we should get rid of those guys like foley and the new member in cotchin shouldnt we?????

ffs

Seriously get with reality our midfield is currently one of the worst in the competition.

 

[astro_toby]

Hindsight remember.


You would rather Nathan Brown then Brent Stanton and Jed Adcock. Two tough inside players that would fill a massive hole in our piss weak midfield? If that trade could happen in this years' trade week would you take it?

if brown hadn't broken his leg - yes i would have

no one could predict the terrible injury he would have gotten - he was pure class.

my point is though that stanton went at 17 and adcock at 33. so it was extremely small odds of any club selecting those two picks with its picks of 6 and 20. they were 2 of 80 players that were worthwhile - it would have been near impossible to get thos sort of selections correct.

i dont understand why u have chosen this draft to wear your high hat on - any other of the past 10 years and you would have an unlose-able arguement.

even more confusing - why haven't you tried to save ur pride and admitted that maybe you were wrong? its the one ____ing year we got it right mate!

It had nothing about us ignoring the rebuilding - the way is see it is - the best way to rebuild is to draft the best players possible. we did that when we traded bradley and whoever went at 20 for nathan brown

he was 25 - he should have had 10 years of footy left in him and 8 & 1/2 of those should have been at an elite level if it hadnt been for a incredibly unfortunate injury.

when he broke his leg mate 0 he was winning our B & F by a country mile

 

[tucker777]

Seriously get with reality our midfield is currently one of the worst in the competition.

out of interest what else of our team is the worst in the competition while we are at it cos id rather rebut and bag all your points in the one post rather than type up a few

 

[beaver fever]

if brown hadn't broken his leg - yes i would have

no one could predict the terrible injury he would have gotten - he was pure class.

The fact that brown's injury caused our entire team to fold just highlights poor depth.

my point is though that stanton went at 17 and adcock at 33. so it was extremely small odds of any club selecting those two picks with its picks of 6 and 20. they were 2 of 80 players that were worthwhile - it would have been near impossible to get thos sort of selections correct.

That's my whole ____ing point regarding hindsight numbnuts. My argument is about fixing our list deficiencies, which the Brown trade only worsened.

 

[the ranger]

Hindsight remember.

You're the one going on about hindsight. Even giving up picks 6 and 20, we still had our chance to get Adcock. We took Alex Gilmour.

 

[beaver fever]

out of interest what else of our team is the worst in the competition while we are at it cos id rather rebut and bag all your points in the one post rather than type up a few

What's the point you will just be wrong. Cotchin a part of our gun midfield and only a 4th gamer, that is hilarious.