One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on November 27, 2013, 09:32:18 PM
-
As the thread title says -- How did we all rate Richmond's recruiting this off-season?
DOB Hgt Wgt Position Club
Trade: Shaun Hampson 21/03/1988 201cm 104kg Ruckman Carlton
ND 12: Ben Lennon 05/07/1995 189cm 90kg Midsized Forward Northern Knights
ND 50: Nathan Gordon 12/02/1990 188cm 87kg Midsized Forward North Adelaide
ND 66: Sam Lloyd 03/03/1990 181cm 85kg Small Forward Frankston
RD 11: Todd Banfield 28/06/1990 183cm 83kg Small Forward Brisbane
RD 27: Anthony Miles 28/02/1992 179cm 77kg Inside Midfielder Greater Western Sydney
RD 42: Matt Thomas 27/02/1987 186cm 87kg Inside Midfielder Port Adelaide (AFL)
-
First class, was widely known that the draft only ran 12 deep, meaning we were going to have to be pretty imaginative with the balance of our selections. This is where fj came to the fore, he trod where only angels dare ...we be warehoused more talent than a Victoria secrets fashion parade ...watch this space tigers :clapping
-
Lennon looks like he's going to be another good first round pick
Think we paid overs for Hampson but we needed another ruckman who can offer a target when resting forward
No probs with Gordon or Lloyd considering the lack depth (supposedly) in this years draft
Not sold on Banfield or Thomas but they are only rookies = nothing ventured; nothing gained.
Think Miles could turn out to be a very good rookie selection
-
Lennon looks like he's going to be another good first round pick
Think we paid overs for Hampson but we needed another ruckman who can offer a target when resting forward
No probs with Gordon or Lloyd considering the lack depth (supposedly) in this years draft
Not sold on Banfield or Thomas but they are only rookies = nothing ventured; nothing gained.
Think Miles could turn out to be a very good rookie selection
Great synopsis WP - agree with you totally.
-
All of these players will be delisted by 2018 but we’ll win the flag in 2017 :shh
-
I think Hampson was a trade stuff up. While a ruckman was structurally required, we paid too much for him. It reminds me of the time under Frawley we got Brisbanes backup half forward, for pick 20 odd. He came and went pretty quickly. We seem to be falling into the old trap of assuming we're ready to target the flag after one good year.
When you look at good recruiting teams like Geelong even in premiership years they are bringing in new kids and teams like Sydney are always bringing in recycled bargains to fill holes but rarely fringe discards. We seem to be picking up a lot of discards.
This draft could be the undoing of either FJ or Hardwick if too many fail.
-
I voted wrapped, i am sure it is spelt rapt though !!
-
Locked&Loaded
-
Cherry Ripe.
-
yep locked and loaded for me too.
if people want to know my opinion on what we have done well the wors is poor.
-
NFI from me, but I know "Think" Hampson is a spud!
-
I give it about 1 geez out of ten.
-
Stronger or weaker? Your club's list movements
afl.com.au
November 28, 2013 3:30 PM
RICHMOND
Ins: Shaun Hampson (t), Ben Lennon (d), Nathan Gordon (d), Sam Lloyd (d), Todd Banfield (r), Anthony Miles Matt Thomas (r).
Outs: Tom Derickx (del), Luke McGuane (del), Robin Nahas (del), Shane Tuck (ret), Matt White (f/a), Sam Lonergan (r), Steven Verrier (r).
Strengths:
Shaun Hampson strengthens the Tigers' ruck division, offering more support for Ivan Maric and allowing Ty Vickery to play as a permanent forward. The former Blue is likely to have the most immediate impact of the Tigers' inclusions, but draftee Ben Lennon is an exciting prospect in 2014. The smooth-kicking midfielder has impressed in his early sessions at Punt Road and adds to a growing brigade of young midfielders.
