List analysis [merged]

[the claw]

this is what we have done or taken  the last two seasons to date .and no, there will be no graphs to show what i mean
last yr
lennon 12 should be a very good player at that pick
gordon 50. mature depth player
lloyd  66. mature depth player.
hampson traded 28. in all likelyhood a failure.
banfield r delisted.
miles r  thank god for small mercies.
thomas r. mature depth player
petterd promoted rookie. another mature depth player. make no mistake over the next few yrs we will be looking to upgrade all of em bar one possibly two.

this yr
miles promoted rookie. again thank god eh.
hunt df/a.  mature  role player. foot soldier only imo.
nd 12. we again have to hope we get this one right.
nd 33. should be able to pick up at least a decent player. but hey we are talking jackson and his record here.
nd 52.  what odds on finding a decent player here 40 50% maybe.
5 rookie picks. if we get real lucky we may find 1 good player thats just the way it is. most likely 3 spots will go to topping up depth with mature types again.

now take lennon out and miles who is a bonus and ask yourself where is the quality

[Judge Roughneck]

I expect / hope:

 * miles to continue to be a star
 * Lennon to go good, hbf would be nice to use his kicking if not too slow.
* hunt to play on a wing / tagger. If he can stop someone that is real quality enough, more so for next to free

x3 new starting 18 players , upgrade on two years ago. Granted, hampson Thomas pettard bannfield not looking too healthy.

However you expect 12 to be handy. If we can get some luck elsewhere in the draft, plus its not impossible either/both Lloyd or Gordon can come good over preseason and hold a spot down. Both pretty much in the hunt age bracket, i reckon each has shown enough they may make it. Lloyd over king/Newman, Gordon over grigg is an upgrade

Potential quarter of the senior side turn over...

We have moves on king and Jackson who were poor IMO. Ditto edwards.

 Helbig and Ohanlon, have been upgraded with Gordon llyod...

[Fluffy Tiger]

this is what we have done or taken  the last two seasons to date .and no, there will be no graphs to show what i mean
last yr
lennon 12 should be a very good player at that pick
gordon 50. mature depth player
lloyd  66. mature depth player.
hampson traded 28. in all likelyhood a failure.
banfield r delisted.
miles r  thank god for small mercies.
thomas r. mature depth player
petterd promoted rookie. another mature depth player. make no mistake over the next few yrs we will be looking to upgrade all of em bar one possibly two.

this yr
miles promoted rookie. again thank god eh.
hunt df/a.  mature  role player. foot soldier only imo.
nd 12. we again have to hope we get this one right.
nd 33. should be able to pick up at least a decent player. but hey we are talking jackson and his record here.
nd 52.  what odds on finding a decent player here 40 50% maybe.
5 rookie picks. if we get real lucky we may find 1 good player thats just the way it is. most likely 3 spots will go to topping up depth with mature types again.

now take lennon out and miles who is a bonus and ask yourself where is the quality

Can I ask you claw what percentage of draft picks from all clubs are quality?   Im sure if you take 30% of the new faces for most clubs out (2 of the 7 new faces) then you would have little quality. Im not saying our reciting last year was good (it wasn't) but you just cant take 2 out and look at the others in isolation.

[Beans]

* hunt to play on a wing / tagger. If he can stop someone that is real quality enough, more so for next to free

I actually think they will try Hunt as a defensive forward in the Jake King mould. Hunt can find he goals, is very quick and tackles to hurt. Good replacement IMO

[Diocletian]

Was suprised to see Hunt's only kicked 19 goals in 63 games. Perhaps one aspect of his game we may be expecting a little too much from.

[the claw]

this is what we have done or taken  the last two seasons to date .and no, there will be no graphs to show what i mean
last yr
lennon 12 should be a very good player at that pick
gordon 50. mature depth player
lloyd  66. mature depth player.
hampson traded 28. in all likelyhood a failure.
banfield r delisted.
miles r  thank god for small mercies.
thomas r. mature depth player
petterd promoted rookie. another mature depth player. make no mistake over the next few yrs we will be looking to upgrade all of em bar one possibly two.

this yr
miles promoted rookie. again thank god eh.
hunt df/a.  mature  role player. foot soldier only imo.
nd 12. we again have to hope we get this one right.
nd 33. should be able to pick up at least a decent player. but hey we are talking jackson and his record here.
nd 52.  what odds on finding a decent player here 40 50% maybe.
5 rookie picks. if we get real lucky we may find 1 good player thats just the way it is. most likely 3 spots will go to topping up depth with mature types again.

now take lennon out and miles who is a bonus and ask yourself where is the quality

Can I ask you claw what percentage of draft picks from all clubs are quality?   Im sure if you take 30% of the new faces for most clubs out (2 of the 7 new faces) then you would have little quality. Im not saying our reciting last year was good (it wasn't) but you just cant take 2 out and look at the others in isolation.

hmm we have done this before and it has degenerated... . lets just say first rounders you must be looking for a very good player long term if not elite.
second round id be hoping for a good to v/good player. if im looking at mature players and have a long history to judge by im looking for nothing less than a good player otherwise why chase em.
then you have role players. sometimes the role player is invaluable. as a stopper lets hope hunt is one.

