Richmonds activity in the upcomming 'Super-draft'

[Richo83]

If you look at it statistically, the amount of wins for each position (going from ladders from 1999-2005) are as follows:

8 = 11.78
9 = 11.07
10 = 10.5
11 = 9.92
12 = 8.71
13 = 8.071
14 = 5.78
15 = 4.92
16 = 3.35

Which means that we are pretty much out of the race for a bottom five placing (we play essendon and carlton in the run hom and brisbane in Melb)
IMO we will finish on ten wins, placing us in the position of 10-11 or picks 6 or 7.

Now Selwood and Gibbs will be in the top 7, surely. That leaves 4-5 KPP.

Hansen, Gumbleton, Sellar, Thorp, Riewoldt Looks like the rankings of the top five KPP. Richmond with a position of 10th or 11th could easily pick up either Thorp or Riewoldt.

Our first pick should be a KPP. The second round will giv us a chance to pick up a Fielding or a Schmidt, but our first pick (Idealy in the top seven) should be focused on securing one of the seven mentionned above.

I can't see us beating the bulldogs, the saints, power, the eagles, the demons or Sydney (in Sydney). Most likely we will finish in one or picks better than last year in pick 6-7. I hope we don't do what we did last year and spot some aboriginal wingman and grab him. We as a club really need to address the lack of quality KPP at this club. Just having Pattison and Hughes doens't cut it, especially as Cleave isn't actually a KPP, more of a floating down to the wings and taking marks aka Tarrant type.

Second round and beyond is just picking what has been missed and filling our needs (i.e. ruckman, defenders, another KPP? midfielder? Pretty much one of everyhting would be good.) The later round s are harder to tell because they are more based on what other clubs do and take than everyhting. For example if all the ruckmen and good KPP are taken, you are forced to take something else.

 

[Darth_Tiger]

i couldnt see us beating collingwood either. wont surprise if we get more wins than that.

 

[Richo83]

i couldnt see us beating collingwood either. wont surprise if we get more wins than that.

First game without Coughlan, IMO injuries will start to take their toll.

Also, most of our matches (5, and one agaist 9th placed away) are against top eight sides and none of those will want to drop any of them. Each match will be a struggle, but IMO I can't see us winning more than 3-4.

I think that Wallace will realise that there is no point finishing 9th on 11-11, we need to protect our picks. I'm not saying we should tank, but in reality with our percentage, we are not going to make he finals IMO.

 

[metallichris]

If we beat Port Adelaide...

...we WILL make the finals.

 

[Richo83]

If we beat Port Adelaide...

...we WILL make the finals.

Big if though, Richmond doesn't play well in Adelaide.

 

[metallichris]

Big if though, Richmond doesn't play well in Adelaide.

We did last year.

 

[tigion]

We did last year.

we should of rolled em last year

 

[CJH]

Beck deserves criticism but more often than not our blunders were inspired by the football department who'd trundle off to one under-18 championship match and decide that we needed Pettifer or Fiora.

When the footy department could be sidelined Beck showed a pretty good eye for talent in the later rounds.

The key we have have at the moment is that Miller is able to tell Wallace he can't just have his icecream (JON, Meyer, Tambling) without eating his broccoli (Polo, Pattison) too.

Beck does deserve some credit for the 2000 draft. The first 5 picks are senior regulars and should all play 100+ games for the club.

#9 Kayne Pettifer
#25 Mark Coughlan
#40 Chris Hyde
#41 Andrew Krakouer
#55 Chris Newman
#57 Steven Sziller
#75 Robert Powell

 

[Bentleigh]

And Kayne Pettifer was a Larke Medal winning centreman, and Rory Hilton was the stand-out ruck-rover in his draft year.

I have compared him to Crawford. He doesn't have top-end speed or skills. The thing that makes Crawford is his superb work-ethic. Without it Selwood is not much different to Pettifer.

A 19 year old Crawford sounds good to me.

As for what every one else says? I offer my opinion, not the opinion of everyone else. Perhaps when Bents actually gets to a game and watches them play he might do the same

I don't have enough interst in junior football to go to the effort to get to a game.

You can continue reporting like you do.

 

[Bentleigh]

If you look at it statistically, the amount of wins for each position (going from ladders from 1999-2005) are as follows:

8 = 11.78
9 = 11.07
10 = 10.5
11 = 9.92
12 = 8.71
13 = 8.071
14 = 5.78
15 = 4.92
16 = 3.35

Which means that we are pretty much out of the race for a bottom five placing (we play essendon and carlton in the run hom and brisbane in Melb)
IMO we will finish on ten wins, placing us in the position of 10-11 or picks 6 or 7.

Now Selwood and Gibbs will be in the top 7, surely. That leaves 4-5 KPP.