Weaknesses:
Midfielder Matt White's pace and ability to break lines as the substitute late in games will be missed. With the speedster gone, the Tigers identified medium-sized forwards as a priority in their drafting, avoiding genuine small forwards. Given they didn't trade for proven midfield talent, the Tigers will be banking on their young on-ballers to take another step forward in 2014. - Nathan Schmook
http://www.afl.com.au/news/2013-11-28/your-clubs-list-movements?utm_medium=RSS
-
Spudded up by time
-
Lennon looks like he's going to be another good first round pick
Think we paid overs for Hampson but we needed another ruckman who can offer a target when resting forward
No probs with Gordon or Lloyd considering the lack depth (supposedly) in this years draft
Not sold on Banfield or Thomas but they are only rookies = nothing ventured; nothing gained.
Think Miles could turn out to be a very good rookie selection
Fair call
-
I voted wrapped, i am sure it is spelt rapt though !!
Yes it is, as in "rapture". By the way WP, I don't know why you're not keen on Banfield. Looking at his highlights reel he seems to have the blistering pace we lost with Matty White's defection, a preparedness to tackle and harass, and a happy knack for kicking goals, which his stats bear out. The only question mark seems to be the possible extent of the injury that bogged him down this year, otherwise you'd have to wonder why the Lions delisted him. Personality clash with Voss maybe??
-
By the way WP, I don't know why you're not keen on Banfield. Looking at his highlights reel he seems to have the blistering pace we lost with Matty White's defection, a preparedness to tackle and harass, and a happy knack for kicking goals, which his stats bear out. The only question mark seems to be the possible extent of the injury that bogged him down this year, otherwise you'd have to wonder why the Lions delisted him. Personality clash with Voss maybe??
RR, agree with your comments about his "highlight" reel, he looks good but I also reckon he's a bit of "floater" during games = floats in and floats out of games ;D. Reason I am not sold on Banfield isn't just becuase he didn't play at all this season. You raise the possibility of a personality clash with Voss, my thinking was could it be because he had hit the "there's no more improvment in him" and others had gone ahead of him?
Also, depsite being de-listed the Lions were comitted to taking him as a rookie, so that sugggest to me that the Lions viewed him like we do as being a back-up player, ready for senior footy. Also, would have liked us to take a kid or an untried mature aged player. I've always thought that with the rookie draft you should try your luck on at least one selection
But as I said nothing ventured, nothing gained. I wish him and all our new recruits the best :thumbsup
-
Perhaps, as you say WP, the Lions were going to rookie him, we beat them to it, and they were peeved (though not devastated) at losing him. Who knows? I must admit though, that as an unashamedly one-eyed Tiger supporter most of the "fringe" opposition players are a mystery to me. I know their names and not much else. So if as you say he's a floater who drifts in and out of games I will concede that unlike me, you have watched and assessed him in a "live" situation. Looks promising to me though IF he can re-capture his form.
-
The highlights reel can be a little deceptive....only have to look at the Matt White video on the Port website. On that video Matty looks like Chris Judd in his Brownlow year .
-
The highlights reel can be a little deceptive....only have to look at the Matt White video on the Port website. On that video Matty looks like Chris Judd in his Brownlow year .
:clapping
-
The highlights reel can be a little deceptive....only have to look at the Matt White video on the Port website. On that video Matty looks like Chris Judd in his Brownlow year .
:lol :clapping
-
The highlights reel can be a little deceptive....only have to look at the Matt White video on the Port website. On that video Matty looks like Chris Judd in his Brownlow year .
:lol :clapping
Just had a look at this. Hope he does well.
:cheers
-
RR, agree with your comments about his "highlight" reel, he looks good but I also reckon he's a bit of "floater" during games = floats in and floats out of games
The same could be said for most players of that type - the nippy, flashy, small forward. Even Betts and Milne tend to do this more often than not and only occasionally dominate or stay involved for 4 quarters. Not that I have a problem with that as long as said forward is maintaining defensive pressure and sticking to the game plan then a couple of goals each week on average should be a reasonable output.
-
By the way WP, I don't know why you're not keen on Banfield. Looking at his highlights reel he seems to have the blistering pace we lost with Matty White's defection, a preparedness to tackle and harass, and a happy knack for kicking goals, which his stats bear out. The only question mark seems to be the possible extent of the injury that bogged him down this year, otherwise you'd have to wonder why the Lions delisted him. Personality clash with Voss maybe??
