Redo the 2004 Draft

[Top_4_Tiger]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

You've been hanging it on me for being biased, but you are just as bad.

I happily accept my position, you're a little delusional for thinking your opinion holds more weight than mine because we're as comprimised on this topic as each other.

I have said countless times that I am biased towards my own team and take my opinion for what it is.

Here is what I said:

Roughead over Deledio is also against popular opinion and in favour of your club.

And this is the statement which I am claiming is perfectly true from an unbiased perspective.

Don't make me quote 50 posts proving my statement correct, I'm not serious enough about big footy for that!

If you were referring to my other post then that's cool.

But I did point towards the "popular opinion has Deledio over Roughead" post, and it's you getting angry and biased over this comment, not me


- Majority of people have picked Deledio over Roughead.

- Hawk supporters always pick Roughead over Deledio


That is the issue.

If you don't think you are being biased whatsoever then you're not worth debating with.

I accept I can be biased, especially about the 2004 draft.

 

[CrazyQ]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

How I think it would go in the open draft

1. Franklin
2. Roughead
3. Deledio
4. Griffen
5. Lewis.
6. Cloke
7. Egan
8. Van Berlo
9. Clinton Young (rookie selection that should be taken into account)
10. Pratt

I personally think Lewis could be higher than Griffen, but only because I see him all the time and realise how good he is. I think he is probably quite a bit under-rated, whilst still aware of me being perhaps quite a bit biased.

Young over Pratt?

They are opposites. Complete opposites. One would kill for the ball, the other lurks around packs. Good player to have in a strong team, but I reckon he would be liable in a shit team.

 

[cs61]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

Young over Pratt?

They are opposites. Complete opposites. One would kill for the ball, the other lurks around packs. Good player to have in a strong team, but I reckon he would be liable in a shit team.

far call, i'm probably biased for Young, and I personally just don't like Pratt, so I acknowledge its probably a wrong selection.

i reckon he should be further up the list though, he was up there as BOG in the grand final before going off, he's turning into a pretty good player.

 

[Mario the Lothario]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

Hm lets have a look.

1. Franklin
2. Deledio
3. Roughead
4. Cloke
5. Van Berlo
6. Griffen
7. Lewis
8. Smith
9. Egan
10. Pratt
11. Williams
12. Prismall
13. Rosa
14. Knights
15. Monfries
16. LeCras
17. Taylor
18. Bate
19. Tambling
20. Moore

Jesse Smith is a better footballer than Jordan Lewis and Nathan Van Berlo.

I have no doubt he will rise to number two on that list if he can ever get on the park for a sustained period of time.

 

[markr]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

Jesse Smith is a better footballer than Jordan Lewis and Nathan Van Berlo.

I have no doubt he will rise to number two on that list if he can ever get on the park for a sustained period of time.

But we're talking about re-doing the draft, do you take Lewis who is going to give you 83 games in his first four years, Van Verlo with 70 odd, or Smith who is going to give you 27, with persistent rumours that he may never get his body right.

As much as I rate Smith, I'd actually have him far, far lower in a revised draft. The injury risk is just too high.

 

[doondoon]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

my top two would be Franklin and Roughead. KPF are rare as hens teeth in the AFL these day and both these two are proving to be quality in these positions. im sure every club would be happy to have Roughead as their main target up forward for the next 10 years!!!! Lids is a good player and is stepping up a lot, but is a dime a dozen onballer, he would not be one of the first picked in most midfields in the competition, thus i believe justifying my choices are non biased.

tambling i would not have in the top 20 for the draft. will quite possibly be the worst playr to play 200 games of league footy

 

[Top_4_Tiger]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

tambling i would not have in the top 20 for the draft. will quite possibly be the worst playr to play 200 games of league footy

Usually only about 5 players from each draft play 200+ games.

If Deledio, Tambling, Morton and Thursfield all get close to 200 then I'll be happy

Lids is on target to play 400 games, so he makes up for Tambling

Actually, if Tambling plays 200 games, then has he not justified his #4 pick? That's a good return.

 

[play2win]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

Usually only about 5 players from each draft play 200+ games.

If Deledio, Tambling, Morton and Thursfield all get close to 200 then I'll be happy

Lids is on target to play 400 games, so he makes up for Tambling

Actually, if Tambling plays 200 games, then has he not justified his #4 pick? That's a good return.

for tambling to justify his #4 pick he has to really lift his output and influence more games in the next few seasons. forget about the number of games he may play.

why are richmond supporters so sensitive about tambling? there is no argument, right now it is obvious he was a dud pick when you look at the players picked after him in the draft. he may however look better in coming years when the quality you do have in the midfield (the likes of cotchin, foley, deledio) start to gel and bring the best out of the other players.