Hansen, Gumbleton, Sellar, Thorp, Riewoldt Looks like the rankings of the top five KPP. Richmond with a position of 10th or 11th could easily pick up either Thorp or Riewoldt.
Our first pick should be a KPP. The second round will giv us a chance to pick up a Fielding or a Schmidt, but our first pick (Idealy in the top seven) should be focused on securing one of the seven mentionned above.

I can't see us beating the bulldogs, the saints, power, the eagles, the demons or Sydney (in Sydney). Most likely we will finish in one or picks better than last year in pick 6-7. I hope we don't do what we did last year and spot some aboriginal wingman and grab him. We as a club really need to address the lack of quality KPP at this club. Just having Pattison and Hughes doens't cut it, especially as Cleave isn't actually a KPP, more of a floating down to the wings and taking marks aka Tarrant type.

Second round and beyond is just picking what has been missed and filling our needs (i.e. ruckman, defenders, another KPP? midfielder? Pretty much one of everyhting would be good.) The later round s are harder to tell because they are more based on what other clubs do and take than everyhting. For example if all the ruckmen and good KPP are taken, you are forced to take something else.

From what I understand Riewoldt is not in the same class as Hansen, Gumbleton, Thorp,

Evens Sellar rating appears to have dropped.

 

[Richo83]

From what I understand Riewoldt is not in the same class as Hansen, Gumbleton, Thorp,

Evens Sellar rating appears to have dropped.

Subjective. Riewoldt could easil fall to us, and IMO Riewoldt looks like a good player. All I'm saying is that Richmond would do better to draft a Thorp/Riewoldt than a Selwood, in which we have plenty of.

Plus, Gumbleton and Hansen will go in the top three, so forget about those, we have to pick the best player from our position, that means players like Thorp and Riewoldt

 

[Bentleigh]

Subjective. Riewoldt could easil fall to us, and IMO Riewoldt looks like a good player. All I'm saying is that Richmond would do better to draft a Thorp/Riewoldt than a Selwood, in which we have plenty of.

Plus, Gumbleton and Hansen will go in the top three, so forget about those, we have to pick the best player from our position, that means players like Thorp and Riewoldt

Incorrect.

Same could have would have been said last year but the top shelf KPP we rated were all gone. Instead of going for a Clark we went for JON who we thought was the better prospect.

I have not been impressed with Riewoldt. I'd jump at Thorp however.

If Selwood really is the outstanding midfielder after Gibbs / a 19 year old Crawford type I'd be more than happy to take him with out first pick rathering than taking a 2nd rate tall.

 

[Richo83]

Incorrect.

Same could have would have been said last year but the top shelf KPP we rated were all gone. Instead of going for a Clark we went for JON who we thought was the better prospect.

And that was a mistake IMO, we should have picked Clark.

I have not been impressed with Riewoldt. I'd jump at Thorp however.

If Selwood really is the outstanding midfielder after Gibbs / a 19 year old Crawford type I'd be more than happy to take him with out first pick rathering than taking a 2nd rate tall.

I have been impressed with Riewoldt, secondly, Selwood is just many of the HBFs around, not a player you would waste a top ten pick on when we already have many of them aready.

We will get a second rate player regardless, stop making stupid assumptions. To get a really god player we need to finish bottom four, not going to happen. Therefore, we are forced to pick a second rate player anyway. Thirdly, I'd rather pick a god KPP that we need than another HBF which we don't need. Pick to our weaknesses, which are KPP. Anyone who says that Richmond has good KPP is deluded, incredibly biased, or both.

 

[Bentleigh]

Just having Pattison and Hughes doens't cut it, especially as Cleave isn't actually a KPP, more of a floating down to the wings and taking marks aka Tarrant type

Schultz?

And that was a mistake IMO, we should have picked Clark.

Big strong buzzling CHF who seems to have lots of talent compared to a athletic flanker type. I also thought there was better options than JON but it matters not what we think.

Club picked the player they saw as 'best' over a 2nd teir KPP.

No season we wouldn't do it again. More so when you look at Wallace drafting history top 15 picks: Meyer, Tambling, JON..

I have been impressed with Riewoldt, secondly, Selwood is just many of the HBFs around, not a player you would waste a top ten pick on when we already have many of them aready.

Reiwoldt has looks average IMO. I wonder how we'd talking about him if he had a different sir ane.

Selwood is a half back flanker now eh? Funny that.

From all accounts I'd be more than happy to 'waste' a top 10 pick on hm

We will get a second rate player regardless, stop making stupid assumptions. To get a really god player we need to finish bottom four, not going to happen.

* Gibbs
* Selwood
* Hansen
* Gumby
* Sellar
* Thorp

11th would get as a 'first rate' player.

