Richmonds Drafting Nightmare

[_RT_]

No this isn't about our previous issues this thread is about the new issues facing us. There is an interesting article in the paper today where former North recruiter Neville Stibbard suggests that we're going to have a hard time getting the list right over the next few years.

ONE of the AFL's leading draft experts has warned Richmond faces a long and painful rebuilding period at exactly the wrong time to be needing one.


Neville Stibbard, the former North Melbourne recruiting boss, has delivered a damning assessment of the Tigers’ list, saying Melbourne’s playing group is further advanced and closer to a premiership.

With six Richmond players over 28 and likely to retire in the next two years, the Tigers will have little choice but to invest heavily in youth at the draft table.

But Stibbard, who played a key role putting together the Gold Coast squad, said the new franchise’s draft concessions and the likelihood of a West Sydney team would make Richmond’s task a nightmare.

“We did a lot of work on the AFL Prospectus (publication) crystal ball and Richmond kept saying they had a young list, but the truth is, it ain’t a young list,’” Stibbard said. “It is a very difficult situation they are in.

“They’re in trouble because Gold Coast will get the best kids and then West Sydney will come in, and they will come in – the league is committed to that now.”

Melbourne and Richmond have taken contrasting paths over the past two years, leading into today’s clash between the winless cellar dwellers.

Former Demons ruckman Jeff White said he had no doubts Melbourne did the right thing opting for youth, drafting six players in the top-21 in the past two lotteries, despite that strategy costing him a place on the list.

“With the new club coming in in the next few years, I definitely think they did the right thing rebuilding with the kids,” White said. “It’s something basically every club has to do at some stage – just bite the bullet and look to the future.

“As much as it can be frustrating for supporters, it’s a direction the club had to take, now it’s just a matter of being patient with these very young players.”

Rather than bottom out, Richmond has kept its finals hopes alive in four seasons under coach Terry Wallace by topping up with recycled, mature players.

Its best shot at the draft came when it was handed five picks in the top 20 of the 2004 national draft.

But Stibbard rated that draft the most shallow talent pool in recent times.
“We (the Kangaroos) traded for Jonathan Hay because I didn’t believe the draft was
very strong,” he said.

“It was a bad move as it turned out, but I can remember clearly saying if you are going to trade, this is the year to trade.”

Stibbard said although the more experienced Tigers might win today, re-igniting their fading September hopes, Melbourne was more advanced toward its next flag.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sport/afl/story/0,26576,25354375-19771,00.html

It certainly something to think about as you have your cup of coffee this morning or while making your way to the G for this afternoons game.

Now what I'm interested in seeing is how many posters are going to simply dimiss this as a bullshit article and how many are actually going to address the issues it raises.

 

[DoItForCaptBlood]

What it doesn't mention is the fact you then also need money to develop these 'kids'. At the rate Melbourne is going, they WILL be the next Sydney side!

One reason we have struggled over the years is we don't have the recruiting staff and facilities develop to full potential what we have had. Just having kids and playing them doesn't automatically mean they will be any good.

So my point would be also, when you get to the game today, look at the Melbourne youth, and then consider, does Melbourne have the ability to make them a Grand Final side!

 

[PHX]

I'm going to dismiss it because (a) WHO exactly is Neville Stibbard and high should he get an article about what he thinks? and (b) I why should I care what he has to say about a list that he has analysed through the AFL Propectus?

Looks to me he's just trying to get his name out there looking for a new recruiting position after being sacked by North early last year.

If the most relevant thing he did was trade for Jon Hay I suggest he shuts up. It's not like the youngsters he bought in for North have been much chop compared to what our recruiters have done.

This is one man's opinion, whose record is no better than most of the other recruiters, especially late in his reign, so let's keep it in perspective. I'm not saying it's wrong or right, it's just irrelevant coming from a person whose way of analysing a list is soley looking at a list in the AFL prospectus, it's not Dream Team or SuperCoach, it's AFL.

