official polak is @ richmond

[mightytiges]

I no longer feel angry about the rubbish that went on during trade week only very very sad that a famous football club with a proud and storied history continues to engage in mediocrity and make failure its goal. We will not make the 8 next year. We will finish between 10th and 12th.

I've been very negative about the trade but I'm not that pessimistic about next year. I didn't think we'd make the Eight next year anyway and in fact Polak might actually help us into the top 8 if he can hold down CHB and free up Joel and we finally get a bit of luck with a injury-free run. It's in 3-5 years time that decisions like giving up a 3rd round pick hurt a footy club when that kid you missed out on would have been hitting his straps and adding to your depth.

[Jackstar]

I am a betting man and we are ""morals"" to make the eight next year.
Having less picks in the draft is more than likely plannned due to salary cap restraints as players like Tuck are on backended contracts thus they proved impossible to be traded

[letsgetiton!]

I no longer feel angry about the rubbish that went on during trade week only very very sad that a famous football club with a proud and storied history continues to engage in mediocrity and make failure its goal. We will not make the 8 next year. We will finish between 10th and 12th.

do u need a shrink ramps!!

we wil make the 8, we havent ahad a chb since jim jess, this is exactly what we needed

[Ramps]

the last time i made a big call about where we would finish i was on another forum. I said we would finish stone motherless last. I was banned. 10 months later we finished stone motherless last.

[mightytiges]

I am a betting man and we are ""morals"" to make the eight next year.
Having less picks in the draft is more than likely plannned due to salary cap restraints as players like Tuck are on backended contracts thus they proved impossible to be traded

We still have to use pick 60 because we gained it in a trade. So we won't have less picks, only less quality of picks.

You can't pass on a pick gained through a trade. That's why we knocked back the dogs pick last year and just gave away pick 56 for Paddy. The original deal agreed upon was to exchange 4th round picks.

[Jackstar]

I am a betting man and we are ""morals"" to make the eight next year.
Having less picks in the draft is more than likely plannned due to salary cap restraints as players like Tuck are on backended contracts thus they proved impossible to be traded

And who is responsible for those backended contracts.

Whoever did that should be sacked!

Its called balancing the books to suit the salary cap, all clubs do it, part of AFL footy unfortunately

[Ramps]

Balancing the books lol...how about having a strategy that says Player A B C and D are not gonna be here in 12 months and lets not give em a backended deal because if they can keep up a modicum or some semblance of form we can trade them lol.

[Jackstar]

Well players ABCDEF arent there.
Gone, Rodan, Kellaway, Humm Roach , Stafford,Chaffey, and no doubts the likes of Moore, Jackson, Limbach, McGaune wouldnt be sleeping well in the upcomng weeks

[letsgetiton!]

the last time i made a big call about where we would finish i was on another forum. I said we would finish stone motherless last. I was banned. 10 months later we finished stone motherless last.

dud the spud the dud was coaching then

[WilliamPowell]

Its called balancing the books to suit the salary cap, all clubs do it, part of AFL footy unfortunately

I think it also had a bit to do with Clubs not knowing 12 months ago what the salary cap for 2007 and beyond was going to be.

I mean there's a requirement that they have to pay 92.50% of the cap, no-one knew until late 2006 what the 2007 cap was going to be because the "negotiations" between the AFL and AFLPA, a club cannot afford to have all their players cvoming off contract in one season - cwertain contracts would have signed under that assumption.

[one-eyed]

Pro-stats data on Graham Polak:

http://www.pro-stats.com.au/psw/web/player_career?pid=2002050

[mightytiges]

I checked out Dockerland and there's mixed views amongst Freo supporters. Some think they did well picking up Tarrant and Solomon when they are challenging for the flag in the next year or two, while offloading two fringe players. Others a peeved about no longer having a first round pick and losing Polak on the cusp of coming good and they think we robbed them by not offering a player as well in their trade with us lol. Let's hope it's the latter  .

http://www.dockerland.com/cgi-bin/teemz/teemz.cgi?board=_master&action=opentopic&topic=16379&forum=Docker_Discussions

[Loose Cannon]

The idea of having numerous top 50 picks is a good one, but due to years of us (frawley) mismanaging our list - it is unbalanced. We URGENTLY needed a tall down back who is an upgrade on Hall. I don't think there is much doubt Polak is that.

I think it was a fairly even trade for both parties. A bit like the P.Bowden trade from last year. 

[the_boy_jake]

I don't mind it. The two things I would have liked ideally is,

1) To have kept pick 8.
2) To have involved Krak, Hall, Tiv, Hyde or a similar mid range player with trade value.

The Sydney approach says that trading for established players can work. I think that in getting Polak, a 70-game KP defender with something to prove we are going someway to addressing the list imbalance left by Spud.

I think that in some ways you benefit greatly from swimming against the tide. Sydney were trading away high picks for ready made players when everyone else became obsessed with them and built a very good list by using their lower picks wisely. With priority picks gone and everyone holding onto their first round picks, I think the days of picking up 6 or 7 real good kids in a couple of years (e.g. St Kilda) are behind us and you have to think smarter to get ahead.

The automatic assumption that Hawthorn will automatically be great because they are taking top-10 kids is also naive - the losing culture that group is developing will be very hard to shake. I reckon Plough and Miller are doing things just right, but we will wait and see.

[Tiger Spirit]

I don't mind it. The two things I would have liked ideally is,

1) To have kept pick 8.
2) To have involved Krak, Hall, Tiv, Hyde or a similar mid range player with trade value.

The Sydney approach says that trading for established players can work. I think that in getting Polak, a 70-game KP defender with something to prove we are going someway to addressing the list imbalance left by Spud.

I think that in some ways you benefit greatly from swimming against the tide. Sydney were trading away high picks for ready made players when everyone else became obsessed with them and built a very good list by using their lower picks wisely. With priority picks gone and everyone holding onto their first round picks, I think the days of picking up 6 or 7 real good kids in a couple of years (e.g. St Kilda) are behind us and you have to think smarter to get ahead.

The automatic assumption that Hawthorn will automatically be great because they are taking top-10 kids is also naive - the losing culture that group is developing will be very hard to shake. I reckon Plough and Miller are doing things just right, but we will wait and see.

Any reasonable approach can work, as long as a club has a plan and systematically works towards that.

The Swans seem to have developed a system that works for them and reaped the rewards.  I’m just not sure I understand what RFC’s approach is right now.

The fact the Club threw up names for trade in the same game bracket as Polak, to me, doesn’t say that the club was trying to address the imbalance in that area?  Things just turned out that way.

Instead it comes across that they wanted to fill a hole, and rather than use the long term option of the draft, opted for the quick fix of a trade.  Both options have the same chance of failing as succeeding.

So it’s down to the ability of the coaching staff to get the best out of their players and also the commitment needs to be there from the players, in order for that to happen.  If that doesn’t exist then I don’t think it really matters whether we use the trade or draft to build a list.

Essentially, if worked properly, any system can be effective.  Some clubs just seem to be a little more calculated in their trade/draft dealings, while others seem to make it up as they go along.  I’m not sure which category RFC fits in at the moment.

It’s almost like a ‘hit and miss’ approach, which seems to be reflected in the style of footy we play.