Brad Miller [merged]

[mightytiges]

Why do we need insurance for? To stop us dropping from 15th from 16th ???  . We're going to finish bottom 4 again anyway so if we get injuries then we finish bottom, suck it up and end up with a extra priority pick in another compromise draft where decent picks a golden. You know as we should have done the last two years to accelerate our rebuild. Bringing in a number of recycled fringe players from other clubs is only a pathway to another ninth  .

Wouldn't think this is your best or most insightful post MT.  I posted a reason for your question in an earlier post:

"We might be rebuilding and developing but we learned how to fight out games and win some last year, and those critical lessons will fade and diminish if we aren't competitive going forward.  We can't keep losing and getting smashed in the sole pursuit of putting games into kids - our development to success must be rounded by effort and results."

Not sure if I missed the intent of your post or you are now just holding on to a singular and suffocating point of view.

Sorry I missed your earlier post smokey but having said that as I just posted in replying to bj the Dees lost 4 of the 6 games Miller played in by 40-60 points. Add to that he played 52 games b/w 2007-9 when the Dees won just 12 from 66. So the argument that we need him to stop continually losing after losing doesn't make sense to me. One player (unless they're of Judd's class which Miller sure hell isn't) doesn't save 7 goals say to turn a flogging into a competitive loss. Hawthorn btw lost 12 from 13 games in the middle of 2006 and most of those badly. 14 months late they were playing finals. Losing doesn't kill ya if internally everyone understands where the list is at. Development and getting games into our youngsters is what is important right now instead of results and scoreboard. We are still miles away and IMO Miller won't change that injuries or no injuries.

[camboon]

Mature players that are discards just mean 9th - 30 years of pain is the proof of the pudding

[Smokey]

Sorry I missed your earlier post smokey but having said that as I just posted in replying to bj the Dees lost 4 of the 6 games Miller played in by 40-60 points. Add to that he played 52 games b/w 2007-9 when the Dees won just 12 from 66. So the argument that we need him to stop continually losing after losing doesn't make sense to me. One player (unless they're of Judd's class which Miller sure hell isn't) doesn't save 7 goals say to turn a flogging into a competitive loss. Hawthorn btw lost 12 from 13 games in the middle of 2006 and most of those badly. 14 months late they were playing finals. Losing doesn't kill ya if internally everyone understands where the list is at. Development and getting games into our youngsters is what is important right now instead of results and scoreboard. We are still miles away and IMO Miller won't change that injuries or no injuries.

Fair points MT but I don't think Miller is being chased for his senior on-field potential, rather his skills and experience at the lower tier.  He is an insurance policy if crap goes down and he will be capable of helping stem the tide if it turns against us but I'm not considering him at all as a senior recruit - just someone who can help keep the natives at bay until the cavalry arrive.  And to our young side who learned strong lessons this season about input, output and attitude in general, I think that can potentially be very important.  Hopefully the situation never arises but it won't hurt to have a couple of wheel chocks available while we climb that steep hill.  No point rolling all the way to the bottom again.

[Owl]

yeah he is a senior rookie who only comes in for injured players, ready made experienced player with good credentials to fill in for injury and to mentor developing forwards....hardly an issue.

[WilliamPowell]

I think this will be great

Look at how many pages this topic has got already.....

I love this time of year  

I've got no issue with a role focused around a spot at Coburg.  It's ok to say "focus on youth" but like real life, youth still needs to learn and they don't learn by growing alone - mentoring and 'do as I do' guidance is still paramount to their successful transition to adulthood (senior player).  There's more to building and developing our list than just chocking it up with youth - the value of Ben Cousins has been well accepted on here - and even though Miller is not a player in the same class, if they (the club) are looking to him in a coaching-type role then they obviously rate his input.  Remember, this is the same Brad Miller that knocked back a farewell game with Melbourne seniors because he didn't want to take the spot of one of the kids so I'm happy to trust the judgment of the club that he will be used in a suitable role.  Cameron's words give me heart - "He fully understands the role we have planned for him at Richmond" - that he is not being sought as a shortcut.  As Danog said, insurance if we have a horror run with injuries but a role focused at Coburg accelerating the development of the kids is fine by me.