 

[coke_zero]

it does wake you up a bit.for someone to come out and say that. they may be closer to a grand final but we are closer to finals and once you make them, well you never know. and it feels like he looked at our ages and saw a few 30+ so he thinks were no chance.

 

[nut]

gee I mean we almost made the finals in 2007....... next

 

[tony_montana]

a damning but realistic assessment.

if we had retired Johnson and Bowden at the end of last season we'd be a lot better offlist structure wise spreading out the retirements that will come over the next few yrs instead of getting hammered with 5 or 6 in the next year or 2 when the draft has already been r*ped by the GC. Great foresight there from the RFC

 

[GDUB]

That article was a load of crap.
"Rather than bottom out, Richmond has kept its finals hopes alive in four seasons under coach Terry Wallace by topping up with recycled, mature players."

What was 2004 and 2007 i dont remember anyone thinking we were going to make finals those years!
I can handle so called experts claiming Richmond chose poorly at the draft etc. but this statement implies trading of top picks for experienced players. I can think of only 2 occasions where this has happened and unfortunately neither has worked out for varying reasons and they are Polak and McMuffin. Polak was to fill a need at the time but hasnt really worked out and no one has any clue why they traded for Mc Muffin.

Everyone bags JON and others taken that year but look at the players Hawthorn took that year, Muston, Dowler etc. None have had any impact at all but becuase their 2004 draft players have done well no one even notices.

I suspect things arent as bad as they are being made out to be and 2 or 3 wins will be enough to settle the hysteria.

Its Fremantles turn to get their clackers kicked. 4.4 in a whole game in dry conditions is simply pathetic.

I dont think we played that bad under Fraudley!
G

 

[DoItForCaptBlood]

if we had retired Johnson and Bowden at the end of last season

Not sure we would have been able to use the extra picks, or are you suggesting we should have kept a few of our delisted players?

Agree the two of them could have easily been retired, but last year should we have taken a kid in the 50-60's to replace them?

Maybe Gourdis could have been on the list for one and taken a different rookie. I guess there were possibilities.

Three are listed as our CHF line today too!!

 

[Tetley Tigers]

I think stating that Richmond has one of the oldest lists is slightly misleading (there are lies, lies and then there are statistics). Although I haven't done the maths, I'm pretty sure if you took out the 6 oldest players our list from an age perspective would look quite young. The fact that Richo at 34, Simmonds, Bowden, Johnson & Brown skews the "average" age.

I think Wallace has continually mentioned that we have a list with most players under 23 y.o.

For those more mathematically minded perhaps they could do an analysis on the "mean" vs the "median".

By the way if we have drafted poorly so be it, as long as there was an investment in youth (which there has been) and they gave a group of players the opportunity to play through together.

 

[tony_montana]

Therein lies the problem TT, a lot of under 23's but 6 yes 6 over 30's which brings our average age up. This is nhe type of scrutiny the club doesnt need and the type of stats that will be rolled out time and again whenever we are going through a bad patch. We couldve saved ourselves some heartache by being more ruthless and getting rid of players that were clearly past their best bowden and johnson - add petts.

yes we'd replace them with picks in the 50's and 60's but we could have used the earlier picks on youth instead of thompson and hislop! and used the late 60's picks on hislop and thompson.

Its not effin rocket science its common sense and this club clearly has none.

 

[Bojangles17]

I'm going to dismiss it because (a) WHO exactly is Neville Stibbard and high should he get an article about what he thinks? and (b) I why should I care what he has to say about a list that he has analysed through the AFL Propectus?

.

my sentiments exactly, ...our core of Midfield in Foley, Lids, Cotchin and well documented back half has the framework of a good side...we have only just invested in the remaining KPP in Vickery, Post and a few others...to suggest we are in a nightmare before most have even debuted, well is it any wonder this bum was sacked only recently with his credits including trading 4 R1 pickes for thompson and Hay.....genius

 

[Tetley Tigers]

When the Gold Coast enters the competition I think there will be some opportunities to trade away some of those players who will never make it (Schulz, Pettifer, Raines possibly even McMahon).