RR, agree with your comments about his "highlight" reel, he looks good but I also reckon he's a bit of "floater" during games = floats in and floats out of games ;D. Reason I am not sold on Banfield isn't just becuase he didn't play at all this season. You raise the possibility of a personality clash with Voss, my thinking was could it be because he had hit the "there's no more improvment in him" and others had gone ahead of him?
Also, depsite being de-listed the Lions were comitted to taking him as a rookie, so that sugggest to me that the Lions viewed him like we do as being a back-up player, ready for senior footy. Also, would have liked us to take a kid or an untried mature aged player. I've always thought that with the rookie draft you should try your luck on at least one selection
But as I said nothing ventured, nothing gained. I wish him and all our new recruits the best :thumbsup
The lions didn't want him , they sacked him with a year to go on his contract.
They would only have take Him as a rookie because they are paying his wage anyway.
For some reason they wanted to see the back if him , must be a very frustrating talent
-
By the way WP, I don't know why you're not keen on Banfield. Looking at his highlights reel he seems to have the blistering pace we lost with Matty White's defection, a preparedness to tackle and harass, and a happy knack for kicking goals, which his stats bear out. The only question mark seems to be the possible extent of the injury that bogged him down this year, otherwise you'd have to wonder why the Lions delisted him. Personality clash with Voss maybe??
RR, agree with your comments about his "highlight" reel, he looks good but I also reckon he's a bit of "floater" during games = floats in and floats out of games ;D. Reason I am not sold on Banfield isn't just becuase he didn't play at all this season. You raise the possibility of a personality clash with Voss, my thinking was could it be because he had hit the "there's no more improvment in him" and others had gone ahead of him?
Also, depsite being de-listed the Lions were comitted to taking him as a rookie, so that sugggest to me that the Lions viewed him like we do as being a back-up player, ready for senior footy. Also, would have liked us to take a kid or an untried mature aged player. I've always thought that with the rookie draft you should try your luck on at least one selection
But as I said nothing ventured, nothing gained. I wish him and all our new recruits the best :thumbsup
The lions didn't want him , they sacked him with a year to go on his contract.
They would only have take Him as a rookie because they are paying his wage anyway.
For some reason they wanted to see the back if him , must be a very frustrating talent
yep they wanted him out.
i dont get it so he looks great on highlight reels but if we take time to look at highlight reels why dont we dig a bit deeper.
imean to say hes been at brisbane for 5 yrs people have had ample opportunity to have a good look at him.
what i dislike is hes another in a long list of players we have taken who have poor footskills.
hes supposedly a sml forward but he goes at just on 1 goal a game. i could kick ave that at afl level. he regularly goes missing in games and he just doesnt find much ball.
im not sure he even uses his pace well in a defensive role. in many ways hes a worse performed clone of matt white and believe me matt white was always a player we had to find better than,
what is even more perplexing is we took a shedload of sml/med forwards so why continue on with another one who has such glaring weaknesses and such a poor performance record.
bloody hell we had other areas of real need we should have been trying to address and at the least take a punt on.
there is no logic to this selection.
you know at least with a matt thomas type he addresses a real need. what with tuck retireing we did need a big bodied inside mid we chose thomas who at the least has come of a good yr in a state league and fills the need.
-
By the way WP, I don't know why you're not keen on Banfield. Looking at his highlights reel he seems to have the blistering pace we lost with Matty White's defection, a preparedness to tackle and harass, and a happy knack for kicking goals, which his stats bear out. The only question mark seems to be the possible extent of the injury that bogged him down this year, otherwise you'd have to wonder why the Lions delisted him. Personality clash with Voss maybe??
RR, agree with your comments about his "highlight" reel, he looks good but I also reckon he's a bit of "floater" during games = floats in and floats out of games ;D. Reason I am not sold on Banfield isn't just becuase he didn't play at all this season. You raise the possibility of a personality clash with Voss, my thinking was could it be because he had hit the "there's no more improvment in him" and others had gone ahead of him?
Also, depsite being de-listed the Lions were comitted to taking him as a rookie, so that sugggest to me that the Lions viewed him like we do as being a back-up player, ready for senior footy. Also, would have liked us to take a kid or an untried mature aged player. I've always thought that with the rookie draft you should try your luck on at least one selection
But as I said nothing ventured, nothing gained. I wish him and all our new recruits the best :thumbsup
The lions didn't want him , they sacked him with a year to go on his contract.
