Author Topic: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?  (Read 1875 times)

Online WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 30492
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #15 on: October 27, 2012, 08:56:27 AM »
with magoo suposedly being offered a contract i doubt he will be delisted.
browne delisted and gus moved on probably saves derickx.
that leaves either post or white, assuming one will go to get the 4 ND picks( which may have changed.)

Post being younger and the recruitment of edwards and knights leaves white as the most probable to get the big A.

edwards seems to be an afterthought though, so it may mean we only use 3 picks, which would in effect mean we gave up pick 43(?) for him.

But seeing like McGuane; White has been offered a contract too then using your argument al that only leaves Post doesn't it  ;) ;D
« Last Edit: October 27, 2012, 06:15:30 PM by WilliamPowell »
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

Offline Penelope

  • Internet nuffer and sooky jellyfish
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12930
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #16 on: October 27, 2012, 08:58:16 AM »
forgot white had been offered a contract, but i think the mad one is on the money.
“For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways my ways,” says the Lord.
 
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are my ways higher than your ways,
And my thoughts than your thoughts."

Yahweh? or the great Clawski?

yaw rehto eht dellorcs ti fi daer ot reisae eb dluow tI

Online WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 30492
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #17 on: October 27, 2012, 09:01:50 AM »
forgot white had been offered a contract, but i think the mad one is on the money.

Sadly it would seem so  :-\

Suppose we will know next week
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

Offline WA Tiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 14257
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #18 on: October 27, 2012, 09:12:16 AM »
As expected for mine, Edwards a bit of a surprise but no big names and no ruckman....good to get Chaplin though and if Knights can stay injury free we could really benefit from these two additions.
DIMMA - You will be held ACCOUNTABLE...

“We are really excited about what we have brought in. We have got great depth of players that can take us where we need to go. We are just putting some cream on the top at the moment,” he said.

"Rucks:
Shaun Hampson is the No.1 man"

Offline bojangles17

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5618
  • Platinum member 33 years
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #19 on: October 27, 2012, 10:19:09 AM »
I would have loved toi have secured a R2 selection for Post apart from that it was a spendid period , we bolstered our starting line up no end :clapping
RFC 1885, Often Imitated, Never Equalled

the claw

  • Guest
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #20 on: October 27, 2012, 11:58:27 AM »
with magoo suposedly being offered a contract i doubt he will be delisted.
browne delisted and gus moved on probably saves derickx.
that leaves either post or white, assuming one will go to get the 4 ND picks( which may have changed.)

Post being younger and the recruitment of edwards and knights leaves white as the most probable to get the big A.

edwards seems to be an afterthought though, so it may mean we only use 3 picks, which would in effect mean we gave up pick 43(?) for him.

The easiest and most common sense option is to put Newman on veterans list
no the easiest and most common sense thing to do would be cut white.  a 7 yr player who is still not established is ordinary shkill wise hardly touches the ball and is very limited in what roles he can perform. who is now a long way back in the que for the role he  does do making him not even a depth player.
he might be a nice bloke and he might be a good club man but we arent running a charity here there is not one good footy reason to keep him.

the rookie numbers get pruned back this yr i believe. placing newman there limits what we planned to do in taking some mature players who can perform a role.
darrou, verrier, simon and newman would give us just two rookie picks of which one at least im sure we will use on a mature ruckman. that would leave just one pick and im sorry to say there are many many better players out there than white we could use with this  rookie pick yet alone keeping him and not useing pick 43.
i hope they wake up to themselves.
just lately it seems we  take 2 steps forward and then one step backwards with pooty list decisions,

the way i look at it do we keep matt white who is as plain as the nose on your face a dud and there is no practicle reason to keep him,  lowrie towers hrovat pongracic  are just  three off the top of my head   who could slip to here.  or use pick 43. its a no brainer. imo some very promising kids will be available at 43. nick rodda a kpd could be at43 we could actually do with another genuine kpd. we could pay overs here and take jack hannath ensuring we have a viable young back up ruckman to ivan. dean kent marvin warrell are two west aussies well worth taking here.

if we keep white and fail to use pick 43 we should all be ropeable.
bloody hell imo we needed to get another pick around here and cut two not use the pick at all.

Offline jordie2tivendale

  • Premiership Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 270
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #21 on: October 27, 2012, 02:17:08 PM »
Quite pleased with the list upgrade we recieved for S.F.A . I am very happy to pick up Chris Knights ability wise is the best of the three very hard to match up on and if he stays injury free look out  we rape Adelaide again ... Chaplin  meh  in two minds on the fella i understand where he finished in Poots B&F but he is no world beater and his disposal is suspect he is a definate starting 22 at this point in time only due to  size and experience .
Aaron Edwards is hot and cold goes missing perfect fit for Melbourne .i know he is accurate and kicks roughly 2 goals a game  will add a new dimension list upgrade blah blah but at the end of the day The Beggars let him go so i will be happy to see him leave 2014
 until we get a big bodied run with player that replaces Jackson  we wont be a serious contender so i will continue to keep dreaming
Round 1 is going to be bloody massive  win that  and we will make finals  stop the 4 week blocks Dimma  and start  winning the round 1 Block

