RFC Player Management

[beaver fever]

There have been numerous threads where people have spoke about what richmond need to do in relation to the players we need to get rid of and what we need. This thread is for people to discuss this topic.

As it stands the RFC list has many weaknesses, but not all is doom and gloom. Here is what we have:

Key Position Defenders: Thursfield, McGuane, Polak

3rd Tall Defenders: J. Bowden, Moore

Small Defenders: Raines, Newman, King, Casserly, Hartigan, White, Clingan

Inside Midfielders: Foley, Tuck, Coughlan, Polo

Outside Midfielders: Deledio, Tambling, Connors, Edwards, Hyde, Tivendale, Collins, Howat

Taggers: Johnson, Jackson

Rucks: Simmonds, Knobel, Graham

Utilities: JON, P.Bowden, Pattison, Hall

Small Forwards: Pettifer, Brown, Peterson, Meyer, Krakouer,

Key Position Forwards: Schulz, Richardson, Hughes, Riewoldt

Obviously some players like Newman, White etc may play some time in the midfield, Polo may go in defence and Deledio is everywhere, but IMO these are their primary positions. I may be wrong with a few of the newer kids.

Analysing this list shows a real weakness in rucks and inside midfielders. This trade period is vital for us to help to fix these areas. We should target players in situations like Polak. Young, frustrated players who feel they have more of an opportunity at Richmond (good talking point for this thread). Some examples off the top of my head may include players like Messen, Wood, J.Hunt etc.

Richmond lack inside midfielders who can perform under pressure. Big priority in this draft. Players like Tuck, Tivendale, Howat, Johnson are just not good enough under pressure. Players like Marc Murphy, Daniel Cross, Scott West, Brock McLean aren't the best kicks, but under pressure they do not drop off. This is what richmond are really lacking. Outside midfielders seems to be in ok shape.

Our defenders are in decent shape, just lacking depth. We have a surplus of small defenders, but they may have an opportunity to play midfield in the future such as Raines and Casserly.

Rucks is the obvious problem, which the 1st pick in the draft may help, but mature players are required. PSD and trade for those. Knobel is too one dimensional and injury prone, and Graham is taking a long time to develop. Simmonds needs genuine help, otherwise his body won't be able to cope to the constant hits a ruckman takes.

Another problem is leadership. At the moment the only young player I see with genuine leadership qualities is Jack Riewoldt. Drafting needs to make this a priority.

Depth overall is pretty weak, but that is understandable considering how young the side is. Depth in KP positions will increase when we draft more of these types.

Just a quick analysis. What do you feel Richmond needs, what how should we go about getting it?

 

[_RT_]

There have been numerous threads where people have spoke about what richmond need to do in relation to the players we need to get rid of and what we need. This thread is for people to discuss this topic.

As it stands the RFC list has many weaknesses, but not all is doom and gloom. Here is what we have:

Key Position Defenders: Thursfield, McGuane, Polak, Hall

3rd Tall Defenders: J. Bowden, Moore

Small Defenders: Raines, Newman, King, Casserly, Hartigan, White, Clingan

Inside Midfielders: Foley, Tuck, Coughlan, Polo

Outside Midfielders: Deledio, Tambling, Connors, Edwards, Hyde, Tivendale, Collins, Howat

Taggers: Johnson, Jackson

Rucks: Simmonds, Knobel, Graham

Utilities: JON, P.Bowden, Pattison

Small Forwards: Pettifer, Brown, Peterson, Meyer, Krakouer,

Key Position Forwards: Schulz, Richardson, Hughes, Riewoldt

Obviously some players like Newman, White etc may play some time in the midfield, Polo may go in defence and Deledio is everywhere, but IMO these are their primary positions. I may be wrong with a few of the newer kids.

Analysing this list shows a real weakness in rucks and inside midfielders. This trade period is vital for us to help to fix these areas. We should target players in situations like Polak. Young, frustrated players who feel they have more of an opportunity at Richmond (good talking point for this thread). Some examples off the top of my head may include players like Messen, Wood, J.Hunt etc.