Good post Smokey.

So he takes up our list pookie spot, costs us nothing, plays most likely every bllody game at Coburg and helps develop the cubs - who cares.

The thing that makes me not fussed about it one way or another is the fact this bloke gave up a chance at a farewell game ofr Melb to do the right thing by the CLub he has spent the most of 2010 playing for (in this case Casey). He seems to be very "team focussed" and with a young group like ours we need that

 

[jackstar is back again]

alot of interesting posts.
Also of interest is what the pies have added to there list from other clubs, to help support there younger group.
All clubs do it. we havent been successful in this area in the past as all we want to give up as trade is crap.
Collingwood have added Ball, Jolley, Brown, Dawes , Wood, Medhurst to there overall list for a reason
We CANNOT rely on youth alone and to develop within.
The Saints have also added the following to get them to Grand Finals.
Dawson, King,Ray, Peake,Dempster,Schneider, Gardinier etc.

[TigerTimeII]

there is a lot of upside in taking miller

big body, can play fwd and back, he isn't that old

i remember yrs ago when the rumours started that we were after leigh brown

mt was so dead against him, cos he was a "hack"  yet brown has been a gun at the pies


i say if hardwick sees a role for miller in the team, i trust his judgement

thats why they do what they do, and we r here , some posting dribble, some just become cut and past experts

[bojangles17]

Why do we need insurance for? To stop us dropping from 15th from 16th ???  . We're going to finish bottom 4 again anyway so if we get injuries then we finish bottom, suck it up and end up with a extra priority pick in another compromise draft where decent picks a golden. You know as we should have done the last two years to accelerate our rebuild. Bringing in a number of recycled fringe players from other clubs is only a pathway to another ninth  .

stop trying to forecast the future by reading past chapters MT, honestly mate you're better than that simple minded approach. a journey is one step at a time...ignoring the dearth of forward options at Punt Rd will see us go backwards

List building is about planning for the future though bj. Recruiters are watching potential draftees from at least their U16 days and list managers together with the recruiters need to access the potential strength and depth of the next 2-3 drafts and what will be available in terms of the quality and quantity of mids, KPPs, rucks. Last year was a mids draft with all but John Butcher and Daniel Talia taken in the first round of the draft. We only got Griffiths at 19 because there were concerns about his injured shoulder and he slipped out of the first round. No one said to ignore our dearth of forward options. Quite the contrary. In fact we still lack the necessary quality and depth in most areas on the ground. That's what the draft is for. When in full rebuild mode you accrue as many early picks as possible to add more and more talent and class to our list including key forwards. Maybe you could argue a 22-24 y.o. mature rookie may be worth bringing in if he could develop into an AFL player and fill a need. Not as a temporary "back-up" though which is a waste of time IMO. Melbourne sure thought so with Miller so he played in VFL most of this year. Miller won't solve our dearth of forwards as he'll just be a 27 y.o. temporary back-up. He's only ever kicked more than 15 goals in a season twice; the highest being 26. He's hardly going to replace Jack's output of 78 goals if Jack and Griffiths got injured which is the reasoning for his recruitment as a mature rookie. Add to that in the six games he played this year Melbourne lost 4 of them and most of those were by 40-60 points so he didn't stop the Dees losing badly either. We might as well try Post or Vickery up forward if all we want is a tall target who kicks a goal a game on average. Sorry you can call my opinion "simple minded" all you like but it won't change my opinion that Miller is not needed at Punt Rd.

you are failing to see that our forward line needs strength added if we are to make progress in 2011. Look at how JR performed in the last month of the season as a window to 2011 if we fail to address this problem. miller was a spare parts man at melbourne, but he showed he can take a grab, avg 6 or so a game...we need to add someone in the forward line that can stand tall whilst defenders are marauding JR whilst at the same time allowing our young KPP to develop at their own pace. Heres hoping vick and Post can earn a game as a KP in their own right...sheesh they 'd need to improve some

[WilliamPowell]

All clubs do it. we havent been successful in this area in the past as all we want to give up as trade is crap.