Offline mightytiges

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 45403
  • Eat 'Em Alive!
    • oneeyed-richmond.com
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #22 on: October 28, 2012, 05:37:12 PM »
We've improved our list without giving up anything so all up it's a positive. We started very well in the free agency period especially getting Chaplin and being able trading Gus away for a mid-draft pick was a dream come true lol. Edwards is a bit of a 'meh!' for mine. He'll have a day out once in a blue moon usually against a bottom side but then go missing and end up back in the ressies. Just another Miller! The one negative is it's still disappointing that we'll still have the likes of McGuane on our list. How many more years does the Club need to find out he's not up to it and is a list clogger. I would've also tried to trade Jacko but he's a favourite of the coaches so he was going nowhere.
All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be - Pink Floyd

Gigantor

  • Guest
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #23 on: October 28, 2012, 05:49:09 PM »
Many of us here see the deficiencies in jacko and many wouldnt blink an eyelid in trading him if the opportunity arose.Yet the chatter, is the club thinks very highly of him.So what is it that the coaches see that we dont?Is it his leadership qualities alone?Surely thats not enough to keep him getting a game year in year out.

Online RedanTiger

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 871
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #24 on: October 28, 2012, 06:56:05 PM »
We've improved our list without giving up anything so all up it's a positive. We started very well in the free agency period especially getting Chaplin and being able trading Gus away for a mid-draft pick was a dream come true lol. Edwards is a bit of a 'meh!' for mine. He'll have a day out once in a blue moon usually against a bottom side but then go missing and end up back in the ressies. Just another Miller! The one negative is it's still disappointing that we'll still have the likes of McGuane on our list. How many more years does the Club need to find out he's not up to it and is a list clogger. I would've also tried to trade Jacko but he's a favourite of the coaches so he was going nowhere.

Time to wake up from your dream then.
Gus was traded for a mid-draft UPGRADE from 50 to 40, not a pick.

Online WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 30492
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #25 on: October 28, 2012, 09:14:15 PM »
We've improved our list without giving up anything so all up it's a positive. We started very well in the free agency period especially getting Chaplin and being able trading Gus away for a mid-draft pick was a dream come true lol. Edwards is a bit of a 'meh!' for mine. He'll have a day out once in a blue moon usually against a bottom side but then go missing and end up back in the ressies. Just another Miller! The one negative is it's still disappointing that we'll still have the likes of McGuane on our list. How many more years does the Club need to find out he's not up to it and is a list clogger. I would've also tried to trade Jacko but he's a favourite of the coaches so he was going nowhere.

Time to wake up from your dream then.
Gus was traded for a mid-draft UPGRADE from 50 to 40, not a pick.

Pick 40 is better than pick 50 and to move Gus in the process is a win  ;D

Seriously pick 40 for Gus Graham and pick 50 is bloody good deal (trade).
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

Online Owl

  • Magnificent Bastard
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5800
  • Bring me TWO chickens
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #26 on: October 29, 2012, 07:26:48 AM »
but now its pick 43 so whatever we thought we were getting just got three picks more remote lol
Lots of people name their swords......

Online WilliamPowell

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 30492
  • Better to ignore a fool than encourage one
    • One Eyed Richmond
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #27 on: October 29, 2012, 07:51:31 AM »
but now its pick 43 so whatever we thought we were getting just got three picks more remote lol

True but Gus is still goneskis  ;D
"Oh yes I am a dreamer, I still see us flying high!"

from the song "Don't Walk Away" by Pat Benatar 1988 (Wide Awake In Dreamland)

Offline tigs2011

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 5705
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #28 on: October 29, 2012, 09:37:02 AM »
but now its pick 43 so whatever we thought we were getting just got three picks more remote lol

That pickmay have slid 3 places but the pick we had slid 4. So it's an even bigger win. Crows have 54.

Offline Tigger

  • Jack Dyer medallist
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
  • For We're From Tigerland
Re: How did we rate Richmond's trade/free agency period?
« Reply #29 on: October 29, 2012, 10:55:46 AM »
I voted Excellent - there wasnt an in between choice between good and excellent and given I thought it was better than good - excellent it was.

IMHO it was very good and if they landed Tyson for pick 9 - then excellent would have been spot on.

As others have said - added a few hundred games of experience and depth. Guys who in theory can come straight in and play a role.  Like MT I was 'meh' about A Edwards - but can see the logic.  He is an upgrade on Miller - at least Edwards can kick them from 45 metres out directly in front or at the very least will make the distance.  Chaplin is obviously in our best 22 - probably in our best 12.  Knights - well if his body holds up is a quality player - if it holds up. Time will tell.

Lets see who we get in the Kids draft now as the icing on the cake.