Richmond lack inside midfielders who can perform under pressure. Big priority in this draft. Players like Tuck, Tivendale, Howat, Johnson are just not good enough under pressure. Players like Marc Murphy, Daniel Cross, Scott West, Brock McLean aren't the best kicks, but under pressure they do not drop off. This is what richmond are really lacking. Outside midfielders seems to be in ok shape.

Our defenders are in decent shape, just lacking depth. We have a surplus of small defenders, but they may have an opportunity to play midfield in the future such as Raines and Casserly.

Rucks is the obvious problem, which the 1st pick in the draft may help, but mature players are required. PSD and trade for those. Knobel is too one dimensional and injury prone, and Graham is taking a long time to develop. Simmonds needs genuine help, otherwise his body won't be able to cope to the constant hits a ruckman takes.

Another problem is leadership. At the moment the only young player I see with genuine leadership qualities is Jack Riewoldt. Drafting needs to make this a priority.

Depth overall is pretty weak, but that is understandable considering how young the side is. Depth in KP positions will increase when we draft more of these types.

Just a quick analysis. What do you feel Richmond needs, what how should we go about getting it?

I'll start off by letting you know who I feel may not be at Richmond next year, I have done this by highlighting in bold those I feel may get the chop (either delisted or traded). Having done that I think it gives a better indication as to what we really need to focus on.

IMO we need to look at gaining: 2 ruckmen, 1 ready to go backup and one to develop. WOuld not draft Kruezer as a ruckman though, although Kreuzer is playing ruck at U/18 level I feel his size may well see him play as a KP forward at AFL level. If he is the best player available in the draft we take him as we can always use later picks to get a young ruckman. As much as some might not agree if Meyer wants to return to SA I would look at doing a trade to get Meeson from the Crows or DeLuca from Port. Both young ruckmen who have had some time in the system and could step in and give Simmonds some relief as second ruck. That covers us getting some depth in that dept.

With our next 2 picks PP 17 and Pick 18 (assuming we get one) I would hope the club looks at getting a good solidly built inside mid and another tall KP defender. That addresses those 2 areas which we need the most help in. Top 20 kids that should be able to step into the side next year all things being equal are a priority as we don't want to be waiting 2-3 years for these kids bodies to develop they need to be able to step up and play from the start.

Each pick from Round 3 on should be used on the best kid available at that stage be it tall KPP (defender/forward), young ruckman, midfielder, utility, small forward/defender. That way we continue to add depth to the list. Save one pick for the PSD where we can then take either a young kid that is looking for more opportunity or if a bigger name player is available we can then pick them up without having to trade away crucial picks in the draft.

In summary something like this would be fine:
2 Ruckmen - 1 ready to go (Meeson/De Luca if a trade is done or PSD), 1 to develop
2 KPP - 1 forward (Kreuzer most likely), 1 defender
1-2 Solidly Built Inside Mids, definitely need at least 1.
Any remaining ND picks used to get some more depth in the list.

 

[beaver fever]

Kruezer primarily as a KP forward? Hmm. If that was the case, we should definitely look to see what we can get for Hughes or Schulz.
Too bad pick 2 (Cotchin) would fix both our inside midfielder and leadership problem.

 

[brown_2000au]

How about this scenario,

- Riewoldt leaves StKilda and comes to Richmond via the PSD (there has been plenty of rumours and he has a reason to come to us).
- Schulz would then become expendible, giving us some bait to lure a player such as Deluca.
- Send Meyer to Adelaide for Meesen.

We would have then solved our ruck problem for a while, with two capable 21-22 year old ruckman.

- Use pick 1 on Cotchin for midfield/Leadership depth or well and truely secure our ruck/KP forward stocks with Kruezer.
- Pick 18 and 20 to be used on the Best KP defender and either a ruckman or inside mid (depending on what was used with the 1st Pick)
- With the remaining picks, add another KP defender (or 2) and stock up on Mids
- Promote King and Howat, leaving two positions on the rookie list for two Key position players, one key defender and one forward, who may develope into good players with some work.

 

[beaver fever]

I think you have a bit of a fixation of key position defenders. It is not a major concern at the moment. Only problem is with its depth. Besides most of the best KP players are forwards, and they can be then switched to the back half if needed.