No matter what Gold Coast will want some strong bodies who can play some level of football. A lot of clubs are locking away their stars to make sure they are not out of contract when the Gold Coast come a knockin'.

Here's my tip though - one of Roughhead, Franklin or Riewoldt will end up at the Gold Coast. The amount of money they will offer these guys will just prove too much of a temptation.

 

[Tigertom]

List management, no club gets any credit until success evolves.

Who cares what this ex NMFC recruiter says, F him!

No need to panic, we have had a tough start in 09 and who knows what way our season will go until it's over. We have some good young players performing well at VFL level and given time they will play AFL and do it well.

We should be focusing more on surrounding these players with the best coaching group as possible (F the expence) to ensure they develop as fast and well as they can.

Given the draft conssessions over the next few years ALL our picks will be gold, we should consider using THESE picks to trade for the mature players needed to supplement our youth we allready have. (such as we have allready done with Morton, Cousins and Thomson)

They way it is we have two options;

(1) TW and board, don't loose focus, stay on course and in a couple of years our current 18-22 year olds will have the 50-100 games and stronger bodies to seriously challenge in the 2011 to 2016 period

(2) Replace coach at seasons end with a new coach, rebuild our list for 2020 and beyond( yes we won't turn our list over for 10 years or moe due to GC and WS entering the comp)

 

[coke_zero]

(1) TW and board, don't loose focus, stay on course and in a couple of years our current 18-22 year olds will have the 50-100 games and stronger bodies to seriously challenge in the 2011 to 2016 period

(2) Replace coach at seasons end with a new coach, rebuild our list for 2020 and beyond( yes we won't turn our list over for 10 years or moe due to GC and WS entering the comp)

have to go 1. we have some talented youngsters. that can step up and play good footy. who knows we may be even more unluckey in future drafting and have a crappy list. so we need this group of players to make finals and put in a fair effort for the flag.

 

[peterbuch74]

OK... with the draft concessions coming up, it's going to be a 5 year problem for clubs, not just the next couple of seasons.

OK, yes we've got a lot of over 30s (6 from memory), but let's look at the lists of every club for players who are going to be turning at least 26 this year (ie: born in 1983 or before).

What I'm looking at here is players who in 5 years time will be at least 31 and potentially retiring from the sport.

And when we weigh up the Tigers list against others we're not that bad in this survey.

CLUB # PLAYERS 26+
Sydney 17
Geelong 16
Western Bulldogs 15
Port Adelaide 13
Fremantle 13
Adelaide 12
Collingwood 12
St Kilda 12
West Coast 12
Richmond 11
Carlton 11
Kangaroos 10
Essendon 10
Brisbane 9
Hawthorn 9
Melbourne 8

So now we have that data... Yes Melbourne "seem" to have a younger list and are blooding more younsters, so they would appear to be in the infancy of a rebuilding phase.

Hawks appear to be in the box seat with "mid-aged" players up and running with a good youthful mix interspersed. Looks good for them in the next 5 years. Brisbane too.

With exception of Sydney, Geelong and the Bulldogs, the rest are all pretty much even.

OK, now my beef is this Neville Stibbard comes out says we're going to struggle with list management etc etc etc.

I'd argue that we're well placed. We have a good youthful mix in the midfield, across the centre and across the back line. Our weakness (at the moment) is up forward, but we have untried talent. Who knows what the likes of Vickery, Putt, Collins, and Post are going to be in 5 years time. Let alone the players that we'll draft in the next couple of years.

I wish these twits would give it a rest. Yes, we'll lose Richo, Brown, Bowden, Johnson, Simmonds, Cousins, Tuck etc etc in the next 4 to 5 years, but there's talent behind them.

