Overall Feelings

[froars]

While I'm a bit worried about the height and weight of our team - no very worried lol - I am still pleased to see a third of our list turned over. Got a bit of depth with Morrison and Fletcher who will pressure our own borderline players to lift their game.

The kids, although small, have good pedigree (woof! lol) and a kid who won a B&F in the Calder Cannons who won the premiership looks interesting.

Can't comment on them 'cos i haven't seen them, but there's a lot of them which we haven't had for a while - if half of them turn out ok, that is all you can hope for i guess.

 

[One-eyed Tiger]

Mostly happy. We had late picks and used them on bottom age kids who would probably be picked up higher next year. Also added some mature bodies in Morrison and Fletcher. Jackson also looks to be a solid kid. Hopefully we top up the Rookie list with some of the decent kids who missed out. Maybe Mick Ablett also?

 

[Rodan#18.]

Beauty

Good day for the club...well done guys !

True Gilmour is light but he's young too. Doubt he'll play this year.
Roiach and the others have bit of weight though.

Good draft.

 

[mighty tiges]

Originally posted by froars
I am still pleased to see a third of our list turned over.

That's why I'm happy about today. Seeing a number of fresh and young faces coming to Tigerland for 2004.

 

[mellowyellow]

Hard to assess the outcome of the inclusions .........particularly the kids, but overall im happy with the club is at least adopting a longer term view of developing youngsters and not short term fixes

 

[Rodgerramjet]

Smells like the basis of a huge development program at tigerland, lets hope they get that GOOD development.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

Without knowing too much about the boys in question, I'm really happy about our "new direction" ....

History seems to have shown that most premiership teams of recent times have tended to include a core group that have come through the club together as youngsters (eg. West Coast - Kemp, Matera, Heady, Worsfold etc, Essendon - Mercuri, Misiti Hird, Fletcher etc, then Johnson, Johnson, Rama, Solomon etc 7 years later, Brisbane with Black, Lappin, Lepper, Aker etc..) rather than a team comprising of players added to a club's list over a sustained period of time (eg. the Pies, Tigers 95-03). Which is also why I'm confident that the Saints will win a flag by 2006.

 

[Pirate]

I'm happy, but only time will tell if it's a great draft for us.There are 3 guys 190cm or more (including Tuck at 190cm), and Archibald is strong and aggressive. Tuck is ready for senior football, and Hartigan can't be too bad to win the B&F at Calder Cannons (premiers). Raines is quick and kicks long and will be good given time. Fletcher will give good value as a back-up player.Gilmour has great wraps on him, and hopefully the strong- bodied Jackson will turn out to be more than useful. They would have seen plenty of him while also watching Roach at Carey Grammar.

Therefore, it's thumbs up at this stage for Beck, Wheadon and Miller.

 

[CJH]

Originally posted by GhostofJimJess


...

Which is also why I'm confident that the Saints will win a flag by 2006.

Don't worry. They will find some way to screw it up!

 

[rfctigerarmy]

Moderatly happy with our performance yesterday.

Good to see Morrison picked up. Tuck will probably get a go next year aswell along with Fletcher. Sometimes its better off having a few that can go straight away.

The major thing that impressed me is that we tended to go with kids. We are starting to get the right mix and balance of players. We arent their yet realisticly but we are on our way.

Would have liked another 190cm + player on the list. Even though we retained Hall and got Morrison another would have made it fanstastic.

I really think Fletcher will try. I hope he gives us some respect and im sure he will. I wouldnt label him a dud for the time being.

Love the names we drafted. Raines, Roach, Tuck. Exciting times ahead.

 

[TigerMal]

I am very happy with the draft, considering our picks and N.Brown and would like to welcome all the new players to Punt Rd.

Hopefully the 17 y.os are firing towards the end of the year and next year and we can integrate them into a strong side.

Morrision could be the best thing we have done in a while if he can hold down CHB or CHF.

 

[Tiger_Of_Old]

Originally posted by One-eyed Tiger
Mostly happy. We had late picks and used them on bottom age kids who would probably be picked up higher next year. Also added some mature bodies in Morrison and Fletcher. Jackson also looks to be a solid kid. Hopefully we top up the Rookie list with some of the decent kids who missed out. Maybe Mick Ablett also?

thats the way i read it one eyed.we have looked towards next year and taken kids who possibly would go much much higher in next years draft.[read ketchy,s post on jackson].

we got our man in brown
added depth in morrison and fletcher and to a ceratin extent tuck and whoever we pick up in the psd.

next year we should keep our 1st and 2nd rnd pick no matter what.

cheers!

 

[WilliamPowell]

Of 9 picks used we picked up 6 kids aged 18 or under. I have heard really good things about the kid Hartigan - actually I was surprised he was still available at pick 70, considering the year he had.