I agree with you here Jack  but I think the other thing you've forgotten to mention is the fact that when we have bought in recycled players they haven't been good ones to start with when you measure them against what it cost us. I think case in point is Jordie McMahon, what we got (Jordie) for what we gave up (pick 19) was a terrible deal for the Club.

I find it staggering that people to this day bring up the Tigers selecting Mark Graham in 2005 as being a bad decision by the club. It was a good decision, it costs us late draft pick (in the 50's IIRC) he helped in developing the younger players and allowed some blokes time to develop at VFL level rather havng them thrown in the deep end when they weren't ready. Perhaps if we as club under previous regimes had done this with a few more younger players over the years we'd have better developed young blokes than we do now 

That's why I view the possible Sherman deal as a good one if and the key here is IF - we get a Sherman for our 2nd round pick only IF we secure a pick (say somewhere between 18-25)  before the pick we would have to give up for him (pick 29)

[Judge Roughneck]

Hardwick has been telling about needing big bodies on the list to support the youth.

If we get miller in a pure coburg only role it will not be too bad.

[the claw]

people should realise one thing and if im wrong i stand corrected.

is it or is it not fact that all clubs are entitled to two MATURE ROOKIE PICKS. if we dont use them on mature types we dont get to use them at all.

can any one tell me if we are very young very inexperienced and very undersized when it comes to key forwards.

anyone with half a brain can see where im leading while miller may not be everyones cup of tea a miller type is needed in the short term.

can i ask why was it okay to mature rookie polak last yr and not miller this yr.

[Mr Magic]

Good post claw. Don't have an issue with this one.
He'll come at much less cost than Bradshaw too.

[jackstar is back again]

Good post claw. Don't have an issue with this one.
He'll come at much less cost than Bradshaw too.

agree

[Fishfinger]

people should realise one thing and if im wrong i stand corrected.

is it or is it not fact that all clubs are entitled to two MATURE ROOKIE PICKS. if we dont use them on mature types we dont get to use them at all.

No.
There are 8 spots on the rookie list.* Maximum 2 of the 8 spots can be filled by someone 23yo or older.
All 8 spots can be used for eligible rookie players (18yo to 22yo).

*7 spots if there is 1 eligible veteran, 6 spots if 2 eligible veterans (max 2 - we have none)

[torch]

Depends how you see the big picture, i see as we trade out the likes of tambling, thursfield, mcguane or rance etc ... and draft more kids like Heppell, Mitchell and Lamb etc who will be good players for a long time going forward.

So you trust the club to make the right decisions in regards to picks and kids, but not trades involving mature bodies?

I believe we are better of trading out the likes of Thursfield, Tambling et al and using those picks on Kids. Thats it in a nutshell.

I second that Ramps and MT!

Why doesn't Melbourne delist Miller and tell him to play at Casey in a "Mentoring Role"?

Why don't we just ask him to be a forward coach that just plays at Coburg? At least it "FREES UP" a place for a young cub to get a chance.

Why do we have to Rookie him and play "X" amount? Insurance?

Try someone else! Like Westoff or Westhoff! At least he can get an opportunity! So what if he is very raw! Here is his chance!

I have no problem with Houli, but Grigg? He can't kick? Or am I getting him and Bower mixed up?

Sherman looks like he is a Bulldog.

I would take Adelaide's compersation pick and use it in the Draft.

Trade Thursfield to Fremantle for any pick, keep our picks and go nuts on young cubs!

However ...

Miller, Hislop as Rookie listed players?

Miller will only get one year? What's the point? If you are going to have him around, make it two-three years at least.

Hislop ... Why bother with him?

What will happen to Gilligan? He would have to delisted, with Hicks, Westhoff will retain.

I would not say this is a "Shortcut", I just see this, with Hislop, as a waste of money and space!