Will anyone be as good as Richo? Probably not.
Will anyone be able to replace Richo? Yes
Browny? I'd argue that Morton is better than him now
Bowden? Replaceable
Johnson? Many already past him
Simmo? Nobody ready just yet, but players to be developed. (Remember, we traded Simmo ready made from Freo)

Biggest issue in my eyes is coaching. Getting the most out of the playing group... that's what we lack at the moment.

That's my 2 cents worth anyway.

 

[Goldust]

I'm going to dismiss it because (a) WHO exactly is Neville Stibbard and high should he get an article about what he thinks? and (b) I why should I care what he has to say about a list that he has analysed through the AFL Propectus?

Looks to me he's just trying to get his name out there looking for a new recruiting position after being sacked by North early last year.

If the most relevant thing he did was trade for Jon Hay I suggest he shuts up. It's not like the youngsters he bought in for North have been much chop compared to what our recruiters have done.

This is one man's opinion, whose record is no better than most of the other recruiters, especially late in his reign, so let's keep it in perspective. I'm not saying it's wrong or right, it's just irrelevant coming from a person whose way of analysing a list is soley looking at a list in the AFL prospectus, it's not Dream Team or SuperCoach, it's AFL.

I ACTUALLY thought he made some good points. I understand his logic and his spot on by saying the draft was not strong that year.
And I think the fact he admitted error with Jonathon Hay gives him more credibility.
These guys make mistakes every year - they're human. Least he is man enough to admit it.
Fact...our draft that year was diabolical.
It delivered us one Coburg player, one Coburg reserves player and another guy who isn't on the list.
It shouldn't be Stibbard in there apologising for his mistake, they should have been quoting whoever looked after our drafting at the time apologising for the mess they caused.
As for Jonathon Hay, there were exceptional circumstances that led to his non-performance at North Melbourne and the Hawks were very opportunistic in their dealings.
There could be no telling what would happen with him, just as there was no way you could forsee that Grahm Polak would suffer the injury he did.

 

[Goldust]

When the Gold Coast enters the competition I think there will be some opportunities to trade away some of those players who will never make it (Schulz, Pettifer, Raines possibly even McMahon).
No matter what Gold Coast will want some strong bodies who can play some level of football. A lot of clubs are locking away their stars to make sure they are not out of contract when the Gold Coast come a knockin'.

Here's my tip though - one of Roughhead, Franklin or Riewoldt will end up at the Gold Coast. The amount of money they will offer these guys will just prove too much of a temptation.

DO people still seriously think the likes of Schulz, Pettifer and McMahon have trade value???
Hate saying it, we missed the boat on Jay two years ago.
Pettifer and McMahon are viewed as "soft" and won't be commanding attention from anyone.

 

[The Cotch]

I will dismiss it because one thing I can't stand are so-called analyst's critiquing club's lists, not just ours, when they have never seen an u/18 game or reserves game in their life. It is one of my absolute pet hates.

So therefore, I take his opinion as nothing but trash. He may be a former recruiting officer or whatever he may be, but just look at where the Kangaroos list is these days, and their recruiting the past 10 years.

We know we have talent and we'll see it today. Just get f***** media. Talk about something that you might have a clue about. The problem is not our playing list.

 

[a_fighting_fury]

I simply dismiss this as bullshit, as we have a very good list, not perfect, but top 8 potential. We are at present IMO underperforming.

 

[Goldust]

I will dismiss it because one thing I can't stand are so-called analyst's critiquing club's lists, not just ours, when they have never seen an u/18 game or reserves game in their life. It is one of my absolute pet hates.

So therefore, I take his opinion as nothing but trash. He may be a former recruiting officer or whatever he may be, but just look at where the Kangaroos list is these days, and their recruiting the past 10 years.

We know we have talent and we'll see it today. Just get f***** media. Talk about something that you might have a clue about. The problem is not our playing list.

