Author Topic: Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)  (Read 1988 times)

Offline one-eyed

  • Administrator
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 98034
    • One-Eyed Richmond
Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)
« on: November 27, 2006, 03:09:25 AM »
AFL Draft Grades
aflinsider.net
November 25th 2006 12:12


Richmond: Grade B

Riewoldt was a very good pick and something to watch next season is where he plays. Maybe he is a tall defender if Gaspar misses some games, but it would be a lot more fun to watch if he joined Richardson in the forward line. Edwards is the classic Wallace pick, he is small and he can run. Connors is a midfielder who plays a bit taller than he is so Richmond have some size there with Tuck, Delidio and also Johnson. They lost Stafford so a ruckman might have been a good pick later in the draft, but maybe they will address that in the preseason draft.

13 Jack Riewoldt, 192 86 (Tassie Mariners)
26 Shane Edwards, 180 69 (North Adelaide)
58 Daniel Connors, 183 79 (Bendigo)
60 Carl Peterson, 183 70 (Claremont)
73 Andrew Collins, 184 71 (Bendigo)
84 PASS

------------------------------
Grades for the other clubs:


Essendon: Grade A plus

The Bombers are the winners of the draft because they ended up with three top 10-worthy players. Gumbleton is the big, versatile player that Sheedy likes. It was either Gumbleton, Hansen or Leuenberger at this pick and Essendon couldn't lose. Jetta may even have been a player that Essendon briefly considered at pick 2, so to get him at 18 is huge. They wouldn't have thought they could get both Jetta and Hislop but they did. Hislop at 20 is just as big a steal as Jetta was. Combine Hislop with Watson and Stanton and the Bombers have a young midfield with some size and ability. Essendon also have the veteran play of the Johnsons and with good ruck depth they will have a dominant midfield. Davey is another reason to give the Bombers a high mark, when the Bombers were winning in the past they always had a contribution from one or two small forwards, Davey is ready to step in and score goals.

2 Scott Gumbleton, 197cm 93kg (Peel)
18 Leroy Jetta, 177 76 (South Fremantle)
20 Tom Hislop, 184 86 (Tassie Mariners)
36 Alwyn Davey, 176 78 (South Adelaide)
42 Bachar Houli, 181 89 (Western)
47 Kyle Reimers, 184 78 (Peel)
68 PASS


Adelaide: Grade A

When a team says they need key position prospects it isn't always easy finding them. But Sellar dropped nicely to them and then Tippett was another unexpected bonus. Twelve months ago Sellar was in the running to go at pick 1, so the Crows got a steal. McKay is midfield help in a few years while Campbell can help next season. Gill is a bargain, and with Hentschel to miss the season Gill will fill his role around centre half forward.

14 James Sellar, 195 90 (Glenelg)
32 Kurt Tippett, 201 96 (Southport)
48 David MacKay, 181 69 (Oakleigh)
64 Nick Gill, 192 90 (North Adelaide)
78 Bryce Campbell, 180 80 (Norwood)


Hawthorn: Grade A

The Hawks drafted 5 players who should all play next season. There is also a lot of versatility among the players. Thorp can do anything, Renouf is a ruckman and tall defender, Morton can play at either end, Kennedy could be a big midfielder or played on a flank at either end, while Moss could be played in the centre or a forward pocket.

6 Mitchell Thorp, 194 86 (Tassie Mariners)
24 Brent Renouf, 200 93 (Southport)
33 Jarryd Morton, 191 81 (Claremont)
40 Josh P. Kennedy, 186 88 (Sandringham Dragons)
56 Garry Moss, 180 70 (East Perth)
72 PASS


Geelong: Grade A

Hawkins was worth a top 3 pick, as was Selwood, so Geelong had a successful day. Djerrkura might be a bit of a reach, but if Geelong really wanted him they had to use pick 25 as 41 was already used on Hawkins. Not that Djerrkura won’t help them next season, and he should get in a few games for them next season.