Therefore, we are forced to pick a second rate player anyway. Thirdly, I'd rather pick a god KPP that we need than another HBF which we don't need. Pick to our weaknesses, which are KPP. Anyone who says that Richmond has good KPP is deluded, incredibly biased, or both.

I'd rather a top line midfeilder than a 2nd rate KPP.

If you think a Jack Rewoldt is going to help out the KPP stocks then 'deluded' is a good word to weild.

 

[metallichris]

Schultz?

Scheeyouultsze.

 

[Weaver]

Thirdly, I'd rather pick a god KPP that we need than another HBF which we don't need. Pick to our weaknesses, which are KPP. Anyone who says that Richmond has good KPP is deluded, incredibly biased, or both.

But you are failing to recognise that our game plan is a KP free zone. A big bloke in either goal square, a mobile ruckman and a stand-by utility on the bench.

At the other spots we can improvise. Brown at FF, Pettifer at CHF, Bowden at CHB. Deledio and Tuck can play tall.

If we have a blue-chip big bloke available to us (Hansen, Gumbleton) then we will take him because they are rare and we still need to find a couple.

We won't be taking an ordinary KPP player. We will take the good midfielder over the average KPP. Safe in the knowledge that if we need some KPP filler we can get one in the 3rd round.

Why spend a top-10 pick on an McGuane, Hall, Limbach type when you can spend pick 50?

 

[Weaver]

A 19 year old Crawford sounds good to me.

You ever actually read stuff before you selectively quote? Crawford is a poor kick and poor decision maker. He would have been a very ordinary footballer but for his supreme work rate and dedication.

Selwood has some raw talent but is no home-run selection. If he doesn't find the dedication he will pretty much follow Pettifer's example of a guy who traded on potential for 5 years before finally deciding to get fit enough to play.

I don't have enough interst in junior football to go to the effort to get to a game.

Just an interest in recycling other people's opinions as your own?

 

[CoggaRules]

You ever actually read stuff before you selectively quote? Crawford is a poor kick and poor decision maker. He would have been a very ordinary footballer but for his supreme work rate and dedication.

poor kid, he was born a little to late, this kind of CV would have made him a special for the tigers first pick under Spud.

 

[Crumden]

Beck does deserve some credit for the 2000 draft. The first 5 picks are senior regulars and should all play 100+ games for the club.

#9 Kayne Pettifer
#25 Mark Coughlan
#40 Chris Hyde
#41 Andrew Krakouer
#55 Chris Newman
#57 Steven Sziller
#75 Robert Powell

And 2-3 years after that draft everyone was bitching and moaning about how poorly we did. Just goes to show that 5-6 years gives a better indication of how well you've done.

The 5 still on our list have played a combined 390 games for us.

 

[Richo83]

Schultz?

Oh FFS, IT'S S-C-H-U-L-Z! SPELL IT RIGHT TO F***ING ONCE IN YOUR LIFE!

And anyway, Schulz the saviour of Richmond's KPP problems? Don;t make me laugh, Schulz is a mediocre forward at best, at worst he is a bumbling embarrassment

Big strong buzzling CHF who seems to have lots of talent compared to a athletic flanker type. I also thought there was better options than JON but it matters not what we think.

Club picked the player they saw as 'best' over a 2nd teir KPP.

A second tier player to Gumby is still a good player. The Selwoods of this world will come, lets cash in on the bupmer crop of KPP of this year, instead of picking yet another HBF/wingman.

No season we wouldn't do it again. More so when you look at Wallace drafting history top 15 picks: Meyer, Tambling, JON..

Remember what Mojo said? He clearly outlined the flaws of this strategy.

Reiwoldt has looks average IMO. I wonder how we'd talking about him if he had a different sir ane.

In your opinon. Well, Riewoldt must be good enough to ranked in the top ten by Mojo, so I doubt he is average. Plus you said yourself that you don't go to see any games, so where is your inside knowledge? I like to base my opinon on someone who knows more than anyone here, Mojo.

I'd still talk about Riewoldt, even if he didn't have a famous relative. Skill shines out no matter who you are.

Selwood is a half back flanker now eh? Funny that.

Yes, that's what he is called, he is a flanker.

From all accounts I'd be more than happy to 'waste' a top 10 pick on hm



* Gibbs
* Selwood
* Hansen
* Gumby
* Sellar
* Thorp

11th would get as a 'first rate' player.

Yes, which we should use to get someone like Thorp or Riewoldt. And show me these "all accounts".

I'd rather a top line midfeilder than a 2nd rate KPP.

Selwood is not what we need, and secondly, we should pick to our needs, not what someone has told us that is good.

If you think a Jack Rewoldt is going to help out the KPP stocks then 'deluded' is a good word to weild.

He would help our KPP stocks better than some flanker, that's for sure.