They would only have take Him as a rookie because they are paying his wage anyway.
For some reason they wanted to see the back if him , must be a very frustrating talent
hes supposedly a sml forward but he goes at just on 1 goal a game. i could kick ave that at afl level.
::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
I just wonder why de-list Nahas and pick up Banfield, better the Tiger you know than the Lion you dont
-
I just wonder why de-list Nahas and pick up Banfield, better the Tiger you know than the Lion you dont
Maybe Banfield has a left foot and doesn't slip on perfect surfaces...... :whistle
-
Y&B are you refering to one particular incident when Robbie went A over T this past season on the G?....It was an absolute shocker
-
I just wonder why de-list Nahas and pick up Banfield, better the Tiger you know than the Lion you dont
because nahas was never good enough and had to go. isnt the whole idea about attempting to find players with enough good attributes to make the grade. you should be asking why banfield to replace him a player with just as many weaknesses and probably worse performed.
why are we continually taking players and also hanging onto players who only tick say half the boxes they should.
clearly banfield was taken to replace white. but why a quick player with such a poor performance record and shoddy skills for the type he is. its simple if they cant tick fundamental boxes dont take em at all.
-
I just wonder why de-list Nahas and pick up Banfield, better the Tiger you know than the Lion you dont
because nahas was never good enough and had to go. isnt the whole idea about attempting to find players with enough good attributes to make the grade. you should be asking why banfield to replace him a player with just as many weaknesses and probably worse performed.
why are we continually taking players and also hanging onto players who only tick say half the boxes they should.
clearly banfield was taken to replace white. but why a quick player with such a poor performance record and shoddy skills for the type he is. its simple if they cant tick fundamental boxes dont take em at all.
I agree. I know he is only 61kg but Richard Bourne has speed and football smarts by the bucket full. Kicks both feet, kicks to advantage and hits players at full speed lace out. Why not rookie him instead and see if we can develop his body as he ticks most other boxes.
I hope Banfield can develop his game to the next level. If Jacko can do it I guess anyone can if they want it badly enough.
-
Claw how many players in the AFL tick all the boxes?..maybe a dozen tops
-
Y&B are you refering to one particular incident when Robbie went A over T this past season on the G?....It was an absolute shocker
He went through a patch where he slipping over every quarter (probably a slight exaggeration)
-
Claw how many players in the AFL tick all the boxes?..maybe a dozen tops
:lol :cheers
-
Y&B are you refering to one particular incident when Robbie went A over T this past season on the G?....It was an absolute shocker
Hardwick gave him chances to prove his worth. Nahas failed each time. And yes it was a shocker.
-
Claw how many players in the AFL tick all the boxes?..maybe a dozen tops
so why not apply some basics like kicking pace and footy smarts. of course most players have weaknesses but why not insist the basics at the least are okay. for 30 something yrs we have taken so many players who have lacked in basics. we continue to think it seems we can improve players who lack in basics. im here to tell all it rarely happens.
look lets say your looking at an inside mid an extractor. for me things like size, motor, hands, and smarts. can off set a lack of pace, and maybe poor foot skills did i just say that . they need to be damn good in the former to offset the latter but they are still limited.
quite frankly players like nahas i would not even look at yet alone give em a game.ask yourself what do you need as a sml forward in todays game and nahas lacks in nearly every one of them. he doesnt have a redeeming quality imo. bllody hell a little fella who falls over all the time. a little fella with poor skills. and i have to say it a undersized player who is not overly quick for his type, a little fella who isnt nearly always one touch and clean. imo. im gob smacked we actually took him yet alone hung onto him for as long as we did.
-
Must have been pretty gobsmacked when the little idiot nailed 29 & 34 goals in 2011 & 2012 respectively. ;D
-
Brett Anderson @BrettAndersonIF
As per @kristianpisano, ex-Geelong and more recently Carlton recruiter, Luke Williams has joined Richmond. Great get by the Tiges! #AFL
-
Must have been pretty gobsmacked when the little stuffer nailed 29 & 34 goals in 2011 & 2012 respectively. ;D
tigs...please don't let the facts get in the way of a good Clawing....
