The way I see it, is when trying to rebuild from where we are at into a competitive side, every player you add to the list should offer something that will be potentially long term. That something, though does not necessarily have to be them still being in the side in four years time.( or whatever timeframe you think until finals are a possibility)
Young untried draftees speak for themselves, as do proven top line footballers looking for a change of club, with a number of years still in them.
Recycled players can offer a number of things.
They could be young players with ability that could not crack it at another club, but you believe you can identify and rectify what the problem was, giving you long term players.
They could be a middle aged player who can hold their own and fill a deficiency for a few years until the young players being developed can step up and take over. Not all players develop at the same rate. Some will be ready to play AFl at 18 while others may take longer. This is probably more relevant to key position players than mids.
They could be middle aged or even older players who can bring something besides their ability to get the pill and use it. This something is leadership. Cousins falls into this catagory
What you don't want is players that can't offer something you don't already have. Run of the mill players are a dime a dozen. They are not the foundations of a good side but make up the numbers. There are plenty of players who can hold a spot in a good side, but put them into a poor side expecting them to help take you to the next level and it soon becomes apparent that they are out their depth. You definitely don't want middle aged players that have a serious deficiency in their game.
The only player on the market I can see that could offer any long term benefit to Richmond is Bradshaw, but he wants three years and I believe in the third year he would be in the way. Two years of him at the club would offer, as Paul Roos puts it "mentoring" (he referred to Smith here), of which the benefits linger after he has gone. Bradshaw at Richmond for two years (or three) though is not going to happen, so there no point getting excited about it, either way.
The only other possibility I can see is Ball. I'm not convinced he has any real long term benefit, but I wont say he hasn't either ( I know others will though
) Again that's probably a moot point, because even if he goes into the draft, I cant see Melbourne overlooking him.
All the other names I have seen, to me any way, have either serious injury concerns, or just would not bring any thing that would be of long term benefit to the club.
WA tiger i agree, you do need experience, but it must be, as was said in another thread, "good" experience. There is no point in taking experience for experience sake, they must have leadership as well. Most of these guys are hacks, and would bring nothing to the club, except to be scapegoats for poor performances.
By the same token, if there was a player who could bring leadership to a developing group, you would amiss to overlook him just because he wont be there when you expect the side to be at a stage to be playing finals. If he helped you get to that stage and helped in the development of the young players, so they can take over from him, then he has served his purpose. I just cant see this type being available.