Only 1 pick was used on a player aged 25 (Fletcher - insurance as Myrna would say). Though I will add I am a bit surprised they didn't take Betheras (PSD perhaps)

Morrison is only 22 and Tuck just 21. Both of these are developed enough to play seniors next season.

Personally, I am very happy - what the majority wanted (drafting kids) the Club has done - a big step in the right direction - the future

 

[evo]

-It was essential that we got pick#21 right and I feel we failed.Only time will tell I guess.
-Morrisson was a good get.Suprised he fell so low,must have been the price issue.
-Daniel Jackson sounds most promising ,happy with that.
-Hartigan must be OK if he won a B+f at the cannons.
-I doubt Tuck will be of any use,heart condition and rejected son of former legend.Hard to see Hawthorn stuffing this 1 up.
-Fletcher,man if he gets a game for us during the season we'll either be travellling very badly or severly injured.Gimme a break.

All in all not a great week for RFC I reckon especially after missing Copeland.

 

[lawrence]

Like most I'm pleased that the the club finally went with more youth in this draft as we might get some real talent out of it in a couple of years.

And for the recycled players you never know maybe a different club and a change of atmosphere might do the trick.

Lets keep positive and hope the tigers will be more competetive in the future and bring a little joy to us poor suffering supporters after all these years.

Good luck to all the new players at RFC.


CHEERS

 

[TheFoxhat]

And 2 more picks in the P.S.D .....could be looking fairly good with the young blokes putting pressure on the older blokes to earn their spot in the team....

 

[Weaver]

The Gimour pick is the interesting one. I thought they would go for a safe pick there to be assured of getting at least one very good junior prospect. Gilmour is actually probably the biggest gamble, if he can't bulk-up over the next 3 preseasons he won't be useable. Taking such a raw midfielder so early could really pay off or really cost us. 1/10 or 10/10 time will tell but a big risk.

Wiseby's Jackson review is OTT. Wiz is the best of the hobiests but I think Jackson should have been left to next year. Jackson is a poor KP option and does OK on the ball getting clearances but that is largely because he can simply chase the ball around and not worry to much about tactics and accountability. I'd say he was an Andrew Mills type, going to be a HFF for us. 3/10.

No problem with Fletcher, Tuck or Morrison. We needed some depth and Tuck and Morrison are reasonably young. They should all challenge for 10-12 games each next season. Fletcher and Tuck are utilities who can play all around the field which is good for a bench player. Fletcher 4/10, Tuck 6/10, Morrison 5/10

Raines should not have been taken, and Roach should have been drafted late not father-soned early. Raines 1/10, Roach 3/10.

Hartigan is a handy rover but not too exciting. His best + fairest win came about in part because he didn't get selected for Victoria and therefore he played all matched while the likes of McLean missed 4 games. 3/10

Archibald could be the good one. He is a 3rd-forward or utility but is raw enough and could improve. He is quite mobile and with good coaching could play a Tarrant type role where he pushes down the ground and marks on his chest. Both he and Schultz are in that mobile running style, with Schultz a good overhead mark as well. Good to see a new forward line taking shape. 5/10


Hard to convert late picks into senior players but at least we have looked beyond 2004 and started to look towards the future.

 

[froars]

Gilmour: 1/10 or 10/10 time will tell but a big risk

I think it's a big risk for Beck to go for a kid like this with our first pick. He could either be putting a nail in his coffin or resurrect himself.

Who would you have gone for ahead of Gilmour of the ones that were left Weaver?

We were in desperate need of tall key position players, yet for the 2nd year in a row (3rd, 4th, 5th year lol) they've gone for short people.

Would like your views Weaver because you have more of an idea than most of us would, and would be good to keep for posterity and see how these players come on over the years.

 

[Wally Matera]

Overall opinion of our 2003 National draft is uncertain. I think it was a draft that we had to have, however, in season 2004 l won't be expecting too much. I'm glad that they've decided to go with the 17yo's as it enables us to really set ourselves up. My only question with this though, is that they wont start showing any real potential until they're 22-23 (5 years), by which players like Brown, Richardson, Campbell and Gasper are gone or nearing the end.

My first message would be to Frawley... please give them the same amount of time to develop as you have given to Krakouer. When drafting younger kids, the quick solution is to p*ss them off at a drop of the hat. If he can bite his tongue and let them develop, we can get a better understanding of their true potential.

I thought there were better recycled players than Fletcher. I'm totally not happy with this selection at all. Cut from Geelong, cut from potentially the worst side ever to be put on the park... and then we draft him. Curious to say the least. Happy to eat humble pie if he can play more than 15 games. I heard Fletcher on Saturday night say that he's passion for footy had been re-juvenated through the drafting... not impressed with the throw-away line. Dont have much time for players that say they lose passion to play something the very few get the opportunity to.