-
Must have been pretty gobsmacked when the little stuffer nailed 29 & 34 goals in 2011 & 2012 respectively. ;D
and yet a club like us with a history of at least keeping players until long service leave kicks in got rid of him.
i keep on telling anyone who will listen any vfl standard sml forward could kick 20 plus goals a yr.its when hes not getting cheapies over the top that is the problem. ffs that is it im pulling the boots back on. if a skillless hack like robin can get so many games surely i could get one.
-
on the thread title. lol just one 18 yr old says it all.locked and loaded arre we. sheesh even the reserves supp players are vets.
gonna say it again gf or bust this yr.
-
on the thread title. lol just one 18 yr old says it all.locked and loaded arre we. sheesh even the reserves supp players are vets.
gonna say it again gf or bust this yr.
and what about the year after ?
-
on the thread title. lol just one 18 yr old says it all.locked and loaded arre we. sheesh even the reserves supp players are vets.
gonna say it again gf or bust this yr.
and what about the year after ?
Recruited from the local retirement homes so Spoon or bust the year after. :shh
-
on the thread title. lol just one 18 yr old says it all.locked and loaded arre we. sheesh even the reserves supp players are vets.
gonna say it again gf or bust this yr.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating claw. I just think that the recruiting team decided physically more developed 23 year old players were better choices at 50 and 66 than the 18 year olds that were left. That may be a fair call. We will find out in 10 months time.
-
on the thread title. lol just one 18 yr old says it all.locked and loaded arre we. sheesh even the reserves supp players are vets.
gonna say it again gf or bust this yr.
The proof of the pudding is in the eating claw. I just think that the recruiting team decided physically more developed 23 year old players were better choices at 50 and 66 than the 18 year olds that were left. That may be a fair call. We will find out in 10 months time.
What they decided was Gordon and Lloyd were better players short and LONG term than the 18 year olds left. Are they perfect players? No. Were the 18 year olds left? No. At the end of the day any 18 year old taken late you're waiting until they are 22+ to have an impact at AFL level anyway.
We had kids on our rankings but they were taken earlier. I've said it before, it wasn't a plan to take older players. They took best available on THE CLUBS list rather than anyone here's list, including mine. I wanted Templeton at 50 though I understand why he went rookie. I was surprised he actually went then. And there are a few I'd have preferred as rookies over Banfield and Thomas though I understand they needed to replace White/Tuck straight away not in the future.
Just because Gordon wasn't my preferred choice at 50 doesn't make it a bad pick. And I wanted Lloyd at 66 so that makes me happy.
-
19/44 on our list are 22 or younger
Can't find a legit reason to question or complain about that
But I don't have a job in list management so WTF would I know
-
Well Hardwick obviously has NFI.
Claw said it was bad and so it must be. Dimma clearly delusional in the following article.
"Hardwick also expressed overall satisfaction with Richmond’s recruiting over the past couple of months, which has netted the Club a further seven players (Hampson, Ben Lennon, Nathan Gordon, Sam Lloyd, Todd Banfield, Anthony Miles, Matt Thomas).
“Our recruiting guys have done a terrific job once again,” he said.
“The great thing about it, from a coaching point of view, and a football club overall, is every November you get to improve your side, and that’s what we did again this year.”
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2013-12-11/hardwick-happy-with-hampson
-
19/44 on our list are 22 or younger
Can't find a legit reason to question or complain about that
But I don't have a job in list management so WTF would I know
Going backwards unless it's 44/44. :banghead
-
19/44 on our list are 22 or younger
Can't find a legit reason to question or complain about that
But I don't have a job in list management so WTF would I know
Going backwards unless it's 44/44. :banghead
Claw will probably be then complain that the coaching staff are too old! :lol
-
18% of people in here think we completely stuffed it up ;D
-
of which only two were prepared to put their balls on the line and try to prove they can do better.
-
of which only two were prepared to put their balls on the line and try to prove they can do better.
From memory I was one of those Alfred so whats the problem? ;D
-
Bang!
-
of which only two were prepared to put their balls on the line and try to prove they can do better.
From memory I was one of those Alfred so whats the problem? ;D
Yes you were. :clapping
-
of which only two were prepared to put their balls on the line and try to prove they can do better.