 

[The Dice Man]

And 2-3 years after that draft everyone was bitching and moaning about how poorly we did. Just goes to show that 5-6 years gives a better indication of how well you've done.

The 5 still on our list have played a combined 390 games for us.

A successfull KP player from that draft would have been the cherry on top. It is interesting that at this stage you'd call that draft an overall success, but the lack of a KPP really stands out.

I dont know who went before Pettifer or Cogs, but there wouldn't be too many Id trade em for.

 

[Bentleigh]

You ever actually read stuff before you selectively quote? Crawford is a poor kick and poor decision maker. He would have been a very ordinary footballer but for his supreme work rate and dedication.

Selwood has some raw talent but is no home-run selection. If he doesn't find the dedication he will pretty much follow Pettifer's example of a guy who traded on potential for 5 years before finally deciding to get fit enough to play.

From what I hear of young Joel Selwood I'd be more than happy with he at Tigerland giving Gibbs/Hansen/Thorp/Gumby are gone come our pick and he not.

Just an interest in recycling other people's opinions as your own?

Taking others opinions and judging which would be best, of greatest value at my club next season.

 

[Bentleigh]

Oh FFS, IT'S S-C-H-U-L-Z! SPELL IT RIGHT TO F***ING ONCE IN YOUR LIFE!

And anyway, Schulz the saviour of Richmond's KPP problems? Don;t make me laugh, Schulz is a mediocre forward at best, at worst he is a bumbling embarrassment

Intersting to see comments on Schultz, that you have written him off at his age.

I get the feeling you'd be the first to get on board is the "mediocre at best" player becomes more than that.

A second tier player to Gumby is still a good player. The Selwoods of this world will come, lets cash in on the bupmer crop of KPP of this year, instead of picking yet another HBF/wingman.

Unless you can give me a in deapth review/analysis of the drafts KPP bar-Hansen/Thorp/Gumby/Sellar then I cannot beleive you, as I think you are wrong.

Remember what Mojo said? He clearly outlined the flaws of this strategy.

No I don't. Nor do I think of Mojos comments as bible.

Wallace has drafted Meyer/Tambing/JON and co. over other types. No reason he will not continue to do it.

In your opinon. Well, Riewoldt must be good enough to ranked in the top ten by Mojo, so I doubt he is average. Plus you said yourself that you don't go to see any games, so where is your inside knowledge? I like to base my opinon on someone who knows more than anyone here, Mojo.

I'd still talk about Riewoldt, even if he didn't have a famous relative. Skill shines out no matter who you are.

Riewoldt has looked average according, from my people at Oakliegh. Slow. More so when you compare him to a Gumby/Hansen.

I was not impressed what what I've seen on the lad on ABC either.

Yes, that's what he is called, he is a flanker.

The title 'elite midfielder' has also been heard.

Yes, which we should use to get someone like Thorp or Riewoldt. And show me these "all accounts".

From all accounts, and again the games I've seen

Thorp > Rewoldt.

He's in another class and shouldn't be compared.

Selwood is not what we need,

We don't need anything. There are many areas we could inprove. Going by the readings on Selwood he'd look good on our list.

and secondly, we should pick to our needs

Some would say we should pick to what is best avaible. More so when you are going to choose an average KPP to make up for missing a A-Grade KPP, overlooking a potential very good mid in the process.

, not what someone has told us that is good.

Unless you go and watch dozens of kids games you are always going to going off what people have said rather than 1st hand.

 

[Philhawk]

Subjective. Riewoldt could easil fall to us, and IMO Riewoldt looks like a good player. All I'm saying is that Richmond would do better to draft a Thorp/Riewoldt than a Selwood, in which we have plenty of.

Plus, Gumbleton and Hansen will go in the top three, so forget about those, we have to pick the best player from our position, that means players like Thorp and Riewoldt

Wouldn't be suprised to see Reiwolt slip down to Richmond's pick Richo, but I feel that you severely under-rate Thorp. From what I saw of him at the carnival, he looks Top 4 material to me.

 

[soapyJNR]

Selwood has some raw talent but is no home-run selection. If he doesn't find the dedication he will pretty much follow Pettifer's example of a guy who traded on potential for 5 years before finally deciding to get fit enough to play.

OK I will be a little less cryptic.
Selwood knows that he is going to be drafted that is why this year he has been focussing on getting his body right. He had more to gain by getting his body right than spending a week playing 3 games for Vic Country which he did last year and made the All Australian team. What would he of gained? Individual glory?
As I said before he has looked at what Chris Judd did the year prior to being drafted and has seen the advantage to being physically ready. Dedication is not the problem with the kid. He plays on a HBF simply as this is where the modern game is controlled not ruck rover or centre like it used to.