 

[Top_4_Tiger]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

right now it is obvious he was a dud pick

If only all dud picks went on to play 200 games...

 

[footscray]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

1. Franklin
2.Deledio/Griffen/Roughead- Lets be honest here, they all have their own positives.
5.Lewis
6.Cloke
7. Van Berlo
8.Brent Prismall
9. Matthew Egan
10. Tom Williams

That's the way i see it.

 

[Hencho]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

1. Franklin
2.Deledio/Griffen/Roughead- Lets be honest here, they all have their own positives.
5.Lewis
6.Cloke
7. Van Berlo
8.Brent Prismall
9. Matthew Egan
10. Tom Williams

That's the way i see it.

I've seen people have Prismall between 8 and 15, reminds me of how well essendon did to get him with pick39 this year. Really hoping his knee injury doesn't hold him back and he makes a red hot go of it

 

[OneEyedHawk]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

You've been hanging it on me for being biased, but you are just as bad.

I happily accept my position, you're a little delusional for thinking your opinion holds more weight than mine because we're as comprimised on this topic as each other.

I have said countless times that I am biased towards my own team and take my opinion for what it is.

Here is what I said:



And this is the statement which I am claiming is perfectly true from an unbiased perspective.

Don't make me quote 50 posts proving my statement correct, I'm not serious enough about big footy for that!

If you were referring to my other post then that's cool.

But I did point towards the "popular opinion has Deledio over Roughead" post, and it's you getting angry and biased over this comment, not me


- Majority of people have picked Deledio over Roughead.

- Hawk supporters always pick Roughead over Deledio


That is the issue.

If you don't think you are being biased whatsoever then you're not worth debating with.

I accept I can be biased, especially about the 2004 draft.

I'm not too sure what you're on about, TBH.

It was pretty clear (I thought), that I was referring to your other post (seeing as how I quoted it and bolded the statement in question), where you said that Hawk fans were the only ones putting Roughy ahead of Deledio.

Clearly that's not the case.

Do Hawk fans realise they are the only ones putting Roughead over Deledio or Lewis over Griffen/Cloke

Seems to be common trend.

They bag others for being biased then put Hawk players higher than anyone else would have them.

 

[table tennis]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

So you think it's unfair that, on what we've seen, Tambling isn't considered a "very good player"?

Your bias never ceases to amaze me.


That's just a rubbish argument. This is a 21yr genuine KPP, a power forward, who just kicked 75 goals playing at CHF in the premiership team. This done whilst, even by your own admission, at least probably 70% of forward entries were being directed through Buddy. You're prepared to talk up Tambling on the back of ABSOLUTELY NOTHING..."is a very good player"..."developing into an A-Grader":...yet a player like Roughy, who given his size and style of play could be forgiven for taking years to fully develop, you're at pains to talk down?

Try and show me another player who, with all things considered (age, position, 'type' of player, achievements-to-date etc), could've shown more promise and more reason for optimism.

Go on, try.

Try.





So what? History is littered with unfulfilled talents. At any rate, getting picked up early means nothing. Clubs get it wrong ALL THE TIME. Given your club's recent history, you of all people should realize that.



My top-20*

1. Franklin
2. Roughead
3. Deledio
4. Lewis
5. Cloke
6. Griffen
7. Egan
8. Williams
9. Pratt
10.Van Berlo
11. Knights
12. Monfries
13. Bate
14. Prismall
15. McGuane
16. Rosa
17. Murphy
18. J Smith
19. LeCras
20. Moore

*Subject to change. Whipped up in about 1.5 mins.

Like your arguments.... Tambling must be hearbreaking to watch when you know the calibre of players that you could have had if you were a tiger fan......

Roughead is a star, cant believe people dont realise that. If he kicked goals that are regulation for most, he probably would have given the 100 a shake too.

Tom williams has been underated by most. He is a star, and the doggies dearly missed him when not available this year.

I think Daniel Pratt is exactly what his last name signifies. he is a pratt.

Two blokes with appropriate names going around at the moment. daniel Pratt and Jarryd Roughead.

I would have Prismall ahead of knights, and Cloke ahead of Lewis. Not that Lewis is a hack, just think that Cloke is a star.

 

[table tennis]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

So out of 9 pages you found about 3-4 non-Hawks who put Roughead over Deledio

Lewis over Griffen is the more obvious error though and that's coming from an impartial point of view this time.

Btw I freely admit that being a Tiger supporter I'm comprimised in 2004 trade talk.

But I was 100% right - popular opinion places Deledio over Roughead.

9 pages of lists in this thread is proof.

I hate hawthorn, But i would have Roughead and Buddy in the top 2, and Have Lewis at 5 Behind Cloke and Deledio.