From memory I was one of those Alfred so whats the problem? ;D
i know you were. i even posted a picture of a bloke sitting on two rocks in reply, that was censored.
that wasnt a dig at you gramps :cheers
-
No worries Lamumba ;D
-
:lol
-
Ramps...A Man with bigger balls than a fake sign language interpreter at a worldwide event. ;D
(http://i44.tinypic.com/2db9g2f.gif)
-
Well Hardwick obviously has NFI.
Claw said it was bad and so it must be. Dimma clearly delusional in the following article.
"Hardwick also expressed overall satisfaction with Richmond’s recruiting over the past couple of months, which has netted the Club a further seven players (Hampson, Ben Lennon, Nathan Gordon, Sam Lloyd, Todd Banfield, Anthony Miles, Matt Thomas).
“Our recruiting guys have done a terrific job once again,” he said.
“The great thing about it, from a coaching point of view, and a football club overall, is every November you get to improve your side, and that’s what we did again this year.”
http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2013-12-11/hardwick-happy-with-hampson
just two things. whos blaming hardwick ive often said i really hope the case is our coach has minimal input into recruiting and list management.
oh of course hardwick is going to say hes happy with who we got. what else can he say.
i dont get the angst. all because one or two people are saying bloody hell why just one kid in lennon, why so so so many mature and veteran types where is the balance.
personally ive strongly advocated we take our fair share of mature players even veterans, but never take these older types almost exclusively. which is exactly what we have done.
bloody hell i would have been over the moon if we could have taken chapman , but in f/a and we still take our share of kids. there are plenty state leaguers i like take em cheap take 4 or 5 but bloody hell lets still take our proper share of kids.
only one club did forgo almost entirely youth. that club was us. i would have been happy with 3 kids 5 mature or vice versa. not the 1 to 7 ratio we ended up with.
ive debated long and hard about the processes we go thru and getting them right. this is not a process id ever want us to go thru again because its just too lopsided.
ive always advocated kids in the first 3 rounds within reason, mature players after that point with in reason. of course there can be some variations. . im a firm believer if you regularly go thru good processes and stick to em you build a good footy team with few list problems.
ive been in the main happy with how we have gone about most things, the number of kids where we take our mature players finding a good balance. that is until this trade/draft period.
finally hardwick has no idea nor do we if those we have taklen will improve us. atm we hope they will. that little bug bear wont be known until well into next yr. with so many mature players taken you would want to hope they offer something significant.
-
As the thread title says -- How did we all rate Richmond's recruiting this off-season?
DOB Hgt Wgt Position Club
Trade: Shaun Hampson 21/03/1988 201cm 104kg Ruckman Carlton
ND 12: Ben Lennon 05/07/1995 189cm 90kg Midsized Forward Northern Knights
ND 50: Nathan Gordon 12/02/1990 188cm 87kg Midsized Forward North Adelaide
ND 66: Sam Lloyd 03/03/1990 181cm 85kg Small Forward Frankston
RD 11: Todd Banfield 28/06/1990 183cm 83kg Small Forward Brisbane
RD 27: Anthony Miles 28/02/1992 179cm 77kg Inside Midfielder Greater Western Sydney
RD 42: Matt Thomas 27/02/1987 186cm 87kg Inside Midfielder Port Adelaide (AFL)
5 years later and all gone :P.
-
As the thread title says -- How did we all rate Richmond's recruiting this off-season?
DOB Hgt Wgt Position Club
Trade: Shaun Hampson 21/03/1988 201cm 104kg Ruckman Carlton
ND 12: Ben Lennon 05/07/1995 189cm 90kg Midsized Forward Northern Knights
ND 50: Nathan Gordon 12/02/1990 188cm 87kg Midsized Forward North Adelaide
ND 66: Sam Lloyd 03/03/1990 181cm 85kg Small Forward Frankston
RD 11: Todd Banfield 28/06/1990 183cm 83kg Small Forward Brisbane
RD 27: Anthony Miles 28/02/1992 179cm 77kg Inside Midfielder Greater Western Sydney
RD 42: Matt Thomas 27/02/1987 186cm 87kg Inside Midfielder Port Adelaide (AFL)
5 years later and all gone :P.