7 Joel Selwood, 182 80 (Bendigo)
25 Nathan Djerrkura, 176 77 (Wanderers)
41 Tom Hawkins, 197 95 (Sandringham Dragons)
57 Simon Hogan, 181 68 (Geelong Falcons)


Brisbane: Grade A

Leuenberger could be the best player from this draft, if you go ahead 5 years and people are looking back on the 2006 draft it could Leuenberger who should have gone number 1. Proud wasn't expected to be available at 22 so the Lions got a steal with their second rounder. Pick 34 was acquired for Akermanis and they used that pick on a player who can also kick goals and do many skilful things on the ground, but Schmidt won't be doing handstands.

4 Matthew Leuenberger, 203 93 (East Perth)
22 Albert Proud, 180 83 (Mt Gravatt)
34 Chris Schmidt, 188 81 (West Adelaide)
38 James Hawksley, 186 73 (Peel)
54 Matt Tyler, 194 82 (North Ballarat)
70 Sam Sheldon, 183 79 (Oakleigh)


West Coast: Grade A

An amazing draft for a team that just won the premiership. The Eagles may have been deciding between M Brown and MacKenzie at pick 16, and in the end they got both of them. They may have missed out on Morton but they couldn't draft him over Brown and MacKenzie.

16 Mitchell Brown, 193 90 (North Ballarat)
29 Eric MacKenzie, 196 91 (Claremont)
43 Tim Houlihan, 189 74 (North Ballarat)
50 Will Schofield, 195 82 (Geelong Falcons)
80 James Thomson, 194 81 (Claremont)


Carlton: Grade B plus

They get Gibbs so it was a draft that improved their list a lot. The Blues decided that Hampson was the best ruckman out of Queensland, so this pick will be measured by how well Hampson develops compared to Renouf and Tippett. Grigg is underrated and he should be a valuable player for them. If Austin makes Gibbs happier at Carlton then the pick is worth it, but they did take the tall defender when ruck prospects Goldstein and Currie were still available. Benjamin and Anderson are a similar size, but play differently, and they could be competing for a spot in the backline. Benjamin is the player more likely to become a regular player for them. Carlton missed Sheldon, but will have a chance at Williams and Johnston in the rookie draft.

1 Bryce Gibbs, 187 78 (Glenelg)
17 Sean Hampson, 201 93 (Mt Gravatt)
19 Shaun Grigg, 190 79 (North Ballarat)
35 Mark Austin, 193 88 (Glenelg)
51 Clint Benjamin, 189 81 (Claremont)
67 Joe Anderson 188 81 (Darwin)
81 PASS


Collingwood: B plus

There is nothing wrong with drafting big and Collingwood went key position with their first three picks. Five years from now one of the best, and most athletic, tall defensive combinations could be Reid and Brown. Brown as the full back and Reid as an attacking centre half back. They might be getting Bryan, or Keating, in the preseason draft but they still could have added a ruckman with one of their picks here.

8 Ben Reid, 196 82 (Murray)
10 Nathan Brown, 194 87 (North Ballarat)
28 Chris Dawes, 194 96 (Sandringham Dragons)
44 Brad Dick, 182 69 (East Fremantle)
63 Tyson Goldsack, 191 82 (Gippsland)
75 PASS


Kangaroos: Grade B plus

Probably happy they didn't have to make the Hansen versus Gumbleton decision, and in the end they got the player they would have wanted. Hansen should play every game next season and improve the Kangaroos in the backline. Urquhart before Proud and Petterd was a risky pick. Goldstein could be a great pick, they didn't need a ruckman but they couldn't pass on his potential. Thomas adds some much needed speed and Edwards should add some much needed goal kicking.