Raines was my only other complaint. This selection was purely a decision to make the old-man happy. Poor decision. Just when you go to reward the club for making some tough decisions to better the future, they go ahead and do this. Should've been given a spot on the rookie list. Soft decision.

Happy with Archibald, Gilmour and Morrison. Jury's out on Tuck, Hartigan and Jackson.

 

[Pirate]

I have to disagree with some of the comments of Weaver and Wally.
1. Raines - I can only go on a tape of Q v Tas in the 2003 carnival, but I thought the raw ingredients were there. Quick, sure handling, long-kicking etc.A lot like his Dad. Will improve when he can put on some muscle. Worth a shot at pick 76. That's all we had to give up to get him.That's not a lot.With a list of 40 instead of 36 we can have a few "project players". I doubt we could have got him for the rookie list, as Brisbane has first call on all players in their state overlooked in the draft (as does Sydney).Also, is he old enough? Must be 18, I believe, to be selected for the rookie list. I can't see any reason why Miller would draft him just to keep Geoff happy, Wally.

2. Hartigan - saw him in the u/18 final. He moved well and played with some poise. Here is what some experts have said about him:
good spoil and mark
disciplined, does the right things,predictable
pinpoint kicking
uses the ball superbly out of defence
balanced and poised
HBF TAC team of the year

He may have played less games than MacLean, but he still was good enough to win a B&F in a premiership team. That counts for something. We're talking about giving up pick 70 for him. Pick 70? Sounds like a good deal to me.

3. Jackson - I haven't seen him, but I'm sure RFC saw him many times while also watching Roach.I'll bow to their expertise, plus I'm prepared to accept Wisbey's review of him, especially as it is only pick 53 we are talking about. He's a left-field choice, certainly, but it is often this type of pick that turns up a gold nugget (or perhaps fool's gold, but how can you tell at this stage?).

 

[richcogs]

The Gimour pick is the interesting one. I thought they would go for a safe pick there to be assured of getting at least one very good junior prospect. Gilmour is actually probably the biggest gamble, if he can't bulk-up over the next 3 preseasons he won't be useable. Taking such a raw midfielder so early could really pay off or really cost us. 1/10 or 10/10 time will tell but a big risk.

Wiseby's Jackson review is OTT. Wiz is the best of the hobiests but I think Jackson should have been left to next year. Jackson is a poor KP option and does OK on the ball getting clearances but that is largely because he can simply chase the ball around and not worry to much about tactics and accountability. I'd say he was an Andrew Mills type, going to be a HFF for us. 3/10.

No problem with Fletcher, Tuck or Morrison. We needed some depth and Tuck and Morrison are reasonably young. They should all challenge for 10-12 games each next season. Fletcher and Tuck are utilities who can play all around the field which is good for a bench player. Fletcher 4/10, Tuck 6/10, Morrison 5/10

Raines should not have been taken, and Roach should have been drafted late not father-soned early. Raines 1/10, Roach 3/10.

Hartigan is a handy rover but not too exciting. His best + fairest win came about in part because he didn't get selected for Victoria and therefore he played all matched while the likes of McLean missed 4 games. 3/10

Archibald could be the good one. He is a 3rd-forward or utility but is raw enough and could improve. He is quite mobile and with good coaching could play a Tarrant type role where he pushes down the ground and marks on his chest. Both he and Schultz are in that mobile running style, with Schultz a good overhead mark as well. Good to see a new forward line taking shape. 5/10


Hard to convert late picks into senior players but at least we have looked beyond 2004 and started to look towards the future.

Bad summary Weaver, this is the best draft we had since drafting began

 

[telsor]

How so?

Of the lot, only Tuck and perhaps Hartigan really force their way into our current side.

Morrison and Fletcher are gone ( effectively ).

The rest have only shown glipses.

 

[mighty tiges]

this is the best draft we had since drafting began

The 2000 draft doesn't look too shabby now:

9. Pettifer
24. Cogs
40. Hyde
41. Krakouer
55. Newman

Mind you the 1997-99 and 2001-02 drafts around it were shockers in terms of how many players from them are still on our list now. Something like 6 or 7 guys still at Richmond from 35 draft picks and 7 rookie promotions. Thank you Geisch and Spud!

 

[jezza]

Mind you the 1997-99 and 2001-02 drafts around it were shockers in terms of how many players from them are still on our list now. Something like 6 or 7 guys still at Richmond from 35 draft picks and 7 rookie promotions. Thank you Geisch and Spud!

Yep, and that really hurts for years, you just can't afford a single bad year of drafting like that, and we've had a few.

 

[Thrice3]

Our recruiting of recent years has been a huge step up from pre-2000.