Atleast they all had excellent highlights videos. :shh
And some people actually rate Francis “Betamax” Jackson. :rollin
What an absolute joke.
-
First class, was widely known that the draft only ran 12 deep, meaning we were going to have to be pretty imaginative with the balance of our selections. This is where fj came to the fore, he trod where only angels dare ...we be warehoused more talent than a Victoria secrets fashion parade ...watch this space tigers :clapping
stuff this aged well
-
First class, was widely known that the draft only ran 12 deep, meaning we were going to have to be pretty imaginative with the balance of our selections. This is where fj came to the fore, he trod where only angels dare ...we be warehoused more talent than a Victoria secrets fashion parade ...watch this space tigers :clapping
stuff this aged well
:lol :clapping
-
like woah.... :shh
-
All of these players will be delisted by 2018 but we’ll win the flag in 2017 :shh
Dwaino nailed it!!
-
All of these players will be delisted by 2018 but we’ll win the flag in 2017 :shh
Dwaino nailed it!!
Lol. Last edited that post today..... :lol
-
:shh
-
All of these players will be delisted by 2018 but we’ll win the flag in 2017 :shh
Dwaino nailed it!!
Lol. Last edited that post today..... :lol
:lol
There should be a law against that
-
I was probably more willing to just shrug the shoulders, you win some you lose some looking back at the recruitment from this season, but I found this on BF.
Fairly poignant:
"1. No player has integrated into our best 22 from the 6 players we drafted. Even Shaun Hampson, who we traded for pick 32 at the time, was not an AFL mainstay.
2. This was considered the 'super draft'. Nathan Freeman, Billy Hartung and our pick in Ben Lennon are the only players to have been moved on from the top 30. Yes, you quoted the average but from the top 50 of that draft, 40 of them are still on an AFL list. 10 are gone and 2 of them are the players selected by us. It was just a pretty bad draft to bomb out on. If this was a weak draft, then it would be a little more understandable."
https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/trade-and-free-agency-discussion-2018-edition-v-trade-summary-in-op.1207366/page-13
Absolute carcrash. How an earth did we win a flag 4 seasons later?
-
Wow that is a horrific draft/trade haul.
32 for Hammer :bow
-
Missed out on Cripps, Crouch, Dunstan, Barrass, Brown etc on account of Lennon haha.
Mind you, we can do that with every draft basically... I used to hurt myself by going back and changing every pick to a player we could have had :D
-
Miles was more than just serviceable.
Thomas was the Pitts as was Hampson
I think considering Gordon was 50 and Lloyd 66 they were some good value finds!
Lennon at 12 is a bit of a stinker. The guy could kick! Its a shame we couldn't bring out the best in him. Cripps is a tank but I think a large part of that is also because he has Chris Judd personally mentoring him if I recall correctly?
-
Flash Gordon - his goal against Adelaide kept us alive in 2014.... :shh
-
Lennon is the glaring mistake, and I suppose if we were traded back picks for those guys its not a total loss.
The Hampson one hurts thought. Nankervis, J Kolodjashnij, Aliir Aliir, Riley Knight, Ben Brown all taken between our second and third rounder.
-
wow
-
Thomas was to serve a purpose and he did that we'll for 20 of 44 odd possible games. A bigger body while Cotch Martin and the rest matured. If you expected superman at pick 80 or whatever he was you were dreaming.
-
He was pretty bad, tdy. Had a crack but yeah, not much of a player at this level :shh good guy though.
-
Gerks the Goatfucker loved him.... :shh
-
All of these players will be delisted by 2018 but we’ll win the flag in 2017 :shh
:lol
-
Gerks the Goatstuffer loved him.... :shh
Loved anyone who played SANFL that fella....:shh
-
He'll be doing cartwheels when we get Mitch Grigg through the door then... :shh :shh
-
Moneyball days
-
That reminds me, what the stuff happened to Al? Staunch defender of the moneyball stategy.... :shh
-
Al morphed into Penelope before vanishing..... :shh
-
yeah albert couldnt cut the mustard and got hitched with that fruiterer guy x
Im trying to work out what dios name was back in those days?