Cotch, this is where the Kangaroos list is right now.
Filled with players that barely anyone rates, yet always find a way to win and play finals - consistently play finals.
You could probably count the number of wins we have over the Knagaroos in the past decade on the fingers of one hand.
Their list is pretty handy.
For starters, they have three ruckmen better than our one.

 

[GhostofJimJess]

But Stibbard rated that draft the most shallow talent pool in recent times. “We (the Kangaroos) traded for Jonathan Hay because I didn’t believe the draft was very strong,” he said.

Has anyone ever see someone's credibility plummet so dramatically in so few words.

if we had retired Johnson and Bowden at the end of last season we'd be a lot better offlist structure wise

The possible logic of this remark defies me.

How would two picks so late in the draft be so crucial to our ongoing viability?

Now, if these two veterans had been tradeable, fair enough. Grab a second- or third-rounder by all means. But they weren't so, they would've been outright delistings - except, perhaps, if this Neville Hibbard was still a recruiting officer.

Therein lies the problem TT, a lot of under 23's but 6 yes 6 over 30's which brings our average age up.

Without getting too mathematical on your arse, "average" might be a great measure of a batsman's performance over a period of tiem, but not a great analyser of something like age. It's too prone to extremes.

There is a reason why things like properties values are compared by "medians" instead.

yes we'd replace them with picks in the 50's and 60's but we could have used the earlier picks on youth instead of thompson and hislop! and used the late 60's picks on hislop and thompson.

I'm not a great fan of either Hislop or Thomson, nor our decision to draft them. But technically they are youth. And you're working on the assumption that we could've got them so late in the draft, which is merely speculation.

Hislop's 20 (Pick 20 2006 Draft) and Thomson's 22 (Pick 11 2004 i.e. same draft as Deledio, Tambling).

If they're going to be good players at all, which is far from a foregone conclusion (they've both got "Frawley type" written all over them) then we're going to get ten years out of them.

 

[Goldust]

I will dismiss it because one thing I can't stand are so-called analyst's critiquing club's lists, not just ours, when they have never seen an u/18 game or reserves game in their life. It is one of my absolute pet hates.

So therefore, I take his opinion as nothing but trash. He may be a former recruiting officer or whatever he may be, but just look at where the Kangaroos list is these days, and their recruiting the past 10 years.

We know we have talent and we'll see it today. Just get f***** media. Talk about something that you might have a clue about. The problem is not our playing list.

And I think you disregard the fact the Kangaroos have barely had a top 10 pick for about a decade.
They'ne vever bottomed out and ceratinly had prized pics such as 1, 4 and 7, nor priority picks! They've done a remarkable of reinventing themselves time and time again.

 

[tony_montana]

if you have a look at where the kangas have finished the past 15 yrs, their drafting is in fact excellent. Run through their list and watch the players instead of going by who is a "household name" and you'll find their list is very under rated.


It never ceases to amaze me at how tiger supporters refuse to see it how it is from an outsiders perspective, he is not the only one who doesnt rate is, there are about 12 clubs who dont think we're serious contenders, that speaks volumes from people who in fact are in the know

 

[GhostofJimJess]

And I think you disregard the fact the Kangaroos have barely had a top 10 pick for about a decade.
They'ne vever bottomed out and ceratinly had prized pics such as 1, 4 and 7, nor priority picks! They've done a remarkable of reinventing themselves time and time again.

Well, I hope this Stibbard fellow is supplementing his Richmond article with a similar self-analysis criticising him and his club's own alacrity towards continually ending up mid-table.

 

[Goldust]

if you have a look at where the kangas have finished the past 15 yrs, their drafting is in fact excellent. Run through their list and watch the players instead of going by who is a "household name" and you'll find their list is very under rated.


It never ceases to amaze me at how tiger supporters refuse to see it how it is from an outsiders perspective, he is not the only one who doesnt rate is, there are about 12 clubs who dont think we're serious contenders, that speaks volumes from people who in fact are in the know

COULDN'T agree more, Mr Montana!!
Kangas have done a remarkable job to remain competitive for so long!!!