 

[jezza]

- Riewoldt leaves StKilda and comes to Richmond via the PSD (there has been plenty of rumours and he has a reason to come to us).

What would that be? The attractiveness of being a few years away from being competitive?

 

[_RT_]

Kruezer primarily as a KP forward? Hmm. If that was the case, we should definitely look to see what we can get for Hughes or Schulz.
Too bad pick 2 (Cotchin) would fix both our inside midfielder and leadership problem.

Not really when you consider that Richo probably has 2-3 years left it gives us 4 young KP forwards to develop. Remember 3 of them would be 18-19 years old and would not be expected to carry the side until Richo has retired. The way I look at it is KP take longer to develop than mids, by having those 4 in development by time they are ready the mids are entering the best period of their careers as well. If all come on then we have some real depth in that area which is not a bad thing.

Kruezer is touted as 1 at present but Cotchin could just as easliy go there or for that fact some kid from interstate could just as easily pop up.

 

[polakthetiger]

IMO we need to look at gaining: 2 ruckmen, 1 ready to go backup and one to develop.

Where does Patto fit in? In the original post he was listed as a utility. Seems although he has been forced to play ruck, I think this is his position. He is either a ruck or he is at Coburg. IS that how you would fit him in with Simmo, the 'ready to go' pick up, Patto is then a back up with another one in development (Graham)??

 

[beaver fever]

I just have a feeling that we will have to give up something this year to make inroads into the future.

 

[RichosGuns]

If we get the number one pick and go after Kruezer, I'm pretty sure Angus Graham will be dropped from the rookie list. I would also like to see one of Hall or Knobel delisted, preferably Knobel as he isn't as useful around the ball and has alot of injury worries. Hall can play as a utility pinch hitting ruckman, a superior version to Polak

This leaves our ruck stocks with.

First String Ruckman: Simmonds, probablly has 2-4 years left in him

Second String Ruckman:
- Hopefully Meeson or Deluca which involves a trade using Meyer and/or Schultz.
- Pattison, who could also play as a KP CHF or FF

Developing ruckman: Kreuzer who could be used similar to Mitch Clark or Brad Ottens (ala 2000/01), where he starts in the foward line then plays 5-10 min in ruck, or just rucks in the F50

Backups: Hall: Did some rucking in the early 2000's, if he was fit now he would be rucking with Patto
Polak: As a pinch hitter
Tuck: As a pinch hitter

This means we could play with Simmonds, Patto/Meeson, and Kruezer in the same team, all rotating through the ruck and forward lines, ie.
Simmonds: Ruck 60%, Foward50:30%, Bench, 10%
Patto/Meeson: Ruck 30%, Wing/Foward/Back50: 40%, Bench 30%
Kruezer: Ruck: 10%, Foward: 50%, Bench: 40%

This would keep them all very fresh. By playing only one of Meeson and Pattison we also lower the chances of them being injured at the same time

 

[beaver fever]

Hall can play as a utility pinch hitting ruckman, a superior version to Polak

You serious mate? Hall is nothing compared to Polak

 

[RichosGuns]

You serious mate? Hall is nothing compared to Polak

You seriously rate Polak's rucking ability?

Polak>>>>Hall

While he may be a pretty spudish defender, Hall is alot taller then Polak and hence

Hall's pinch rucking>> Polaks pinch rucking

 

[_RT_]

Where does Patto fit in? In the original post he was listed as a utility. Seems although he has been forced to play ruck, I think this is his position. He is either a ruck or he is at Coburg. IS that how you would fit him in with Simmo, the 'ready to go' pick up, Patto is then a back up with another one in development (Graham)??

Simmonds is number 1 but at 196 I worry about him being a truly damaging ruckman, great around the ground but not a dominant force in the middle. Therefore play him there another year or 2 as the younger blokes gain experience then shift him to CHF. Patto would be a good number 2 at present and a guy like Meeson/DeLuca still needs time to build up their tank to play whole games on ball so they would be the 3rd string back up and if injury hit either Simmonds (has this year) or Patto we still have cover. Then get another young 18 year old to bring along or we persist with Graham either way that gives us 4 ruckmen all of whom are at varying stages of development and we have a plan in place allowing for natural progression.