mate i have done the whole poo and caboodle on here, ive advocated state leaguers  especially those that meet criteria that i have regularly set out, ive advocated mature players like chappy, martin, goddard even bradshaw, and those that are still juniors like hallahan, and at every turn there have been those who argue to the death how wrong it is.
ive continually argued we stay in the nd  especially first second and even third rounds and take kids  thus giving us the best chance of getting quality kids, but when the club  only takes one junior in the nd that process is poo poohed by many on here.

mate its not about one yr going down a certain path and the next going down another its all about a continuous and balanced process that must be gone thru every yr.
yes your right not all picks can be high quality but im not just going on about high quality how nice would it be to just get our hands on 4 or 5 players every yr who range thru just plain decent thru verygood or even elite if we are lucky.

imo as a club we need to find every yr at least 4 good to elite players just to tread water.
so i  apologise it is wrong to phrase things as just finding quality.

[Judge Roughneck]

4 new, elite players on the list pet year, is dreaming.

[the claw]

4 new, elite players on the list pet year, is dreaming.

can i just suggest you have a little re read.

[Judge Roughneck]

4 new, good to elite players on the list pet year, is dreaming.

[one-eyed]

General Manager of Football, Dan Richardson's comments on the state of our current list:

"A lot of people forget, if you go through and analyse our list, particularly our key players, it’s still quite young and it’s still developing. Even if you project forward to 2017 and beyond, particularly two or three years away, there are not too many players that you would say won’t be around due to age. So our list is young, and we still think there’s scope for improvement. We’ve got to keep improving, we know that.  We think improvement can come from within. We’re confident that what we’ve seen over the summer will highlight that this year.”

Full article: http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2015-03-25/tigers-have-an-eye-to-the-future

[🏅Dooks]

I think we are still the 9th youngest list

[the claw]

4 new, elite players on the list pet year, is dreaming.

is it. fail to do it and the very best you can hope for is to tread water. we turned over 9 players this yr  id be bitterly disappointed if i was replacing them and i couldnt find 4 good to very good players.
 i would like us to use 4 or 5  picks in the nd as a minimum every yr unless we trade for a good player.i would expect at least two of those 4 or 5 picks to be good or better. i certainly expect any traded player to be at least good and the same applies to f/as. throw in the fact that every two yrs you will turn over somewhere between 6 to 10 rookies  if you cant find at least two decent players you should not be in the job.

if cory ellis and menadue turn out to be good players hunt and lambert as mature recruits go alright then we have another what 5  nd and rookie picks to find just one player to take us above 4 good to very good players. it isnt hard imo especially when this yr the average number of players cut from every side was nearly 9 per club 8.67 in fact.with f/a, trades, mature picks from state leagues, and the nd and rookie draft every club will be aiming for better than 50% success rate.most will achieve it.under francis jackson we have rarely achieved it.

ive said this before. if the average for an afl player is 10 yrs  then just to tread water over that time frame you need to find 4 players every yr just to break even.if its less than 10 yrs then you have to find more than 4 players.

[the claw]

General Manager of Football, Dan Richardson's comments on the state of our current list:

"A lot of people forget, if you go through and analyse our list, particularly our key players, it’s still quite young and it’s still developing. Even if you project forward to 2017 and beyond, particularly two or three years away, there are not too many players that you would say won’t be around due to age. So our list is young, and we still think there’s scope for improvement. We’ve got to keep improving, we know that.  We think improvement can come from within. We’re confident that what we’ve seen over the summer will highlight that this year.”

Full article: http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2015-03-25/tigers-have-an-eye-to-the-future

reading that article makes me cringe.i can pick holes in it everywhere but cant be bothered atm. why are we kidding ourselves. geez the first club i looked at was adelaide they  had 34 players aged 25 and under and richardson is crowing about how many again. not one mention of the quality and likelihood of players making it. not one mention of the holes that will have to be filled in two yrs time and beyond.
theres real spin here and things are made to look rosy when the opposite is true.

[Zlatan]

im still shocked hes playing his comments in regards to key forwards and Lloyd

[Zlatan]

General Manager of Football, Dan Richardson's comments on the state of our current list:

"A lot of people forget, if you go through and analyse our list, particularly our key players, it’s still quite young and it’s still developing. Even if you project forward to 2017 and beyond, particularly two or three years away, there are not too many players that you would say won’t be around due to age. So our list is young, and we still think there’s scope for improvement. We’ve got to keep improving, we know that.  We think improvement can come from within. We’re confident that what we’ve seen over the summer will highlight that this year.”

Full article: http://www.richmondfc.com.au/news/2015-03-25/tigers-have-an-eye-to-the-future

reading that article makes me cringe.i can pick holes in it everywhere but cant be bothered atm. why are we kidding ourselves. geez the first club i looked at was adelaide they  had 34 players aged 25 and under and richardson is crowing about how many again. not one mention of the quality and likelihood of players making it. not one mention of the holes that will have to be filled in two yrs time and beyond.
theres real spin here and things are made to look rosy when the opposite is true.

pettard hampson grigg newman thomas gordon chaplin foley knights etc.

the list is not that young