3 Lachlan Hansen, 197 90 (Gippsland)
21 Gavin Urquhart, 181 80 (Morningside)
37 Todd Goldstein, 201 106 (Oakleigh)
53 Lindsay Thomas, 180 76 (Port Adelaide)
69 Ben Warren, 186 78 (Zillmere Eagles)
82 Aaron Edwards, 184 88 (Frankston)


Fremantle: Grade B

The Dockers have said that they ranked their picks in the top 30 players for the draft, so even drafting with lower picks they got quality. Not only were the picks local players but would have also been the best available at each pick. The Dockers have a lot of depth in the midfield but it wouldn't be a surprise if Collard and O'Brien managed a few games for the Dockers next season.

31 Clayton Collard, 182 86 (South Fremantle)
52 Brock O'Brien, 181 75 (Peel)
77 Calib Mourish, 190 85 (Towns)


Sydney: Grade B

Daniel O'Keefe can kick goals and also get a lot of possessions, so he sounds a bit like Ryan O'Keefe. Currie and White are two different ruck prospects and the Swans made the right decision to draft help in that area.

15 Daniel O'Keefe, 184 74 (Geelong Falcons)
49 Daniel Currie, 200 91 (Northern Knights)
65 Peter Faulks, 192 74 (Calder)
79 Jesse White, 196 101 (Southport)


Port Adelaide: Grade C plus

If Boak doesn't become a star there will be a lot of questions about what Port was doing as they took him over Thorp, Selwood and Sellar. The Power should know more about Stewart than most teams, and they will have had their reasons for taking him over MacKenzie or Renouf. Gray and Krakouer will add even more variety to the Power forward line.

5 Travis Boak, 183 76 (Geelong Falcons)
23 Paul Stewart, 190 82 (Woodville-West Torrens)
39 Nathan Krakouer, 182 61 (Claremont)
55 Robert Gray, 182 82 (Oakleigh)
71 Justin Westhoff, 199 83 (Central Districts)
83 Ryan Williams, 188 89 (Geelong Falcons)
86 David Rodan, 171 83 (Richmond)
88 PASS


St Kilda: Grade C plus

Their best player from this draft could be Jarryd Allen, so he was a real bargain at pick 59. Armitage is an interesting choice, and they picked him over Hislop, Proud and Jetta. Armitage should be very good, but for the Saints they will need him to be better than those midfielders that they chose Armitage over. Not sure why they would bring back Ferguson, they need a bigger player than him and there were several available to draft even late in the draft.

9 David Armitage, 184 80 (Morningside)
27 Brad Howard, 181 72 (Redlands)
59 Jarryd Allen, 193 88 (Calder)
74 Matthew Ferguson, 187 87 (St Kilda)
85 PASS
87 PASS
89 PASS


Western Bulldogs: Grade C plus

Everitt could be anything, from a full back to a wingman, but for the Bulldogs this was a draft to help them a few years from now. The Bulldogs were a team that were expected to draft a young ruckman but that didn't happen. All the picks here could have the project label put on them, so it will be a couple of years for a real result from this draft.

11 Andrejs Everitt, 193 77 (Dandenong)
45 Brennan Stack, 184 76 (Perth)
61 Josh Hill, 186 72 (Claremont)
66 Malcom Lynch, 178 65 (NSW/ACT Rams)
76 Paul O'Shea, 192 82 (Redlands)


Melbourne: Grade C

They passed on Sellar, but Frawley should be worth the first round pick but that will take a few years. Petterd is a good pick in the second round, but a small defender wasn't a big need. Maybe the Demons could have added another ruckman, and Tippett and Goldstein were still there when they picked Petterd. Garland is another project key position player. This draft won't help next season, or the one after that, but in a few more years if the players do develop into stars the draft grade will be higher.

12 James Frawley, 193 81 (North Ballarat)
30 Ricky Petterd, 185 77 (Broadbeach)
46 Colin Garland, 191 85 (Tassie Mariners)
62 Isack Weetra, 182 78 (Port Adelaide Magpies)

http://www.aflinsider.net/afl-draft-grades/

Offline wayne

  • Fame of Hall
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 8464
  • In Absentia
Re: Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)
« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2010, 12:38:30 PM »
Interesting to read this.