Say around 2010 we have Simmonds at about 31 and at the end of his 5 year deal, Patto, say Meeson/DeLuca at 24-25 and another kid at about 21-22. Looks much better than what it does at present.

 

[beaver fever]

You seriously rate Polak's rucking ability?

Polak>>>>Hall

While he may be a pretty spudish defender, Hall is alot taller then Polak and hence

Hall's pinch rucking>> Polaks pinch rucking

Ah, I took it out of context. Either way Polak should never be in a position to have to pinch hit, and Hall's other qualities don't amount to him deserving a spot in our side. We should have a proper ruckman as depth, and not Bigrayohall.

 

[_RT_]

You seriously rate Polak's rucking ability?

Polak>>>>Hall

While he may be a pretty spudish defender, Hall is alot taller then Polak and hence

Hall's pinch rucking>> Polaks pinch rucking

Hall is a full 2 cm taller than Polak hardly what you would call a lot taller. Personally I would prefer neither were used as ruckmen in any scenario and as such we need to recruit a guy like Meeson/DeLuca/Wood if possible plus another young kid and add them to Simmonds, Pattison and Graham. Thus giving us 5 ruckmen as ruckmen can take a while to develop no harm in having 2-3 playing at Coburg learning the craft and also putting us in a strong position in future years trading wise.

 

[polakthetiger]

- Pattison, who could also play as a KP CHF or FF

Patto/Meeson: Ruck 30%, Wing/Foward/Back50: 40%,

As I said in an earlier post, I don't think Patto has the skills to play anywhere but ruck (resting forward 10%??)...and to suggest he could play down back...I assume you mean as a loose man....but the on wing...well you are stretching your imagination there a bit don't you think!!

 

[RichosGuns]

As I said in an earlier post, I don't think Patto has the skills to play anywhere but ruck (resting forward 10%??)...and to suggest he could play down back...I assume you mean as a loose man....but the on wing...well you are stretching your imagination there a bit don't you think!!

I'm not 100% positive, but I'm pretty sure Meeson plays a bit at CHB in the SANFL, so that was why i said back. As far as Patto playing on the wing goes, he clearly has pretty good mobility for a guy his size and once he grows into his body more it could definatly be an option. Wing/utilities players with a bit of extra hieght are very useful. Think about how good Cox is around the ball

 

[RichosGuns]

Hall is a full 2 cm taller than Polak hardly what you would call a lot taller. Personally I would prefer neither were used as ruckmen in any scenario and as such we need to recruit a guy like Meeson/DeLuca/Wood if possible plus another young kid and add them to Simmonds, Pattison and Graham. Thus giving us 5 ruckmen as ruckmen can take a while to develop no harm in having 2-3 playing at Coburg learning the craft and also putting us in a strong position in future years trading wise.

My bad, i thought he was taller then that. Isn't Polak 192cm and ray hall either 196 or 198cm?

Thats not the point, the point is back in the 2002-2004 season Ottens and Staff were sometime injured mean Ray Hall would have to chip in rucking for a few quaters here and there. Alot better ruckman then Polak, which is saying much i know

 

[beaver fever]

Polak 194 cm, Hall 196 cm

 

[RichosGuns]

Thats not the point, the point is back in the 2002-2004 season Ottens and Staff were sometime injured mean Ray Hall would have to chip in rucking for a few quaters here and there. Alot better ruckman then Polak, which isn't saying much i know

As I said

 

[beaver fever]

As I said

I wasn't making a point, just showing the correct numbers.

 

[telsor]

Something which occurred to me earlier today as I read the huns article on Polak and his desire to go forward.

Didn't Schulz play some pretty decent games at CHB a few years back?

Maybe we should try swapping them...

 

[beaver fever]

Richmond are getting closer to the number 1 pick with Carlton winning again.

 

[Rayzorwire]

Not criticising, merely discussing Beaver, but FWIW, Connors - at least on his junior football and potential - could well end up belonging to the inside midfielders group IMO. Jackson could well end up there if he can thrive and move on from a suitable apprenticeship...tagging and learning the finer points of positioning.

