Welcome everyone to One-Eyed Richmond's Tiger Forum Cheers from mightytiges and WilliamPowell.
Not sure claw watches SANFL. Gordon had more impressive games than Fuller.
Quote from: the claw on December 03, 2013, 09:40:23 PMstill lol at the thread. there is no excuses on the planet that can excuse us taking just one 18 yr old for the entire trade and nd period. seems everyone wants to pretend this did not happen.its a differing opinion to the defenders of all things richmond, but with just picks 12 50 and 66, at the very least one of of 50 or 66 should have been used on a kid logically pick 50 imo. if it was me id have used both 50 and 66 on kids and taken one of the mature blokes at pick 78. i can say this because im absolutely certain both would have been available here.im going to say it one more time as a player and a state league pick i have no problem with either gordon or or lloyd. im all for taking mature players to fill needs its where we take em and how we balance out our picks thats important. i remain adamant though both gordon and lloyd would have been available later nd or in the rookie draft, and there was kids at 18 with plenty of potential still there at 18. i still believe our footy dept still regularly takes players way too early. we clearly had a lot of mature players in our sights but why at pick 50. apparently every mature player we took was about to be snaffled up its hilarious, but what actually transpired suggests overwhelmingly otherwise.apart from us only the wb and i say only the western bulldogs took a mature player with a live nd pick inside the top 50. they took a bloke who actually banged the door down whos skills set is something most of our players dream about. he warranted pick 42. no other club apart from the rfc was interested in taking a mature player with a live pick in the nd.Taking the 18 yoa means in all likely hood Gordon would have Ben unavailable at our third pick.
still lol at the thread. there is no excuses on the planet that can excuse us taking just one 18 yr old for the entire trade and nd period. seems everyone wants to pretend this did not happen.its a differing opinion to the defenders of all things richmond, but with just picks 12 50 and 66, at the very least one of of 50 or 66 should have been used on a kid logically pick 50 imo. if it was me id have used both 50 and 66 on kids and taken one of the mature blokes at pick 78. i can say this because im absolutely certain both would have been available here.im going to say it one more time as a player and a state league pick i have no problem with either gordon or or lloyd. im all for taking mature players to fill needs its where we take em and how we balance out our picks thats important. i remain adamant though both gordon and lloyd would have been available later nd or in the rookie draft, and there was kids at 18 with plenty of potential still there at 18. i still believe our footy dept still regularly takes players way too early. we clearly had a lot of mature players in our sights but why at pick 50. apparently every mature player we took was about to be snaffled up its hilarious, but what actually transpired suggests overwhelmingly otherwise.apart from us only the wb and i say only the western bulldogs took a mature player with a live nd pick inside the top 50. they took a bloke who actually banged the door down whos skills set is something most of our players dream about. he warranted pick 42. no other club apart from the rfc was interested in taking a mature player with a live pick in the nd.
Quote from: tigs2011 on December 04, 2013, 12:35:24 PMNot sure claw watches SANFL. Gordon had more impressive games than Fuller.He's too busy watch oakliegh religiously And yet was unaware of where aarnot played
we took gordon with our third rnd pick there is little doubt he would have lasted until the rookie draft.
Quote from: the claw on April 04, 2014, 12:03:52 AMwe took gordon with our third rnd pick there is little doubt he would have lasted until the rookie draft.We took the players where we did that WE wanted. Not who others wanted.We're not privvy to who others have on their list. Hartley especially has a track record most would envy. Earned credit.Let's see how Nat G goes..
are any of the players taken by hartley better than goddard and chapman both of whom cost nothing. are we allowed to include the many failed mature picks since blair has been there or are they fjs selections when they fail lol.
The Commisioner
Why don't we just call him a stuffing spud and be done with it.
Quote from: the claw on April 04, 2014, 12:53:51 AMare any of the players taken by hartley better than goddard and chapman both of whom cost nothing. are we allowed to include the many failed mature picks since blair has been there or are they fjs selections when they fail lol.You can't just use the cost of those players in draft picks though Claw. There is an impact in list management as well and in the case of these 2 guys they would be on fair coin, Goddard especially. Maybe we didn't have the room in our cap over the period they were asking so we looked at different options. To judge the decision fairly and correctly you at least need to be in possession of all the facts, not just apply the subset you know of.