They rated Hislop a top-ten player.

I think we're a B+, but Riewoldt and Collins could become stars and I still have hopes for Edwards and to a lesser extent, Connors.

Essendons (then) A+ (now) C - Gumbleton injury cursed, Jetta is average and Hislop gone.

Adelaide A A  - Sellar average, Tippett a star in the making, McKay looks good also.

Hawthorn A C - Thorp and Kennedy gone, Renouf ok, the other two meh.

Geelong A A+ - Selwood a star, Hawkins improving

Brisbane A C - Leunberger always injured, the rest ho hum

West Coast A B - Brown has shown a bit

Carlton B+ A - First three picks were solid

Collingwood B+ B+ - Brown, Dick, Sack all handy

Kangaroos B+ B

Fremantle B F

Sydney B D+

Port Adelaide C+ B+

St. Kilda C+ D+

Bulldogs C+ C+

Melbourne C B
And you may not think I care for you
When you know down inside that I really do

Offline Smokey

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9279
Re: Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)
« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2010, 01:26:18 PM »
A very interesting exercise going back to review a draft against the initial expectations/gradings.  Lends support to the theory that the order of the draft pick is much less relevant than the effort, skill and luck of the recruiting team when choosing them.  Relevance of tanking, anyone?

Con65

  • Guest
Re: Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)
« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2010, 05:53:52 PM »
Quite an interesting excercise...I agree Wayne...we are probably a B+ from that drafty...5 guys drafted and Riew, Edw and Collins can all play AFL - so too Connors at times...

Interesting how some of the teams which were marked an A have fared...some have flopped quite spectacularly.

the claw

  • Guest
Re: Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)
« Reply #4 on: January 22, 2010, 09:46:56 PM »
A very interesting exercise going back to review a draft against the initial expectations/gradings.  Lends support to the theory that the order of the draft pick is much less relevant than the effort, skill and luck of the recruiting team when choosing them.  Relevance of tanking, anyone?
hmm well carlton were accused of tanking 06 dint seem to hurt them. or what about collingwood in 05. need i go on.

Offline Smokey

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9279
Re: Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)
« Reply #5 on: January 23, 2010, 11:03:30 AM »
A very interesting exercise going back to review a draft against the initial expectations/gradings.  Lends support to the theory that the order of the draft pick is much less relevant than the effort, skill and luck of the recruiting team when choosing them.  Relevance of tanking, anyone?
hmm well carlton were accused of tanking 06 dint seem to hurt them. or what about collingwood in 05. need i go on.

How much difference has Dale Thomas made to Collingwood?  Has he won them a flag?  Will they win a flag with their current list?

I thought Carlton tanked in '07?  If it was '06 then how much difference has Shaun Hampson made to Carlton.  If it was '07 then how much difference has Kruezer made to Carlton?  Has either of them won them a finals game?  Will they win a flag with their current list?

That's the thing with all the tanking theorists - they seem to think that the mystical priority pick will make all the difference when reality is nothing could be further from the truth.  What makes the difference is the players you choose and how they are developed, not the order they are picked in.

Offline smasha

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 708
Re: Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)
« Reply #6 on: January 23, 2010, 11:22:34 AM »
Quite an interesting excercise...I agree Wayne...we are probably a B+ from that drafty...5 guys drafted and Riew, Edw and Collins can all play AFL - so too Connors at times...

Interesting how some of the teams which were marked an A have fared...some have flopped quite spectacularly.

Just goes to show,the media are human like everyone else.

They make as much mistakes as any one.

Take their BS with a grain of salt!

Essendon A plus LOLOLOL.

Just reaffirms my opinion that the media is full of Essendon supporters.