So I dont think its bias, I think that its fact. Roughead and Franklin = Premiership.

Deledio & Tambling = Down payment on perminent position on 9th avenue.

 

[2Sewell4School]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

Cloke should be Top 5 in every single list, without doubt - He's won a Best and Fairest and "Best Finals Player" in a side that went to prelim.

Other than Buddy and Roughead, nobody on the list has acheived that much, and I'd argue he's ahead of Roughy - Let Cloke play next to Buddy Franklin and he'd kick that many goals too.

There is clear doubt.

You are only as good as your last season particularly seeing as though these boys are now reaching a point where they have grown into their bodies and we have a better indication of where they're at.

This years form should be the main judging point and lets face it Cloke would be lucky to make top ten.

1. Buddy - Clearly the best player form this draft
2. Roughead - Rare find - Young Key Forward kicked over 70 goals this season
3. Deledio - Classy - Found his place in midfield
4. Griffen - Exciting and Skillful though goes missing
5. Lewis - Hard Nut, touch of class also goes missing
6. Van Berlo -
7. Prismall
8. Cloke
9. Tambling
10. Knights

Woodsman over rate this guy so much.

 

[play2win]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

Woodsman over rate this guy so much.

not quite. cloke is a gun.

cloke pretty much was the collingwood forward line in 2008. in 2007, he had an outstanding year but he also had rocca and rusling around more to help out. the pies midfield also dropped off a bit this year compared to last.

yeah he is behind buddy, but it is debatable as to where he lies between 2-5. personally i'd have him 3, but my own bias aside i'd find it within reason to have him ahead of roughy to be no.2.

like the cloke vs. roughy debate, you could throw a blanket over deledio, griffen and lewis. i probably lean towards deledio, he can outshine the others athletically and in goal scoring power.

 

[tesseract]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

BUMP!

It seems as good a time as any for a bump, considering how boring the offseason is. D+T has been discussing the 2005 draft recently, now I'd like your opinions regarding the 2004 draft, and how it would be redone knowing what we know now.
Fire away BigFooty experts.

 

[Howler]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

I think LeCras has shot up the list a bit

 

[DrTomSwift]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

I think LeCras has shot up the list a bit

I'd say so. 6th or 5th?

 

[cooper6]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

If redone today, I would say:

1. Lance Franklin
2. Jarryd Roughead
3. Brett Deledio
4. Ryan Griffen
5. Travis Cloke
6. Mark Lecras
7. Jordan Lewis
8. Nathan Van Berlo
9. Brett Prismall
10. Chris Knights
11. Daniel Pratt
12. Tom Williams
13. Justin Sherman
14. Richard Tambling
15. Matthew Bate
16. Angus Monfries
17. Matt Rosa
18. Nathan Ablett
19. Thomas Murphy
20. Cameron Wood
21. Mitch Morton
22. Henry Slattery
23. Simon Taylor
24. Jesse Smith (a punt)

 

[INSANE]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

I'd say so. 6th or 5th?

I'd say 4th behind Buddy, Roughy and just behind Deledio.

Griffen and Cloke are both average and not really getting any better.

 

[DrTomSwift]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

I'd definitly put him in front Cloke, not sure about Griffen.

 

[tesseract]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

I'd say 4th behind Buddy, Roughy and just behind Deledio.

Griffen and Cloke are both average and not really getting any better.

I was thinking likewise in regards to LeCras.

Cloke is a pretty good player, I don't think I'd have him at 4 though.

Griffen seems to have stagnated somewhat. That's not to say that he's not a good player though, I just expected him to keep on coming on leaps and bounds and head towards being a star, that hasn't happened yet.

 

[Ants]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

If redone today, I would say:

1. Lance Franklin
2. Jarryd Roughead
3. Brett Deledio
4. Ryan Griffen
5. Travis Cloke
6. Mark Lecras
7. Jordan Lewis
8. Nathan Van Berlo
9. Brett Prismall
10. Chris Knights
11. Daniel Pratt
12. Tom Williams
13. Justin Sherman
14. Richard Tambling
15. Matthew Bate
16. Angus Monfries
17. Matt Rosa
18. Nathan Ablett
19. Thomas Murphy
20. Cameron Wood
21. Mitch Morton
22. Henry Slattery
23. Simon Taylor
24. Jesse Smith (a punt)

Not sure if Prismall should be above Knights, hopefully this time next year. Should Williams be a bit lower as well? And surely Morton has to be higher, he was Richmond's highest goal scorer last year.

The interesting one is Egan. Should he be high up based on what he did for a short time? Or off the list since Geelong only got a handful of (important) years out of him?

 

[Byron_Clanger]

Re: 2004 Draft Re-Done

Big Leccas increased draft stocks kkthx