Tambling and/or Deledio could well mature into the sort of player who has a little of the in and out about them, Peterson and Collins are very talented kids that could end up anything. Even JON with a lot more bulk and a lot of skill work could end up in the midfield mix. With enough dash, an outside (at face value) midfielder can end up the most effective type of insider - a one touch 'swooper' whose pace can split a pack without the need for a hurried short disposal (Judd).

I'd be inclined to add two more to this mix at the next draft - it's the most crucial part of the ground and depth in this area is vital for our future. The more quality we add, the closer we are to building the sort of 'untaggable' midfield the best sides have...shut down one or two and the rest hurt you almost as badly.

Kreuzer is going to be an above average ruckman who should have a decade long career...we'll have to think long and hard on him or the best inside-capable midfielder available.

We have question marks on a number of players with regard to injury. Blokes who are very replaceable like P Bowden, Hyde and Hartigan need to be evaluated at season's end - a developing list can't afford to carry long term or recurring injuries to average, replaceable players. While I'm aware this won't be popular, with recurring chronic OP issues and two knee reco's under his belt, a potentially well below his best Coughlan is in the same boat over the next year or two.

Knobel and Hall are not as easily replaced, but certainly need to be scrutinised. Miller has stated Knobel has a chronic, deteriorating ankle problem - where that leaves him I'm really not sure. At his best he's in the top two or three pure ruckmen in the league - as his one fit season for us where he topped the league for hitouts to advantage clearly showed. We wanted and needed him to be a relatively cheap 29-30yo Clark type who fitted very nicely into a fast, hard running side who was a serious finals threat in 2-3 years from now.

His weakness is obviously what he does away from the ruck, and if he's going to be a very risky proposition 2-3 years from now - i.e. whether or not he'll regularly break down - we're probably better off to delist him at season's end.

Hall apparently doesn't have a big enough profile for us to be even given a vague clue as to whether his injury problems are chronic and ongoing, if not, at 26 he still shapes as an important tall utility who is match hardened and can be relied on to do his best game after game in a variety of roles. Thursfield and Polak have both had knee problems, Bowden is ageing, McGuane is largely unproven. There is not much long term depth in the key defender ranks and Hall (despite perceptions) has been mostly serviceable there...often under the worst of circumstances. He's not a natural defender though and should not be thought of purely as a defender just because we've been forced to play him there.

He's by no means a great ruckman, but he's deceptive in that he's often more effective once the ball is there to be won at ground level. At full fitness, he has superb endurance for a bloke his size and can be given a difficult tagging matchup like Goodes, run another ruckman into the ground, or present a very difficult matchup himself if he's given a role on a wing or as a lead-up forward operating between the centre and the attacking 50. As a forward he's always performed well when given the opportunity, has a great record for accuracy (despite being labelled as a poor kick) and can kick goals from well outside 50. He's also constantly up there in the things that get little attention or credit - tackles, referred pressure, hard ball gets and 1%ers. That's what you want and expect from your 16-22 ranked players.

You don't throw 196cm players with that sort of versatility away lightly - especially not when they're 26 and on minimum wage. Only a major risk of ongoing injuries would be sufficient grounds to delist him.

I think at this stage we should delist Kingsley, Hartigan, Moore, one or two of P Bowden, Howat or Hyde (depending largely on injury status), Tivendale, and probably Knobel.

That'll give us 6-7 selections all up, first three for a quality 10yr ruckman and two potential inside mids in the national draft, the rest allocated on best available and a possible no.1 PSD 'Sword of Damacles' to threaten another club, with the proviso that we add another tall and a ruckman somewhere in that mix.

We're really not far off having a decent list with all bases fairly well covered. I can see Brown and Richardson playing on for quite a while yet and getting one last crack at glory before retirement. Eventually, with Gaspar/Johnson/Tivendale/Richardson/Brown gone, we will have a lot of salary cap room to play with. If at that point we look to be going places and an attractive club to become a part of, we'll be in a very good position to fill any 'gaps' with a quality traded player or two.

When you almost have all the fundamentals in place on-field, and all the finances in order off-field, that's the right time swing a big trade.

 

[beaver fever]

I think that's fair enough about bigrayohall. I've put him into the utility list. I think he deserves a chance to play another season in a different position to a KP back. We can assess his future then.