The Herald Sun and The Age.


the claw

  • Guest
Re: Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)
« Reply #7 on: January 23, 2010, 12:31:30 PM »
A very interesting exercise going back to review a draft against the initial expectations/gradings.  Lends support to the theory that the order of the draft pick is much less relevant than the effort, skill and luck of the recruiting team when choosing them.  Relevance of tanking, anyone?
hmm well carlton were accused of tanking 06 dint seem to hurt them. or what about collingwood in 05. need i go on.

How much difference has Dale Thomas made to Collingwood?  Has he won them a flag?  Will they win a flag with their current list?

I thought Carlton tanked in '07?  If it was '06 then how much difference has Shaun Hampson made to Carlton.  If it was '07 then how much difference has Kruezer made to Carlton?  Has either of them won them a finals game?  Will they win a flag with their current list?

That's the thing with all the tanking theorists - they seem to think that the mystical priority pick will make all the difference when reality is nothing could be further from the truth.  What makes the difference is the players you choose and how they are developed, not the order they are picked in.
of course what players you choose and how well they develop makes a difference no advocate of tanking would say differently. its the doubling up of quality that is the bonus. hmm 07 carlton tanking not only got them kruezer but judd as well. collingwood got pendulbury and thomas. and hampson is a ruckman whos shown enough to say he will develop into a good one. you expect talls to impact straight away.

put it this way ive advocated tanking since the end of 06 and didnt agree with wallaces wanting to give the older players a chance to play finals. it was never going to work and didnt.

we should have cleaned out again in 05 and we probably would have had a pp at the end of 06. but we didnt. anyway wallace got his 2 yrs with the older duds the rebuild should have started in vain but it didnt.

we didnt need to tank in 07 a spoon sort of told us all that wallace had wasted his first two yrs.

07 we got 2 cotchin 18 and 19 which should have been rance and pears or ward. but we  basically trade away the pp. if we had done what needed to be done in 05 we could easily have had picks 1 and 3 in 07
08 should have been full on tank like i said if we had done what needed to be done we would hardly have had to tank.08 should have been picks 1 pp  and  one of picks 2 3 or 4.
09 would have equated to pick 1pp and 4.the list of players from just these 3 drafts is astounding .

we could have aquired all the following players just by tanking or how i like to say it properly bottoming out.

kruezer, cotchin, watts, rich, scully, morabito. or any combination of decent players for those yrs.
this up one yr winning meaningless games with below par players  and then down when it means something has killed us and cost us, any fool can see it.

sheesh hands up those who are still dirty they were so stupid to trade away pick 19. i wanted tayte pears at that pick callum ward was taken with it  this is what should have happened but didnt.

it wasnt just about tanking but properly cleaning out the list. then properly bottoming out and then aquireing as many quality kids as possible while bottoming out. if we bit the bullet tanking would not have come into it.

Offline Smokey

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 9279
Re: Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)
« Reply #8 on: January 23, 2010, 01:42:14 PM »

of course what players you choose and how well they develop makes a difference no advocate of tanking would say differently. its the doubling up of quality that is the bonus. hmm 07 carlton tanking not only got them kruezer but judd as well. collingwood got pendulbury and thomas. and hampson is a ruckman whos shown enough to say he will develop into a good one. you expect talls to impact straight away.


No, they did not get Kruezer and Judd, they did not get Thomas and Pendlebury - don't forget that both these teams were crap and would have had one of those picks anyway, without tanking.

Quote

put it this way ive advocated tanking since the end of 06 and didnt agree with wallaces wanting to give the older players a chance to play finals. it was never going to work and didnt.

we should have cleaned out again in 05 and we probably would have had a pp at the end of 06. but we didnt. anyway wallace got his 2 yrs with the older duds the rebuild should have started in vain but it didnt.

we didnt need to tank in 07 a spoon sort of told us all that wallace had wasted his first two yrs.

07 we got 2 cotchin 18 and 19 which should have been rance and pears or ward. but we  basically trade away the pp. if we had done what needed to be done in 05 we could easily have had picks 1 and 3 in 07
08 should have been full on tank like i said if we had done what needed to be done we would hardly have had to tank.08 should have been picks 1 pp  and  one of picks 2 3 or 4.
09 would have equated to pick 1pp and 4.the list of players from just these 3 drafts is astounding .

we could have aquired all the following players just by tanking or how i like to say it properly bottoming out.


Would've, could've, should've.  I'm the most insightful and intelligent guy going around when I use my hindsight.  Trouble is, that is only going to work for this year by around 2013.

It would have been a logistical impossibility to have tanked right throughout the Wallace reign as you suggest - pick a year, any year and then afterwards assess if the tanking 'benefits' you received in that year made a difference.  Premiership teams are built over a large number of years by clubs who are strong in the area of recruitment and development, not by those who hoodwink themselves in to thinking that an extra pick or lower pick over one or two years is going to be the goose that delivers the golden egg.

Quote

kruezer, cotchin, watts, rich, scully, morabito. or any combination of decent players for those yrs.
this up one yr winning meaningless games with below par players  and then down when it means something has killed us and cost us, any fool can see it.


1 extra pick per year for each year you tank.  1 or 2 of any of these would not make any difference to a bottom club in becoming a premiership threat.  Remember that the club is on the bottom because it is basically crap.  Tanking devotees blind themselves to the perceived benefits that tanking gives - in reality it is only putting a bandaid on a sucking chest wound.  Build your premiership by drafting well, trading well, developing well and coaching well.  This formula is tried and true - there is not a premiership been won in the past 10 years by a club that hasn't done it this way.

Quote

sheesh hands up those who are still dirty they were so stupid to trade away pick 19. i wanted tayte pears at that pick callum ward was taken with it  this is what should have happened but didnt.

it wasnt just about tanking but properly cleaning out the list. then properly bottoming out and then aquireing as many quality kids as possible while bottoming out. if we bit the bullet tanking would not have come into it.


While this comment is sort of correct, it still implies that you need to finish on the bottom to clean out and improve.  Wrong.  You can clean out while still having a zero tolerance for not trying (coaches and players) and by winning as many games as you can - it all comes down to how good you are at building your list, developing your list and coaching you list.

Tanking?  Nah.

the claw

  • Guest
Re: Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)
« Reply #9 on: January 23, 2010, 10:38:41 PM »
one thing for sure we agree to disagree better to leave it at that.but i will close by saying if i was offered a hand ful of extra wins with below standard players  or scully kruezer watts on top of the kids we got i know what id take.

Offline Penelope

  • Internet nuffer and sooky jellyfish
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12777
Re: Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)
« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2010, 01:54:37 AM »
So you would be happy for the club to deliberately loose for draft picks?

What about for big money as well?
“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

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Re: Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)
« Reply #11 on: January 24, 2010, 03:59:55 PM »
So you would be happy for the club to deliberately loose for draft picks?

What about for big money as well?

picks - yes

money - no

from 04-2009  no point tanking now

Offline Penelope

  • Internet nuffer and sooky jellyfish
  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 12777
Re: Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)
« Reply #12 on: January 24, 2010, 06:11:01 PM »
Whats the difference?
You are happy to take a dive for draft picks, but if Gupta came along with an offer of $1m to lay down against Carlton round 1 that's not acceptable?
Its OK to sell your soul for a lottery pick, but not for cold hard cash?



“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

Offline Judge Roughneck

  • RFC Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11132
  • Sir
Re: Richmond's draft graded a B (aflinsider.net)
« Reply #13 on: January 24, 2010, 06:21:42 PM »
Whats the difference?
You are happy to take a dive for draft picks, but if Gupta came along with an offer of $1m to lay down against Carlton round 1 that's not acceptable?
Its OK to sell your soul for a lottery pick, but not for cold hard cash?





The difference is tanking for draft picks could have landed us a top class footballer for the next 15 years ie. Murphy 2005.

Richmond making money of losing is no good to me.

Richmond losing when the outcome if the best young players in the country has much more upside